In this dissertation I develop a theory that seeks to account for the variation in order present across regions. I propose that the observed variation in regional order in the international system is rooted in the domestic politics of region members. Unlike other attempts at explaining regional order, I account for domestic politics in the political capacity of member states. Measured as the relative ability of states to extract resources from their domestic societies, political capacity provides a measure of institutional and cultural constraints upon the ability of states to engage in costly foreign policies, such as conflict. The more extensive these constraints, the more likely a state will engage in cooperative behavior, resulting in more extensive regional institutions or trade interdependence. I show that regions comprised of high capacity democracies, like Europe, are highly cooperative, while those comprised of high capacity autocracies, like the Middle East, are more conflictual. The more cooperative the region, the greater the degree of interdependence and institutional architecture that will emerge. Finally, because the presence of regional order is contingent upon the domestic characteristics of constituent states, I develop a novel means of identifying regions for the proper measurement and identification of regional variables of interest. Using an opportunity and willingness framework, I define regions as stable geographic spaces of interacting states behaving uniquely from the broader international system. The resulting empirical analysis is a new dataset that provides not only a necessary means of case selection for the regional level variables included in this dissertation, but a specification of regions broadly applicable to regionalist research.

This dissertation will explore how developing provinces within countries attract foreign direct investment. The policy implication to this study is important because it could account for the uneven distribution of growth in developing countries that so frequently leads to dual economies. To attract foreign direct investments, provincial governments compete among themselves trying to appeal to international investors. There is consensus in the economic development literature that both economic and political variables interact to advance a nation's economy. The ability for a country to provide a free market economy to exchange goods and ideas makes the environment more favorable for investors, hence it makes sense to focus on institutions that can attract FDI if the government is committed to developing its economy and compete in the global market. Political factors serves as an important component of strengthening a country's economy. Political variables such as political capacity have helped ensure the success of a growing economy. Governments must possess the ability to extract resources from its people, thereby pursuing policy goals to create a more favorable market environment for investors. Investors then feel more confident and comfortable investing in these economies. This political variable has helped countries redefine themselves in the global community as credible and safe countries for investment. However, this political variable alone is not enough to explain how to attract foreign direct investments in developing countries. Rather, governments must also possess the economic tools necessary, such as economic growth and an open economy. These economic tools combined with political capacity can effectively attract foreign direct investments. Many provinces in developing countries lack these variables, thereby jeopardizing the opportunity to attract foreign direct investments and compete in the global market. Hence, I look at both the political and economical variables as an interaction variable as a strong indicator to attract foreign direct investments. If my work is successful, I hope that these findings can serve as a policy tool for provinces of developing countries to effectively attract foreign direct investments in a competitive global market.

The central question for this study is the popular perception of the state in four Eastern European countries. The democratic transition in this part of Europe has often been marked by deep mistrust towards politicians and sometimes towards the new political system as such. Among other things, the low election turnout in these countries has sometimes been quoted as a symptom of the aforementioned problems. Does lack of explicit trust towards politicians and the political system mean that the ability of the state to act as a regulator and a welfare producer is affected adversely? Is the capacity of the state to fulfill its roll as an intervening actor directly connected to this expressed trust? This study is concerned with these questions and by posing them it reaches beyond the common studies on democratization, whose main concern is the status of ’democracy’ as such. Data from the three Baltic States and Poland reveals that possible connections between citizens’ expressed trust towards the political branches of the state and their opinion on the legitimate role of the state as a regulator is probably more complex than one could expect. The given role of the state as an intervening actor in two policy areas – environmental protection and alcohol consumption – appears very much unaffected by the popular trust towards the political sphere of the state, or its lack. This constitutes a significant finding which opens new avenues into studying state legitimacy in Eastern Europe and elsewhere. / Den centrala frågan för avhandlingen är synen på staten i fyra östeuropeiska länder. Övergången till demokrati i den delen av Europa har ofta kännetecknats av djup misstro mot politiker och ibland misstro mot det politiska systemet som sådant. Bland annat har lågt valdeltagande tolkats som symptom på de ovan nämnda problemen. Innebär misstron mot det politiska etablissemanget och det politiska systemet att statens handlingsfrihet som reglerande (intervenerande) aktör begränsas? Är statens förmåga att uppfylla sina funktioner som reglerare och tjänsteproducent direkt kopplat till den uttryckliga tilltron till statens politiska, demokratiska maktfördelning? Avhandlingen tar upp dessa frågor och går därmed utöver de vanliga studierna av demokratisering, där medborgarnas tilltro till demokratin brukar främst stå i fokus. Data från de tre baltiska länderna samt Polen tycks visa att ett eventuellt samband mellan medborgarnas uttryckliga tilltro till statens politiska sfär och deras uppfattning om dess rättmätiga roll som reglerare är mycket mer komplicerat än man skulle kunna förvänta sig. Statens legitima roll som den intervenerande aktören inom två policyområden – miljöskydd och som bekämpare av alkoholmissbruk – tycks ohotad i alla de undersökta länderna, oavsett medborgarnas tilltro till den politiska sfären, eller bristen därav. Detta öppnar ett nytt perspektiv på statens folkliga förankring i dessa länder och ger upphov till nya frågor när det gäller studier av statens legitimitet.