Democratizing dictators? Non-democratic regime conditions and the allocation of US democracy assistance, 1975–2010

Abstract

As the USA initiated strategies of democracy promotion to support the spread of democracy, a key element involved democracy assistance. However, some states receive substantial commitments of US democracy aid while other states receive little or none, and the mix of democracy assistance varies in allocation between civil society and institutional channels. This study examines democracy aid allocation, focusing on the role of regime conditions on the targeting and composition of the aid. We disaggregate regime type to differentiate among non-democratic governments and argue that such differences affect both the amount of democracy aid and whether aid packages target government institutions or civil society channels. We theorize how these regime conditions shape allocations, controlling for donor interests and recipient features, and test our argument against US democracy aid allocations by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) from 1975 to 2010. We conclude with discussion of the implications of these findings.

Promoting Democracy Under Electoral Authoritarianism: Evidence From Cambodia

“…But a significant portion of aid for democracy promotion globally goes to programming in non-democracies (Scott & Carter, 2020), where these pathways may be distinct. Mechanisms for citizens to hold leaders accountable, in particular, are more limited in autocracies and often do not exist through traditional electoral pathways.…”

“…Many citizens were afraid to share opinions perceived as counter to the ruling party’s position, detentions of citizens by police were routine, and surveillance was more or less expected during political events (see Human Rights Watch, 2012). As a multiparty authoritarian regime at the time of our study, Cambodia therefore represented the most common type of autocracy where democracy promotion is carried out (Scott & Carter, 2020), making it an instructive case.…”

“…A substantial portion of funding for democracy promotion, however, is directed at more entrenched authoritarian countries, particularly electoral autocracies, where similar programming faces unique challenges (Bush, 2015;Grimm & Leininger, 2012;Scott & Carter, 2020). In these contexts, organizations must balance the goal of supporting democratization against the reality of working under governments that may be threatened by direct democracy promotion.…”