The Political and Tax Capacity of Government in Developing Countries

Fauvelle-Aymar, Christine

doi:10.1111/j.1467-6435.1999.tb00224.x

Cited by 68 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hence, we agree withFauvelle-Aymar (1999) in considering essential for the full understanding of revenue policy, especially among developing countries, the inclusion of non-tax revenues. Do authoritarian institutions mobilize economic cooperation?…”

supporting

confidence: 56%

“…Similarly, we include the aid per capita, to control for cases where the high amount of it permits the ruler to apply lower rates on other taxes. Conversely, more developed and diversified economies are able to rely more on tax revenues, specifically on taxes on incomes and profits, so we also take into account the potential effect of the log of GDP per capita as a determinant of a country's tax structure (Fauvelle-Aymar 1999;Bräutigam 2008).…”

Section: The Control Variables: Tax Bases and Collection Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Do authoritarian institutions mobilize economic cooperation?

Escribà‐Folch

2008

Const Polit Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 56%

Section: The Control Variables: Tax Bases and Collection Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do authoritarian institutions mobilize economic cooperation?

Escribà‐Folch

2008

Const Polit Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The tax ratio is the standard measure of the state's extractive capacity (e.g., Campbell 1993;Centeno 2002;Fauvelle-Aymar 1999). Taxes and the bureaucracies that support regularized extraction are the stuff out of which the modern state is built.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

War, Rivalry, and State Building in Latin America

Thies

2005

American J Political Sci

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars of Latin America have recently begun to apply the bellicist approach to state building to the region, the central claim of which is that wars are a great stimulus to centralizing state power and building institutional capacity. This article argues that current applications of these models of state building are too narrowly specified to be of much use in Latin America or elsewhere in the developing world. Replacing the focus on interstate war with the more general phenomenon of interstate rivalry, alongside the consideration of intrastate rivals, allows us to account for the impact of both external and internal forces on the development of the state. I demonstrate the utility of this approach through several cross-sectional time-series analyses that provide evidence that external and internal rivals affect the Latin American state in a manner consistent with the general nature of bellicist theory.

show abstract

“…Total taxes/GDP is the most common revenue-based indicator of overall size and capacity of the state. The measure has been used widely in comparative politics and international relations (Levi, 1988;Cheibub, 1998;Garrett, 1998;Fauvelle-Aymar, 1999), and the underlying logic is central to fiscal sociological accounts of development of the modern state (Tilly, 1975;Downing, 1992;Campbell, 1993). In order for states to accomplish anything, they must satisfy their resource demands.…”

Section: Bureaucratic/administrative Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring state capacity: Theoretical and empirical implications for the study of civil conflict

Hendrix

2010

Journal of Peace Research

488

283

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article identifies and addresses key conceptual and measurement issues raised by measures of state capacity in studies of civil conflict. First, it reviews competing definitions and operationalizations of state capacity, focusing specifically on those that emphasize (1) military capacity, (2) bureaucratic administrative capacity, and (3) the quality and coherence of political institutions. Second, it critically assesses these measures on the basis of construct validity, focusing attention on whether they accurately capture the theoretical concept of state capacity, and whether they allow the researcher to differentiate between competing causal mechanisms. Third, it employs principal factor analysis to identify the underlying dimensionality of 15 different operationalizations of state capacity. State capacity is characterized by low dimensionality, with three factors -or dimensions of state capacityexplaining over 90% of the variance in the 15 measures. While the first factor, rational legality, captures bureaucratic and administrative capacity, the second, rentier-autocraticness, and third, neopatrimoniality, capture aspects of state capacity that cut across theoretical categories. The article concludes by suggesting a multivariate approach to modeling state capacity, and that (1) survey measures of bureaucratic quality, and (2) tax capacity are the most theoretically and empirically justified.

show abstract

The Political and Tax Capacity of Government in Developing Countries

Cited by 68 publications

References 35 publications

Do authoritarian institutions mobilize economic cooperation?

Do authoritarian institutions mobilize economic cooperation?

War, Rivalry, and State Building in Latin America

Measuring state capacity: Theoretical and empirical implications for the study of civil conflict

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About