This paper investigates whether autocratic elections, despite uneven playing fields, lead to better social assistance programs and outcomes for poor citizens. While previous research suggests a link between multiparty elections in autocracies and human development improvements, this study provides empirical evidence by examining program adoption specifically.

Contradicting Conventional Wisdom

New findings challenge earlier assumptions about the relationship between electoral autocracy type (open vs closed) and social welfare outcomes. The argument that open autocracies are more responsive to citizens' demands appears valid for targeted policies, but less so for broad human development benefits.

Methodology & Results

Using regression analysis on international datasets covering various countries during different periods,

we demonstrate:

* Open autocracies (electoral authoritarianism) show significantly higher rates of adopting social assistance programs than closed autocracies.

* These adoption patterns appear linked to electoral responsiveness, specifically targeting poor voters.

* However, the improved outcomes for citizens do not necessarily translate into broader human development gains.

Implications & Future Research

The results highlight a crucial nuance: authoritarian regimes may implement targeted social policies primarily as political tools rather than comprehensive welfare improvements. This paper offers guidance on how future research should better understand these governance dynamics and their selective impact.