How and Why do Dictatorships Survive? Lessons for the Middle East

Political events in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) have dominated news headlines for the past two years. Since the revolution in Tunisia in December 2010, one dictatorship after the next has appeared on the verge of collapse, as citizens gather en masse to voice their demands for democratic governance. In countries such as Libya and Egypt, though relatively successful democratic elections were held following the collapse of long-standing dictatorships, it is uncertain whether the new political system being installed will be democratic or autocratic. When looking to the future of the region beyond the Arab Spring, one thing seems clear: the Middle East’s monarchies do not appear to be going away any time soon

Oil and Autocratic Regime Survival

This article uncovers a new mechanism linking oil wealth to autocratic regime survival: the investigation tests whether increases in oil wealth improve the survival of autocracies by lowering the chances of democratization, reducing the risk of transition to subsequent dictatorship, or both. Using a new measure of autocratic durability shows that, once models allow for unit effects, oil wealth promotes autocratic survival by lowering the risk of ouster by rival autocratic groups. Evidence also indicates that oil income increases military spending in dictatorships, which suggests that increasing oil wealth may deter coups that could have caused a regime collapse

Authoritarian Politics: Trends and Debates

In the past two decades, the field of authoritarian politics has grown substantially. This commentary surveys the major findings in the field, how it is has evolved, and key debates that have emerged in response

Autocratic Breakdown and Regime Transitions: A New Data Set

When the leader of an autocratic regime loses power, one of three things happens. The incumbent leadership group is replaced by democratically elected leaders. Someone from the incumbent leadership group replaces him, and the regime persists. Or the incumbent leadership group loses control to a different group that replaces it with a new autocracy. Much scholarship exists on the first kind of transition, but little on transitions from one autocracy to another, though they make up about half of all regime changes. We introduce a new data set that facilitates the investigation of all three kinds of transition. It provides transition information for the 280 autocratic regimes in existence from 1946 to 2010. The data identify how regimes exit power, how much violence occurs during transitions, and whether the regimes that precede and succeed them are autocratic. We explain the data set and show how it differs from currently available data. The new data identify autocratic regime breakdowns regardless of whether the country democratizes, which makes possible the investigation of why the ouster of dictators sometimes leads to democracy but often does not, and many other questions. We present a number of examples to highlight how the new data can be used to explore questions about why dictators start wars and why autocratic breakdown sometimes results in the establishment of a new autocratic regime rather than democratization. We discuss the implications of these findings for the Arab Spring

A systematic review of doctoral graduate attributes: Domains and definitions

Doctoral graduate attributes are the qualities, skills, and competencies that graduates possess, having completed their doctorate degree. Graduate attributes, in general, lack conceptual clarity, making the investigation into and quality assurance processes attached to doctoral outcomes challenging. As many graduate attributes are “unseen” or implicit, the full range of attributes that doctoral graduate actually possess needs to be synthesized, so that they may be recognized and utilized by educational stakeholders. The aim of this study was to establish and describe what attributes graduates from doctoral degrees possess. A systematic review of peer-reviewed, primary literature published between January 2016 and June 2021 was conducted, identifying 1668 articles. PRISMA reporting was followed, and after screening and full text critical appraisal, 35 articles remained for summation through thematic synthesis. The doctoral graduate attribute domains identified included knowledge, research skills, communication skills, organizational skills, interpersonal skills, reputation, scholarship, higher order thinking skills, personal resourcefulness, and active citizenship. Many of the domains were conceptualized as transferable or interdisciplinary, highlighting the relevance of the attributes doctoral graduates possess. The review findings align with existing frameworks yet extend those that tend to focus on generic “seen” attributes, and include a range of “unseen”, intrinsic qualities as outcomes of the doctoral degree. The review contributes to the conceptual development of doctoral graduate attributes, by synthesizing actual outcomes, as opposed mto prospective attributes or attributes-in-process. Doctoral graduate attributes should be conceptualized to integrate both generic attributes alongside intrinsic qualities that are important for employability. Increased awareness as to the scope of doctoral graduate attributes among stakeholders, such as doctoral supervisors, students, graduates and employers, may facilitate improved educational outcomes and employability. Future research into the contextual relevance of the domains identified and how they are developed may be beneficial. Future research could involve the development of context-relevant scales to empirically measure doctoral graduate attributes among alumni populations, as a quality assurance outcome indicator. Such findings could inform program reform, improving the relevance of doctoral education and the employability of doctoral graduate

Risk factors associated with failing pre-transmission assessment surveys (pre-TAS) in lymphatic filariasis elimination programs: Results of a multi-country analysis.

Achieving elimination of lymphatic filariasis (LF) as a public health problem requires a minimum of five effective rounds of mass drug administration (MDA) and demonstrating low prevalence in subsequent assessments. The first assessments recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) are sentinel and spot-check sites-referred to as pre-transmission assessment surveys (pre-TAS)-in each implementation unit after MDA. If pre-TAS shows that prevalence in each site has been lowered to less than 1% microfilaremia or less than 2% antigenemia, the implementation unit conducts a TAS to determine whether MDA can be stopped. Failure to pass pre-TAS means that further rounds of MDA are required. This study aims to understand factors influencing pre-TAS results using existing programmatic data from 554 implementation units, of which 74 (13%) failed, in 13 countries. Secondary data analysis was completed using existing data from Bangladesh, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Ghana, Haiti, Indonesia, Mali, Nepal, Niger, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, and Uganda. Additional covariate data were obtained from spatial raster data sets. Bivariate analysis and multilinear regression were performed to establish potential relationships between variables and the pre-TAS result. Higher baseline prevalence and lower elevation were significant in the regression model. Variables statistically significantly associated with failure (p-value ≤0.05) in the bivariate analyses included baseline prevalence at or above 5% or 10%, use of Filariasis Test Strips (FTS), primary vector of Culex, treatment with diethylcarbamazine-albendazole, higher elevation, higher population density, higher enhanced vegetation index (EVI), higher annual rainfall, and 6 or more rounds of MDA. This paper reports for the first time factors associated with pre-TAS results from a multi-country analysis. This information can help countries more effectively forecast program activities, such as the potential need for more rounds of MDA, and prioritize resources to ensure adequate coverage of all persons in areas at highest risk of failing pre-TAS

Socializing One Health: an innovative strategy to investigate social and behavioral risks of emerging viral threats

In an effort to strengthen global capacity to prevent, detect, and control infectious diseases in animals and people, the United States Agency for International Development’s (USAID) Emerging Pandemic Threats (EPT) PREDICT project funded development of regional, national, and local One Health capacities for early disease detection, rapid response, disease control, and risk reduction. From the outset, the EPT approach was inclusive of social science research methods designed to understand the contexts and behaviors of communities living and working at human-animal-environment interfaces considered high-risk for virus emergence. Using qualitative and quantitative approaches, PREDICT behavioral research aimed to identify and assess a range of socio-cultural behaviors that could be influential in zoonotic disease emergence, amplification, and transmission. This broad approach to behavioral risk characterization enabled us to identify and characterize human activities that could be linked to the transmission dynamics of new and emerging viruses. This paper provides a discussion of implementation of a social science approach within a zoonotic surveillance framework. We conducted in-depth ethnographic interviews and focus groups to better understand the individual- and community-level knowledge, attitudes, and practices that potentially put participants at risk for zoonotic disease transmission from the animals they live and work with, across 6 interface domains. When we asked highly-exposed individuals (ie. bushmeat hunters, wildlife or guano farmers) about the risk they perceived in their occupational activities, most did not perceive it to be risky, whether because it was normalized by years (or generations) of doing such an activity, or due to lack of information about potential risks. Integrating the social sciences allows investigations of the specific human activities that are hypothesized to drive disease emergence, amplification, and transmission, in order to better substantiate behavioral disease drivers, along with the social dimensions of infection and transmission dynamics. Understanding these dynamics is critical to achieving health security--the protection from threats to health-- which requires investments in both collective and individual health security. Involving behavioral sciences into zoonotic disease surveillance allowed us to push toward fuller community integration and engagement and toward dialogue and implementation of recommendations for disease prevention and improved health security

State, Development, Democracy, Conflict and Terrorism

Globalization has dramatically changed the role of the state in today’s world. With increased interdependence between states, states now have less autonomy and find that their sovereignty is weakened. In this context, many states have become “failed states”: states that have lost their capacity to provide for their citizens and adequately manage domestic and foreign policy. This book-length project examines the concept of “failed states” with a critical eye, arguing that it offers limited analytical leverage and that an emphasis on state institutions, instead, is advisable. It does so relying on the expansive literature devoted to both “failed states” and state institutions, integrating case studies throughout to provide context to the discussion. The book (written with co-author Natasha Ezrow) is set for release this fall with Bloomsbury Publishers. This was made possible through the CARS Summer Grant, which enabled me to spend the summer writing the book’s core chapters

Tying the dictator’s hands: Leadership survival in authoritarian regimes. Doctoral Dissertation

Abstract: In this paper, I examine one of the most important elements of authoritarian politics: leadership survival. I argue that a key actor in understanding leadership survival in dictatorships is the elite coalition-the group of individuals a dictator relies on for support. Whether elites are bound together by a dominant institution, such as a party or military, affects their ability to overthrow the dictator. I look at elite coalitions in personalist, single-party and military dictatorships. Due to institutional differences in the nature of the elite coalition, elites in military dictatorships should have the greatest ability to oust the dictator, followed by elites in single-party dictatorships, and lastly elites in personalist dictatorships. I test this expectation using a survival model and find substantial support for my argument. Military dictators face the highest risk of removal from office and personalist dictators face the lowest. 2 In comparison to democratic systems, we know very little about how dictatorships work, who the key political actors are, and where the locus of power rests. In fact, authoritarian rule is one of the least-studied areas of political science