State Capacity, Social Fragmentation, and Public Goods Provision: A Cross‐National Comparative Analysis

ABSTRACT This study investigates why state capacity does not always translate into improved public goods provision. I argue that the effect of state capacity depends critically on state–society interactions, which are shaped by regime type and, more decisively, by social fragmentation. While existing research often assumes a uniformly positive impact of capacity, this study shows otherwise. In democracies, institutionalized responsiveness ensures that higher capacity consistently enhances provision, regardless of fragmentation. In authoritarian states, however, outcomes hinge on the degree of social fragmentation: where fragmentation is high, strong states provide more goods to mitigate conflict and maintain legitimacy; where society is cohesive, high capacity may instead be diverted to elite projects, exclusionary distribution, or control. Using panel data on 177 countries (1960–2015), I demonstrate that state capacity's effect is conditional, not absolute. These findings highlight how social fragmentation, interacting with political regime, fundamentally shapes the governance returns of state capacity.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Governance
Published
2025-11-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.70088
Primary Topic
Political Conflict and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

State Capacity, Social Fragmentation, and Public Goods Provision: A Cross‐National Comparative Analysis

Jiali Shen
Governance
Political Conflict and Governance
article

State Capacity, Social Fragmentation, and Public Goods Provision: A Cross‐National Comparative Analysis

Jiali Shen
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study investigates why state capacity does not always translate into improved public goods provision. I argue that the effect of state capacity depends critically on state–society interactions, which are shaped by regime type and, more decisively, by social fragmentation. While existing research often assumes a uniformly positive impact of capacity, this study shows otherwise. In democracies, institutionalized responsiveness ensures that higher capacity consistently enhances provision, regardless of fragmentation. In authoritarian states, however, outcomes hinge on the degree of social fragmentation: where fragmentation is high, strong states provide more goods to mitigate conflict and maintain legitimacy; where society is cohesive, high capacity may instead be diverted to elite projects, exclusionary distribution, or control. Using panel data on 177 countries (1960–2015), I demonstrate that state capacity's effect is conditional, not absolute. These findings highlight how social fragmentation, interacting with political regime, fundamentally shapes the governance returns of state capacity.

GovernanceVol. 39(1)
Kobe Design University (JP), Kobe University (JP)
Openalex Percentile: Top 55%
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.

State Capacity, Social Fragmentation, and Public Goods Provision: A Cross‐National Comparative Analysis — Jiali Shen · Governance (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS