“Substitutable Protections: Socioeconomic Insulation and Credible Commitment Devices.” (with Christopher Reenock) [PDF]

Scholars have argued that credible commitment institutions have important impacts on political outcomes as diverse as economic growth and social order. If commitment institutions function as theorized, then their effects should vary across individuals, groups or states, based upon their respective vulnerability to promise breaking. Yet existing empirical studies never pursue this implication. The failure to do so risks a number of inferential errors and can lead to suboptimal policy prescriptions for institutional reform. In this paper, we develop and provide empirical evidence for these claims within the context of a commitment problem that scholars believe undermines social order.