I havenât read any of the papers cited here, nor am I especially well-versed in relevant areas of economics. But my initial reaction to âMost of the biggest growth accelerations have occurred in autocraciesâ is that that sounds like a correlation thatâs relatively unlikely to be explained by autocracy causing more growth, and relatively unlikely to conflict with the idea that democracy causes better growth (with all other factors held constant).
In particular, Iâve heard it argued that âcatch-upâ growth is substantially easier than âcutting-edgeâ growth. If thatâs true, then that might suggest autocracies might have experienced growth accelerations more often than democracies not because being an autocracy causes a higher chance of having a growth acceleration, but rather because:
it happens to be that autocracies have less often been on the âcutting edgeâ than democracies, so theyâve more often been able to engage in âcatch-upâ growth
on top of that, being an autocracy makes it more likely that a country will have deceleration episodes, which then creates additional opportunities for âcatch-upâ growth
A related or perhaps identical possibility is that autocracies may sometimes implement policies that actively harm their economies in major ways, such that merely removing those policies could cause rapid growth. (I have in mind the transition from Maoâs policies to Deng Xiaopingâs policies, though I donât know much about that transition, really.)
This is all rather speculative. Iâd be interested to hear thoughts on this from someone with more knowledge of the area.
I havenât read any of the papers cited here, nor am I especially well-versed in relevant areas of economics. But my initial reaction to âMost of the biggest growth accelerations have occurred in autocraciesâ is that that sounds like a correlation thatâs relatively unlikely to be explained by autocracy causing more growth, and relatively unlikely to conflict with the idea that democracy causes better growth (with all other factors held constant).
In particular, Iâve heard it argued that âcatch-upâ growth is substantially easier than âcutting-edgeâ growth. If thatâs true, then that might suggest autocracies might have experienced growth accelerations more often than democracies not because being an autocracy causes a higher chance of having a growth acceleration, but rather because:
it happens to be that autocracies have less often been on the âcutting edgeâ than democracies, so theyâve more often been able to engage in âcatch-upâ growth
on top of that, being an autocracy makes it more likely that a country will have deceleration episodes, which then creates additional opportunities for âcatch-upâ growth
A related or perhaps identical possibility is that autocracies may sometimes implement policies that actively harm their economies in major ways, such that merely removing those policies could cause rapid growth. (I have in mind the transition from Maoâs policies to Deng Xiaopingâs policies, though I donât know much about that transition, really.)
This is all rather speculative. Iâd be interested to hear thoughts on this from someone with more knowledge of the area.