ScholarGate
어시스턴트

방법 비교

선택한 방법을 나란히 검토하세요. 서로 다른 행은 강조 표시됩니다.

Resource Curse Analysis×State Autonomy Analysis×
분야Political EconomyPolitical Economy
계열Regression modelProcess / pipeline
기원 연도20011984
창시자Jeffrey Sachs & Andrew Warner (growth); Michael Ross (democracy)Theda Skocpol, Peter Evans, Dietrich Rueschemeyer & Michael Mann
유형Cross-country regression analysis of resource dependenceState-centered analytical framework
원전Sachs, J. D., & Warner, A. M. (2001). Natural Resources and Economic Development: The Curse of Natural Resources. European Economic Review, 45(4-6), 827-838. DOI ↗Evans, P. B., Rueschemeyer, D., & Skocpol, T. (Eds.). (1985). Bringing the State Back In. Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 9780521313131
별칭Natural Resource Curse Analysis, Paradox of Plenty Analysis, Rentier State Analysis, Resource Dependence RegressionState-Centered Analysis, Relative Autonomy Analysis, Infrastructural Power Analysis, Bringing the State Back In Approach
관련33
요약Resource curse analysis is the empirical study of the paradox that economies rich in natural resources — oil, gas, minerals — often grow more slowly, remain less democratic, and suffer more conflict than resource-poor economies. Jeffrey Sachs and Andrew Warner's influential work, summarized in their 2001 European Economic Review article, documented a robust negative cross-country correlation between resource dependence and economic growth. Michael Ross's 2001 World Politics article extended the logic to politics, showing statistically that oil wealth is associated with weaker democracy through rentier, repression, and modernization mechanisms. The workhorse method is a cross-country regression of growth or democracy on a measure of resource dependence with controls for the standard determinants of development.State autonomy analysis treats the state not as a neutral arena or a simple instrument of the dominant class but as an organization with interests, capacities, and powers of its own. Crystallized in the 1985 volume Bringing the State Back In edited by Evans, Rueschemeyer, and Skocpol, and given a sharp conceptual edge by Michael Mann's 1984 distinction between despotic and infrastructural power, the framework asks two linked questions: how far can a state formulate goals independent of the preferences of dominant social classes (autonomy), and how effectively can it actually implement those goals across its territory (capacity)? The approach reoriented comparative political economy away from purely society-centered explanations.
ScholarGate데이터셋
  1. v1
  2. 2 출처
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 출처
  3. PUBLISHED

검색으로 이동 슬라이드 다운로드

ScholarGate방법 비교: Resource Curse Analysis · State Autonomy Analysis. 2026-06-25에 다음에서 검색함: https://scholargate.app/ko/compare