Why did (not) the East Extend the Franchise? Democracy, Intra-Elite Conflict and Risk Sharing
The process of enfranchisement is studied in a model of intra-elite conflict over the sharing of social surplus. The relative bargaining power of each elite, function of the surplus each elite is able to appropriate if the bargaining breaks down, is uncertain ex-ante. Accordingly, two competing elites can decide to enfranchise a weak but numerically large non-elite group in order to insure against future imbalances in relative bargaining power. The enfranchisement decision requires the non-elite group to be relatively weak and imperfectly informed about intra-elite bargaining power. Our results are robust to public good provision following enfranchisement when there is preference heterogeneity over the location of the public good across the different elites. A comparative analysis of the Indian Democracy is provided.
|Date of creation:||Jun 2006|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +45 6550 2233
Fax: +45 6550 1090
Web page: http://degit.sam.sdu.dk/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Humberto Llavador & Robert Oxoby, 2003.
"Partisan competition, growth and the franchise,"
Economics Working Papers
730, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Sep 2004.
- John P. Conley & Akram Temimi, 2001. "Endogenous Enfranchisement When Groups' Preferences Conflict," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(1), pages 79-102, February.
- Daron Acemoglu & James A. Robinson, 2000.
"Why Did The West Extend The Franchise? Democracy, Inequality, And Growth In Historical Perspective,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
MIT Press, vol. 115(4), pages 1167-1199, November.
- Acemoglu, Daron & Robinson, James A, 1998. "Why did the West Extend the Franchise? Democracy, Inequality and Growth in Historical Perspective," CEPR Discussion Papers 1797, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Fleck, Robert K & Hanssen, F Andrew, 2006. "The Origins of Democracy: A Model with Application to Ancient Greece," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(1), pages 115-46, April.
- Daron Acemoglu & James Robinson, 1999.
"A Theory of Political Transitions,"
99-26, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Bertocchi, Graziella, 2003.
"The Law of Primogeniture and the Transition from Landed Aristocracy to Industrial Democracy,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
3723, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Graziella Bertocchi, 2006. "The Law of Primogeniture and the Transition from Landed Aristocracy to Industrial Democracy," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 43-70, 03.
- Galor, Oded & Moav, Omer, 2001.
"Das Human Kapital,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
2701, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Alessandro Lizzeri & Nicola Persico, 2004. "Why Did the Elites Extend the Suffrage? Democracy and the Scope of Government, With an Application to Britain's "Age of Reform"," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 119(2), pages 705-763, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:deg:conpap:c011_032. 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: (Jan Pedersen)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.