On "Good" Politicians and "Bad" Policies : Social Cohesion, Institutions, and Growth

Ritzen, Jo ; Easterly, William ; Woolcock, Michael

World Bank, Washington, DC

关键词: AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION;    AVAILABLE DATA;    AVERAGE GROWTH;    BAD POLICIES;    BUREAUCRACY;   

DOI  :  10.1596/1813-9450-2448
RP-ID  :  WPS2448

学科分类：社会科学、人文和艺术（综合）

来源: World Bank Open Knowledge Repository

【 摘 要 】

Social cohesion - that is, theinclusiveness of a country's communities - is essentialfor generating the trust needed to implement reforms.Citizens have to trust that the short-term losses thatinevitably arise from reform, will be more than offset bylong-term gains. However, in countries divided along classand ethnic lines, and with weak institutions, even theboldest, most civic-minded and well-informed politician (orinterest group) will face severe constraints in bringingabout policy reform. The authors hypothesize that keydevelopment outcomes (particularly economic growth) are mostlikely to be associated with countries that are bothsocially cohesive and governed by effective publicinstitutions. They test this hypothesis for the sample ofcountries with available data. The authors develop aconceptual framework based on the idea of social cohesion,then review the evidence on which it is based. While severalearlier studies have shown that differences in growth ratesamong developing countries are a result of weak rule of law,lack of democracy, and other institutional deficiencies, theauthors focus on the social conditions that give rise tothese deficiencies. They also seek to establish empiricallya causal sequence from social divisions to weak institutionsto slow growth. The essence of their argument, supported bynew econometric evidence, is that pro-development policiesare comparatively rare in the developing world less becauseof the moral fiber of politicians (though that surelymatters) than because good politicians typically lack theroom for maneuver needed to make desired reforms. This lackof maneuverability is a product of insufficient socialcohesion and weak institutions. The authors also explore thedeterminants of social cohesion, focusing on historicalaccidents, initial conditions, and natural resourceendowments. Social cohesion should not be seen as a concernprimarily of developing and transition economies. Indeed, itis important in the United Kingdom as in Ukraine, in Canadaas in Colombia, in the Netherlands as in Australia.