States, Regimes, Societies

9.45 – 10.00 Coffee, welcome, and introductions

10.00 – 11.50 Panel: Between Political Regimes and Policy Regimes

• Catherine Owen (Exeter): ‘Are Democratic Innovations always “Democratic”? Exploring the Influence of Regime Type on Public Engagement Mechanisms’ (co-authored with Sonia Bussu, Birmingham)
• Stephen Greasley (Exeter): ‘Regimes in Policy Research’
• Stephen Skinner (Exeter): ‘”We are not a government. We are a regime.” Interpreting Fascism in Legal History.’
• Dario Castiglione (Exeter): ‘Is there anything to gain in talking of “political regimes”’?

11.50 – 12.00 Break

12.00 – 12.40 Discussion: Elena Gadjanova (Exeter) and Eleanor Gao (Exeter)

12.40 – 13.30 Lunch

13.30 – 15.30 Round Table: Debating the State-Regime-Society Nexus

What does regime mean to you and in your work? Is it a useful concept? How does it differ from and relate to the state-society relationship?

• Biao Zhang (Chinese University of Politics and Law)
• David Lewis (Exeter)
• Xianan Jin (Exeter)
• Nelly Bekus (Exeter)
• Shuangli Zhang (Fudan)

Chair: Sean Carter (Exeter)

15.30 – 15.45 Coffee

15.45 – 17.45 Books Talk – Societies beyond Regimes?

• Anthony Ince (Cardiff): Society Despite the State: Reimagining Geographies of Order
• Lara Montesinos Coleman (Sussex): Struggles for the Human: Violent Legality and the Politics of Rights

Chair/Discussant: Alex Prichard (Exeter)

On June 10th, 2024, the Global Authoritarianism Research Network, the Centre for Political Thought, and the Voice, Participation and Governance Cluster (HaSS Cornwall), convened a workshop to discuss the dynamics of States, Regimes, and Societies. This event brought together scholars and researchers from Exeter and other Universities to discuss and debate contemporary issues in political governance, regime dynamics, and societal impacts, offering fresh perspectives and approaches to understanding the interaction between these political entities.

Catherine Owen began the panel with her presentation, A Scalar Approach to Regime Dynamics, which presented on-going work with Dr Licia Cianetti at the University of Birmingham and Dr Gianni Del Panta at the University of Pavia. The presentation challenged conventional methodologies in comparative regime studies. She identified three major shortcomings: the failure of existing literature to capture transformative changes in concepts like the state and governance, the inconsistent application of regime theories leading to implicit biases, and the persistent methodological nationalism that treats regimes as self-contained, homogeneous entities. To address these issues, Owen proposed two key analytical shifts. The first is to examine the relationship between the state, the regime, and governance structures, which she termed the ‘state-regime-governance triad’. The second is a scalar approach to regimes, recognizing that in the context of late capitalism, regimes operate at transnational, national, and sub-national levels.

Stephen Greasley discussed Regimes in Policy Research, exploring how policy regimes shape and are shaped by political regimes. He emphasised the dynamic interaction between policy regimes and political structures, often blurring the lines between different regime types. Greasley's insights highlighted the need for a refined approach to studying regimes that accounts for the difficulties of policy interactions and their broader implications.

Stephen Skinner's talk, We are not a government. We are a regime: Interpreting Fascism in Legal History, discussed the legal and political traits of fascist regimes. He discussed how these regimes manipulate legal frameworks to maintain power, contrasting them with democratic governments. Drawing on historical examples, Skinner highlighted the ways in which fascist leaders used the law to legitimise their actions and suppress opposition, often under the pretext of maintaining national security. He also explored the ideological foundations that support these practices. In his conclusion, Skinner warned of contemporary authoritarian trends and stressed the importance of protecting democratic institutions.

Dario Castiglione concluded the panel with his presentation, Is there Anything to Gain in Talking of ‘Political Regime’? He discussed the evolving meanings of 'regime' and its implications for political discourse, tracing the term's historical usage from the 'Ancien Régime' to contemporary contexts. Castiglione highlighted its varied connotations, from authoritarian orders to broader governance frameworks. He emphasised the importance of a 'thick' understanding of political regimes, considering both formal and substantive aspects of political order. Castiglione argued that adopting a more nuanced interpretation of regimes could enhance comparative political studies by overcoming the simplistic democracy vs. authoritarianism dichotomy and acknowledging the complex socio-historical factors shaping political orders.

The afternoon began with a round table, entitled "Debating the State-Regime-Society Nexus", chaired by Sean Carter (Exeter), and with the participation of Shuangli Zhang (Fudan), David Lewis (Exeter), Xianan Jin (Exeter), Nelly Bekus (Exeter), Biao Zhang (CUPL).

Participants explored the term's utility in their research and its distinction from, and connection to, the state-society relationship. The discussion emphasised the importance of 'regime' as a lens to examine the nuanced dynamics of power, authority, and governance beyond the rigid structures of the state. Scholars debated whether 'regime' serves as a more flexible and encompassing framework to understand political order, compared to the traditional state-centric models. They highlighted how regimes, unlike states, encapsulate the fluid interactions between governing elites and the governed, including the socio-legal foundations of political power. The conversation also touched upon how regimes manifest across different scales—from local to global—and how these layers influence the broader state-society dynamics. Ultimately, the round table underscored the value of 'regime' as a concept that bridges formal political institutions and the substantive socio-political processes that shape governance.

The workshop’s final session featured the presentation by Anthony Ince (Cardiff) and Lara Montesinos Coleman (Sussex) of their recently published books. Alex Prichard (Exeter) introduced the session, which explored concepts of society and governance beyond the traditional state framework.

Anthony Ince’s book, entitled Society Despite the State: Reimagining Geographies of Order, co-authored with Gerónimo Barrera de la Torre, challenges conventional notions of the state. Ince posed a provocative question: “What if the state had never existed?” This thought experiment encouraged attendees to reconsider how societal order and human behaviour might evolve without the state’s influence. Instead of debating the state’s definition or arguing for its abolition, Ince approached the state as a logical outcome of specific patterns. This perspective shifts the focus from the state as an institution to understanding the underlying dynamics that lead to its formation, emphasising how societal structures and orders could function independently of the state.

Lara Montesinos Coleman’s book, Struggles for the Human: Violent Legality and the Politics of Rights, explores the overlap of legality, violence, and human rights, examining how legal frameworks can both uphold and undermine human rights, highlighting the multifaceted and often contradictory role of law in political struggles. Coleman’s analysis emphasised the dual nature of law, which can be a tool for both oppression and liberation. She drew attention to the political and violent dimensions of legal practices, underscoring how rights are contested and negotiated within legal systems. This examination provided a critical perspective on the role of law in shaping human rights and the ongoing struggles for justice and equity.