Situating Change Under the AKP

  • Ceren LordEmail author


How should we understand the post-2002 period of Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi, AKP) rule? How should we assess and situate change and transformation alongside continuity? With respect to these questions, there have been two main interpretations. First, the dominant paradigm has principally been premised on transition theory, with the AKP period analysed in terms of a democratic transition process advanced by a move away from military tutelage. Second, others have stressed elements of persistence, involving the conception of the AKP period as constituting continuity with the previous ‘oppressive and authoritarian state’ remodelled in Islamist-conservative form (Bedirhanoğlu, 2009).


Electoral System Informal Institution Strategic Action Veto Player Central Bank Independence 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. AK Parti. 30 September 2012. 2023 Political Vision. Google Scholar
  2. Altan, M. 29 April 2014. ‘İç savaşın kanlı cehenneminden geçmeden.’ T24.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, Benedict. 1991. Imagined Communities. New York: Verso Books.Google Scholar
  4. Barkey, H. J., & Çongar, Y. (2007). ‘Deciphering Turkey’s Elections: The Making of a Revolution.’ World Policy Journal 24,3: 63–73.Google Scholar
  5. Bedirhanoğlu, Pınar. (2009). ‘Türkiye’de Neoliberal Otoriter Devletin AKP’li Yüzü.’ In AKP Kitabı: Bir Dönüşümün Bilançosu edited by İlhan Uzel and Bülent Duru, Ankara: Phoenix Yayınevi.Google Scholar
  6. Buğra, A. and Savaşkan, O. 2010. ‘Yerel Sanayi ve Bugünün Türkiye’sinde İş Dünyası.’ Toplum ve Bilim 118.Google Scholar
  7. Bulaç, A. 12 April 2014. ‘Ey vicdan ve akıl sahipleri.’ Zaman Gazetesi. Google Scholar
  8. Bulsara H. & Kissane B. 2009. ‘Lijphart and Irish Democracy.’ West European Politics 32,1: 172–95.Google Scholar
  9. Carothers, T. 2002. ‘The End of the Transition Paradigm.’ Journal of Democracy 13,1: 5–21.Google Scholar
  10. Cizre, U. & Walker, J. 2010. ‘Conceiving the New Turkey after Ergenekon.’ The International Spectator 45,1: 89-98.Google Scholar
  11. Demir, F. 2005. ‘Militarization of the Market and Rent‐Seeking Coalitions in Turkey’. Development and Change 36,4: 667-690.Google Scholar
  12. Dunleavy, P. 1992. Democracy, Bureaucracy and Public Choice. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  13. Flinders, M. 2005. ‘Majoritarian Democracy in Britain: New Labour and the Constitution’. West European Politics 28,1: 61–93.Google Scholar
  14. Gallagher, M. 1991. ‘Proportionality, Disproportionality and Electoral Systems.’ Electoral Studies 10,1: 33-51.Google Scholar
  15. Gürsoy, Y. 2011. ‘The Impact of EU-driven Reforms on the Political Autonomy of the Turkish Military.’ South European Society and Politics 16,2: 293-308.Google Scholar
  16. Hale, H. E. 2005. ‘Regime Cycles: Democracy, Autocracy, and Revolution in post-Soviet Eurasia.’ World Politics 58,01: 133-165.Google Scholar
  17. Hall, P.A. & Taylor, R.A. 1996. ‘Political Science and Three New Institutionalisms.’ Political Studies 44,5: 936-957.Google Scholar
  18. Hall, P.A. & Taylor, R.A. 1998. ‘The Potential of Historical Institutionalism: a Response to Hay and Wincott’. Political Studies 46,5: 958–62.Google Scholar
  19. Hausner, J., Jessop, B., & Nielsen, K. 1995. Strategic Choice and Path-dependency in Post-socialism: Institutional Dynamics in the Transformation Process. Brookfield, Vt: E. Elgar.Google Scholar
  20. Heper, M. 1985. The State Tradition in Turkey. Walkington: Eothen Press.Google Scholar
  21. Hürriyet Gazetesi. 26 September 2014. ‘Kurtulmuş’tan HSYK seçimleri hakkında önemli açıklama.’Google Scholar
  22. İnsel, A. 2003. ‘The AKP and Normalizing Democracy in Turkey.’ The South Atlantic Quarterly 102,2: 293-308.Google Scholar
  23. Jenkins, G. H. 2011. ‘From Politicization to Monopolization? The AKP’s New Judicial Reforms.’ Turkey Analyst 4,3.Google Scholar
  24. Kalaycıoğlu, E. 2007. Politics of Conservatism in Turkey. Turkish Studies 8,2: 233–52.Google Scholar
  25. Kandiyoti, D. 2012. ‘The Travails of the Secular: Puzzle and Paradox in Turkey.’ Economy and Society 41,4: 513-531.Google Scholar
  26. Kandiyoti, D. 2014. ‘No Laughing Matter: Women and the New Populism in Turkey.’ Open Democracy.Google Scholar
  27. Kissane, B., & Sitter, N. 2010. ‘The Marriage of State and Nation in European Constitutions.’ Nations and Nationalism 16,1: 49–67.Google Scholar
  28. Kymlicka, W. 2001. Politics in the Vernacular: Nationalism, Multiculturalism, and Citizenship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Levitsky, S. & Murillo, M. V. 2013. ‘Building Institutions on Weak Foundations.’ Journal of Democracy 24, 2: 93-107.Google Scholar
  30. Levitsky, S. & Way, L. 2002. ‘The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism.’ Journal of Democracy 13,2: 51–65.Google Scholar
  31. Lijphart, A. 1999. Patterns of Democracy. Yale University Press: New Haven, London.Google Scholar
  32. Lord, C. 2012. ‘The Persistence of Turkey’s Majoritarian System of Government.’ Government and Opposition 47, 2: 228-255.Google Scholar
  33. Öniş, Z. 2013. ‘Sharing Power: Turkey’s Democratization Challenge in the Age of the AKP Hegemony.’ Insight Turkey 15,2: 1013.Google Scholar
  34. Öniş, Z. 2014. ‘Monopolizing the Center: The AKP and the Uncertain Path of Turkish Democracy.’ Available at SSRN 2499213.Google Scholar
  35. Özbudun, E. 2006. ‘From Political Islam to Conservative Democracy: The Case of the Justice and Development Party in Turkey.’ South European Society & Politics 11,3–4: 543–57.Google Scholar
  36. Özbudun, E. 2011. ‘Turkey’s Constitutional Reform and the 2010 Constitutional Referendum.’ Mediterranean Politics. Google Scholar
  37. Özbudun, E. 2012. ‘Presidentialism vs. Parliamentarism in Turkey.’ Global Turkey in Europe. Policy Brief 1.Google Scholar
  38. Özbudun, E. 2014. ‘AKP at the Crossroads: Erdoğan’s Majoritarian Drift.’ South European Society and Politics 19,2: 155-167.Google Scholar
  39. Patton, M. J. 2007. AKP Reform Fatigue in Turkey: What Has Happened to the EU Process? Mediterranean Politics 12,3: 339–58.Google Scholar
  40. Radikal Gazetesi 14 May 2014. ‘Kurtulmuş’tan SPK ve BDDK mesajı.’Google Scholar
  41. Radikal Gazetesi. 6 March 2014. ‘10 gazetede aynı manşet: Millet oyunu sandıkta bozacak.’Google Scholar
  42. Resmi Gazete. August 2011. Kanun Hükmünde Kararname, KHK/649. No: 2802817.Google Scholar
  43. Sayari, S. 2007. Towards a New Turkish Party System? Turkish Studies 8,2: 197-210.Google Scholar
  44. Sayari, S. 2011. Clientelism and Patronage in Turkish Politics and Society. Sabancı University.Google Scholar
  45. Schedler, A. 2006. Electoral Authoritarianism: The Dynamics of Unfree Competition. Boulder and London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
  46. Tepe, S. 2005. ‘Turkey’s AKP: A Model “Muslim-Democratic” Party?’ Journal of Democracy 16,3: 69–82.Google Scholar
  47. Tezcur, G. M. 20 September 2011. ‘The AKP Years in Turkey: The Third Stage.’ Open Democracy. Google Scholar
  48. Today’s Zaman. 25 April 2014. ‘Government does away with state agency entrance exam.’Google Scholar
  49. Yavuz, M. H. 2009. Secularism and Muslim Democracy in Turkey. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.OxfordUK

Personalised recommendations