This item is under embargo and not available online per the author's request. For access information, please visit http://libanswers.wustl.edu/faq/5640.
The Politics of Compensation for Expropriation
Date of Award
Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
A large literature in political science has examined the choices of governments to expropriate or nationalize foreign investment. Leaders, often with short time horizons, may renege on contracts with foreign investors for political gain, but these choices have serious costs. Existing work has examined why governments are willing to pay these costs or how institutional constraints limit the ability of states to renege on these commitments. What is missing in this literature is a recognition that many governments provide at least some amount of compensation to investors after reneging on these commitments. While political scientists have largely ignored this policy choice, scholars of law often see expropriations with adequate compensation as lawful. In my dissertation, I integrate both of these literatures and focus on the incentives of governments to ultimately renege on contracts while often providing partial compensation. My central insight is that governments can manage the costs of expropriations by compensating investors. I build a formal model of government incentives for both expropriation and compensation and use a novel dataset to test the empirical implications of the theoretical model.
Chair and Committee
Nathan M Jensen
Nathan M Jensen, Andrew C Sobel, Randall Calvert, John Patty, Bret Gustafson, Sebastian Galiani
Pereyra-Johnston, Noel, "The Politics of Compensation for Expropriation" (2013). Arts & Sciences Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 296.