The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Winners Take All: The Politics of Partial Reform in Postcommunist Transitions
Abstract
Conventional models of the politics of economic reform tend to be based on an assumption about the costs and benefits of reform, known informally as the J-curve. Reforms are expected to make things worse before they get better. This presents a classic time inconsistency dilemma for reformist governments forced to demand severe sacrifices from the public in the short term for the mere promise of future gains. In response, political economy models of the reform process have tended to stress the importance of insulating governments from the pressures of the short-term losers until a sufficient constituency of winners has been created with a stake in supporting and enhancing the reforms. Based on evidence from the postcommunist transitions, this article suggests that the most serious political obstacles to the process of economic reform have come not from the short-term losers but from the shortterm winners. Groups that gain substantial rents from the early distortions of a partially reformed economy have a stake in maintaining a partial reform equilibrium that generates high private gains, but at a considerable social cost. In these countries, the main political challenge has been, not to marginalize the losers, but to restrain the winners. This explains the paradoxical outcome of the postcommunist transitions: that political systems which are more inclusive of the losers have been able to adopt and sustain more comprehensive economic reforms than states insulated from popular pressures.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Linkages between Citizens and Politicians in Democratic Polities
Kitschelt, H. (2000) · Comparative Political Studies · doi:10.1177/001041400003300607 · Cited by 1,439
Djankov, S., Glaeser, E., La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (2003) · Journal of Comparative Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jce.2003.08.005 · Cited by 1,204
Why the rich may favor poor protection of property rights
Sonin, K. (2003) · Journal of Comparative Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jce.2003.09.005 · Cited by 325
Political Parties and Uncertainty in Developing Democracies
Lupu, N., & Riedl, R. B. (2013) · Comparative Political Studies · doi:10.1177/0010414012453445 · Cited by 178
Kapstein, E. B., & Converse, N. (2008) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511817809 · Cited by 149
Metadata
- Authors
- Hellman, J. S.
- Venue
- World Politics
- Publisher
- Project MUSE
- Published
- 1998-01
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 203-234
- ISSN
- 0043-8871 (ISSN-L)
- 1086-3338
- OpenAlex
- W2151843295
- Cited by
- 1,515
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 169.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Winners Take All: The Politics of Partial Reform in Postcommunist Transitions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0043887100008091
- The paper
- Hellman, J. S. (1998). Winners Take All: The Politics of Partial Reform in Postcommunist Transitions. World Politics. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0043887100008091
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.