Advertisement

Studies in Comparative International Development

, Volume 51, Issue 3, pp 286–307 | Cite as

The Politics of Urban Bias: Rural Threats and the Dual Dilemma of Political Survival

  • Jan H. PierskallaEmail author
Article

Abstract

Urban bias in government policy is a common phenomenon in many developing countries. Bates (1981) has famously argued that the wish to industrialize, paired with the political clout of urban residents, results in distinctly anti-rural policies. Empirically, however, the strength of urban bias varies substantially across countries and over time. This paper explains this variation by developing an argument about a countervailing force to urban bias: the threat of a rural insurgency. The direction of urban and rural bias is a function of the political threat that geographically distinct groups pose to the survival of the central government. When the rural periphery lacks collective action capacity, urban bias emerges, but if there exists a credible threat of rural violence, urban bias is diminished. I test this proposition and competing explanations using data on net taxation in the agricultural sector, covering up to 55 low- and middle-income countries from 1955 to 2007. The results show a strong relationship between past territorial conflict (which proxies for credible rural threats) and lower levels of urban bias in the developing world. The findings are robust to alternative model specifications, measures, and sensitivity analyses.

Keywords

Urban bias Political economy Agricultural policy Rural insurgency 

References

  1. Acemoglu D, Ticchi D, Vindigni A. 2009. Persistence of civil wars. Working Paper.Google Scholar
  2. Ades A, Glaeser EL. Trade and circuses: explaining urban giants. Q J Econ 1995;110(1):195–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson K, (ed). 2009. Distortions to agricultural incentives. A global perspective, 1955-2007. World Bank.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson K, (ed). 2010. The political economy of agricultural price distortions. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Anderson K Masters, WA, (ed). 2009. Distortions to agricultural incentives in africa. World Bank.Google Scholar
  6. Angrist, JD, Imbens G. Identification and estimation of local average treatment effects. Econometrica 1994;62(2):467–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Arezki R, Brückner M. 2011. Food prices and political instability. IMF Working Paper.Google Scholar
  8. Baker A. Why is trade reform so popular in Latin America. World Polit 2003;55(3):423–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Basedau M, Lay J. Resource curse or rentier peace? The ambiguous effect of oil wealth and oil dependence on violent conflict. J Peace Res 2009;46(6):757–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bates R. Urban Bias: A Fresh Look. In: Varshney A, editor. Beyond urban bias; 1993. Frank Cass.Google Scholar
  11. Bates RH. Markets and states in tropical africa. The political basis of agricultural policies: University of California Press; 1981.Google Scholar
  12. Bates RH, Block SA. Revisiting African agriculture: institutional change and productivity growth. J Polit 2013;75(2):372–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bellemare MF. 2011. Rising food prices, food price volatility, and political unrest. Working Paper.Google Scholar
  14. Bellows J, Miguel E. War and local collective action in Sierra Leone. J Public Econ 2009;93(11-12):1144–1157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bezemer D, Headey D. Agriculture, development and urban bias. World Dev 2008;36(8):1342–1364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Binswanger HP, Deininger K. Explaining agricultural and agrarian policies in developing countries. J Econ Lit 1997;35(4):1958–2005.Google Scholar
  17. Binswanger H. The policy response of agriculture. Proceedings of the World Bank Annual Conference on Development; 1989.Google Scholar
  18. Bravo-Ortega C, Lederman D. 2005. Agriculture and national welfare around the world: Causality and international heterogeneity since 1960. World bank policy research working paper No. 3499.Google Scholar
  19. Bruton HJ. A reconsideration of import substitution. J Econ Lit 1998;36(2): 903–36.Google Scholar
  20. Buhaug H, Rød JK. Local determinants of African civil wars, 1970–2001. Polit Geogr 2006;25:315–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Buhaug H, Gates S, Lujala P. Geography, rebel capability, and the duration of civil conflict. J Confl Resolut 2009;53(4):544–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Campante FR, Do Q-A. Isolated capital cities, accountability and corruption: evidence from US States. Am Econ Rev 2014;104(8):2456–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Casper BA, Tyson SA. Popular Protest and Elite Coordination in a Coup d’état. J Polit 2014;76(2):548–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Chaloemtiarana T. Thailand. The politics of despotic paternalism: Cornell University Press; 2007.Google Scholar
  25. Choeun H, Godo Y, Hayami Y. The economics and politics of rice export taxation in Thailand: A historical simulation analysis, 1950-1985. J Asian Eco 2006;17:103–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Christensen SR. 1993. Coalitons and collective action: the politics of institutional change in thai agriculture. Ph.D. thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
  27. Collier P, Elliott VL, Hegre H, Hoeffler A, Reynal-Querol M, Sambanis N. Breaking the conflict trap. Civil war and development policy: World Bank and Oxford University Press; 2003.Google Scholar
  28. Danguilan M. 1999. Bullets and bandages: public health as a tool of engagement in the Philippines. Takemi program in international health research paper No. 161.Google Scholar
  29. de Gorter H, Swinnen J. 2002. Handbook of agricultural economics. Vol. 2B. Chap. Political economy of agricultural Policy, pages 1893–1943.Google Scholar
  30. Diao X, Hazell P, Resnick D, Thurlow J. 2006. The role of agriculture in development: implications for sub-sahara Africa. IFPRI development strategy and policy division discussion paper No. 29.Google Scholar
  31. Dixon C. 1999. The thai economy. Uneven development and internationalisation. Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Do Q-A, Campante FR. 2007. Keeping dictators honest: the role of population concentration. Working Paper.Google Scholar
  33. Doronila A. 1992. The state, economic transformation, and political change in the Philippines: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Dreher A. IMF and economic growth: the effects of programs, loans, and compliance with conditionality. World Dev 2006;34(5):769–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Eastwood R, Lipton M. Pro-poor Growth and Pro-growth Poverty Reduction: Meaning, evidence, and policy implications. Asian Dev Rev 2000;18:22–58.Google Scholar
  36. Fearon JD. Ethnicity, insurgency, and civil war. Am Polit Sci Rev 2003;97(1):75–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Forssell S. 2009. Rice price policy in thailand. Policy making and recent developments. Working Paper.Google Scholar
  38. Grossman GM, Helpman E. Special interest politics: The MIT Press; 2001.Google Scholar
  39. Haber S, Menaldo V. Do natural resources fuel authoritarianism? a reappraisal of the resource curse. Am Polit Sci Rev 2011;105(1):1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Haggard S, Kaufman RR. Development, democracy, and welfare states. latin america, east asia, and eastern Europe: Princeton University Press; 2008.Google Scholar
  41. Hawes G. Theories of peasant revolution: a critique and contribution from the Philippines. World Polit 1990;42(2):261–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Henderson JV. The urbanization process and economic growth: the so-what question. J Econ Growth 2003;8(1):47–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Henderson JV. Cities and development. J Reg Sci 2010;50(1):515–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Henderson JV, Wang HG. Urbanization and city growth: The role of institutions. Reg Sci Urban Econ 2007;37:282–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Herbst J. States and power in africa: comparative lessons in authority and control. Princeton: NJ: Princeton University Press; 2000.Google Scholar
  46. Heston A, Summers R, Aten B. 2011. Penn world table version 7.0. center for international comparisons of production, income and prices at the university of pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  47. Hirschman AO. The political economy of import-substituting industrialization in latin america. Q J Econ 1968;82:1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Isvilanonda S, Poapongsakorn N. 1995. Rice supply and demand in Thailand. The future outlook. TDRI research report.Google Scholar
  49. Jones GA, Corbridge S. The continuing debate about urban bias: the thesis, its critics, its influence and its implications for poverty-reduction strategies. Prog Dev Stud 2010;10(1):1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Jones GR. Red revolution. Inside the philippine guerrilla movement: Westview Press; 1989.Google Scholar
  51. Kalyvas SN. The logic of violence in civil wars: Cambridge University Press; 2006.Google Scholar
  52. Kay C. Why east asia overtook latin america: Agrarian reform, industrialization and development. Third World Q 2002;23(6):1073–1102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Kerkvliet BJ. The huk rebellion: a study of peasant revolt in the philippines: University of California Press; 1977.Google Scholar
  54. Khan MH. Agricultural taxation in developing countries: a survey of issues and policy. Agric Econ 2001;24:315–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Kriger NJ. Zimbabwe’s guerilla war: Cambridge Univ Press; 1992.Google Scholar
  56. Krugman P. Geography and trade: MIT Press; 1991.Google Scholar
  57. Lewis Arthur. Economic development with unlimited supplies of labor. Manch Sch 1954;22(2):139–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lewis A. The evolution of the international economic order: Princeton University Press; 1978.Google Scholar
  59. Lipton M. Why poor people stay poor. A study of urban bias in world development: Harvard University Press; 1977.Google Scholar
  60. Lipton M. 2005. The family farm in a globalizing world: The role of crop science in alleviating poverty. 2020 Discussion paper No. 40 international food policy research institute.Google Scholar
  61. McGuire J. Social policy and mortality decline in east asia and latin america. World Dev 2001;29(10):1673–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. McVey R, (ed). 2000. Money & power in provincial Thailand. University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
  63. Migdal JS. Peasants, politics, and revolution. Pressure toward political and social change in the third world: Princeton University Press; 1974.Google Scholar
  64. Moore B. Social origins of dictatorship and democracy: lord and peasant in the making of the modern world: Beacon Press; 1966.Google Scholar
  65. Muscat RJ. Thailand and the United States. Development, Security, and Foreign Aid: Columbia University Press; 1990.Google Scholar
  66. Myrdal G. Economic theory and underdeveloped regions: Duckworth; 1958.Google Scholar
  67. Nolan P, White G. Urban bias, rural bias or state bias? Urban-rural relations in post-revolutionary China. J Dev Stud 1984;20(3):52–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Olson M. The logic of collective action. Public goods and the theory of groups: Harvard University Press; 1965.Google Scholar
  69. Overman HG, Venables A. 2005. Cities in the developing world. CEP discussion paper No 695.Google Scholar
  70. Paige JM. Agrarian revolution. Social movements and export agriculture in the underdeveloped world: The Free Press; 1975.Google Scholar
  71. Pierskalla JH. Protest, deterrence, and escalation: the strategic calculus of government repression. J Confl Resolut 2010;54(1):117–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Ravaillon M, Chen S. 2004. China’s (Uneven) progress against poverty. World bank policy research working paper No. 3408.Google Scholar
  73. Ravaillon M, Datt G. Why has economic growth been more pro-poor in some states of India than others? J Dev Econ 2002;68(2):381–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Scott JC. Weapons of the weak. Everyday forms of peasant resistance: Yale University Press; 1985.Google Scholar
  75. Simatupang P, Timmer CP. Indonesian rice production: policies and realities. Bull Indones Econ Stud 2008;44(1):65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Swinnen J. The Political Economy of Agricultural Distortions: The Literature to Date. In: Anderson K, editor. The political economy of agricultural price distortions: Cambridge University Press; 2010.Google Scholar
  77. Teorell J, Charron N, Samanni M, Holmberg S, Rothstein B. 2009. The quality of government dataset. University of gothenburg: the quality of government institute.Google Scholar
  78. The World Bank. 2007. World development report 2008. Agriculture for development. The world bank.Google Scholar
  79. Themnér L, Wallensteen P. Armed Conflict, 1946-2013. J Peace Res 2014; 51(4).Google Scholar
  80. Varshney A, (ed). 1993. Beyond urban bias. Frank Cass.Google Scholar
  81. Varshney A. Democracy, development, and the country. Urban-rural struggles in India: Cambridge Univ Press; 1994.Google Scholar
  82. Wallace J. Cities, redistribution, and authoritarian regime survival. J of Politics. 2013;75(3):632–645.Google Scholar
  83. Ward MD, Greenhill BD, Bakke KM. The perils of policy by p-value: predicting civil conflicts. J Peace Res 2010;47(4):363–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Waterbury J. The long gestation of brief triumph of import-substituting industrialization. World Dev 1999;27(2):323–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Wibbels E, Ahlquist JS. Development, trade, and social insurance. Int Stud Q 2011;55:125–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Wickham-Crowley TP. Guerrillas and revolution in latin America: Princeton University Press; 1991.Google Scholar
  87. Wolf ER. 1969. Peasant wars of the twentieth century. Harper & Row.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations