What does this research mean for the field?

The introduction of multiparty elections in authoritarian regimes decreases public goods provision unless the regime possesses high state capacity, in which case it significantly increases the prioritization of broad public goods. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.INCREMENTAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

What question did this study set out to answer?

The study aims to explore when authoritarian regimes are likely to enhance public goods provision based on their motivation and capacity.

June 14, 2026Social Science QuarterlyOpen Access

When Authoritarian Regimes Provide Public Goods: Motivation and Capacity

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

DKDa Sul Kim

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Empirical analysis reveals the complex relationship between state capacity and public goods provision in authoritarian regimes.

Key Points

The study aims to explore when authoritarian regimes are likely to enhance public goods provision based on their motivation and capacity.
Analyzed a panel of 95 authoritarian regimes from 1970 to 2015
Utilized the Driscoll-Kraay estimator for empirical analysis
Conducted two robustness tests to validate findings
Introduction of a competitive party system is negatively associated with public goods provision
Regimes with state capacity at the 75th percentile are more likely to allocate budgets toward public goods after adopting multiparty elections

Cite This Study

Da Sul Kim (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a2e45d5b1cc60ccdea8ad22 https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.70172

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

June 14, 2026Social Science QuarterlyOpen Access

When Authoritarian Regimes Provide Public Goods: Motivation and Capacity

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

DKDa Sul Kim

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Empirical analysis reveals the complex relationship between state capacity and public goods provision in authoritarian regimes.

Key Points

The study aims to explore when authoritarian regimes are likely to enhance public goods provision based on their motivation and capacity.
Analyzed a panel of 95 authoritarian regimes from 1970 to 2015
Utilized the Driscoll-Kraay estimator for empirical analysis
Conducted two robustness tests to validate findings
Introduction of a competitive party system is negatively associated with public goods provision
Regimes with state capacity at the 75th percentile are more likely to allocate budgets toward public goods after adopting multiparty elections

Cite This Study

Da Sul Kim (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a2e45d5b1cc60ccdea8ad22 https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.70172

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark