Chapter 9 Study Notes: Democracy and Development

Chapter 9: Democracy and Development I: From Development to Democracy

9.1 Introduction

• This chapter outlines the causal relationship between democracy and development, focusing on how development can lead to democracy.

• Key focus: Examining the hindrances posed by poverty on democratisation processes and the implications for the slow rate of democratisation in the developing world.

9.1.1 Learning Outcomes

By the end of this chapter, students should be able to:

• Discuss the theoretical links between poverty and democratisation regarding both establishment and maintenance of democratic institutions.

• Assess the role of collective action, natural resources, industrialisation, and inequality in influencing the pace of democratisation.

• Explain the differing rates of democratisation in various regions of the developing world.

• Evaluate competing hypotheses regarding the future of democratisation in current non-democratic regions of the world.

9.1.2 Essential Reading

1. Acemoglu, D. & Robinson, J.A. - Chapter 11 ‘The Virtuous Circle’

2. Przeworski, A. - ‘The Poor and the Viability of Democracy’, in Krishna, A. (ed.) Poverty, Participation, and Democracy: A Global Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. [ISBN 9780521729604]

3. Rodrik, D. - ‘Is Liberal Democracy Feasible in Developing Countries?’, Studies in Comparative International Development, 51(1), 2016, pp.50–59.

9.1.3 Further Reading

High Priority

4. Inglehart, R. & Welzel, C. - ‘How Development Leads to Democracy: What We Know about Modernization’, Foreign Affairs, 88(2), 2009, pp.33–48.

5. Knutsen, C.H. et al. - ‘Economic Development and Democracy: An Electoral Connection’, V-Dem Working Paper No. 2015:16, The V-Dem Institute, 2015.

6. Reilly, B. - ‘An Elephant’s Graveyard? Democracy and Development in East Asia’, Government and Opposition, 52(1), 2017, pp.162–83.

Lower Priority

7. Acemoglu, D. & Robinson, J.A. - Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. [ISBN 9780521855266].

8. Bradshaw, S. & Howard, P.N. - ‘Troops, Trolls and Troublemakers: A Global Inventory of Organized Social Media Manipulation’, Computational Propaganda Research Project Working Paper No. 2017.12, University of Oxford, 2017.

9. Bueno de Mesquita, B. & Downs, G.W. - ‘Development and Democracy’, Foreign Affairs, 84(5), 2005, pp.77–86.

9.2 Poverty and Democracy: A Historical Overview

• Historically, most states have remained poor and non-democratic, with significant portions of the world experiencing democracy only in the last century.

• Over this period, there has been a significant reduction in poverty across both developed and many developing countries.

• Notably, democracies can regress back into autocracies, creating a non-linear relationship between democracy and development.

• The correlation between poverty reduction and democratisation is complex and merits exploration.

• Key Scholars: Seymour Martin Lipset, who articulated the belief that wealthier nations have a higher likelihood of sustaining democracy. He asserted that reducing poverty would enable the poor to adopt longer-term political perspectives, reducing support for dictators.

Box 9.1: A Definition of Democracy

• Definition: Democracy is defined as a system where parties can lose elections, characterized by competition organized by rules and periodic winners and losers (Przeworski, 1991).

9.3 Inequality, Poverty, and Democratisation

• Lipset's assertion has endured criticism and analysis, with subsequent scholars such as Barrington Moore reinforcing the need for a robust middle class to foster democracy.

• Moore’s findings are based on historical precedents across various countries, including France and Germany.

• However, evidence does not strongly support Lipset's thesis, which posits that the poor are inherently disposed to dictatorship.

• In several developing nations, voting patterns indicate the poor are more active participants in elections compared to wealthier citizens, as seen in diverging U.S. trends.

Activity 9.1

• 
  

• Activity involves analyzing a list of countries from Table 9.1 based on their Polity2 scores from 1995 to 2015, identifying common factors related to democratising vs. failing democracies.
  
  
  
  Table 9.1: Highest Absolute Declines and Increases in Democracy Levels (1990–2015)
  

  Country	Polity2 Score, 1995	Polity2 Score, 2015	Change in Polity2 Score
  Gambia	8	–5	–13
  Haiti	7	0	–7
  Thailand	3	–3	–6
  Turkey	9	3	–6
  Indonesia	–7	9	16
  Kenya	–7	9	16
  Zambia	–9	7	16
  9.4 Democratic Backsliding and Development

  • Scholars such as Acemoglu and Robinson have contributed significantly to the understanding of the democracy-development nexus identified by Lipset.

  • They argue that development boosts citizens' ability to mobilize collectively against regimes, enabling democratic transitions.

  • Key points from their work:
      - Citizens can gain de facto power through education and economic growth, facilitating political change.
      - The choice faced by dictatorial regimes between repression and concession is economically driven, influenced by the possibility of losing wealth through taxation of fixed capital.

  • In light of this, the relationship between inequality and democracy requires a careful balance to foster pro-democracy activism and prevent elite resistance.

  • Various case studies illustrate these concepts:
      1. United Kingdom: Development fostered citizen power, leading to democracy.
      2. Apartheid South Africa: Elites resisted democratisation due to fear of land redistribution.
      3. Argentina: A turbulent political history influenced by a landed elite and inequality.
      4. Singapore: Low inequality resulting in minimal demands for political reform.

  9.5 Explaining Poverty Reduction and (Non)-Democratisation in the Developing World

  • Przeworski offers insights into why some democracies fail while others endure under poverty.

  • His observations include two mechanisms to maintain democracy in impoverished nations:
      1. Suppressing poor demands for redistribution, often shifting political rhetoric towards social issues like ethnicity and religion.
      2. Maintaining low income inequality minimizes calls for wealth redistribution.

  • India exemplifies a nation where low inequality and political strategies have supported the longevity of its democracy despite high poverty levels.

  Activity 9.2

  • Create a list of economic policies to implement that could lead your non-democratic country towards democracy without raising alarm among superiors.

  9.6 Questions of Theories and Political Landscapes

  • Current examples such as China challenge existing theories regarding development and democratisation.

  • Despite substantial poverty reduction, China remains non-democratic, illustrating that development does not guarantee democratic transition.

  • Similar patterns are seen in Gulf states and Southeast Asian countries, suggesting that reliance on natural resources may deter reforms.

  • Przeworski’s assertion: Shows that development influences stability within democracies rather than guaranteeing new democratic formations.

  Activity 9.3

  • Research government-directed changes to enhance the probability of democratisation in China, and discuss findings with peers.

  9.7 Overview of Chapter

  • The chapter examined the complex and established relationship between democracy and development, highlighting three major theories:
      1. Lipset’s theory regarding the poor and non-democratic values, which was contested through empirical data.
      2. Acemoglu & Robinson’s collective action model, where poverty inhibits citizen mobilization.
      3. Przeworski’s model focusing on stabilizing democratic systems through equitable policies.

  • Overall, these frameworks help clarify the dynamics of development, democracy, and the persistence of authoritarian regimes in specific global contexts.

  9.8 Reminder of Learning Outcomes

  • Ability to discuss theoretical connections between poverty and democratisation.

  • Assessment of factors affecting the pace of democratisation (collective action, natural resources, industrialisation, inequality).

  • Understanding variances in democratisation rates in the developing world.

  • Evaluation of hypotheses concerning future democratization prospects in non-democratic nations today.

  Test Your Knowledge and Understanding

  1. Why are poor countries so often non-democratic?

  2. Discuss the notion that economic development does not lead to democratisation but prevents the failure of democracies.