This essay aims to explain why Colombia has not consolidated into a liberal democracy between the years 1991 to 2015. To examine the purpose of this essay five interactive arenas are analyzed in order to describe to which extent Colombia is affected by the various arenas. Three questions are being discussed and answered; to which extent have the political society and civil society affected the consolidation of a liberal democracy, to which extent have rule of law and the state bureaucracy affected the consolidation of a liberal democracy and, to which extent have the economic society affected the consolidation of a liberal democracy.The theoretical framework is based upon theories regarding different types of democracy and democratic consolidation. The essay is a theory consuming case study, with descriptive questions and explanatory approach. The framework is used to qualitatively illuminate empirical material to the study research questions. The conclusions of this essay shows that Colombia has not consolidated into a liberal democracy because of large illegal activities, physical attacks from non-state groups, widespread distrust of the political system and absence of conflict resolution through a democratic process.

This essay aims to explore and analyze Ukraine’s democratic development over time. This will be done within two time periods from 2007 to 2014 and 2014 to 2019 to enable drawing reasonable conclusions regarding what challenges prevent further democratic development and what similarities and differences can be seen between the periods. Democracy is often described as a complex concept that can vary between being defined minimalistic and maximalistic. This essay will study the maximalistic perception through the theory of Linz and Stepans four arenas of democratic consolidation, political society, civil society, the rule of law and state bureaucracy and be doing so as a qualitative theory consuming diachronical comparative study. The arenas will in turn be broken down into statements to make them easier to measure. This essay concludes that both periods have had democratic problems regarding all arenas. The widespread corruption remains as a main problem through both periods as do the low institutional trust, although in the second period the Crimea-conflict becomes the bigger political priority which affects the ongoing democratic process. Despite this civil society has remained strong and forced forward change when needed. To conclude there has been improvements but Ukraine still faces large democratic challenges.

This essay aims to investigate and analyse the extent to which there are conditions in Guatemala and Honduras to introduce liberal democracy, how the countries conditions differ and to draw conclusions about which country  that has the most conditions and thus is the most likely to introduce liberal democracy. The theoretical framework that this essay is based on is Juan J. Linz and Alfred Stepan's four arenas; civil society, political society, the rule of law and the state bureaucracy. In order to reach the purpose, a comparative case study was done. The  conclusions  of  this  essay shows that both countries have, to some extent, conditions to introduce liberal democracy, however they also lack conditions within other areas.

This study aims to demonstrate the reasons why there is a prevailing difference in democratization between the south American countries Chile and Peru. By applying democratization researchers, Juan Linz, and Alfred Stepans framework: The Five Arenas of a Consolidated Democracy, and a causal mechanism. I discover an institutional and civil pattern which when functional, contributes to democratization. In the case of Chile, the results show that a strong rule of law and states apparatus, institutionally makes democracy the only game in town in Chile. However, in the case of Peru, the weak state apparatus and rule of law allows undemocratic forms of action which in part, can explain the difference in democratization. The results that emanate from the civil society, show that both countries suffer from weak connection to the political arena which in turn affects the economical arena. This also gives implications to the remaining democratizing challenges for Chile and Peru. The results however are affected by the strengths and shortcomings of Linz & Stepans framework which is also discussed in this study.

The aim of this thesis is to examine whether Venezuela's democratic decline could be explained by the consolidation theory of Juan Linz and Alfred Stepan. Between the years 2005 – 2017, the organization Freedom House concluded that Venezuela’s political and civil rights declined, resulted in that Freedom House classified Venezuela from “partly free” in 2005 to “not free” in 2017, and several scientists classified Venezuela year 2017 as an autocracy. The method is to apply the consolidation theory and its five arenas (the civil society, the political society, rule of law, state bureaucracy and economic society) in the case Venezuela between the years 2005 – 2017. Each arena contains different qualifications which are all needed for a state to transition from democracy to consolidated democracy. However, in this thesis the aim is to study if the consolidation theory is able to explain a state’s transition from democracy to autocracy. By using material as scientific articles and reports, it is concluded that each arenas’ qualifications have deteriorated between the years 2005 - 2017. Therefore, it is found that the consolidation theory works very well in explaining a state’s transition from democracy to autocracy, which in this case is Venezuela.

This study aims to utilize Juan J. Linz and Alfred Stepan's (1996) theory of democratic consolidation with its five interactive arenas to comprehend how the Belarusian dictatorship consolidated during the 1990s. A crucial aspect to achieve this aim is to ascertain whether the theory can provide clarity on when autocratic consolidation has occurred, or if it rather elucidates the process of autocratization in Belarus. The paper adopts a descriptive qualitative case study methodology with a deductive approach. By flipping the theory's perspective and examining how the regime undermined the arenas to strengthen autocracy, the study reveals the extent to which Belarus fulfills Linz and Stepan's (1996) three criteria of behavioral, attitudinal, and constitutional consolidation to gain insights into the consolidation of the Belarusian dictatorship. The findings reveal that the Lukashenko-led Belarusian regime systematically eroded aspects across all five arenas to consolidate its dictatorship. However, given the unascertainable attitudinal consolidation that transpired in Belarus during the 1990s, the study cannot pinpoint when autocratic consolidation occurred. Instead, it concludes that an autocratization process began under Lukashenko's rule, facilitated by political, social, legal, institutional, and economic maneuvers aimed at consolidating power. Taken together, the results deepen our understanding of what strategies autocratic regimes may employ to strengthen autocracy.