Which dimensions of state capacity are most effective in safeguarding democracies from distinct modes of breakdown? This article theorizes and examines how two fundamental dimensions of state capacity—coercive and administrative—affect democratic stability differently depending on whether threats arise from incumbents or nonincumbents. Based on a global analysis covering democratic breakdowns from 1789 to 2020, we find that administrative capacity, characterized by meritocratic recruitment, impartial administration, and predictable enforcement, significantly reduces the risk of incumbent-led democratic breakdowns. In contrast, coercive capacity indicators, such as territorial control and military resources, do not robustly relate to either incumbent-led or nonincumbent-led breakdowns. Our study highlights the critical role of high-quality administrative institutions for democratic stability.
BrehmJGatesS (1997) Working, Shirking, and Sabotage: Bureaucratic Response to a Democratic Public. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
15.
BuxtonJ (2001) The Failure of Political Reform in Venezuela. New York: Ashgate.
16.
CapocciaG (2005) Defending Democracy. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
17.
CollierPHoefflerA (2007) Military Spending and the Risk of Military Coups D’État. Working Paper, Centre for the Study of African Economies, Oxford University, March.
18.
CoppedgeMGerringJKnutsenCH, et al. (2022a) V-Dem Country_Year Dataset V12. Varieties of Democracy (V-dem) Project.
19.
CoppedgeMGerringJKnutsenCH, et al. (2022b) V-Dem Codebook V12. Varieties of Democracy (V-dem) Project.
20.
CornellALapuenteV (2014) Meritocratic Administration and Democratic Stability. Democratization21 (7): 1286–1304.
21.
CornellAKnutsenCHTeorellJ (2020) Bureaucracy and Growth. Comparative Political Studies53 (14): 2246–2282.
22.
DahlströmCLapuenteV (2017) Organizing Leviathan: Politicians, Bureaucrats, and the Making of Good Government. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23.
DahlströmCLapuenteV (2022) Comparative Bureaucratic Politics. Annual Review of Political Science25: 43–63.
24.
EdgellABMaerzSFMaxwellL, et al. (2020) Episodes of Regime Transformation Dataset (v2.0) Codebook. (Varieties of Democracy Institute). Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.
25.
FarissCJAndersTMarkowitzJN, et al. (2022) New Estimates of Over 500 Years of Historic GDP and Population Data. Journal of Conflict Resolution66 (3): 553–591.
26.
FjeldeHde SoysaI (2009) Coercion, Co-optation, or Cooperation? State Capacity and the Risk of Civil War, 1961-2004. Conflict Management and Peace Science26 (1): 5–25.
27.
FukuyamaF (2014) Political Order and Political Decay. London: Profile Books.
28.
GassebnerMLamlaMJVreelandJR (2013) Extreme Bounds of Democracy. Journal of Conflict Resolution57 (2): 171–197.
29.
GiblerDMRandazzoKA (2011) Testing the Effects of Independent Judiciaries on the Likelihood of Democratic Backsliding. American Journal of Political Science55 (3): 696–709.
30.
GjerløwHKnutsenCHWigT, et al. (2021) One Road to Riches? How State Building and Democratization Affect Economic Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31.
HaggardSKaufmanR (2016) Dictators and Democrats. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
32.
HajnalGBodaZ (2021) Illiberal Transformation of Government Bureaucracy in a Fragile Democracy: The Case of Hungary. In:BauerMWPetersBGPierreJ, et al. (eds) Democratic Backsliding and Public Administration. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp.76–100.
33.
HansonJKSigmanR (2021) Leviathan’s Latent Dimensions: Measuring State Capacity for Comparative Political Research. Journal of Politics83 (4): 1495–1510.
34.
HermanM (2001) Intelligence Services in the Age of Information. London: Routledge.
35.
HickenABaltzSVasselaiF (2022) Political Institutions and Democracy. In: CoppedgeMEdgellABKnutsenCH, et al. (eds) Why Democratic Develop and Decline. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp.161–184.
36.
JacobsLRChoateJ (2022) Democratic Capacity: Election Administration as Bulwark and Target. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science699 (1): 22–35.
37.
JacobsNFKingDMilkisSM (2019) Building a Conservative State: Partisan Polarization and the Redeployment of Administrative Power. Perspectives on Politics17 (2): 453–469.
38.
JenkinsJCKposowaAJ (1990) Explaining Military Coup D’État: Black Africa, 1957-1984. American Sociological Review55 (6): 861–875.
39.
KimNK (2021) Previous Military Rule and Democratic Survival. Journal of Conflict Resolution65 (2-3): 534–562.
40.
KnutsenCHMarquardtKLSeimB, et al. (2024) Conceptual and Measurement Issues in Assessing Democratic Backsliding. PS: Political Science & Politics57 (2): 162–177.
41.
KuruAT (2012) The Rise and Fall of Military Tutelage in Turkey: Fears of Islamism, Kurdism, and Communism. Insight Turkey14 (2): 37–57.
42.
LapuenteVRothsteinB (2014) Civil War Spain Versus Swedish Harmony: The Quality of Government Factor. Comparative Political Studies47 (10): 1416–1441.
43.
LeonG (2014) Loyalty for Sale? Military Spending and Coups D’état. Public Choice159: 363–383.
44.
LeonardME (2024) Democratic Backsliding in the American States: The Case of Judicial Independence. Publius: The Journal of Federalism54 (3): 573–597.
45.
LevitskyS (1999) Fujimori and Post-party Politics in Peru. Journal of Democracy10 (3): 78–92.
46.
LevitskySZiblattD (2018) How Democracies Die. New York: Crown Publishers.
47.
LindvallJ (2019) Reform Capacity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
48.
LindvallJTeorellJ (2016) State Capacity as Power: A Conceptual Framework. STANCE Working Paper Series, vol. 1, Lund University, Lund.
49.
LinzJJ (1978) The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes: Crisis and Reequilibration. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
LoewensteinK (1937) Militant Democracy and Fundamental Rights, II. American Political Science Review31 (4): 638–658.
52.
MøllerJSkaaningS-E (2024) Democratization and Autocratization in Comparative Perspective. London: Routledge.
53.
McCoyJLMyersDJ (2008) The Unraveling of Representative Democracy in Venezuela. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
54.
McElligottA (2014) Rethinking the Weimar Republic: Authority and Authoritarianism, 1916-1936. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
55.
McMannKPemsteinDanielSeimBrigitteTeorellJanLindbergStaffan. (2022) Assessing Data Quality: An Approach and An Application. Political Analysis30 (3): 426–449.
56.
MaedaK (2010) Two Modes of Democratic Breakdown: A Competing Risks Analysis of Democratic Durability. Journal of Politics72 (4): 1129–1143.
57.
MannM (1984) The Autonomous Power of the State: Its Origins, Mechanisms and Results. European Journal of Sociology25 (2): 185–213.
58.
MazzucaSMunckG (2014) State or Democracy First? Alternative Perspectives on the State-Democracy Nexus. Democratization21 (7): 1221–1243.
59.
MazzucaSMunckG (2021) A Middle-quality Institutional Trap: Democracy and State Capacity in Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.
60.
MazzucaSL (2010) Access to Power Versus Exercise of Power: Reconceptualizing the Quality of Democracy in Latin America. Studies in Comparative International Development45 (3): 334–357.
61.
MunckG (2024) The State as a Determinant of Democracy: Durable Poor-Quality Democracies in Contemporary Latin America. Democratization31 (2): 341–365.
62.
MunoWBricenoH (2021) Venezuela: Sidelining Public Administration Under a Revolutionary-Populist Regime. In: BauerMWPetersBGPierreJ, et al. (eds) Democratic Backsliding and Public Administration. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp.200–221.
63.
NorrisP (2011) Democratic Deficit: Critical Citizens Revisited. New York: Cambridge University Press.
64.
O’ReillyCMurphyRH (2022) An Index Measuring State Capacity, 1789–2018. Economica89 (355): 713–745.
65.
PemsteinDMarquardtKLTzelgovE, et al. (2020) The V-Dem Measurement Model: Latent Variable Analysis for Cross-National and Cross-Temporal Expert-Coded Data. V-dem Working Paper 21, 7th ed. New York: SSRN.
66.
PetersBG (2021) Administrative Traditions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
67.
PrzeworskiA (2009) Conquered or Granted? A History of Suffrage Extensions. British Journal of Political Science39 (2): 291–321.
68.
PrzeworskiAAlvarezMECheibubJA, et al. (2000) Democracy and Development. New York: Cambridge University Press.
69.
RødEGKnutsenCHHegreH (2020) The Determinants of Democracy: A Sensitivity Analysis. Public Choice185: 87–111.
70.
RemingtonT (2008) Patronage and the Party of Power: President-Parliament Relations Under Vladimir Putin. Europe-asia Studies60 (6): 959–987.
71.
RothsteinBTeorellJ (2008) What Is Quality of Government? A Theory of Impartial Government Institutions. Governance21 (2): 165–190.
SamuelsD (2023) The International Context of Democratic Backsliding: Rethinking the Role of Third Wave “Prodemocracy” Global Actors. Perspectives on Politics21 (3): 1001–1012.
74.
SavchenkoA (2009) Belarus: A Perpetual Borderland. London: Brill.
75.
SingerJDBremerSStuckeyJ (1972) Capability Distribution, Uncertainty, and Major Power War, 1820-1965. In: RussettB (ed.) Peace, War, and Numbers. Beverly Hills: Sage, pp.19–48.
76.
SinghN (2014) Seizing Power: The Strategic Logic of Military Coups. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
SkaaningS-E (2025) A Global, Historical Rule of Law Index. Zeitschrift Für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft. Epub ahead of print 13 February 2025. DOI: 10.1007/s12286-025-00625-2.
79.
SkaaningS-EJohnGBartuseviciusH (2015) A Lexical Index of Electoral Democracy. Comparative Political Studies48 (12): 1491–1525.
80.
SobekD (2010) Masters of Their Domains: The Role of State Capacity in Civil Wars. Journal of Peace Research47 (3): 267–271.
81.
SomerM (2019) Turkey: The Slippery Slope from Reformist to Revolutionary Polarization and Democratic Breakdown. Annals: AAPSS681 (1): 41–61.
82.
StatonJKReenockCHolsingerJ (2022) Can Courts Be Bulwarks of Democracy? Judges and the Politics of Prudence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
83.
StepanAC (1988) Rethinking Military Politics: Brazil and the Southern Cone. New York: Princeton University Press.
84.
SvolikM (2013) Learning to Love Democracy: Electoral Accountability and the Success of Democracy. American Journal of Political Science57 (3): 685–702.
85.
SvolikM (2015) Which Democracies Will Last? Coups, Incumbent Takeovers, and the Dynamic of Democratic Consolidation. British Journal of Political Science45 (4): 715–738.
86.
TillyC (1992) Coercion, Capital, and European States, Ad 990-1992. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
87.
TillyC (2007) Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
88.
VaccaroA (2023) Measures of State Capacity: So Similar, Yet So Different. Quality & Quantity57 (3): 2281–2302.
89.
van HamCGarnettHA (2019) “Building Impartial Electoral Management? Institutional Design, Independence and Electoral Integrity.”International Political Science Review40 (3): 313–334.
90.
VoglerJ (2019) Imperial Rule, the Imposition of Bureaucratic Institutions, and Their Long-Term Legacies. World Politics71 (4): 806–863.
91.
WaldnerDLustEC (2018) Unwelcome Change: Coming to Terms with Democratic Backsliding. Annual Review of Political Science21: 93–113.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
