What do you think?
Rate this book
Social Dictatorships: The Political Economy of the Welfare State in the Middle East and North Africa
Why have social spending levels and social policy trajectories diverged so drastically across labour-abundant Middle Eastern and North African regimes? And how can we explain the marked persistence of spending levels after divergence? Using historical institutionalism and a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods Social The Political Economy of the Welfare State in the Middle East and North Africa develops an explanation of social spending in authoritarian regimes. It emphasizes the importance of early elite conflict and attempts to form a durable support coalition under the constraints imposed by external threats and scarce resources.
Social Dictatorships utilizes two in-depth case studies of the political origins of the Tunisian and Egyptian welfare state to provide an empirical overview of how social policies have developed in the region, and to explain the marked differences in social policy trajectories. It follows a multi-level approach tested comparatively at the cross-country level and process-traced at micro-level by these case studies.
Social Dictatorships utilizes two in-depth case studies of the political origins of the Tunisian and Egyptian welfare state to provide an empirical overview of how social policies have developed in the region, and to explain the marked differences in social policy trajectories. It follows a multi-level approach tested comparatively at the cross-country level and process-traced at micro-level by these case studies.
380 pages, Hardcover
Published March 27, 2020
16 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
March 13, 2026
had to read this for one of my modules, the author’s argument made sense but i wish he talked more about golf countries and how they compare to Iran or algeria. Also the book was quite boring but its not supposed to be entertaining so i cant complain about that.
March 15, 2026
Middle Eastern political economy course reading. Focusing on seven countries in North Africa and the Levant—Iran, Jordan, Syria, Tunisia, Algeria, Egypt, and Morocco—it challenges the conventional narrative of the “Egyptian welfare state,” arguing with quantitative evidence that Tunisia, Algeria, and Iran are in fact more typical welfare states in the Middle East.
The book breaks down “social welfare” into two dimensions: the incentive to provide it, shaped by elite competition and social fragmentation, and the capacity to provide it, shaped by war and resource availability. The theoretical and quantitative chapters are somewhat dull, but the case studies on Tunisia and Egypt are excellent. It is one of the most detailed accounts of 20th-century Middle Eastern socioeconomic history I’ve read so far, dissecting policies such as health insurance with remarkable precision.
“Social welfare” did not originate primarily from leftist ideology; rather, it is closely tied to struggles among nationalist elites. When rivals allied with business interests and moved toward liberalism, the alternative was to ally with strongly organized trade unions. Students who benefited from free education later continued to support the expansion of education, while upper-level crony political and business networks that benefited from energy and food subsidies also had incentives to maintain the welfare system.
For Egypt, the 1979 shift did not simply redirect military spending toward social welfare. It continued to outsource costs through free social policies despite limited resources. The narrative that “neoliberalism weakened social welfare” is overly simplistic—there is far more institutional inertia and complexity involved.
The book breaks down “social welfare” into two dimensions: the incentive to provide it, shaped by elite competition and social fragmentation, and the capacity to provide it, shaped by war and resource availability. The theoretical and quantitative chapters are somewhat dull, but the case studies on Tunisia and Egypt are excellent. It is one of the most detailed accounts of 20th-century Middle Eastern socioeconomic history I’ve read so far, dissecting policies such as health insurance with remarkable precision.
“Social welfare” did not originate primarily from leftist ideology; rather, it is closely tied to struggles among nationalist elites. When rivals allied with business interests and moved toward liberalism, the alternative was to ally with strongly organized trade unions. Students who benefited from free education later continued to support the expansion of education, while upper-level crony political and business networks that benefited from energy and food subsidies also had incentives to maintain the welfare system.
For Egypt, the 1979 shift did not simply redirect military spending toward social welfare. It continued to outsource costs through free social policies despite limited resources. The narrative that “neoliberalism weakened social welfare” is overly simplistic—there is far more institutional inertia and complexity involved.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews