Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950-1990: Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics

The relationship between political institutions and well-being is a complex and contested one. Some scholars argue that democratic institutions are essential for promoting well-being, while others argue that authoritarian institutions can be just as effective, if not more so. This book examines the relationship between political institutions and well-being in the world from 1950 to 1990. It finds that there is a strong positive correlation between democracy and well-being, and that this relationship is mediated by economic development. The book also finds that there is a negative correlation between authoritarianism and well-being, and that this relationship is mediated by political instability.

Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950–1990 (Cambridge Studies in the Theory of Democracy Book 3)

4.3 out of 5

FREE

The Relationship Between Democracy and Well-Being

There is a large body of research that finds a positive correlation between democracy and well-being. This research has shown that democratic countries have higher levels of life expectancy, infant mortality, and literacy than authoritarian countries. They also have lower levels of poverty, inequality, and crime.

There are a number of reasons why democracy may promote well-being. First, democratic institutions provide citizens with a voice in how their country is governed. This allows them to hold their leaders accountable and to ensure that their needs are met. Second, democratic institutions promote the rule of law, which protects citizens from arbitrary arrest and detention. Third, democratic institutions promote economic development, which can lead to higher levels of well-being.

The Relationship Between Authoritarianism and Well-Being

There is also a large body of research that finds a negative correlation between authoritarianism and well-being. This research has shown that authoritarian countries have lower levels of life expectancy, infant mortality, and literacy than democratic countries. They also have higher levels of poverty, inequality, and crime.

There are a number of reasons why authoritarianism may undermine well-being. First, authoritarian institutions do not provide citizens with a voice in how their country is governed. This can lead to a lack of accountability and to the suppression of dissent. Second, authoritarian institutions often do not promote the rule of law, which can lead to arbitrary arrest and detention. Third, authoritarian institutions can hinder economic development, which can lead to lower levels of well-being.

The Mediating Role of Economic Development

The relationship between political institutions and well-being is mediated by a number of factors, including economic development. Economic development can promote well-being by increasing incomes, improving health care, and providing access to education. It can also reduce poverty, inequality, and crime.

The relationship between democracy and well-being is stronger in countries with higher levels of economic development. This is because economic development provides the resources that are necessary for democratic institutions to function effectively. In contrast, the relationship between authoritarianism and well-being is weaker in countries with higher levels of economic development. This is because economic development can provide citizens with some of the benefits of democracy, such as higher incomes and better health care.

The Mediating Role of Political Instability

The relationship between political institutions and well-being is also mediated by political instability. Political instability can undermine well-being by disrupting economic activity, destroying infrastructure, and leading to violence. It can also make it difficult for governments to provide essential services, such as health care and education.

The relationship between democracy and well-being is weaker in countries with higher levels of political instability. This is because political instability can make it difficult for democratic institutions to function effectively. In contrast, the relationship between authoritarianism and well-being is stronger in countries with higher levels of political instability. This is because authoritarian institutions can provide some stability in the face of political turmoil.

The relationship between political institutions and well-being is complex and contested. There is a strong positive correlation between democracy and well-being, and a negative correlation between authoritarianism and well-being. However, the relationship between political institutions and well-being is mediated by a number of factors, including economic development and political instability.

This book has shown that the relationship between political institutions and well-being is complex and nuanced. There is no one-size-fits-all solution to promoting well-being. The best approach will vary depending on the specific circumstances of each country. However, the evidence suggests that democracy and economic development are two key ingredients for promoting well-being around the world.

Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950–1990 (Cambridge Studies in the Theory of Democracy Book 3)

4.3 out of 5

FREE