Conflicting objectives are often problematized as challenges to the effectiveness of international democracy promotion. However, systematic research about their emergence and effects is still missing. This special issue addresses this research gap and seeks to provide conceptual and empirical answers in the field of conflicting objectives in international democracy promotion. The authors represented in this special issue investigate (post-) conflict societies, developing countries, and authoritarian regimes, attempting to identify the patterns of conflicting objectives in democracy promotion, the reasons for their emergence, and their consequences. This introduction presents a conceptual framework that pursues four aims: first, it differentiates between two types of conflicting objectives (intrinsic and extrinsic); second, it offers an approach for identification of their phases of emergence; third, it proposes reasons for their emergence; and fourth, it discusses how political actors deal with these conflicting objectives. The empirical findings of the contributions to this special issue illustrate and substantiate the theoretical and conceptual reflections.

Achieving the ambitious Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda requires strong and accountable institutions. However, the focus on sustainability outcomes set forth in the Agenda’s 17 SDGs has side-lined the debate on accountability mechanisms to ensure effective policy implementation. Six years into the adoption of the 2030 Agenda, it is time to assess progress made in this regard. Drawing on theories of public interest and rational choice, this paper argues that horizontal accountability between different state organs will be key to the emergence of national SDG accountability regimes. We provide evidence on monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for SDG progress based on an original database (AccountSDG) built through a document analysis of 136 Voluntary National Reviews (VNR) submitted between 2016 and 2019. Our analysis provides the first systematic cross-national empirical analysis of the role assigned to parliaments, Supreme Auditing Agencies (SAI), and National Human Rights Institutions (NHRI) in national processes of SDG implementation. We conclude that horizontal accountability, especially the role of SAI and NHRI, remains under-institutionalized in most countries. We conclude by discussing best practices and addressing the most important lacunae, as well as by pointing out limitations of our study and avenues for future research.

While there is substantial evidence of the effect of social protection on poverty and vulnerability, limited research has focused on societal outcomes. This paper serves as introduction to a special issue (SI) examining the relationship between social protection and social cohesion in low- and middle-income countries. Over the last years, social cohesion has emerged as a central goal of development policy. The introduction and the papers in the SI use a common definition of social cohesion as a multi-faceted phenomenon, comprising three attributes: cooperation, trust and inclusive identity. This introductory article provides a conceptual framework linking social protection to social cohesion, shows the current empirical evidence for the bi-directional linkages, and highlights how the papers in the SI contribute to filling existing research gaps. In addition to this introduction, the SI encompasses seven papers, covering different world regions and social protection schemes, and using different quantitative and qualitative methods.

The article comparatively investigates the role of religious actors in the democratization processes of five ‘young’ democracies from the Catholic, Protestant, Christian-Orthodox and Muslim world: West Germany after World War II (1945–1969), Georgia and Ukraine post-1987/9, Mali (post-1987), and Indonesia from 1998. The analysis provides an overview of the roles religious actors played in the erosion of authoritarian rule, the transition to democracy and subsequent democratic consolidation processes, as well as de-democratization processes. Our three paired comparisons, including one in-country comparison, show that the condition which most affected the role of religious actors in all three phases of democratic transitions was the de facto autonomy they enjoyed vis-à-vis the political regime as well as the organizational form these actors took. Their aims, means, and the political significance of their theology were highly dependent on the extent to which they benefitted from de facto autonomy within the state.