IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v59y2004i2p321-333.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dependency, democracy, and infant mortality: a quantitative, cross-national analysis of less developed countries

Author

Listed:
  • Shandra, John M.
  • Nobles, Jenna
  • London, Bruce
  • Williamson, J.B.John B.

Abstract

This study presents quantitative, sociological models designed to account for cross-national variation in infant mortality rates. We consider variables linked to four different theoretical perspectives: the economic modernization, social modernization, political modernization, and dependency perspectives. The study is based on a panel regression analysis of a sample of 59 developing countries. Our preliminary analysis based on additive models replicates prior studies to the extent that we find that indicators linked to economic and social modernization have beneficial effects on infant mortality. We also find support for hypotheses derived from the dependency perspective suggesting that multinational corporate penetration fosters higher levels of infant mortality. Subsequent analysis incorporating interaction effects suggest that the level of political democracy conditions the effects of dependency relationships based upon exports, investments from multinational corporations, and international lending institutions. Transnational economic linkages associated with exports, multinational corporations, and international lending institutions adversely affect infant mortality more strongly at lower levels of democracy than at higher levels of democracy: intranational, political factors interact with the international, economic forces to affect infant mortality. We conclude with some brief policy recommendations and suggestions for the direction of future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Shandra, John M. & Nobles, Jenna & London, Bruce & Williamson, J.B.John B., 2004. "Dependency, democracy, and infant mortality: a quantitative, cross-national analysis of less developed countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 321-333, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:59:y:2004:i:2:p:321-333
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(03)00562-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:59:y:2004:i:2:p:321-333. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.