Abstract
We revisit the hypothesis that a Weberian bureaucracy enhances economic growth. Theoretically, we develop arguments for why such a bureaucracy may enhance growth and discuss plausible counterarguments. Empirically, we use new measures capturing various Weberian features in countries across the world, with some time series extending back to 1789. The evidence base from previous large- N studies is surprisingly thin, but our extensive data enable us to move beyond the problematic cross-country correlations used in previous studies. Hence, we conduct tests that control for country-specific characteristics while ensuring sufficient variation on the slow-moving bureaucracy variables to enable precise estimation. Our analysis suggests that previous cross-country regressions have vastly overstated the strength of the relationship. While this casts uncertainty on the proposition that there is an effect of Weberian bureaucracy on growth, our further analysis suggests that—if an effect exists—it may operate in the short term and be stronger in recent decades.
Highlights
We revisit the hypothesis that a Weberian bureaucracy enhances economic growth
Bureaucracies displaying “neo-patrimonial” modes of governance instead of Weberian features are proposed as a key reason for the underdevelopment of many Sub-Saharan African countries (Goldsmith, 1999; Sandbrook, 1986)
Our various panel models report modest, though typically positive, point estimates, but these results are often statistically insignificant at conventional levels. While this casts some uncertainty on the proposition that there is, an effect of Weberian features of the bureaucracy on growth, further analysis on our measure of impartial and rule-following administrations suggests that—if it exists—it tends to operate in the short term and it is stronger in recent decades
Summary
We revisit the hypothesis that a Weberian bureaucracy enhances economic growth. Theoretically, we develop arguments for why such a bureaucracy may enhance growth and discuss plausible counterarguments. Evans and Rauch (1999) is, to our knowledge, the only previous study that directly tests the impact of Weberian bureaucracy on economic growth.2 The study is the first attempt to collect quantitative data on different features of the public administration using expert survey data to gauge the level of “Weberianness.” Employing cross-country ordinary least squares (OLS) regressions, they find a positive relationship between degree of “Weberianness” and growth, and the estimated “effect” is substantial.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
