{"title":"民主青睐频道","authors":"Ziho Park","doi":"arxiv-2408.05059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A large body of literature in economics and political science examines the\nimpact of democracy and political freedoms on various outcomes using\ncross-country comparisons. This paper explores the possibility that any\npositive impact of democracy observed in these studies might be attributed to\npowerful democratic nations, their allies, and international organizations\ntreating democracies more favorably than nondemocracies, a concept I refer to\nas democratic favor channel. Firstly, after I control for being targeted by\nsanctions from G7 or the United Nations and having military confrontations and\ncooperation with the West, most of the positive effects of democracy on growth\nin cross-country panel regressions become insignificant or negatively\nsignificant. Secondly, using the same empirical specification as this\nliterature for demonstrating intermediating forces, I show that getting\nsanctioned, militarily attacked, and not having defense cooperation with the\nWest are plausible channels through which democracy causes growth. Lastly, in\nthe pre-Soviet-collapse period, which coincides with the time when democracy\npromotion was less often used as a justification for sanctions, the impact of\ndemocracy on GDP per capita is already weak or negative without any additional\ncontrols, and it becomes further negative once democratic favor is controlled.\nThese findings support the democratic favor channel and challenge the idea that\nthe institutional qualities of democracy per se lead to desirable outcomes. The\ncritique provided in this paper applies to the broader comparative institutions\nliterature in social sciences and political philosophy.","PeriodicalId":501273,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - ECON - General Economics","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Democratic Favor Channel\",\"authors\":\"Ziho Park\",\"doi\":\"arxiv-2408.05059\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A large body of literature in economics and political science examines the\\nimpact of democracy and political freedoms on various outcomes using\\ncross-country comparisons. This paper explores the possibility that any\\npositive impact of democracy observed in these studies might be attributed to\\npowerful democratic nations, their allies, and international organizations\\ntreating democracies more favorably than nondemocracies, a concept I refer to\\nas democratic favor channel. Firstly, after I control for being targeted by\\nsanctions from G7 or the United Nations and having military confrontations and\\ncooperation with the West, most of the positive effects of democracy on growth\\nin cross-country panel regressions become insignificant or negatively\\nsignificant. Secondly, using the same empirical specification as this\\nliterature for demonstrating intermediating forces, I show that getting\\nsanctioned, militarily attacked, and not having defense cooperation with the\\nWest are plausible channels through which democracy causes growth. Lastly, in\\nthe pre-Soviet-collapse period, which coincides with the time when democracy\\npromotion was less often used as a justification for sanctions, the impact of\\ndemocracy on GDP per capita is already weak or negative without any additional\\ncontrols, and it becomes further negative once democratic favor is controlled.\\nThese findings support the democratic favor channel and challenge the idea that\\nthe institutional qualities of democracy per se lead to desirable outcomes. The\\ncritique provided in this paper applies to the broader comparative institutions\\nliterature in social sciences and political philosophy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"arXiv - ECON - General Economics\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"arXiv - ECON - General Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/arxiv-2408.05059\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - ECON - General Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2408.05059","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
经济学和政治学中有大量文献通过跨国比较研究了民主和政治自由对各种结果的影响。本文探讨了这样一种可能性,即在这些研究中观察到的民主的积极影响可能归因于强大的民主国家、其盟国和国际组织给予民主国家比非民主国家更优惠的待遇,我将这一概念称为民主优惠渠道。首先,在控制了被七国集团或联合国制裁以及与西方国家发生军事冲突和合作之后,在跨国面板回归中,民主对经济增长的正向影响大多变得不显著或负向显著。其次,我使用了与上述文献相同的经验规格来证明中介力量,结果表明,获得制裁、受到军事攻击以及与西方国家没有防务合作都是民主导致增长的合理渠道。最后,在苏联解体前的时期,也就是促进民主较少被用作制裁理由的时期,民主对人均 GDP 的影响在没有任何额外控制的情况下已经很弱或为负,而一旦控制了民主支持,这种影响就会进一步变为负值。这些发现支持了民主支持渠道,并对民主的制度品质本身会带来理想结果的观点提出了质疑。本文的批判适用于社会科学和政治哲学中更广泛的比较制度文献。
A large body of literature in economics and political science examines the
impact of democracy and political freedoms on various outcomes using
cross-country comparisons. This paper explores the possibility that any
positive impact of democracy observed in these studies might be attributed to
powerful democratic nations, their allies, and international organizations
treating democracies more favorably than nondemocracies, a concept I refer to
as democratic favor channel. Firstly, after I control for being targeted by
sanctions from G7 or the United Nations and having military confrontations and
cooperation with the West, most of the positive effects of democracy on growth
in cross-country panel regressions become insignificant or negatively
significant. Secondly, using the same empirical specification as this
literature for demonstrating intermediating forces, I show that getting
sanctioned, militarily attacked, and not having defense cooperation with the
West are plausible channels through which democracy causes growth. Lastly, in
the pre-Soviet-collapse period, which coincides with the time when democracy
promotion was less often used as a justification for sanctions, the impact of
democracy on GDP per capita is already weak or negative without any additional
controls, and it becomes further negative once democratic favor is controlled.
These findings support the democratic favor channel and challenge the idea that
the institutional qualities of democracy per se lead to desirable outcomes. The
critique provided in this paper applies to the broader comparative institutions
literature in social sciences and political philosophy.