Show simple item record

Democracy vs. Economic Growth: Which Came First, the Chicken or the Egg?

Democracia vs crecimiento económico: ¿Quién fue primero, el huevo o la gallina?;
Democracia x crescimento econômico: Quem veio primeiro, a galinha ou o ovo?

dc.creatorMezú, Rodrigo
dc.date2020-11-11
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-17T12:59:44Z
dc.date.available2021-06-17T12:59:44Z
dc.identifierhttps://publicacionesfac.com/index.php/cienciaypoderaereo/article/view/660
dc.identifier10.18667/cienciaypoderaereo.660
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12963/322
dc.descriptionIt has long been taught that democratic strength is the best remedy to gain economic development. In that sense, the broader the social freedoms, the greater the opportunities for the growth of a nation. However, with the rapid development of the Asian tigers, where democracy might not be the common denominator, this vision of development turned not only toward democratic strength but to the structure of institutions as well. Although democracy could remain as the main ingredient to achieve this longed-for and westernized economic development (Lipset, 1959a, 1959b), it is not necessarily the only variable to determine such progress; rather, is the type of institution what becomes essential in establishing incentives and creating better conditions to achieve a political and economic “take-off” of this kind. Hence, democracy, in the long term, would allow opening the way to development, although not without ignoring the importance of history in each country, which in the end determines singularities for the development of nations.eng
dc.descriptionPor mucho tiempo se ha enseñado en las aulas de clase que el mejor remedio para el desarrollo económico es la fortaleza democrática. En ese sentido, entre mayores libertades sociales mayor sería la oportunidad en el crecimiento de una nación. No obstante, con el rápido desarrollo de los tigres asiáticos, donde la democracia no es el común denominador, la visión del desarrollo se volcó, no necesariamente a la fortaleza democrática sino también a la estructura de las instituciones. Aunque la democracia podría seguir siendo el ingrediente principal para lograr ese anhelado y occidentalizado desarrollo económico (Lipset, 1959a,b), no necesariamente es la única variable por considerar para determinar tal avance; más bien, el tipo de instituciones ayudan a establecer incentivos y crear mejores condiciones para alcanzar ese “despegue” en lo político y lo económico. De ahí que, la democracia, en el largo plazo, permitiría abrir el paso al desarrollo, no sin desconocer la importancia de la historia en cada país, lo que al final determina las propias singularidades de su desarrollo.spa
dc.descriptionPor muitos anos foi ensinado nas aulas de clase que o melhor remedio para o desenvolvimento econômico é a fortaleza democrática. Nesse sentido, quanto maiores são as liberdades sociais, maiores são as oportunidades de crescimento de uma nação. No entanto, com o rápido desenvolvimento dos tigres asiáticos, onde a democracia não seria o denominador comum, a visão de desenvolvimento voltou-se não necessariamente para a fortaleza democrática, mas também para a estrutura das instituções. Embora a democracia pudesse continuar sendo o ingrediente principal para alcançar o almejado e ocidentalizado desenvolvimento econômico (Lipset, 1959a/b), não é necessariamente a única variável a ser considerada para determinar esse progresso; pelo contrário, o tipo de instituções ajuda a estabelecer incentivos e criar melhores condições para atingir essa “decolagem” política e econômica. Deste modo, a democracia, ao longo prazo, permitiria  abrir caminho ao desenvolvimento, não sem desconhecer a importância da história em cada país, o que no final acaba determinando as próprias singularidades no seu desenvolvimento.por
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.formattext/html
dc.languagespa
dc.publisherEscuela de Postgrados de la Fuerza Aérea Colombianaspa
dc.relationhttps://publicacionesfac.com/index.php/cienciaypoderaereo/article/view/660/946
dc.relationhttps://publicacionesfac.com/index.php/cienciaypoderaereo/article/view/660/956
dc.relation/*ref*/Acemoglu, D. (2012). Introduction to economic growth. Journal of economic theory, 147(2), 545-550. Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2000). Political losers as a barrier to economic development. American Economic Review, 90(2), 126-130. Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012, 18 de junio). 10 Reasons Countries Fall Apart. Foreign Policy, (194), 89. Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2014). Por qué fracasan los países. Los orígenes del poder, la prosperidad y la pobreza. Revista Austral de Ciencias Sociales, 26, 139-146. Acemoglu, D., Naidu, S., Restrepo, P., & Robinson, J. A. (2019). Democracy does cause growth. Journal of Political Economy, 127(1), 47-100. Barro, R. J. (1996). Determinants of economic growth: A cross-country empirical study. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research. Baum, M. A., & Lake, D. A. (2003). The political economy of growth: democracy and human capital. American Journal of Political Science, 47(2), 333-347. Bayart, J. F. (2010). Les études postcoloniales. Un carnaval académique. Politique étrangère, (4), 912-918. Burkhart, R. E., & Lewis-Beck, M. S. (1994). Comparative democracy: The economic development thesis. American Political Science Review, 88(4), 903-910. Cardoso, F. H., & Faletto, E. (1979). Dependency and development in Latin America. California: University of California Press. Cheibub, J. A., Przeworski, A., Limongi, F. P., & Álvarez, M. M. (1996). What makes democracies endure? Journal of Democracy, 7(1), 39-55. Feng, Y. (1997). Democracy, political stability and economic growth. British Journal of Political Science, 27(3), 391-418. Haggard, S. (1990). Pathways from the periphery: The politics of growth in the newly industrializing countries. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Haggard, S., & Kaufman, R. R. (2008). Development, democracy, and welfare states: Latin America, East Asia, and Eastern Europe. Nueva Jersey: Princeton University Press. Helliwell, J. F. (1994). Empirical linkages between democracy and economic growth. British journal of political science, 24(2), 225-248. Heo, U., & Tan, A. C. (2001). Democracy and economic growth: A causal analysis. Comparative Politics, 33(4), 463-473. Huntington, S. P. (1970). Political order in changing societies. VRÜ, Verfassung und Recht in Übersee, 3(2), 257-261. King, G., Pan, J., & Roberts, M. E. (2013). How censorship in China allows government criticism but silences collective expression. American Political Science Review, 107(2), 326-343. Krieckhaus, J. (2006). Democracy and economic growth: how regional context influences regime effects. British Journal of Political Science, 36(2), 317-340. Leblang, D. A. (1996). Property rights, democracy and economic growth. Political Research Quarterly, 49(1), 5-26. Linz, J. J., & Valenzuela, A. (Eds.). (1994). The failure of presidential democracy. Comparative perspectives Volume 1. Baltimore: Johns Hopkings University Press. Lipset, S. M. (2001) Algunos requisites sociales de la democracia: Desarrollo económico y legitimidad política. En: 10 Textos Básicos de Ciencia Política. España: Ariel, pp. 113-150. Lipset, S. M. (1959a). Political man: The social bases of politics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkings University Press. Lipset, S. M. (1959b). Some social requisites of democracy: Economic development and political legitimacy. American Political Science Review, 53(1), 69-105. Londregan, J. B., & Poole, K. T. (1996). Does high income promote democracy? World politics, 49(1), 1-30. Mainwaring, Scott and Aníbal Pérez-Liñán (2005). “Latin American Democratization since 1978: Democratic Transitions, Breakdowns and Erosions”. En: The Third Wave of Democratization in Latin America. Advances and Setbacks, editado por Frances Hagopian y Scott Mainwaring. . United States of America. Cambridge University Press. Mody, A., & Wang, F. Y. (1997). Explaining industrial growth in coastal China: economic reforms… and what else? The World Bank Economic Review, 11(2), 293-325. Moore, B. (1966). Social origins of dictatorship and democracy: Lord and peasant in the making of the modern world. Boston: Beacon Press. Needler, M. C. (1968). Political development and socioeconomic development: the case of Latin America. American Political Science Review, 62(3), 889-897. Nelson, M. A., & Singh, R. D. (1998). Democracy, economic freedom, fiscal policy and growth in LDCs: a fresh look. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 46(4), 677-696. O’Donnell, G. A. (1973). Modernization and bureaucratic-authoritarianism: studies in South American politics. Berkeley: University of California Intl. Olson, M. (1945). The varieties of Eurosclerosis: the rise and decline of nations since 1982. Economic growth in Europe since, 73-94. Olson, M. (1984). Rise and decline of nations. Economic Growth, Stagflation, and Social Rigidities. Connecticut :Yale University Press Przeworski, A. (1991). Democracy and the market: Political and economic reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Przeworski, A. (2004). Institutions matter? Government and opposition, 39(4), 527-540. Przeworski, A., Álvarez, R. M., Álvarez, M. E., Cheibub, J. A., & Limongi, F. (2000). Democracy and development: political institutions and well-being in the world, 1950-1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Przeworski, A., Limongi, F. P, Giner, S. (1995). Political regimes and economic growth. En: Democracy and development (pp. 3-27). Londres: Palgrave Macmillan. Sirowy, L., & Inkeles, A. (1990). The effects of democracy on economic growth and inequality: A review. Studies in Comparative International Development, 25(1), 126-157. Tilly, C. (2017). War making and state making as organized crime. En. Collective violence, contentious politics, and social change (pp. 121-139). Londres: Routledge. Wade, R. (2004). Governing the market: Economic theory and the role of government in East Asian industrialization. Nueva Jersey: Princeton University Press.
dc.rightsDerechos de autor 2020 Escuela de Postgrados de la Fuerza Aérea Colombianaspa
dc.rightshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0spa
dc.sourceCiencia y Poder Aéreo; Vol. 15 No. 2 (2020): Julio-Diciembre; 18-31eng
dc.sourceCiencia y Poder Aéreo; Vol. 15 Núm. 2 (2020): Julio-Diciembre; 18-31spa
dc.sourceCiencia y Poder Aéreo; v. 15 n. 2 (2020): Julio-Diciembre; 18-31por
dc.source2389-9468
dc.source1909-7050
dc.subjectEconomic growtheng
dc.subjectdemocracyeng
dc.subjectdevelopmenteng
dc.subjectpolitical and economic institutionseng
dc.subjectcrecimiento económicospa
dc.subjectdemocraciaspa
dc.subjectdesarrollospa
dc.subjectinstituciones políticas y económicasspa
dc.subjectCrescimento econômicopor
dc.subjectdemocraciapor
dc.subjectdesenvolvimentopor
dc.subjectinstituições políticas/econômicaspor
dc.titleDemocracy vs. Economic Growth: Which Came First, the Chicken or the Egg?eng
dc.titleDemocracia vs crecimiento económico: ¿Quién fue primero, el huevo o la gallina?spa
dc.titleDemocracia x crescimento econômico: Quem veio primeiro, a galinha ou o ovo?por
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record