The paper contrasts Lipset’s modernization hypothesis and Przeworski- Limongi hypothesis that entries into democracy are random with respect to income. We use data on income and democracy going back to 1820, multiple definitions of democracy, and non-parametric testing focusing on the distribution of entrants’ incomes. We find that income matters for entry into higher levels of democracy; but if we control for the previously achieved level of democracy, the income effect vanishes. This means that countries that enter into higher levels of democracy are not a random draw from the universe of all country incomes but are a random draw from the joint distribution of previous level of democracy and income. These results are compatible with the presence of a subgroup of (low) income and (low) democracy countries from which recruitment into democracy is seldom made. But for other countries, accession to higher levels of democracy is income-random. Income seems therefore both to matter (probably explaining why poor countries cannot improve their democracy levels) and not matter (explaining why for other countries improvements in democracy are income-random).
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by EconWPA in its series Law and Economics with number
0509004.
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.: