Political Institutions, Policy Choice and the Survival of Leaders

Institutional arrangements influence the type of policies that leaders pursue. We examine two institutional variables: size of the selectorate (S) – the set of people who have an institutional say in choosing leaders – and the size of the winning coalition (W) – the minimal set of people whose suppo...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:British journal of political science 2002-10, Vol.32 (4), p.559-590
Hauptverfasser: BUENO DE MESQUITA, BRUCE, MORROW, JAMES D., SIVERSON, RANDOLPH M., SMITH, ALASTAIR
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 590
container_issue 4
container_start_page 559
container_title British journal of political science
container_volume 32
creator BUENO DE MESQUITA, BRUCE
MORROW, JAMES D.
SIVERSON, RANDOLPH M.
SMITH, ALASTAIR
description Institutional arrangements influence the type of policies that leaders pursue. We examine two institutional variables: size of the selectorate (S) – the set of people who have an institutional say in choosing leaders – and the size of the winning coalition (W) – the minimal set of people whose support the incumbent needs in order to remain in power. The larger the winning coalition, the greater the emphasis leaders place on effective public policy. When W is small, leaders focus on providing private goods to their small group of supporters at the expense of the provision of public goods. The size of the selectorate influences how hard leaders work on behalf of their supporters. The greater the size of the selectorate, the more current supporters fear exclusion from future coalitions. This induces a norm of loyalty that enables leaders to reduce their effort and still survive. As a first step towards a theory of endogenous selection of institutions, we characterize the institutional preferences of the different segments of society based on the consequences of these institutions for individual welfare. We conclude by examining the implication of the model for the tenure of leaders, public policy, economic growth, corruption, taxation and ethnic politics.
doi_str_mv 10.1017/S0007123402000236
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60629360</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0007123402000236</cupid><jstor_id>4092374</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>4092374</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c518t-d15e970cb411d66fd83cfd2a323611e424d82613a97cdcb938db8d671a2a76153</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kMtKxDAUhoMoOI4-gOCiuHBlNSdpk3Yp4xUGL6gbNyGTpJqx02iSir69KSMiiqtcvu8__ByEtgEfAAZ-eIsx5kBogUm6EcpW0AgKVucEgKyi0YDzga-jjRDm6VnRCkbo6Nq1Nlol2-yiC9HGPlrXhf1s-Fcf2eTJWWUy2eksPpnstvdv9i3JrsmmRmrjwyZaa2QbzNbXOUb3pyd3k_N8enV2MTma5qqEKuYaSlNzrGYFgGas0RVVjSaSpq4ApiCFrggDKmuutJrVtNKzSjMOkkjOoKRjtLec--Lda29CFAsblGlb2RnXB8EwIzVlOIm7v8S5632XugmoS0pIwQcJlpLyLgRvGvHi7UL6DwFYDBsVfzaaMjvLzDxE578DBa4J5UXC-RLbEM37N5b-WTBOeSnY2Y3gl4xMHu6OBSSfflWQi5m3-tH8KPpviU9Vl43o</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>195322470</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Political Institutions, Policy Choice and the Survival of Leaders</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>BUENO DE MESQUITA, BRUCE ; MORROW, JAMES D. ; SIVERSON, RANDOLPH M. ; SMITH, ALASTAIR</creator><creatorcontrib>BUENO DE MESQUITA, BRUCE ; MORROW, JAMES D. ; SIVERSON, RANDOLPH M. ; SMITH, ALASTAIR</creatorcontrib><description>Institutional arrangements influence the type of policies that leaders pursue. We examine two institutional variables: size of the selectorate (S) – the set of people who have an institutional say in choosing leaders – and the size of the winning coalition (W) – the minimal set of people whose support the incumbent needs in order to remain in power. The larger the winning coalition, the greater the emphasis leaders place on effective public policy. When W is small, leaders focus on providing private goods to their small group of supporters at the expense of the provision of public goods. The size of the selectorate influences how hard leaders work on behalf of their supporters. The greater the size of the selectorate, the more current supporters fear exclusion from future coalitions. This induces a norm of loyalty that enables leaders to reduce their effort and still survive. As a first step towards a theory of endogenous selection of institutions, we characterize the institutional preferences of the different segments of society based on the consequences of these institutions for individual welfare. We conclude by examining the implication of the model for the tenure of leaders, public policy, economic growth, corruption, taxation and ethnic politics.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-1234</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-2112</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0007123402000236</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BPLSBO</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Autocracy ; Coalitions ; Constituency ; Democracy ; Economic resources ; Incumbents ; Influence ; Institutions ; Leadership ; Mathematical models ; Policy Making ; Political institutions ; Political Representation ; Political science ; Political systems ; Polities ; Private goods ; Public Goods ; Public policy ; Research Article</subject><ispartof>British journal of political science, 2002-10, Vol.32 (4), p.559-590</ispartof><rights>2002 Cambridge University Press</rights><rights>Copyright 2002 Cambridge University Press</rights><rights>Copyright Cambridge University Press, Publishing Division Oct 2002</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c518t-d15e970cb411d66fd83cfd2a323611e424d82613a97cdcb938db8d671a2a76153</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/4092374$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123402000236/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,776,780,799,12824,27901,27902,55603,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>BUENO DE MESQUITA, BRUCE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MORROW, JAMES D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SIVERSON, RANDOLPH M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SMITH, ALASTAIR</creatorcontrib><title>Political Institutions, Policy Choice and the Survival of Leaders</title><title>British journal of political science</title><addtitle>Brit. J. Polit. Sci</addtitle><description>Institutional arrangements influence the type of policies that leaders pursue. We examine two institutional variables: size of the selectorate (S) – the set of people who have an institutional say in choosing leaders – and the size of the winning coalition (W) – the minimal set of people whose support the incumbent needs in order to remain in power. The larger the winning coalition, the greater the emphasis leaders place on effective public policy. When W is small, leaders focus on providing private goods to their small group of supporters at the expense of the provision of public goods. The size of the selectorate influences how hard leaders work on behalf of their supporters. The greater the size of the selectorate, the more current supporters fear exclusion from future coalitions. This induces a norm of loyalty that enables leaders to reduce their effort and still survive. As a first step towards a theory of endogenous selection of institutions, we characterize the institutional preferences of the different segments of society based on the consequences of these institutions for individual welfare. We conclude by examining the implication of the model for the tenure of leaders, public policy, economic growth, corruption, taxation and ethnic politics.</description><subject>Autocracy</subject><subject>Coalitions</subject><subject>Constituency</subject><subject>Democracy</subject><subject>Economic resources</subject><subject>Incumbents</subject><subject>Influence</subject><subject>Institutions</subject><subject>Leadership</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Policy Making</subject><subject>Political institutions</subject><subject>Political Representation</subject><subject>Political science</subject><subject>Political systems</subject><subject>Polities</subject><subject>Private goods</subject><subject>Public Goods</subject><subject>Public policy</subject><subject>Research Article</subject><issn>0007-1234</issn><issn>1469-2112</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><sourceid>PQHSC</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kMtKxDAUhoMoOI4-gOCiuHBlNSdpk3Yp4xUGL6gbNyGTpJqx02iSir69KSMiiqtcvu8__ByEtgEfAAZ-eIsx5kBogUm6EcpW0AgKVucEgKyi0YDzga-jjRDm6VnRCkbo6Nq1Nlol2-yiC9HGPlrXhf1s-Fcf2eTJWWUy2eksPpnstvdv9i3JrsmmRmrjwyZaa2QbzNbXOUb3pyd3k_N8enV2MTma5qqEKuYaSlNzrGYFgGas0RVVjSaSpq4ApiCFrggDKmuutJrVtNKzSjMOkkjOoKRjtLec--Lda29CFAsblGlb2RnXB8EwIzVlOIm7v8S5632XugmoS0pIwQcJlpLyLgRvGvHi7UL6DwFYDBsVfzaaMjvLzDxE578DBa4J5UXC-RLbEM37N5b-WTBOeSnY2Y3gl4xMHu6OBSSfflWQi5m3-tH8KPpviU9Vl43o</recordid><startdate>20021001</startdate><enddate>20021001</enddate><creator>BUENO DE MESQUITA, BRUCE</creator><creator>MORROW, JAMES D.</creator><creator>SIVERSON, RANDOLPH M.</creator><creator>SMITH, ALASTAIR</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQHSC</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20021001</creationdate><title>Political Institutions, Policy Choice and the Survival of Leaders</title><author>BUENO DE MESQUITA, BRUCE ; MORROW, JAMES D. ; SIVERSON, RANDOLPH M. ; SMITH, ALASTAIR</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c518t-d15e970cb411d66fd83cfd2a323611e424d82613a97cdcb938db8d671a2a76153</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Autocracy</topic><topic>Coalitions</topic><topic>Constituency</topic><topic>Democracy</topic><topic>Economic resources</topic><topic>Incumbents</topic><topic>Influence</topic><topic>Institutions</topic><topic>Leadership</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Policy Making</topic><topic>Political institutions</topic><topic>Political Representation</topic><topic>Political science</topic><topic>Political systems</topic><topic>Polities</topic><topic>Private goods</topic><topic>Public Goods</topic><topic>Public policy</topic><topic>Research Article</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>BUENO DE MESQUITA, BRUCE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MORROW, JAMES D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SIVERSON, RANDOLPH M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SMITH, ALASTAIR</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Military Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Military Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>History Study Center</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>British journal of political science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>BUENO DE MESQUITA, BRUCE</au><au>MORROW, JAMES D.</au><au>SIVERSON, RANDOLPH M.</au><au>SMITH, ALASTAIR</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Political Institutions, Policy Choice and the Survival of Leaders</atitle><jtitle>British journal of political science</jtitle><addtitle>Brit. J. Polit. Sci</addtitle><date>2002-10-01</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>559</spage><epage>590</epage><pages>559-590</pages><issn>0007-1234</issn><eissn>1469-2112</eissn><coden>BPLSBO</coden><abstract>Institutional arrangements influence the type of policies that leaders pursue. We examine two institutional variables: size of the selectorate (S) – the set of people who have an institutional say in choosing leaders – and the size of the winning coalition (W) – the minimal set of people whose support the incumbent needs in order to remain in power. The larger the winning coalition, the greater the emphasis leaders place on effective public policy. When W is small, leaders focus on providing private goods to their small group of supporters at the expense of the provision of public goods. The size of the selectorate influences how hard leaders work on behalf of their supporters. The greater the size of the selectorate, the more current supporters fear exclusion from future coalitions. This induces a norm of loyalty that enables leaders to reduce their effort and still survive. As a first step towards a theory of endogenous selection of institutions, we characterize the institutional preferences of the different segments of society based on the consequences of these institutions for individual welfare. We conclude by examining the implication of the model for the tenure of leaders, public policy, economic growth, corruption, taxation and ethnic politics.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S0007123402000236</doi><tpages>32</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0007-1234
ispartof British journal of political science, 2002-10, Vol.32 (4), p.559-590
issn 0007-1234
1469-2112
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60629360
source Jstor Complete Legacy; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Cambridge University Press Journals Complete
subjects Autocracy
Coalitions
Constituency
Democracy
Economic resources
Incumbents
Influence
Institutions
Leadership
Mathematical models
Policy Making
Political institutions
Political Representation
Political science
Political systems
Polities
Private goods
Public Goods
Public policy
Research Article
title Political Institutions, Policy Choice and the Survival of Leaders
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-12T09%3A01%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Political%20Institutions,%20Policy%20Choice%20and%20the%20Survival%20of%20Leaders&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20political%20science&rft.au=BUENO%20DE%20MESQUITA,%20BRUCE&rft.date=2002-10-01&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=559&rft.epage=590&rft.pages=559-590&rft.issn=0007-1234&rft.eissn=1469-2112&rft.coden=BPLSBO&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0007123402000236&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E4092374%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=195322470&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0007123402000236&rft_jstor_id=4092374&rfr_iscdi=true