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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | British journal of political science 2002-10, Vol.32 (4), p.559-590 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
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 |