Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T07:59:25.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Returns to Office in a “Rubber Stamp” Parliament

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2014

RORY TRUEX
RORY TRUEX*
Affiliation:
Yale University
*
Rory Truex is Ph.D. Candidate, Rosenkranz Hall, Department of Political Science, Yale University New Haven, CT 06520 ([email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Are there returns to office in an authoritarian parliament? A new dataset shows that over 500 deputies to China’s National People’s Congress are CEOs of various companies. Entropy balancing is used to construct a weighted portfolio of Chinese companies that matches companies with NPC representation on relevant financial characteristics prior to the 11th Congress (2008–2012). The weighted fixed effect analysis suggests that a seat in the NPC is worth an additional 1.5 percentage points in returns and a 3 to 4 percentage point boost in operating profit margin in a given year. Additional evidence reveals that these rents stem primarily from the “reputation boost” of the position, and not necessarily formal policy influence. These findings confirm the assumptions of several prominent theories of authoritarian politics but suggest the need to further probe the nature of these institutions.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 108 , Issue 2 , May 2014 , pp. 235 - 251
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Boix, C., and Svolik, M.. 2013. “The Foundations of Limited Authoritarian Government: Institutions and Power-sharing in Dictatorships.” Journal of Politics 75: 300–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brambor, T., Clark, W., and Golder, M.. 2006. “Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analysis.” Political Analysis 14: 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bristow, M. 2009. “Chinese Delegate Has ‘No Power’.” BBC News. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7922720.stm.Google Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, B., Smith, A., Silverson, R. M., and Morrow, J. D.. 2003. The Logic of Political Survival. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, B., Smith, A., Silverson, R. M., and Morrow, J. D.. 2008. “Retesting Selectorate Theory: Separating the Effects of W from Other Elements of Democracy.” American Political Science Review 103 (3): 393–400.Google Scholar
China Securities Investor Protection Fund Corporation. 2009. “Comprehensive Survey of Chinese Securities Investors in 2009.” http://www.sipf.com.cn/.Google Scholar
Deng, G. S., and Kennedy, S.. 2010. “Big Business and Industry Association Lobbying in China: The Paradox of Contrasting Styles.” The China Journal 63: 101–25.Google Scholar
Diamond, A., and Sekhon, J.. 2006. “Genetic Matching for Causal Effects: A General Multivariate Matching Method for Achieving Balance in Observational Studies.” Department of Political Science, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
Dickson, B. J. 2008. Wealth into Power: The Communist Party’s Embrace of China’s Private Sector. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eggers, A. C., and Hainmueller, J.. 2009. “MPs for Sale? Returns to Office in Postwar British Politics.” American Political Science Review 103: 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faccio, M. 2006. “Politically Connected Firms.” The American Economic Review 96: 369–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, T., and Voth, H. 2008. “Betting on Hitler—The Value of Political Connections in Nazi Germany.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 123: 101–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferraz, C., and Finan, F.. “Electoral Accountability and Corruption: Evidence from the Audits of Local Governments.” American Economic Review 101: 1274–311.Google Scholar
Fisman, R. 2001. “Estimating the Value of Political Connections.” The American Economic Review 91: 1095–102.Google Scholar
Gandhi, J. 2008. Political Institutions under Dictatorship. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gandhi, J., and Przeworski, A.. 2006. “Cooperation, Cooptation, and Rebellion under Dictatorship.” Economics and Politics 18: 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gandhi, J., and Przeworski, A.. 2007. “Authoritarian Institutions and the Survival of Autocrats.” Comparative Political Studies 40: 1279–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, E., Rocholl, J., and So, J. 2009. “Does Political Connectedness Affect Firm Value?” Review of Financial Studies 22: 2333–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hainmueller, J. 2012. “Entropy Balancing for Causal Effects: A Multivariate Reweighting Method to Produce Balanced Samples in Observational Studies.” Political Analysis 20: 25–46.Google Scholar
Jayachandran, S. 2006. “The Jeffords Effect.” Journal of Law and Economics 49: 397–425.Google Scholar
Jiang, J. S. 2003. The National People’s Congress of China. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, S., and Mitton, T.. 2003. “Cronyism and Capital Controls: Evidence from Malaysia.” Journal of Financial Economics 67: 351–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, S. 2008. The Business of Lobbying In China. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lenz, G. S., and Lim, K. 2009. “Getting Rich(er) in Office? Corruption and Wealth Accumulation in Congress.” APSA 2009 Toronto Meeting Paper.Google Scholar
Lust-Okar, E. 2006. “Elections under Authoritarianism: PreliminaryLessons from Jordan.” Democratization 13: 456–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malesky, E., and Schuler, P.. 2010. “Nodding or Needling: Analyzing Delegate Responsiveness in an Authoritarian Parliament.” American Political Science Review 104: 482–502.Google Scholar
Malesky, E., Schuler, P., and Tran, A.. 2012. “The Adverse Effects of Sunshine: A Field Experiment on Legislative Transparency in an Authoritarian Assembly.” American Political Science Review 106: 762–86.Google Scholar
Manion, M. 2011. “Congresses with Constituents, Constituents without Congresses: Representation for Authoritarian Rule in China.” University of Wisconsin - Madison, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
O’Brien, K. 1988. “China’s National People’s Congress: Reform and Its Limits.” The China Quarterly 13: 343–74.Google Scholar
O’Brien, K. 1990. Reform without Liberalization: China’s National Congress and the Politics of Institutional Change. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, K. 1994. “Agents and Remonstrators: Role Accumulation by Chinese People’s Congress Deputies.” The China Quarterly 138: 359–80.Google Scholar
Querubin, P., and Snyder, J. M.. 2008. “The Rents to Political Office in the U.S., 1840–1870.” Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Manuscript.Google Scholar
Roberts, B. 1990. “A Dead Senator Tells No Lies: Seniority and The Distribution of Federal Benefits.” American Journal of Political Science 34: 31–58.Google Scholar
Shih, V., Adolph, C., and Liu, M. X.. 2012. “Getting Ahead in the Communist Party: Explaining the Advancement of Central Committee Members in China.” American Political Science Review 106: 166–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svolik, M. W. 2009. “Power Sharing and Leadership Dynamics in Authoritarian Regimes.” American Journal of Political Science 53 (2): 477–94.Google Scholar
Svolik, M. W. 2012. The Politics of Authoritarian Rule. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tanner, M. S. 1998. The Politics of Lawmaking in Post-Mao China: Institutions, Processes, and Democratic Prospects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Truex, R. 2014. Representation Within Bounds: Politics and Policy in China’s National People’s Congress. Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
“What Makes a Rubber Stamp.” 2012. Analects Blog: The Economist. http://www.economist.com/blogs/analects/2012/03/national-peoples-congress.Google Scholar
Wright, J. 2008. “Do Authoritarian Institutions Constrain? How Legislatures Affect Economic Growth and Investment.” American Journal of Political Science 52: 322–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.