CP - week 3

Introduction to State Emergence

  • Topic: Understanding the emergence of the state in comparative politics.

  • Key thinkers: Thomas Hobbes and Mancur Olson.

Lecture 3 Overview

  • Focus: Why and how did the state emerge?

  • Empirical evidence discussed:

    • Hierarchies in pre-industrial societies (Mayshar, Moav, and Pascali, 2022).

    • Armed actors in the DRC (Sánchez de la Sierra, 2019).

    • Early states in southern Iraq (Allen, Bertazzini, Heldring, 2023).

Thomas Hobbes’ Theory of State Formation

Concept of the State of Nature

  • Hobbes' idea: Imagined society without government characterized by conflict.

  • Life in the state of nature:

    • Described as solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

    • Lack of safety leading to absence of industry, agriculture, and knowledge.

    • Individuals live in constant fear of violent death.

Implications of the State of Nature

  • Violence prevents cooperative activities like farming.

  • Each individual’s security depends solely on their strength.

Mancur Olson’s Critique of Hobbes

Collective Action Problem

  • Critique: Small groups may achieve peaceful order by voluntary agreements, but large groups struggle.

  • Explanation: Individuals bear full costs while benefits are shared, leading to an incentive to free-ride.

Public Goods Nature of Peace and Order

  • Peace and order are public goods that are non-excludable.

  • Resulting collective action problems can cause under-provision of these goods.

Olson’s Theory of State Formation

Rational Self-Interest

  • Formation of government arises from self-interest, particularly among those with the capacity for violence.

  • Emphasis on stationary bandits who offer stability and protection.

    • They monopolize violence and establish a predictably taxing environment that incentivizes production and investment.

Stationary Bandits vs. Roving Bandits

  • Stationary bandits provide order by monopolizing theft and creating a stable tax environment.

  • Roving bandits cause chaos but can transition to stationary bandits if it serves their interest to establish order and collect taxes.

Empirical Evidence for State Formation

Role of Land Productivity

  • Higher agricultural output leads to the emergence of complex hierarchies due to surpluses facilitating elite development.

  • The conventional view is challenged by findings indicating that the type of crops (cereal vs. tubers) plays a significant role.

Insights on Armed Actors in the DRC

  • Loss of government control led to armed groups fulfilling roles typically associated with the state.

  • Armed actors provide essential functions, such as protection and taxation, similar to stationary bandits.

Theoretical Comparison: Grain Types

Appropriability of Resources

  • Difference between root/tubers and cereals affects taxation:

    • Cereals are storable and easier to tax than perishable root crops.

  • The shift to cereal farming promotes the establishment of governing bodies to manage surpluses.

Conclusion: Exam Preparation Points

Key Questions:

  • Describe Hobbes and Olson’s views on state formation.

  • Define the state of nature and the implications of Hobbes’ theory as a demand-side explanation.

  • Explain collective action problems and their relevance to Olson’s critique.

  • Link empirical studies to the theoretical frameworks discussed. 1. **Hobbes’ Views on State Formation**: Thomas Hobbes believed that in the absence of government, society would exist in a 'state of nature', characterized by chaos and violence. This condition drives individuals to seek a strong, centralized authority to maintain peace and protect life, leading to state formation. 2. **Olson’s Views on State Formation**: Mancur Olson critiqued Hobbes by introducing the concept of the collective action problem, where small groups may achieve order voluntarily, but larger groups struggle due to incentives for free-riding. He argues that governments arise from the rational self-interest of individuals, particularly those who have the capacity for violence, leading to the establishment of order by monopolizing violence. 3. **State of Nature Implications**: Hobbes’ theory suggests that in the state of nature, individuals live in constant fear of violent death, which prevents cooperation and economic development. Therefore, the establishment of governance is vital for fostering safety and stability, necessary conditions for any form of industry and societal progress. 4. **Collective Action Problems**: These problems arise because peace and order are public goods that are non-excludable and can lead to under-provision. Olson highlights that while individuals bear the costs of establishing order, the benefits are shared, creating an incentive for individuals to free-ride rather than contribute to collective security. 5. **Linking Empirical Studies to Theoretical Frameworks**: Empirical evidence like the roles of armed actors in the DRC and the impact of land productivity on state emergence support these theories. For instance, in the DRC, when government control diminished, armed groups began to fulfill state-like functions, showcasing the necessity of governance for order. Additionally, studies show that agricultural surpluses create hierarchies, challenging previous notions about state formation by suggesting that the type of crops cultivated influences governance formation.