Presidential Succession and Democratic Transitions
42 Pages Posted: 18 Apr 2007
Date Written: March 2007
Abstract
Why might presidential succession in partly- and non-democratic regimes render the probability of democratic transition more likely? Many presidential regimes in developing world are highly personalist and their stability depends on the strength of their rulers. Transitions are often initiated and driven by elite splits, and the process of presidential succession triggers these splits and uncertainty along the chain of command. Building upon previous work on liberalizing elections (Howard and Roessler 2006), I find that presidential designated successors lose elections more often than the long-standing incumbents, which increases the probability of democratic change, since the former compete against the pro-democratic opposition in a recent, 1990-2004 period. I also find that the presence of hegemonic parties mitigates these effects.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Recommended Papers
-
A Theory of Endogenous Institutional Change
By Avner Greif and David Laitin
-
Micro Theory and Recent Developments in the Study of Economic Institutions Through Economic History
By Avner Greif
-
The Adoption of Workers' Compensation in the United States 1900-1930
By Price V. Fishback and Shawn Kantor
-
Trade, Institutions and Religious Tolerance: Evidence from India
By Saumitra Jha
-
The Adoption of Workers' Compensation in the United States 1900-1930
By Price V. Fishback and Shawn Kantor
-
The Killing Game: A Theory of Non-Democratic Succession
By Georgy Egorov and Konstantin Sonin
-
The Killing Game: Reputation and Knowledge in Non-Democratic Succession
By Georgy Egorov and Konstantin Sonin
-
Economic History and Game Theory: A Survey
By Avner Greif
-
Citizens, Autocrats, and Plotters: An Agency Theory of Coups D'Etat