Impact of ICTs on Repressive Regimes: Findings

My dissertation focuses on the impact of digital resistance on nonviolent political transitions. Digital resistance is a term I use to describe the convergence between civilian resistance and digital activism in countries with repressive regimes. I’ve finally completed the quantitative part of my research and would be very grateful to get as much feedback as possible on the findings so I can write up a final draft in the comings weeks and start planning the field research.

Introduction

The question driving my dissertation research is whether digital resistance poses a threat to authoritarian rule? In other words, are the tactics associated with nonviolent civilian resistance movements greatly enhanced by access to modern information communication technologies (ICTs) such as mobile phones and the Web? Or are repressive regimes becoming increasingly savvy in their ability to regulate the impact of the information revolution within their borders?

If I could turn my research into a Hollywood Blockbuster, the title would probably be: “Repression 2.0 versus Revolution 2.0: A Cyber Game of Cat-and-Mouse.”

There are many anecdotes on both sides of the cyber trenches, each asserting tactical victory over the other. But what do all these anecdotes add up to? Can they be quantified to determine what the final score on the scoreboard will read?

Methodology

One way to answer this question is to test whether the diffusion of information communication technology—measured by increasing numbers of Internet and mobile phone users—is a statistically significant predictor of anti-government protests after controlling for other causes of protests. If a positive and statistically significant relationship exists between protest frequency and access to ICT, then one might conclude that the information revolution empowers civil resistance movements at the expense of coercive regimes. If a negative relationship exists, one might deduce that repressive governments have the upper hand.

I used correlation analysis and negative binomial regression analysis on 22 countries between 1990-2007. These countries were selected because their regimes have the technical capacity to repress information. Five regression models were run. The first model included all 22 countries. The second and third model split the countries between high and low levels of protests. The fourth and fifth models split the countries between high and low numbers of mobile phone users.

Findings

This cluster approach was used to minimize the possibility of cancelation effects and to facilitate case study selection for further qualitative research. The cluster of countries with low levels of protests resulted in a statistically significant albeit negative relationship between the number of mobile phone users and protest frequency. This means that an increase in the number of mobile phone users is associated with a decrease in protest frequency.

The cluster of countries with high levels of mobile phones produced a statistically significant and positive relationship between the number of mobile phone users and protest frequency. In other words, an increase in the number of mobile phones is associated with an increase in the number of protests. The other two country clusters, “high protests” and “low mobile phones,” did not produce a statistically significant result for mobile phone use. The number of Internet users was not significant for any of the five models.

The results may suggest that the information revolution empowers civil resistance movements at the expense of repressive regimes in countries with relatively high levels of access to technology. On the other hand, repressive regimes appear to maintain the upper hand in countries with low levels of protest.

Presentation

I’ve written up the findings in this paper (PDF), which I am presenting next week at the International Studies Association (ISA) convention in New York. The paper is part of a panel I organized and will be Chairing on:

“The Changing Role of ICT in Political Activism, Resistance and Human Rights.”

My fellow panelists are presenting the following papers:

  • Fabien Miard on “Mobile Phones as Facilitators of Political Activism.”
  • Joshua Goldstein on “The Role of Digital Networked Technologies in the Ukrainian Orange Revolution.”
  • Lucia Munoz & Indra de Soysa on “The Blog vs Big Brother: Communication Technologies and Human Rights, 1980-2005.”

The chair of my dissertation committee, Professor Daniel Drezner from The Fletcher School, will be the discussant for the panel. Needless to say, I’m really looking forward to this panel. Stay tuned as I’ll be blogging the presentations, discussant feedback and Q&A next Tuesday.

Patrick Philippe Meier

16 responses to “Impact of ICTs on Repressive Regimes: Findings

  1. Pingback: ISA: Why Human Rights 2.0 Matters « iRevolution

  2. Your results are correlative, not causative, no? Your claims of empowerment seem premature in claiming causation. it could very well be that whatever is indexed by increasing mobile phone usage in countries with already high numbers is also a factor in increasing protests.

    • Many thanks for your note, Lilly. My results are definitely *not* causative. At no point in my blog post or in my paper do I write the word causative. Quite to the contrary, I wrote that mobile phones *may be* associated with an increase in protests in countries with already high levels of mobile phone users. That’s all. And if you read the paper, particularly the last paragraph in the conclusion, you’ll also note the numerous concerns I have with the data sets and why I therefore explicitly do *not* claim the results are conclusive, hence my taking a mixed methods approach to the research.

      I’d be grateful for any further feedback/guidance you might be able to offer. For example, I think I should be including population as a control variable and that I should cluster the data into High/Low mean rankings for degree of repression. What do you think?

  3. Pingback: Smart Mobs » Blog Archive » Impact of ICTs on Repressive Regimes

  4. Pingback: ISA 2009: Mobile Phones and Political Activism « iRevolution

  5. Pingback: ISA 2009: Digital Technologies in Kenya’s Post Election Crisis « iRevolution

  6. Pingback: ISA 2009: Panel on ICTs, Human Rights, Activism and Resistance « iRevolution

  7. Pingback: Impact of ICTs on Repressive Regimes: Findings by Patrick Philippe Meier « Remixing the Web for Social Change

  8. Pingback: links for 2009-02-19 « Social Sim

  9. Pingback: New Media Web Pulse 2009-02-20 « UKTI Blog

  10. Pingback: Democratic Effects of the Internet: Latest Findings « iRevolution

  11. Pingback: iRevolution One Year On… « iRevolution

  12. Pingback: Conflict Early Warning Blog: One Year On « Conflict Early Warning and Early Response

  13. Pingback: An Analytical Framework to Understand Twitter’s use in Iran « iRevolution

  14. Pingback: An Analytical Framework to Understand Twitter’s use in Iran? « iRevolution

  15. Pingback: New Media, Accuracy and Balance of Power in Crises « iRevolution

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s