Abstract
Although empirical research has generally demonstrated that democracies experience more terrorism than autocracies, research suggests that this depends upon complex institutional differences that go beyond the democracy-autocracy divide. This study examines these differences, linking institutions to strategies of coercion and co-optation. Using zero-inflated negative binomial regression estimations on Geddes' (2003) autocratic regime-type data for 161 countries between 1970 and 2006, we find that single-party authoritarian regimes consistently experience less domestic and international terrorism relative to military autocracies and democracies. This finding is robust to a large number of specifications, underscoring the explanatory power of regime type for predicting terrorism. Our explanation for these findings is that party-based autocracies have a wider range of coercion and co-option strategies that they can employ to address grievance and dissent than do other, more strategically restricted, regimes.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 941-955 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Journal | American Journal of Political Science |
| Volume | 57 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Oct 2013 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Sociology and Political Science
- Political Science and International Relations
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Autocracies and Terrorism: Conditioning Effects of Authoritarian Regime Type on Terrorist Attacks'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver