Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/307012 
Authors: 
Year of Publication: 
2022
Citation: 
[Journal:] Studies in Comparative International Development [ISSN:] 1936-6167 [Volume:] 58 [Issue:] 2 [Publisher:] Springer US [Place:] New York, NY [Year:] 2022 [Pages:] 129-194
Publisher: 
Springer US, New York, NY
Abstract: 
Could imperial rule affect state institutions at the national, regional, and local level differently? No systematic theory to answer this question exists, which is surprising given the importance that is attributed to foreign rule for political-administrative organization around the world. The effectiveness of imperial rule may differ along the administrative hierarchy because empires are often subject to financial constraints, limits on organizational capabilities, and informational asymmetries. Therefore, a commonly used approach—aggregation at the national level—may yield erroneous findings about colonial legacies by ignoring vital nuances. To address this gap, I develop a novel theory of imperial pervasiveness and test it through a number of statistical analyses. Leveraging an original dataset of citizen perceptions of state institutions in Romania, this study reveals vastly different long-term effects of historical Habsburg rule at the regional and local levels. The results indicate that we need to rethink the study of colonial origins.
Subjects: 
Imperialism
Legacies
State building
Bureaucracy
Foreign rule
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article
Document Version: 
Published Version

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.