Democracy and Redistribution: The Role of Regime Revisited

Abstract

This study challenges a well-supported institutionalist theory in comparative politics that links democracy with higher levels of redistribution as well as studies that link authoritarianism with welfare state liberalization. Using pooled cross-sectional data for ten post-communist countries spanning twenty-five years and a dynamic model specification, the study shows that, contrary to what the institutionalist theory predicts, post-communist democratic governments redistribute about 0.6 percent less of their GDP on social protection in the short term and 1.3 percent less in the long term than post-communist autocrats do. However, consistent with the cultural legacies hypothesis, there are no differences when it comes to redistribution of life chances through health care and education. I attribute the finding that post-communist autocracies redistribute more via social spending and are reluctant to liberalize their welfare states to their need to maintain popular legitimacy in a region where citizens are accustomed to high levels of redistribution and popular protests often lead to regime turnover. I argue that post-communist democracies have other available mechanisms to maintain their legitimacy, namely, free and fair elections, while post-communist autocratic governments have to rely on redistribution to do so. The findings have implications for our understanding of authoritarian resilience in the region.

Understanding Social Security Development: Lessons From the Chinese Case

“…Limitations on the expansion of resource bases resulted in furious discussions regarding proper or efficient measures of social security implementation. Scholars frequently used “political matters” to account for the diversity of social security systems (Beloshitzkaya, 2020; Stephens, 1979). In this respect, power resource theory became the most famous explanation.…”

“…Scholars have also demonstrated the importance of the intensity of electoral competition among parties and voters in the development and variation of social security (Beloshitzkaya, 2020; Hicks & Swank, 1984). The class content of elections is altered by high voter turnout, which generally reflects increases in the participation of lower status and previously excluded groups, thereby shifting the center of political power to the left (Iversen, 2001).…”

“…For instance, scholars like Feldstein (2018) have highlighted the ongoing exhaustion of the social security fund in America. Studies on Eastern Europe have observed more generous social expenditure in postcommunist autocratic countries compared with postcommunist democratic countries (Vera, 2020). East Asian studies have tended to focus on the positive impact of social security development on economic growth (Zhao, 2013), often emphasizing the importance of traditional culture in the development of social security.…”

Development of the System of Social Protection in Ukraine in the Context of European Choice

“…The further studies in the 1970s were directed towards highlighting the advantages of social security in affluent democracies, in particular Swedish, French and Swiss healthcare systems, which proved that centralization and insulation of central executive power authorities from excessive parliamentary control is an important condition for success (Immergut, 1992). In the 21 st century, the research has continued with a focus on the problems and their solutions under conditions of globalization, identification of advantages in separate countries, and implementation of promising models taking into account the positive experience of other countries (Bhandari & Burroway, 2018;Beloshitzkaya, 2020;Lupenko et al, 2022). The peculiarities of the social protection system development in Ukraine were outlined in the works by Gitis & Lysenko (2020) and Shapovalova (2022).…”

Bread or Roses: How Economic Inequality Affects Regime Support in China?

“…First, autocracies need to generate satisfactory economic performance and ensure good governance to compensate for the deficits in procedure legitimacy (Beloshitzkaya, 2020; Gilley, 2006). This effect reflects the performance legitimacy thesis in China, where the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) garners public support through economic growth (Chen, 2017; Lu and Dickson, 2020) and expansion of social welfare provisions (Huang and Gao, 2017; Lü, 2014b).…”