Democracy and State Development: Patterns of Public Spending in the First Two Waves of Democratization

How do core principles of modern democracy impact the development of state spending? Drawing on Dahl’s (1971) conceptualization of polyarchy, we explain that public budgets in modern states evolved according to how electoral competition and suffrage incorporated key actors within societies. Before contestation and suffrage, land-owning elites led states that focused spending on repressive capacity to maintain regime security. Contestation without broad participation incorporated urban elites who benefited from spending on economic development. Extending suffrage to the masses expanded spending on social welfare but only when regimes allowed for political competition. To test the hypotheses, we collect data on patterns of government finance for over thirty countries across the globe between the early 19th and mid-20th centuries. Two-way fixed effects models and multiple sensitivity analyses offer strong evidence for the theoretical expectations. The findings expand on a substantial literature to form a more complete understanding of democracy and public budgets.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Comparative Political Studies
Published
2024-12-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140241302723
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Social Policy and Reform Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.92

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Democracy and State Development: Patterns of Public Spending in the First Two Waves of Democratization

Masaaki Higashijima, Austin M. Mitchell
4 citations
Comparative Political Studies
Social Policy and Reform Studies
8.92
article

Democracy and State Development: Patterns of Public Spending in the First Two Waves of Democratization

Masaaki Higashijima, Austin M. Mitchell
article en
4 citations

Abstract

How do core principles of modern democracy impact the development of state spending? Drawing on Dahl’s (1971) conceptualization of polyarchy, we explain that public budgets in modern states evolved according to how electoral competition and suffrage incorporated key actors within societies. Before contestation and suffrage, land-owning elites led states that focused spending on repressive capacity to maintain regime security. Contestation without broad participation incorporated urban elites who benefited from spending on economic development. Extending suffrage to the masses expanded spending on social welfare but only when regimes allowed for political competition. To test the hypotheses, we collect data on patterns of government finance for over thirty countries across the globe between the early 19th and mid-20th centuries. Two-way fixed effects models and multiple sensitivity analyses offer strong evidence for the theoretical expectations. The findings expand on a substantial literature to form a more complete understanding of democracy and public budgets.

Comparative Political StudiesVol. 58(11)
Hiroshima University (JP), Higashihiroshima Medical Center (JP), The University of Tokyo (JP)
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Social Policy and Reform Studies
8.92
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.