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)


Authoritarian predatory (Nigeria, Zaire (DRC))


Neither development nor capability
Developmental democracies (Chile, Costa Rica, Mauritius)


Economic development and improved citizen capability
Development and improved citizen capability
Fragmented democracies (Brazil, India, Philippines)

Some development and some citizen capability
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, antiunion 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)
AUTHORITARIAN DEVELOPMENTAL:
POLICIES
Goal = rapid industrialization; long-term
competitiveness
 Initially, pursued import substitution
industrialization (ISI)
 Over time, manufactured for export, exportoriented 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

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

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)
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
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

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

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



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)


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)
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)

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
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)
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
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)
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
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