Dimensions of State Capacity and Modes of Democratic Breakdown

Which dimensions of state capacity are most effective in safeguarding democracies from distinct modes of breakdown? This article theorizes and examines how two fundamental dimensions of state capacity—coercive and administrative—affect democratic stability differently depending on whether threats arise from incumbents or nonincumbents. Based on a global analysis covering democratic breakdowns from 1789 to 2020, we find that administrative capacity, characterized by meritocratic recruitment, impartial administration, and predictable enforcement, significantly reduces the risk of incumbent-led democratic breakdowns. In contrast, coercive capacity indicators, such as territorial control and military resources, do not robustly relate to either incumbent-led or nonincumbent-led breakdowns. Our study highlights the critical role of high-quality administrative institutions for democratic stability.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Political Studies
Published
2025-06-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00323217251344758
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Political Conflict and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

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

Dimensions of State Capacity and Modes of Democratic Breakdown

Carl Henrik Knutsen, Svend‐Erik Skaaning, David Andersen
1 citations
Political Studies
Political Conflict and Governance
article

Dimensions of State Capacity and Modes of Democratic Breakdown

Carl Henrik Knutsen, Svend‐Erik Skaaning, David Andersen
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Which dimensions of state capacity are most effective in safeguarding democracies from distinct modes of breakdown? This article theorizes and examines how two fundamental dimensions of state capacity—coercive and administrative—affect democratic stability differently depending on whether threats arise from incumbents or nonincumbents. Based on a global analysis covering democratic breakdowns from 1789 to 2020, we find that administrative capacity, characterized by meritocratic recruitment, impartial administration, and predictable enforcement, significantly reduces the risk of incumbent-led democratic breakdowns. In contrast, coercive capacity indicators, such as territorial control and military resources, do not robustly relate to either incumbent-led or nonincumbent-led breakdowns. Our study highlights the critical role of high-quality administrative institutions for democratic stability.

Political Studies
University of Oslo (NO), Aarhus University (DK)
H2020 European Research Council
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 81%
Political Conflict and Governance
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.