Presentation on theme: "Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950-1990 ACLP: Alvarez, Cheibub, Limongi & Przeworski Presentation by:"— Presentation transcript:
Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, ACLP: Alvarez, Cheibub, Limongi & Przeworski Presentation by: Comparative Politics Margarita Lakova Prof. Marco Giuliani EPS 2013
The following two questions were examined by looking at the experiences of 135 countries between : 1. Is economic development conductive to political democracy? 2. Does democracy foster or hinder material welfare?
Classification of democracies and dictatorships “Democracy is a system in which incumbents lose elections and leave office when the rules so dictate” Contestation is key: Ex-ante uncertainty: anyone can win Ex-post irreversibility: losers don’t try to change the results Repeatability
Types of Democracy: Presidential Construct: government "serves at the pleasure of the president" Operationalization: the president can dismiss the government (implicit) Parliamentary Construct: government serves at pleasure of legislature Operationalization: the legislature "can dismiss the government“ Mixed Construct: government answers to both legislature and president Operationalization: everything else, presumably.
Dictatorship Basically anything that isn’t a democracy. Might be “mobilizing” or “exclusionary” Mobilizing Construct: It organizes "permanent political participation" with a party and "elections" Operationalization: Had at least one political party Exclusionary Construct: Doesn't organize participation Operationalization: No parties. Whether it has "elections" doesn't matter.
Types of Dictatorship: Bureaucratic Construct: Governs according to published, codified laws Operationalization: has a legislature Autocratic Construct: A "sultanistic" (Linz) regime, with "neither rules of operation nor publicly announced universalistic intentions." Operationalization: no legislature
Criticism: The following are not part of the democracy / dictatorship definitions: Social/economic equality “Accountability”, “responsibility”, ”responsiveness” Freedom, liberty Military's role They need to consider variations in dictatorships rather than putting them into a single category.
The ACLP Data Set Covers 135 countries For an “entry” year is considered: 1950 the year of independence the first year for which data on economic growth is available For an “exit” year is considered: 1990 the last year for which data on economic growth is available *Azerbaijan is replaced by USSR **Germany is replace by West Germany and East Germany
ACLP Codebook Our countries of interest Name of CountryCode Venezuela 77 Bulgaria 103 West Germany 108 East Germany 109 Greece 110 Hungary 111 Italy 114 USSR 127
Some Regime Variables REG: Dummy variable coded: 1 for dictatorships 0 for democracies Transition years are coded as the regime that emerges in that year. AGER: Age in years of the current regime as classified by REG. The year in which the regime comes into existence is coded as 1.
Name of Country CodeREGAGER Venezuela Bulgaria West Germany East Germany Greece Hungary Italy USSR Value of AGER in 1950:
Regime Variables LAWS and AUT LAWS: Classification of political regimes in which dictatorships are distinguished by the existence of a legislature (elected or appointed). Coded: 0 if democracy; 1 if bureaucracy (dictatorships with a legislature); 2 if autocracy (dictatorships without a legislature). Transition years are coded as the regime that emerges in that year. AUT: Identical to LAWS, except that coding was adjusted for transitional regimes.
Adjustments for Transitional Dictatorships in AUT There are four potentially problematic sequences (B=bureaucracy, A = autocracy and D =democracy) when we code the variable LAWS: (1) B/AB or D/AB, where / stands for the occurrence of a coup (or a change in administration). This may indicate a transitional autocracy, that is, a regime that is reorganizing after the breakdown. (2) A/BD or B/AD. These sequences pose a problem because they may indicate a liberalizing bureaucracy or autocracy, that is, a regime that is in the process of becoming democratic.
From our countries of interest only Greece falls in the cases recorded in AUT A = Autocracy; B = Bureaucracy Name of the countryCodeYear(s)FromTo Number of years Greece771973AB1
All Regime variables REG INST: Classification of political regimes in which democracies are distinguished by the type of executive. 0 if dictatorship 1 if parliamentary democracy 2 if mixed democracy 3 if presidential democracy INST2: Identical to INST, except for the cases that resulted in a transition from above (by the incumbent). DIVIDED: Classification of political regimes in which dictatorships are distinguished by the number of formal powers. Coded: 0 if democracy 1 if dictatorship with a legislature or at least one political party 2 if dictatorship with executive only
MOBILIZE: Classification of political regimes in which dictatorships are distinguished by the presence of political parties. Coded: 0 if democracy 1 if mobilizing dictatorship (with parties) 2 if exclusionary dictatorship (without parties) AUT LAWS The following table is a composed of our countries of interest in the last year available according to all the above stated regime variable:
Conclusions 1. The two regimes that are classified as autocracies (East Germany and USSR) have the same value according to all the variables. 2. The same applies to the regimes listed as democracies with the exception of Venezuela, which differs only in the INST variable that puts the country in the group of countries with presidential democracy. Nevertheless, all the other variables test the same.