Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Mini-Conference
Browse By Division
Browse By Session or Event Type
Search Tips
Virtual Exhibit Hall
Personal Schedule
Sign In
X (Twitter)
In recent times, an increasing number of developing countries have devised various diaspora engagement policies (DEPs) to tap into their diasporas’ resources vital to economic development. However, despite the proliferation of DEPs in the developing world, the determinants of DEPs are not well understood. What countries are interested in engaging with diasporas? Are there noticeable differences between democracies and autocracies over their interests in devising DEPs? In this paper, I investigate whether regime type explains countries’ interests in DEPs in the developing world. I argue that autocracies are more motivated to employ DEPs than democracies because their less business-friendly climate and hostile relationship with domestic and overseas populations might dampen diaspora groups’ interests in transmitting resources to the origin countries. So, autocratic countries devise various types of DEPs – policies improving the legal status of diasporas, lowering informational obstacles to economic activities, or reducing diaspora groups’ hostility toward home countries – to improve a business climate and manage the relationship with overseas populations. Using an original dataset of 10 DEPs covering 27 Asian developing countries from 2000 to 2014, I tested the relationship between regime type of a country and the number of DEPs the country implemented. Controlling for various factors, there is evidence that regime type matters. More DEPs are observed in autocracies than in democracies. The results also show democracies and autocracies are interested in different types of DEPs. While autocracies tend to implement DEPs focusing on the legal status of diasporas and informational barriers to economic activities which will create a more business-friendly environment, democratic countries are more interested in DEPs managing the relationship with diaspora groups.