Dictators and Their Viziers: Agency Problems in Dictatorships
The possibility of treason by a close associate has been a nightmare of most dictators throughout history. Better informed viziers are also better able to discriminate among potential plotters, and this makes them more risky subordinates for the dictator. To avoid this, dictators – especially those which are weak and vulnerable – sacrifice the competence of their agents, hiring mediocre but loyal subordinates. One reason why democracies generally witness more talented people in the government is the dictator’s inability to commit to the optimal (less than the capital) punishment for those who unsuccessfully plotted to remove him from power. Furthermore, any use of incentive schemes by a dictator is limited by the fact that rewards are conditional on dictator’s own willingness to keep his promises, while punishments are conditional on dictator’s own survival. We model a principal-agent game between a dictator and his (probably, few) viziers both in static and dynamic perspectives. The dynamic model allows us to focus on the succession problem the insecure dictators face.
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.
|Date of creation:||Dec 2004|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820
|Order Information:|| Email: |
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.:
- Stephen Morris, 2001.
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(2), pages 231-265, April.
- Daron Acemoglu & James A. Robinson & Thierry Verdier, 2003.
"Kleptocracy and Divide-and-Rule: A Model of Personal Rule,"
NBER Working Papers
10136, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Acemoglu, Daron & Robinson, James A & Verdier, Thierry, 2003. "Kleptocracy and Divide-and-Rule: A Model of Personal Rule," CEPR Discussion Papers 4059, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Torsten Persson, 2002.
"Do Political Institutions Shape Economic Policy?,"
Econometric Society, vol. 70(3), pages 883-905, May.
- Andrei Shleifer & Fausto Panunzi & Mike Burkart, 2002.
LSE Research Online Documents on Economics
24926, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- Andrei Shleifer & Fausto Panunzi & Mike Burkart, 2002. "Family Firms," FMG Discussion Papers dp406, Financial Markets Group.
- Mike Burkart & Fausto Panunzi & Andrei Shleifer, 2002. "Family Firms," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1944, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Burkart, Mike & Panunzi, Fausto & Shleifer, Andrei, 2002. "Family Firms," CEPR Discussion Papers 3234, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Mike Burkart & Fausto Panunzi & Andrei Shleifer, 2002. "Family Firms," NBER Working Papers 8776, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Carrillo, Juan D. & Mariotti, Thomas, 2001. "Electoral competition and politician turnover," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 1-25, January.
- Glazer, Amihai, 2002.
"Allies as rivals: internal and external rent seeking,"
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 155-162, June.
- Glazer, A., 1999. "Allies as Rivals: Internal and External Rent Seeking," Papers 99-00-10, California Irvine - School of Social Sciences.
- Martin C. McGuire & Mancur Olson Jr., 1996. "The Economics of Autocracy and Majority Rule: The Invisible Hand and the Use of Force," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(1), pages 72-96, March.
- Robert H. Bates & Avner Greif & Margaret Levi & Jean-Laurent Rosenthal, 1998. "Analytic Narratives," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 6355.
- Acemoglu, Daron, 2003.
"Why not a political Coase theorem? Social conflict, commitment, and politics,"
Journal of Comparative Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 620-652, December.
- Daron Acemoglu, 2002. "Why Not a Political Coase Theorem? Social Conflict, Commitment and Politics," NBER Working Papers 9377, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Dmitriy Gershenson & Herschel I. Grossman, 2001.
"Cooption and Repression in the Soviet Union,"
Economics and Politics,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 31-47, 03.
- De Long, J. Bradford & Shleifer, Andrei, 1993.
"Princes and Merchants: European City Growth before the Industrial Revolution,"
3451302, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- De Long, J Bradford & Shleifer, Andrei, 1993. "Princes and Merchants: European City Growth before the Industrial Revolution," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(2), pages 671-702, October.
- J. Bradford De Long & Andrei Shleifer, 1993. "Princes and Merchants: European City Growth before the Industrial Revolution," NBER Working Papers 4274, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Jody Overland & Kenneth L. Simons & Michael Spagat, 2000.
"Political Instability and Growth in Dictatorships,"
William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series
354, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
- Overland, Jody & Simons, Kenneth L & Spagat, Michael, 2000. "Political Instability and Growth in Dictatorships," CEPR Discussion Papers 2653, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Jody Overland, Kenneth Simons and Michael Spagat, 2003. "Political Instability and Growth in Dictatorships," Royal Holloway, University of London: Discussion Papers in Economics 03/11, Department of Economics, Royal Holloway University of London, revised Dec 2003.
- Adam Przeworski & Fernando Limongi, 1993. "Political Regimes and Economic Growth," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 51-69, Summer.
- North, Douglass C. & Weingast, Barry R., 1989. "Constitutions and Commitment: The Evolution of Institutions Governing Public Choice in Seventeenth-Century England," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(04), pages 803-832, December.
- Canice Prendergast & Robert H. Topel, 1993.
"Favoritism in Organizations,"
NBER Working Papers
4427, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Maria Gallego & Carolyn Pitchik, 1999.
"An Economic Theory of Leadership Turnover,"
pitchik-99-01, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
- Edward L. Glaeser & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silane & Andrei Shleifer, 2004.
"Do Institutions Cause Growth?,"
NBER Working Papers
10568, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Herschel I. Grossman & Suk Jae Noh, 1990. "A Theory Of Kleptocracy With Probabilistic Survival And Reputation," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(2), pages 157-171, 07.
- Acemoglu, Daron & Robinson, James A, 1999.
"A Theory of Political Transitions,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
2277, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Guido Friebel & Michael Raith, 2004. "Abuse of Authority and Hierarchical Communication," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(2), pages 224-244, Summer.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:4777. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.