This paper investigates whether Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) decisions are influenced by state... more This paper investigates whether Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) decisions are influenced by state ownership. The literature has established that host country institutions affect FDI allocation, but there is no systematic evidence how state ownership affects such relationships. However, we expect that state ownership systematically affects the relation between host country institutions and FDI. Theoretical arguments indicate that state-owned enterprises (SOEs)
This paper investigates to what extent Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) decisions are influenced b... more This paper investigates to what extent Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) decisions are influenced by state ownership. The literature on determinants of FDI indicates that host country institutions affect FDI allocation. The paper presents theoretical arguments that indicate differences between state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and privately owned enterprises (POEs), when it comes to how host country institutions affect FDI decisions. SOEs are
Do autocrats who pursue partial liberalization of their regimes grossly miscalculate and put thei... more Do autocrats who pursue partial liberalization of their regimes grossly miscalculate and put their political survival at risk? This could be the case according to plausible interpretations of statistical studies on regime type and regime stability. These studies indicate that ``mixed'', ``incoherent'' or ``semi-democratic'' regimes are less durable than pure forms of both democratic and dictatorial regimes. However, the short duration of regimes coded as semi-democratic might be due to other factors, such as these regimes relatively often being multi-party autocracies and military regimes rather than more durable monarchies or one-party regimes, or that semi-democracy is endogenous to latent factors that reduce regime-survival prospects in general. In this paper, we identify four such potential ``methodological'' explanations to why semi-democracies are relatively short-lived. We investigate the relevance of these explanations empirically by replicating and then expanding the analysis in \citet{Gates:2006AJPS}. Although the relative instability of semi-democracies may have been exaggerated in previous studies, we do find that semi-democracies are inherently less durable. However, when only considering regime changes towards more democracy, there is no difference between autocracies and semi-democracies. Furthermore, we find only weak evidence of differences in the duration of different authoritarian regime types, such as military and single-party regimes, once accounting for differences in degree of democracy. However, there is some evidence that monarchies are relatively durable. Furthermore, in contrast to being a semi-democracy, being a competitive authoritarian regime does not reduce survival prospects.
This study takes a new tack on the question of modernization and democracy, focused on the outcom... more This study takes a new tack on the question of modernization and democracy, focused on the outcome of theoretical interest. We argue that economic development affects the electoral component of democracy but has minimal impact on other components of this diffuse concept. This is so because development (a) alters the power and incentives of top leaders and (b) elections provide a focal point for collective action. The theory is tested with two new datasets -Varieties of Democracy and Lexical Index of Electoral Democracy -that allow us to disaggregate the concept of democracy into meso-and micro-level indicators. Results of these tests corroborate the theory: only election-centered indices are correlated with economic development. This may help to account for apparent inconsistencies across extant studies and may also shed light on the mechanisms at work in a much-studied relationship.
This paper investigates whether Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) decisions are influenced by state... more This paper investigates whether Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) decisions are influenced by state ownership. The literature has established that host country institutions affect FDI allocation, but there is no systematic evidence how state ownership affects such relationships. However, we expect that state ownership systematically affects the relation between host country institutions and FDI. Theoretical arguments indicate that state-owned enterprises (SOEs)
This paper investigates to what extent Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) decisions are influenced b... more This paper investigates to what extent Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) decisions are influenced by state ownership. The literature on determinants of FDI indicates that host country institutions affect FDI allocation. The paper presents theoretical arguments that indicate differences between state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and privately owned enterprises (POEs), when it comes to how host country institutions affect FDI decisions. SOEs are
Do autocrats who pursue partial liberalization of their regimes grossly miscalculate and put thei... more Do autocrats who pursue partial liberalization of their regimes grossly miscalculate and put their political survival at risk? This could be the case according to plausible interpretations of statistical studies on regime type and regime stability. These studies indicate that ``mixed'', ``incoherent'' or ``semi-democratic'' regimes are less durable than pure forms of both democratic and dictatorial regimes. However, the short duration of regimes coded as semi-democratic might be due to other factors, such as these regimes relatively often being multi-party autocracies and military regimes rather than more durable monarchies or one-party regimes, or that semi-democracy is endogenous to latent factors that reduce regime-survival prospects in general. In this paper, we identify four such potential ``methodological'' explanations to why semi-democracies are relatively short-lived. We investigate the relevance of these explanations empirically by replicating and then expanding the analysis in \citet{Gates:2006AJPS}. Although the relative instability of semi-democracies may have been exaggerated in previous studies, we do find that semi-democracies are inherently less durable. However, when only considering regime changes towards more democracy, there is no difference between autocracies and semi-democracies. Furthermore, we find only weak evidence of differences in the duration of different authoritarian regime types, such as military and single-party regimes, once accounting for differences in degree of democracy. However, there is some evidence that monarchies are relatively durable. Furthermore, in contrast to being a semi-democracy, being a competitive authoritarian regime does not reduce survival prospects.
This study takes a new tack on the question of modernization and democracy, focused on the outcom... more This study takes a new tack on the question of modernization and democracy, focused on the outcome of theoretical interest. We argue that economic development affects the electoral component of democracy but has minimal impact on other components of this diffuse concept. This is so because development (a) alters the power and incentives of top leaders and (b) elections provide a focal point for collective action. The theory is tested with two new datasets -Varieties of Democracy and Lexical Index of Electoral Democracy -that allow us to disaggregate the concept of democracy into meso-and micro-level indicators. Results of these tests corroborate the theory: only election-centered indices are correlated with economic development. This may help to account for apparent inconsistencies across extant studies and may also shed light on the mechanisms at work in a much-studied relationship.
Uploads
Papers by Carl Knutsen