
Why This Question Matters
Political regimes are often judged by their ability to improve the lives of the poorest citizens. Lisa Blaydes and Mark Andreas Kayser ask whether democratic institutions actually translate economic growth into greater consumption for the least privileged—and whether authoritarian regimes do worse at this redistributive task.
A New Measure: Calories as Distribution
The authors propose average daily calorie consumption as an alternative, widely available indicator of transfers to the poor. Because biological limits prevent a small elite from consuming the bulk of a country's calories, calories provide a direct, distribution-sensitive measure of population-level material well-being that avoids some limitations of conventional wealth or goods-based measures.
What the Authors Did
Blaydes and Kayser compare regime types—democracies, hybrid regimes, and autocracies—using cross-national data on calorie consumption and economic growth. Their approach examines how growth translates into two distinct nutritional outcomes: total daily calories (a measure of broad caloric access) and calories from animal sources (a proxy for higher-quality diets).
Key Findings
Why This Matters
By reframing distributional outcomes around calories, the study offers a clear, biologically grounded way to assess who benefits from growth. The results suggest that political institutions shape not only the quantity of consumption distributed across a population but also its nutritional quality—an insight with implications for development policy, welfare measurement, and comparative studies of regime performance.

| Counting Calories: Democracy and Distribution in the Developing World was authored by Lisa Blaydes and Mark Andreas Kayser. It was published by Oxford in ISQ in 2011. |