Skip to main content

A proposal for a more objective measure of de facto constitutional constraints

Abstract

In this paper we propose two new indicators of de facto constitutional constraints. The indicators are based on the presence or the absence of easily observable political events. This makes the proposed measures relatively objective and easy to verify relative to the most widely used indicators of de jure and de facto constitutions. This paper describes the indicators and demonstrates their usefulness for research on economic development.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Alvarez et al. (1996) and Przeworski (2000)

  2. 2.

    This case is widely publicized and politically significant, so we (or any expert) could easily detect the case.

  3. 3.

    Ríos-Figueroa and Staton classification (2014) would definethe criterion as a “de facto measure”.

  4. 4.

    To assess the observable regime as RoLD we use stronger form of the criterion (3) “…AND call for its replacement, without routine intimidation, revenge or punishment?”.

  5. 5.

    The total number of observations actually engaged in the analysis restricted by GDP per capita Growth rate data availability so we have got 12,160 observations without imputation and 25,375 observations with imputed data (see Descriptive Statistics in the Supplemental Materials https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2993465; imputation procedure see pp. 21–22 of Supplemental materials).

  6. 6.

    https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2993465

  7. 7.

    http://www.ggdc.net/maddison/maddison-project/home.htm.

  8. 8.

    http://www.systemicpeace.org/polity/polity4.htm.

  9. 9.

    https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/economic-freedom.

  10. 10.

    Lipset hypothesized that Democracy is caused and supported by sustainable economic development, political and cultural maturity.

References

  1. Alvarez, M., Cheibub, J. A., Limongi, F., & Przeworski, A. (1996). Classifying political regimes. Studies in Comparative International Development, 31, 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Barro, R. J. (1999). Determinants of economic growth. London: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bils, M., & Klenow, P. J. (2000). Does schooling cause growth? The American Economic Review, 90(5), 1160–1183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bolt, J., & van Zanden, J. L. (2014). The Maddison Project: collaborative research on historical national accounts. The Economic History Review, 67(3), 627–651.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dupuy E. R., & Dupuy T. N. (1986). The encyclopedia of military history (2nd ed.). Harper & Row Publishers.

  6. La Porta, R., López-de-Silanes, F., Pop-Eleches, C., & Shleifer, A. (2004). Judicial Checks and Balances. Journal of Political Economy, 112(2), 445–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lipset, S. M. (1959). Some social requisites of democracy: Economic development and political legitimacy. American Political Science Review, 53(01), 69–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Polity IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800–2010 Monty G. Marshall, Director http://www.systemicpeace.org/polity/polity4.htm.

  9. Przeworski, A. (2000). Democracy and development: Political institutions and well-being in the world, 1950–1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. Ríos-Figueroa, J., & Staton, J. K. (2014). An evaluation of cross-national measures of judicial independence. Journal of Law Economics and Organization, 30(1), 104–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Suharev, A. Ya. (Ed.). (2003). Legal system of the countries around the world (3rd ed.). Moscow: Norma.

  12. Tavares, J., & Wacziarg, R. (2001). How democracy affects growth. European economic review, 45(8), 1341–1378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Aknowledgements

We wish to thank the Editor in Chief Roger Congleton for his help that greatly influenced this article. We are also grateful to three anonymous referees for comments and references.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Moshe Yanovskiy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yanovskiy, M., Ginker, T. A proposal for a more objective measure of de facto constitutional constraints. Const Polit Econ 28, 311–320 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10602-017-9242-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • De facto constitutional constraints
  • Constitutional constraints
  • Expert ranking
  • Retrospective assessments
  • Democracy and growth

JEL Classification

  • P50
  • N40
  • O43
  • C81