Regimes in less developed countries

1. Regimes in less developed countries • Regime = common constellation of politics, policy and institutions • Two key differences with regimes in Rich Democracies • Much less stable • Conflict more likely to result in violence • Institutions more fragile • Policies more erratic • Greater diversity • Types • Authoritarian developmental (S. Korea, Taiwan) • Economic development and improved citizen capability • Authoritarian predatory (Nigeria, Zaire (DRC)) • Neither development nor capability • Developmental democracies (Chile, Costa Rica, Mauritius) • Development and improved citizen capability • Fragmented democracies (Brazil, India, Philippines) • Some development and some citizen capability

2. Authoritarian Developmental: Politics • Geographical and political circumstances • Threatened by powerful enemies (S. Korea by N. Korea; Taiwan by China); needed support of citizens; prosperity would lend legitimacy • Threats of internal unrest: rapid industrialization would raise living standards and reduce conflict • Absence of rich natural resources • These challenges (conditions) gave elites incentives to promote economic development and share wealth • Advantages: colonized by Japan (developed infrastructure); had model of state-led growth; enormous economic and military aid (U.S., anticommunist allies) • Appealed to nationalism, anticommunism • Built support in specific constituencies • Among entrepreneurs/capitalists through credit, tariffs, anti-union labor policy) • Among farmers through (agricultural extension programs; land reform) • In short run, workers paid much of the cost of industrialization; over time, enjoyed more benefits (increased literacy, social mobility, better jobs, wage increases)

3. Authoritarian Developmental: Policies • Goal = rapid industrialization; long-term competitiveness • Initially, pursued import substitution industrialization (ISI) • Over time, manufactured for export, export-oriented industrialization (EOI) • To compete in world markets in price and quality • Did not use market capitalism model • Instead, used Japan’s state-led development model • Government played an important role in promoting key sectors through incentives (loans, credit, etc.) • Social welfare targeted well-off and key allies • Invested in wealth-sharing mechanisms: universal public education, land reform, promoted small and medium-sized businesses

4. Authoritarian Developmental: Institutions • Centralized political system • Power concentrated in small elite (executive) • Elected legislatures, courts, and local government not effective checks • Strong and coherent state • Effective policy implementation • Government officials autonomous (shielded from pressures), competent, professional (corruption minimized) • Officials executed policies as leadership intended • Close relationship to business community • Frequent consultation • Institutions devoted to legitimation and security • Elections gave façade of democratic accountability • Schools and media towed government line • Iron fist: huge armies, massive security apparatus, repression of dissent

5. Predatory: Politics • Least successful authoritarian regimes in economic and human development • Rulers have little incentive • No military threats (no need to industrialize to produce weapons) • Oil, diamonds, gold (natural resources) reduce incentives to industrialize, educate citizens) • Rely on foreign aid • Plagued by ethnic, linguistic, regional conflicts • Class interests submerged (lack business/working class to assert interests) • Loyalties built on narrow coalitions based on ethnic, linguistic, regional loyalties • Cemented through clientelism = patron (powerful) gives client (less powerful) favors (patronage) in return for support • Government positions (bureaucracy, police, army) with access to salaries and income from corruption • State contracts, valuable licenses in return for kickbacks, political favors • Divide and rule tactics; intimidation • Clientelist politicians draw support from narrow, geographically defined constituencies; concentrate on providing patronage to supporters • Large parts of population receive little benefit or support (health care, education, safety)

6. Predatory: Policies • Goal of leaders = enrich themselves, families, followers • Economic development policies means to concentrate wealth in elite hands • ISI led to accumulation of wealth by leaders • Human development policies • Education and health care provide opportunities for making money • School, clinic construction – kickbacks, graft

7. Predatory: institutions • Weak states: without capacity to implement policy and without autonomy from powerful individuals • Political parties without clear policy goals • Weak legislatures (without significant role in policy, checking executive) • Bureaucracies riddled with corruption • Personal considerations key • Massive corruption by elites permeates bureaucracy • Few incentives to follow rules • State unable to deliver basic goods and services • Inadequate infrastructure • Limited protection of property rights • Inefficient firms protected • Inefficient management of foreign investment, aid

8. Typology of authoritarian regimes • Table 8.1, 225 • Why do authoritarian regimes vary in their promotion of economic and human development? • Why are some developmental while others are predatory? • Incentives leaders have to build broad or narrow coalitions of support • Quality of state institutions available for implementing policies • Kinds of groups and social classes available for constructing coalitions of support

9. Democratic developmental: Politics • Commitment to democracy, economic growth, and human development (increasing citizens’ capability) • Leaders view goals as mutually reinforcing • Consolidating democracy requires convincing social groups/classes they benefit from democracy • Meet needs of poor; do not threaten interests of wealthier groups • Economic growth through market; policies improve capability of peasants and workers • Capitalists reassured regime supports economic growth; in turn, pay higher taxes • Workers and rural poor assured by improved education, health care, and pensions (progress slow) • Trade-offs require broad-based social democratic political parties, federations of labor and business, state bureaucracies that are capable and coherent • Compromise gives political influence to agricultural workers, small farmers, and urban workers (beyond clientelist relationships)

10. Democratic developmental: Policies • Strong social democratic parties • Capitalist economic growth with substantial safety nets • Minimal state ownership of enterprises • Growth with equity • Export-led growth and integration into global market • Substantial social welfare programs • Strengthened labor union bargaining power with employers • Increased citizens’ capability (in terms of infant mortality, life expectancy, and literacy)

11. Democratic developmental: Institutions • Stable, broad-based political parties • Capable, coherent state bureaucracies • Encompassing labor and business federations • Parties appeal to broad groups of voters through policies that aim to promote growth with equity • Agricultural laborers, small farmers, urban workers, parts of middle class • Important part of governing coalitions • Broad-based labor and business federations • Represent workers and businesses in most sectors • Prevents narrowly based unions or business associations from seeking benefits only for their members at expense of society (narrow agendas) • Makes bargaining easier • Strong, autonomous states • Make, implement policies favoring broad categories of population (especially poor, disadvantaged) • State bureaucracies with capable officials; more coherent, successful policy-making and implementation

12. Fragmented democracies: Politics • Fragmented political parties, interest associations, and states • Parties win elections by utilizing patronage and appealing to narrow groups of voters based on racial, ethnic, religious, regional identities • Interest groups represent specific groups with narrow interests • State often beset by bureaucratic infighting • Tend to emerge in countries with large inequalities in wealth, power, citizen capability; large and diverse populations • Wealth concentrated in hands of elite • Diversity makes broad-based interest associations, political parties difficult to form • Politicians appeal to upper income groups (owners of large businesses, urban middle class, large commercial farmers) • Clientelism inhibits peasants and workers • Rulers engage in identity politics (submerging class differences; avoids having to promise change in distribution of income/wealth) • Politicians also engage in populism • Governments target benefits to privileged groups, organized workers • Local elites manipulate elections (electoral democracies: frequent violations of civil and political rights)

13. Fragmented democracies: policies • Benefits of economic and social policies go mainly to wealthier business people, some union leaders, large farmers, and middle class • ISI protects businesses; gives subsidies to large farmers • Educational, health care, retirement, unemployment spending geared to upper- and middle-classes • Policies biased toward urban middle-class and wealthy, but some improvements in lives of poor • Declining poverty rates

14. Fragmented democracies: institutions • Fragmented political institutions • Multiple political parties, interest groups, federal systems • Create obstacles to improve health, education, and safety for the poor • Rich do not need broad-based associations or political parties to promote interests (can use personal connections, narrow interest associations) • Parties rely on patronage and/or appeals to racial and ethnic identity rather than presenting consistent policies • Legislators focus on pork barrel projects, local benefits • Often benefiting middle and upper income groups the most • Do little to promote capabilities • Fragmentation within the state prevents implementation of coherent programs (bureaucratic infighting and political competition for ministry positions, patronage opportunities)

15. Typology of Democratic regimes • Table 8.4, 236 • Differences in ability to promote citizens’ capability • Incentives leaders have to build broad or narrow coalitions of support • Quality of state institutions available for implementing policies • Groups and social classes available for constructing coalitions of support • Also used to differentiate between authoritarian developmental and authoritarian predatory • Extent to which political parties and interest groups are broad-based or fragmented • Poor and marginalized citizens can be effective politically only when they have broad-based parties and associations to represent them

16. Comparing capability • Physical well-being • Authoritarian developmental and developmental democratic regimes lowest rates of absolute poverty (Table 8.5, 237) and best records on health (infant mortality, life expectancy) (Table 8.6, 238); predatory regimes the worst • Informed decision-making • In terms of adult literacy (Table 8.7, 239), a similar pattern emerges (from best to worst): Authoritarian developmental  developmental democracy  fragmented democracy  predatory • Safety • Likewise with political stability/violence and rule of law (Table 8.8, 240): developmental democracy  fragmented democracy  predatory • Civil and political rights • From best to worst in terms of civil liberties, political rights (Table 8.9, 241): developmental democracy  fragmented democracy  authoritarian developmental predatory