Citizen Restraints on “Leviathan” Government: Transition Politics in Bulgaria
Standard theories of government in transition countries (Olson, M., Jr., 1995. Why the Transition from Communism Is So Difficult. Eastern Economic Journal 21, 437-462.) regard politicians and bureaucracies as “bandits” who extract the maximum resources from the public. Extraction is limited when the bandit expects to maintain power for a longer period of time and when the public can resist. When “bandits” try to gain wealth quickly and then leave, it is hard for them to work together – they become “disorganized roving bandits”. In the transition, the public begins to act together to restrain the ability of the government to extract rents, changing the constraint faced by “bandits”. The paper uses these principles to analyze the politics of transition in Bulgaria. While some political actors extracted rents for their personal use, others followed traditional authoritarian principles, producing the leader’s idea of the public good – a concept of government as Leviathan. Four episodes of transition policy are considered. In each, the government followed policies that led to its collapse under citizen resistance. Either governments were too “disorganized” to carry out utility-maximizing policies, or they underestimated the willingness of the public to resist their policies.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): (2000)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 3, Aksakov Str., 1040, Sofia|
Phone: (+359 2) 810 40 18
Fax: (+359 2) 988 21 08
Web page: http://www.iki.bas.bg
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Koford, Kenneth, 1993. "The Median and the Competitive Equilibrium in One Dimension," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 76(3), pages 273-288, July.
- Roberts, Paul Craig, 1969. "The Polycentric Soviet Economy," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 12(1), pages 163-179, April.
- Steven Rosefielde, 1999. "Russia's Warped Transition: The Destructive Consequences of Ethically Unconstrained Utility Seeking," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 25(4), pages 459-476, Fall.
- Becker, Gary S., 1985.
"Public policies, pressure groups, and dead weight costs,"
Journal of Public Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 329-347, December.
- Gary S. Becker, 1984. "Public Policies, Pressure Groups, and Dead Weight Costs," University of Chicago - George G. Stigler Center for Study of Economy and State 35, Chicago - Center for Study of Economy and State.
- David D. Li, 1998. "Changing Incentives of the Chinese Bureaucracy," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 130, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
- Michael L Wyzan, 1998. "The Political Economy of Bulgaria's Peculiar Post-Communist Business Cycle*," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 40(1), pages 5-42, April.
- Robert H. Bates & Avner Greif & Margaret Levi & Jean-Laurent Rosenthal, 1998. "Analytic Narratives," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 6355.
- Li, David D, 1998. "Changing Incentives of the Chinese Bureaucracy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(2), pages 393-397, May.
- Alberto Alesina & Allan Drazen, 1989. "Why are Stabilizations Delayed?," NBER Working Papers 3053, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Alesina, A. & Drazen, A., 1991. "Why Are Stabilizations Delayed?," Papers 6-91, Tel Aviv - the Sackler Institute of Economic Studies.
- Coughlin, Peter J & Mueller, Dennis C & Murrell, Peter, 1990. "Electoral Politics, Interest Groups, and the Size of Government," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 28(4), pages 682-705, October.
- Adi Schnytzer & Janez Šušteršič, 1998. "Why join the party in a one-party system?: Popularity versus political exchange," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 117-134, January.
- Schnytzer, Adi & Sustersic, Janez, 1998. "Why Join the Party in a One-Party System?: Popularity versus Political Exchange," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 94(1-2), pages 117-134, January.
- Gary S. Becker, 1983. "A Theory of Competition Among Pressure Groups for Political Influence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 98(3), pages 371-400. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)