Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Download

Authoritarian Regime Type and the Choice of Elite Management Strategy

Fri, September 11, 2:00 to 3:30pm MDT (2:00 to 3:30pm MDT), TBA

Abstract

There has been a growing literature on strategies that autocratic leaders use to maintain their rule (Mahdavi and Ishiyama, 2019; Greitens, 2016; Svolik 2012). This literature has suggested that there are a variety of strategies available to autocratic leaders to consolidate their hold on power. To date, however, most of this work has focused on single cases (such as China and North Korea- see Mahdavi and Ishiyama 2019; Greitens 2016; Ishiyama 2014a;2014b) or on a set of illustrative case studies (Svolik 2012). There has yet to be, as far as we can discern, a systematic large N, cross national study examining factors that affect the strategies adopted by authoritarian leaders.

In this paper we examine the effects autocratic regime characteristics on the choice of the Dictator’s elite management strategy. In particular, we examine whether there are differences between personalist, one party, and military autocracies, as well as examining the effects of personalism as a regime attribute, while controlling for leadership transitions, and economic and political crises on three different types of autocratic elite management strategies—cooptation, elite shuffle, and purges. Using data on 109 autocracies from 1946-2018 we test several theoretical expectations regarding autocratic regime type and the degree of personalism in autocratic regimes. We find that, contrary to our initial expectations, expectations derived from the extant literature, personalism and personalist regimes are not more likely to engage in purges and elite shuffles when compared to other regimes. However, one party regimes, particularly those with highly personalistic attributes, are significantly less likely to engage in “elite shuffles”. Our findings contribute to the broader literature on elite dynamics in authoritarian regimes and to subnational studies on the politics of power-sharing in communist states.

Authors