Luis Fernando Garcés Giraldo, José Antonio Beraún Barrantes, José Alexander Velásquez Ochoa, Juan Fernando Montoya Carvajal, Cesar Felipe Henao Villa, David Alberto García Arango, José Albán Londoño Arias
ABSTRACT
Democratic backsliding and modern authoritarianism manifest themselves through gradual adjustments in the rules and institutions of democratic regimes, which requires an understanding of how the academic literature has addressed these processes (Bermeo, 2016). To this end, a systematic review was conducted in Scopus, applying PRISMA 2020 with a two-stage screening and explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria. From 217 initial entries, 60 articles were selected and analyzed using Bibliometrix, VOSviewer, and Python scripts. These tools allowed for mapping scientific production by year and country, exploring the co-occurrence of terms and keywords, and mapping networks of authors, institutions, and countries. The results show sustained growth in the literature since 2018, with a peak of 20 articles in 2024 and 11 in 2025; Together, these two years account for more than half of the sample, with the 2020-2025 period accounting for 57 of the 60 publications (Stockemer, 2025). The United Kingdom emerges as a recent leader, accelerating after 2023; the United States and the Netherlands show stable trajectories, while Germany registers an early contribution and stabilizes thereafter. Countries such as Poland and Sweden emerge strongly from 2024 onwards. Production intensity places the United Kingdom in the high concentration and high pace quadrant; the United States and the Netherlands show intermediate concentrations; Poland, Sweden, and Brazil are emerging with high recent concentration but lower annual intensity; Germany lags behind, consistent with its early contribution. At the thematic level, the literature converges on a core organized around "democratic backsliding" and "rule of law" (Holesch & Portela, 2025). This core connects a European cluster linked to the European Union, Article 7, and the cases of Hungary and Poland, and another judicial-institutional cluster focused on judicial review, constitutional courts, and the balance of powers. The keywords demonstrate that these axes have dominated the debate since 2022, along with concepts such as autocratization and populism. Affiliation networks point to hubs at the University of Gothenburg and V-Dem, the WZB Berlin, the Universiteit van Amsterdam, and American universities, around which international collaborations are articulated. Furthermore, most authors contribute only one article, and only a few stand out for their greater productivity, indicating a broad-based, expanding field.Overall, the research reveals that studies on democratic backsliding and modern authoritarianism are entering a maturing phase. The focus is shifting from general categories to specific erosion mechanisms and judicial responses, with a notable European focus, especially given the role of the rule of law in the European Union, complemented by a North American critical mass (Scherz, 2025). These trends suggest that the contemporary academic agenda is focused on understanding and countering autocratization tactics through robust legal and institutional frameworks, which has direct implications for the design of public policies aimed at protecting the rule of law and judicial independence.
