Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Elections, Special Interests, and Financial Crisis

  • Philip Keefer (a1)

A large literature concludes that democracy has ambiguous effects on public policy and that political checks and balances exacerbate crisis. The analysis in this article finds that although democracies are no less likely to experience banking crises, in the event of financial crisis, competitively elected governments intervene more rapidly in insolvent banks and make transfers to them that are between 10 and 20 percent of gross domestic product less than those made by nondemocratic governments. Their countries suffer far smaller growth collapses. However, political checks and balances have no effect on government responses to financial crisis. A simple model offers new explanations for these regime effects. First, for those public policies for which voter information and political credibility are particularly likely to be problematic (financial regulation), electoral accountability matters only when the consequences of failure become large and visible (financial crisis). Second, checks and balances reduce political incentives to seek rents, offsetting the delays they induce in crisis response. The analysis in this article underlines the importance of considering regime effects on political incentives to cater to special interests at the expense of broad social interests, and of avoiding aggregated and subjective measures of democracy that can obscure the identification of regime effects.This article benefited from the generous comments of George Clarke, Robert Cull, and Patrick Honohan, and from those of participants at the 6th International Conference on Finance and Development, Moscow 2005; and in seminars at the University of California, Los Angeles, Universität Basel, and the Inter-American Development Bank.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

Acemoglu, Daron, and James A. Robinson. 2001. Inefficient Redistribution. American Political Science Review 95 (3):64961.

Acemoglu, Daron, Simon Johnson, and James A. Robinson. 2002. Reversal of Fortune: Geography and Institutions in the Making of the Modern World Income Distribution. Quarterly Journal of Economics 117 (4):123194.

Adserà, Alícia, Carles Boix, and Mark Payne. 2003. Are You Being Served? Political Accountability and Quality of Government. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 19 (2):44590.

Beck, Thorsten, George Clarke, Alberto Groff, Philip Keefer, and Patrick Walsh. 2001. New Tools in Comparative Political Economy: The Database of Political Institutions. World Bank Economic Review 15 (1):16576.

Besley, Timothy, and Stephen Coate. 2001. Lobbying and Welfare in a Representative Democracy. Review of Economic Studies 68 (1):6782.

Ferejohn, John. 1986. Incumbent Performance and Electoral Control. Public Choice 50 (2):525.

Frederiksson, Per G., and Jakob Svensson. 2003. Political Instability, Corruption and Policy Formation: The Case of Environmental Policy. Journal of Public Economics 87 (7–8):1383405.

Grossman, Gene M., and Elhanan Helpman. 1996. Electoral Competition and Special Interest Politics. Review of Economic Studies 63 (2):26586.

Hicken, Allen, Shanker Satyanath, and Ernest Sergenti. 2005. Political Institutions and Economic Performance: The Effects of Accountability and Obstacles to Policy Change. American Journal of Political Science 49 (4):897907.

Honohan, Patrick, and Daniela Klingebiel. 2003. The Fiscal Cost Implications of an Accommodating Approach to Banking Crises. Journal of Banking and Finance 27 (8):153960.

Keefer, Philip, and Stuti Khemani. 2005. Democracy, Public Expenditures, and the Poor: Understanding Political Incentives for Providing Public Services. World Bank Research Observer 20 (1):127.

Lizzeri, Alessandro, and Nicola Persico. 2001. The Provision of Public Goods Under Alternative Electoral Incentives. American Economic Review 91 (1):22539.

Montinola, Gabriella R. 2003. Who Recovers First? Banking Crises Resolution in Developing Countries. Comparative Political Studies 36 (5):54174.

Mulligan, Casey B., Ricard Gil, and Xavier Sala-i-Martin. 2004. Do Democracies Have Different Public Policies than Non-Democracies? Journal of Economic Perspectives 18 (1):5174.

Powell, G. Bingham, Jr., and Guy D. Whitten. 1993. A Cross-National Analysis of Economic Voting: Taking Account of the Political Context. American Journal of Political Science 37 (2):391414.

Rasmusen, Eric, and J. Mark Ramseyer. 1994. Cheap Bribes and the Corruption Ban: A Coordination Game Among Rational Legislators. Public Choice 78 (3–4):30527.

Remmer, Karen L. 1991. The Political Impact of Economic Crisis in Latin America in the 1980s. American Political Science Review 85 (3):777800.

Rodrik, Dani. 1999. Where Did All the Growth Go? External Shocks, Social Conflict, and Growth Collapses. Journal of Economic Growth 4 (4):385412.

Rosenbluth, Frances, and Ross Schaap. 2003. The Domestic Politics of Banking Regulation. International Organization 57 (2):30736.

Tsebelis, George. 1999. Veto Players and Law Production in Parliamentary Democracies: An Empirical Analysis. American Political Science Review 93 (3):591608.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

International Organization
  • ISSN: 0020-8183
  • EISSN: 1531-5088
  • URL: /core/journals/international-organization
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 1
Total number of PDF views: 37 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 106 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 24th June 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.