Cultural and economic prerequisites of democracy: Reassessing recent evidence

The purpose of this article is to reassess two influential theories of democratic development: the theory of democratic culture and the theory of economic development. The leading predecessors in each domain—Ronald Inglehart and Adam Przeworski—are the prime targets of analysis. We take issue with recent evidence presented by these authors on three grounds: the evidence (1) confuses “basic” criteria of democracy with possible “quality” criteria (Inglehart); (2) conceptualizes democracy in dichotomous rather than continuous terms (Przeworski); and (3) fails to account for endogeneity and contingent effects (Inglehart). In correcting for these shortcomings, we present striking results. In the case of democratic culture, the theory lacks support; neither overt support for democracy nor “self-expression values” affect democratic development. In the case of economic development, earlier findings must be refined. Although the largest impact of modernization is found among more democratized countries, we also find an effect among “semi-democracies.” Axel Hadenius is professor of political science at Uppsala University in Sweden. He is the author ofDemocracy and Development (Cambridge University Press, 1992) andInstitutions and Democratic Citizenship (Oxford University Press, 2001). Jan Teorell is associated professor of political science at Uppsala University. His articles on intra-party democracy, social capital, and political participation appear in international journals.     

Dominance and change in the global computer industry: Military, bureaucratic, and network state developmentalisms

This article examines the conditions under which firms in different economies were able to emerge as significant actors in the global computer industry during different time periods. To achieve this, the article divides into three periods the history of the industry in terms of the three major policy regimes that have supported the dominant firms and regions. It argues that these policy regimes can be thought of as state developmentalisms that take significantly different forms across the history of the industry. U.S. firms’ dominance over their European counterparts in the 1950s and 1960s was underpinned by a system of “military developmentalism” where military agencies funded research, provided a market and developed infrastructure, but also demanded high quality products. The “Asian Tigers”—Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and South Korea—in the 1970s and 1980s were able to eclipse their Latin American and Indian rivals due in large part to the significant advantages offered by a highly effective system of “bureaucratic developmentalism,” where bureaucratic elites in key state agencies and leading business groups negotiated supports for export performance. The 1990s saw the emergence of a system of “network developmentalism” where countries such as Ireland and Israel were able to emerge as new nodes in the computer industry by careful economic and political negotiation of relations to the United States, reestablished at the center of the industry, and by more decentralized forms of provision of state support for high-tech development. Finally, the conditions under which new regimes can emerge are a consequence of the unanticipated global consequences of previous regimes. While state developmentalisms have been shaped by existing global regimes, they have promoted further and different rounds of industry globalization. Seán ó Riain is professor of sociology at the National University of Ireland, Maynooth. His research has been primarily on the political economy of high-tech growth in Ireland and elsewhere, and on work and class politics among software developers. He is the author ofThe Politics of High Tech Growth: Developmental Network, States in the Global Economy (Cambridge, 2004).     

Chile’s new entrepreneurs and the “economic miracle”: The invisible hand or a hand from the state?

The Chilean economy has grown by leaps and bounds over the last decade, thanks to a dramatic increase in export activities (and earnings), and the emergence of a more entrepreneurial capitalist class. This article attempts to explain that remarkable phenomenon using original data on entrepreneurs in one of Chile’s most important new export industries, namely, fishing. The central argument of the article is that domestic entre-preneurship flourished during the Pinochet period not because the state “got the economic environment right,” as the neoliberal ideologues are wont to argue, but rather because the Pinochet government behaved, in several important senses, like a “developmental state,”a la the states of East Asia. The analysis also reveals a heretofore ignored role of a developmental state, which is to help produce a new capitalist class culture. In the Chilean case, it was state policy as well as ideology that gave rise to a new generation of entrepreneurs. Rachel A. Schurman is assistant professor in the Energy and Resources Group and the Department of Sociology at the University of California at Berkeley. Her primary interests are in environmental sociology, and the role that natural resource industries play in regional economic development. She is currently working on the changing character of the tuna industry in the Western Pacific afters the Third U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea. Her next project will be a book on the economic and ecological sustainability of natural resource-based, export-led growth in Chile.     

Democracy,confusion, or chaos: Political conditionality in Kenya

We argue that the policy of conditioning all economic development aid on a process of democratization is a mistake. Good economic policy should be rewarded for its own sake. The process of democratization is costly to participants, and forcing it prematurely can lead to institutional collapse rather than development. Unclear definition of political conditionality has made donor policies inconsistent and capricious. We make these arguments conceptually and then review the experience of one of the most explicit cases of conditionality-induced “democratization”—Kenya. An aid cutoff stimulated the government to hold multiparty elections for the first time in many years. Despite the apparent success, the human and economic costs have been high, and the political changes less than donors hoped.     

When States Implode: The Correlates of Africa’s civil wars, 1950–92

This article provides a systematic analysis of the extent to which political, economic, and cultural factors are associated with civil wars in sub-Saharan African states. Drawing on a theoretical argument that associates the likelihood of civil war with the tumult that arises from the simultaneous challenges of state building and nation building, several testable propositions are derived on the correlates of African civil wars. Results of logistic regression analyses indicate that previous colonial experience is a significant predictor to the likelihood of civil wars. It is also found that economic development reduces the probability of civil war while militarization increases it. Regime type played no significant role in African civil wars. Similarly, no support was found for the thesis that cultural factors are significantly associated with African civil war, which belies the notion that African civil wars are simply “ethnic conflicts.” It appears that politico-economic factors—instead of cultural ones—give rise to civil wars in Africa. Errol A. Henderson, Ph.D. is Associate Professor of Political Science, Wayne State University. He has published articles on international war, foreign policy, domestic conflict, and international political economy inInternational Studies Quarterly, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Journal of Peace Research, Journal of Politics, Peace & Change, andWorld Affairs.     

Compressed Development

In this paper we argue that the path of economic development for would-be developers has changed fundamentally since the 1980s. Focusing on East Asia, and taking a broad perspective that spans the economic and social dimensions of development, we contend that the path charted by the “late development” model has become all but impassible. The path is now better conceived as one of “compressed development.” Key differences are 1) the extent and consequences of compression; 2) the primary mode of engagement with the world economy—via global value chains; and 3) the interaction of these. Compressed development forces states to address a number of simultaneous challenges, resulting in “policy stretch.” We identify key features of an “adaptive state” suited to navigating the path of compressed development.     

The New Commons vs. The Second Enclosure Movement: Comments on an Emerging Agenda for Development Research

The relationship between property rights and development has always been a central concern for both theorists and policy makers. The growing role of information and communications technology in the economies of both North and South intensifies the salience of this issue. This commentary extends the discussion of the two visions of property rights that are introduced by Weber and Bussell (2005). In one, property rights are restructured along the lines pioneered by the open-source software community to create a “new commons” of productive tools; in the other, Northern corporations successfully defend their politically protected monopoly rights over intangible assets and even extend them through a “second enclosure movement” to an ever larger set of ideas, information, and images. Currently, the second enclosure movement remains dominant, but which of these visions is likely to predominate in the longer run depends on the interests and potential power of key actors and on the possibilities for alliances among them—not just Northern corporations, but Southern states and private entrepreneurs, as well. Peter Evans is professor of sociology and Marjorie Meyer Eliaser Chair of International Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. His research has focused on the comparative political economy of developing countries, particularly industrialization and the role of the state, as exemplified byEmbedded Autonomy: States and Industrial Transformation (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995). He has also worked urban environmental issues, producing the edited volumeLivable Cities: Urban Struggles for Livelihood and Sustainability (University of California Press, 2002). His current interest in the politics of globalization is reflected in his chapter, “Counter-hegemonic Globalization: Transnational Social Movements in the Contemporary Global Political Economy,” forthcoming in theHandbook of Political Sociology (Cambridge University Press).     

Growth with pollution: unsustainable development in Taiwan and its consequences

During the 1980s, economic development in Taiwan received much attention in development studies. The “Taiwan miracle” has made Taiwan rich and famous. This article examines an often ignored aspect of development—environmental quality—and argues that Taiwan has achieved “growth with pollution” that will not increase but decrease the welfare of the people in the long run. The root cause of Taiwan's environmental degradation rests on the obsession with fast economic growth at any cost by the powerful coalition between the ruling Kuomington and the capitalists. The article argues that the case of Taiwan is far from being a “model” for developing countries. Taiwan's experience of “growth with pollution,” on the contrary, should stand as a warning to other developing countries pursuing similar development paths. Chun-Chieh Chi received his B.A. in sociology from Tunghai University in Taiwan, and his M.A. and Ph.D. in sociology from State University of New York at Buffalo. He is assistant professor of sociology at the University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK 74104. His research interests include sustainable development in Taiwan and Kenya, indigenous people and the environment, and women and the environment in developing countries.     

Networks and Public Policies in the Global South: The Chilean Case and the Future of the Developmental Network State

Recently, there has been considerable excitement about the economic potential of the “developmental network state”—decentralized government policies that successfully accelerated growth in several high- and medium-income countries. The question remains whether such a strategy could be successful in less-developed nations whose scientific and technological resources were relatively limited. This paper analyzes the trajectory of Chile, a Southern country which, despite adverse conditions, managed to produce something akin to an economic miracle during the last few decades. Our argument is that Chile’s success was based on the developmental network state strategy. Moreover, we highlight the centrality to understanding the Chilean experience of the concept of “network failures”—a common phenomenon that occurs when domestic production would be best served by network forms of organization but for a variety of reasons, these networks either fail to materialize or fail to take hold (Schrank and Whitford 2011). Over and over again, we see that the logic behind the actions of the Chilean state was to provide resources that reduced the likelihood of network failures. We examine three case studies of successful export sectors: salmon; wine; and fruit and vegetables. The paper outlines some of the challenges faced by the Chilean model and assesses its long-term viability.     

Overcoming the past: De-communization and reconstruction of post-communist societies

In several of the central and eastern European nations, the fall of Communism has initiated a new round of political intolerance that threatens to destroy the foundations of their fragile democratic regimes. Campaigns of lustration (political “cleansing”) have imposed ideological tests for employment and political participation in the Balkan countries and in parts of the former Soviet Union. The small, poor nation of Albania has been especially seriously impacted by this atmosphere of vengeacean against ex-Communists and their families. Justified by the principles of destructive entitlement—reminiscent of ancient cultural rituals of blood retribution—journalists have been arrested, members of the opposition have been imprisoned, and University programs have been suspended. In response to Albania’s plight, and to a similar pattern of civil rights abuses in neighboring countries, social scientists have begun to analyze the powerful role played by the “past-in-the-present” in current reconstruction efforts. As Jurgen Habermas, Adam Michnik, Seymour Martins Lipset, and others have noted, a new “culture of forgiveness” may well be a necessary condition for the development of stable and authentic democratic societies in the region. Fatos Tarifa is currently at the Department of Sociology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He received his Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Tirana in 1985. He is director of the New Sociological Research Center (NSRC) in Tirana, Albania, and is the author of several books and journal articles, including a 1991 bookIn Search of the Sociological Fact (published in Albanian). Jay Weinstein is a professor of sociology at Eastern Michigan University. He has travelled widely in the Third World and in Central and Eastern Europe. Author of numerous books, journal articles, and chapters, he is currently working on a volume entitledSocial and Cultural Change: Social Science for a Dynamic World (forthcoming in 1997 by Allyn & Bacon Publishers).     

Rectification at three: Impact on the Cuban economy

Since 1986, Cuba has been engaged in a national effort to redirect its polity and economy; this effort, spearheaded by President Castro, is generally known as the “rectification” campaign. Although occurring at roughly the same time as reforms in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, the Cuban process—which emphasizes dismantling market-oriented mechanisms and enhancing economic centralization—differs radically from the others. An impressionistic assessment of the economic effects of rectification after its first three years (focusing on the behavior of macroeconomic indicators and of the construction sector) suggests that rectification has not turned the Cuban economy around. Moreover, it is questionable that rectification could do so in the medium term, considering the reforms that are taking place in Cuba's main trading partners, the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Jorge F. Pérez-López is an international economist with the Bureau of International Labor Affairs, U.S. Department of Labor. This article presents only his personal views. He has written on different aspects of the Cuban economy, including economic growth, the sugar industry, international trade and energy balances. His book,Measuring Cuban Economic Performance, was published by the University of Texas Press in 1987.     

Financial mobilization and allocation: The South Korean case

There are two major competing views on how financial resources may best be mobilized and allocated to accelerate economic growth of developing countries. One emphasizes the importance of competitive financial markets; the other stresses the role of the developmental state. This study examines one of the world’s fastest-growing economies during the past few decades, that of South Korea, focusing on its experience with financial resources mobilization and allocation. It finds that a state-centered approach provides a better, albeit imperfect, account of the South Korean postwar experience, in which the state has assiduously influenced the access to, and cost, of, available financial resources, going far beyond merely “getting the prices right.” Lawrence Chang is assistant professor of political science at Kean College of New Jersey. His publications include articles on Chinese politics inChina Spring and the political economy of East Asian development inMid-American Journal of Politics. He is currently completing a study of direct foreign investment in the People’s Republic of China.     

Bonanza and dependency in Botswana

This article compares the recent history of economic growth in Botswana with Becker’s model of “bonanza development.” While the Becker model generally applies to Botswana, the case also manifests some areas of disagreement. “Bonanza development” in Botswana is characterized by the continuation of dependency and related social inequalities. Perhaps the Botswana experience is described best as “dependent bonanza development.” Thomas Meisenhelder is a professor of sociology at California State University in San bernardino, California 92407. He spent 1986–1987 as a Fulbright Lecturer in the department of sociology at the University of Botswana (Gaborone) and lived in Harare Zimbabwe during 1992. He has recently published inMonthly Review andNature, Society and Thought. His current research includes a study of the adoption of a structural adjustment program in Zimbabwe and an interpretation of the references to Africa in the writings of Marx and Engels.     

Limitations of rational-choice institutionalism for the study of Latin American politics

This article analyzes the analytical limitations of rational-choice institutionalism for the study of Latin American politics. Adherents of this approach have made important contributions by analyzing topics that Latin Americanists traditionally neglected, such as the political impact of electoral rules and the processes of legislative decision-making. But rational-choice institutionalism has difficulty explaining the complicated, variegated, and fluid patterns of Latin American politics. It overemphasizes the electoral and legislative arenas and—in general—the input side of politics; it overestimates the importance and causal impact of formal rules and institutions; it does not explain the origins of political change and often suggests a static image of political development; it offers an incomplete analysis of institutional creation by neglecting the importance of political beliefs; it cannot fully account for crisis politics; and it puts excessive, analytically arbitrary emphasis on “microfoundations.” The article questions whether these limitations can successfully be overcome, arguing that rational-choice institutionalism—while an important addition to the debate—is not inherently superior to other approaches applied in Latin American Studies. Kurt Weyland is associate professor of government at the University of Texas at Austin. He is the author of two books—Democracy without Equity: Failures of Reform in Brazil (Pittsburgh, 1996) andThe Politics of Market Reform in Fragile Democracies: Argentina, Brazil, Peru, and Venezuela (Princeton, 2002)—and of numerous journal articles on democratization, market reform, social policy, and populism in Latin America. His current research focuses on the diffusion of policy innovations across countries. I would like to thank Barry Ames, James Booth, Ruth Collier, Marcelo Costa Ferriera, Wendy Hunter, Mark Jones, Fabrice Lehoucq, Scott Mainwaring, Gerardo Munck, Anthony Pereira, Tim Power, Ken Roberts, Charles Shipan, Richard Snyder, Donna van Cott, and two anonymous reviewers for excellent comments.     

From Situations of Dependency to Globalized Social Democracy

President Cardoso's recent assessment of the prospects for “globalized social democracy” raises, once again, the question of what space for agency exists within the global political economy for actors in the South, which was central to the analysis Cardoso and Faletto presented in Dependency and Development 40 years ago. Dependency and Development's “historical–structural” approach balanced belief in the possibility of political agency with a keen appreciation of structural constraint. Cardoso's current exploration of global possibilities carries forward both tradition of the historical–structural method, arguing that social democracy is an option in the South and that the globalized social democrats in the South will play a growing role in shaping global political institutions. He does not explore the possibility that social democrats in the South may need to play a role in shaping global economic rules. This paper argues that reconstructing global market rules is crucial to the long-run success of “globalized social democracies” in the South and that such reconstruction, however difficult, lies within the realm of the historically viable.     

Citizenship,equality, and urban property rights in Latin America: The Peruvian case

Research on liberal democracy in newly developing countries has been hampered by the view of civil society as a bounded realm; by insufficient attention to power, class, and legal-juridical institutions; and by too limited a conception of social movements with democratic potential. In this study of urban migrants’ struggle for property rights, the migrants’ political action is found to be associated with a capitalist social movement. The legal changes that the movement helped institute and the means that it employed have enhanced democracy by extending property rights to the poor and by opening up policy processes to public debate and input. Insofar as liberal reform involves the law and its administration, it requires a positive, facilitative state, in spite of liberalism’s broadly antistatist commitments. The study also reveals that liberal reform can have a popular content even if supported by elites. The findings suggest that the realization of full citizenship rights is, for now, at least as crucial to the future of Latin American democracy as the narrowing of economic inequalities. David G. Becker is associate professor of government at Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755. He is the author ofThe New Bourgeoisie and the Limits of Dependency (Princeton University Press, 1982); a counthor ofPostimperialism (Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1987); and the author of “Beyond Dependency: Development and Democracy in the Era of International Capitalism,” in Dankwart A. Rustow and Kenneth P. Erickson (ededs.),Comparative Political Dynamic (HarperCollis, 1991), in addition to many other articles on aspects of political development. Becker’s current research centers of the nature of constitutionalism and democracy in Latin America. He is preparing a book-length treatment of the rule of law in Latin America, along with an edited book on postimperialism that will present new case studies of a variety of countries and world regions.     

Democracy, Law, and Comparative Politics

This article offers a revision of democratic theory in light of the experience of recently democratized countries, located outside of the northwestern quadrant of the world. First, various definitions of democracy that claim to follow Schumpeter and are usually considered to be “minimalist” or “processualist” are critically examined. Building upon but clarifying these conceptual efforts, a realistic and restricted, but not minimalist, definition of a democratic regime is proposed. Thereafter, this article argues that democracy should be analyzed not only at the level of the political regime but also in relation to the state—especially the state qua legal system—and to certain aspects of the overall social context. The main underlying theme that runs through this article is the concept of agency, especially as it is expressed in the legal system of existing democracies. I dedicate this article to my daughter Julia, for the metonymy and much love Guillermo O'Donnell is the Helen Kellogg Professor of Government at the University of Notre Dame. He has written many books and articles on authoritarianism, political transitions, democratization, and democratic theory. His latest book,Counterpoints, was published in 1998 by the University of Notre Dame Press. O'Donnell is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. I presented previous versions of this paper and received useful comments at seminars held in April and May 1999 at the University of North Carolina; Cornell University; Berlin's Wissenschaftszentrum; the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Atlanta, August 1999; and in September 1999 at the Kellogg Institute. I also appreciate the comments and criticisms received from Michael Brie, Maxwell Cameron, Jorgen Elklit, Robert Fishman, Ernesto Garzón Valdés, Jonathan Hartlyn, Osvaldo Iazzetta, Gabriela Ippolito-O'Donnell, Iván Jaksić, Oscar Landi, Hans-Joachim Lauth, Steven Levitsky, Juan Linz, Scott Mainwaring, Juan M. Abal Medina, Martha Merritt, Peter Moody, Gerardo Munck, Luis Pásara, Timothy Power, Adam Przeworski, Héctor Schamis, Sidney Tarrow. Charles Tilly, Ashutosh Varshney, and Ruth Zimmerling. I am particularly grateful for the careful revision and editing undertaken by Gerardo Munck and Ruth Collier for the present issue ofSCID.     

Development as institutional change: The pitfalls of monocropping and the potentials of deliberation

Development theory has moved from a single-minded focus on capital accumulation toward a more complex understanding of the institutions that make development possible. Yet, instead of expanding the range of institutional strategies explored, the most prominent policy consequence of this “institutional turn” has been the rise of “institutional monocropping”: the imposition of blueprints based on idealized versions of Anglo-American institutions, the applicability of which is presumed to transcend national circumstances and cultures. The disappointing results of monocropping suggest taking the institutional turn in a direction that would increase, rather than diminish, local input and experimentation. The examples of Porto Alegre, Brazil, and Kerala, India, reinforce Amartya Sen’s idea that “public discussion and exchange” should be at the heart of any trajectory of institutional change, and flag potential gains from strategies of “deliberative development” which rely on popular deliberation to set goals and allocate collective goods. Peter Evans teaches in the Sociology Department at the University of California, Berkeley, where he holds the Marjorie Meyer Eliaser Chair of International Studies. He is currently exploring the role of labor as a transnational social movement. His earlier research has focused on the role of the state in industrial development, an interest reflected in his bookEmbedded Autonomy: States and Industrial Transformation (Princeton University Press 1995). He is also interested in urban environmental issues, as indicated by the recent edited volume,Livable Cities: Urban Struggles for Livelihood and Sustainability (University of California Press 2002). I would like to thank the editors, Atul Kohli, Dani Rodrik, and Anne Wetlerberg for their valuable comments and suggestions. Remaining analytical and empirical errors are, of course, my own. For an earlier effort (in Portugese) to make this argument, see Evans 2003.     

Institutions for high-quality growth: What they are and how to acquire them

This article opens with a discussion of the types of institutions that allow markets to perform adequately. While we can identify in broad terms what these are, there is no unique mapping between markets and the non-market institutions that underpin them. The paper emphasizes the importance of “local knowledge”, and argues that a strategy of institution building must not over-emphasize best-practice “blueprints” at the expense of experimentation. Participatory political systems are the most effective ones for processing and aggregating local knowledge. Democracy is a meta-institution for building good institutions. A range of evidence indicates that participatory democracies enable higher-quality growth. Sakenn pe prie dan sa fason (Everyone can pray as he likes.) —Mauritian folk wisdom This paper was originally prepared for the International Monetary Fund’s Conference on Second-Generation Reforms, Washington, DC, November 8–9, 1999. I thank Ruth Collier, Steve Fish, Mohsin Khan, Saleh Nsouli, conference participants, and an anonymous referee for helpful comments. Dani Rodrik is professor of international political economy at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. He is also the research coordinator for the Group of 24 (G-24), a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research, and a research fellow of the Centre for Economic Policy Research (London). He serves as an advisory committee member of the Institute for International Economics, senior advisor of the Overseas Development Council, and advisory committee member of the Economic Research Forum for the Arab Countries, Iran and Turkey. Professor Rodrik’s recent research is concerned with the consequences of international economic integration, the role of conflict-management institutions in determining economic performance, and the political economy of policy reform.