A Dynamic Model of Authoritarian Social Control

Abstract Authoritarian regimes often use targeted social control—unequal application of the law to limit expressive freedom and enforce social conformity. At the same time, their methods appear less draconian than in the past. In this model, an authority structures punishments and rewards to compel adherence to its preferred norm. The authority’s commitment is time-limited and depends on imperfectly informative signals of a citizen’s behaviour. Given two citizens with the same observed behaviour, the authority imposes harsher punishments on the poorer and/or ex ante dissident individual. Lighter punishments are imposed on the wealthier citizen to prevent “over-compliance”. Wealth inequality increases over time. Some citizens become prosperous “lackeys” while others become destitute from confiscation. In stable regimes with high state capacity, the authority reduces punishments and/or increases rewards to allow citizens to accumulate wealth, leading to social conformity and balanced growth in the long run. In unstable regimes with low capacity, the citizenry splits into groups of wealthy lackeys and destitute proles.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Review of Economic Studies
Published
2024-11-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdae109
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Sociopolitical Dynamics in Russia
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.13
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Dynamic Model of Authoritarian Social Control

Roger Lagunoff
1 citations
The Review of Economic Studies
Sociopolitical Dynamics in Russia
1.13
article

A Dynamic Model of Authoritarian Social Control

Roger Lagunoff
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Authoritarian regimes often use targeted social control—unequal application of the law to limit expressive freedom and enforce social conformity. At the same time, their methods appear less draconian than in the past. In this model, an authority structures punishments and rewards to compel adherence to its preferred norm. The authority’s commitment is time-limited and depends on imperfectly informative signals of a citizen’s behaviour. Given two citizens with the same observed behaviour, the authority imposes harsher punishments on the poorer and/or ex ante dissident individual. Lighter punishments are imposed on the wealthier citizen to prevent “over-compliance”. Wealth inequality increases over time. Some citizens become prosperous “lackeys” while others become destitute from confiscation. In stable regimes with high state capacity, the authority reduces punishments and/or increases rewards to allow citizens to accumulate wealth, leading to social conformity and balanced growth in the long run. In unstable regimes with low capacity, the citizenry splits into groups of wealthy lackeys and destitute proles.

The Review of Economic StudiesVol. 92(5)
Georgetown University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Sociopolitical Dynamics in Russia
1.13
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.