How do regimes instrumentalize ascriptive identity to maintain political power? In a CDDRL research seminar series talk, Lisa Blaydes, Stanford Professor of Political Science and FSI Senior Fellow, explained how regime policies in Kuwait have helped longstanding elite families maintain their social prestige in the contemporary era. 

Blaydes’ argument is grounded in a theory of social authoritarianism, which captures how regimes institutionalize identity-based differences to maintain the social order, thereby defining “insider” and “outsider” groups. 

In this framework, regimes reward coalition members with “status.” Status carries a lower cost than pure patronage. It is also more enduring and thus more appealing from the perspective of its recipients. Kuwait has multiple citizenship categories, which the regime relies on to bestow different levels of status.

Blaydes explained that prior to the discovery of oil, Kuwait's economy relied primarily on trade and pearling. The advent of cultured pearl production and the Great Depression decimated this economic landscape. Coinciding with the decline of the pearl industry in Kuwait was the discovery of oil reserves, resulting in a dramatic and rapid economic shift.

To track the transformation of social status after the discovery of oil, Blaydes employs factor analysis of novel data documenting the involvement of large Kuwaiti families in various economic sectors before the discovery of oil. Two factors stood out, namely, one denoting engagement in Indian Ocean trade and another capturing property holders in the old city and date palms of Basra.

How do each of the two factors affect a given family’s representation in contemporary economy, including corporate boards, university faculty positions, government scholarships, national assembly, and government minister posts? According to Blaydes, whereas factor one correlates with all the said positions, factor two correlates only with corporate board membership and involvement in government ministries.

The findings suggest that social authoritarian regimes “freeze” social status, thereby allowing it to endure in the face of economic shifts. Blaydes theorizes that this occurs via two principal mechanisms. The first is state distribution channels. “Rooted” families were given exclusive access to overseas trading opportunities, and merchants with proximity to the ruling family were able to co-create the political environment. The second mechanism is marriage. In a network analysis of Kuwaiti families, Blaydes found marriage to be an important link between rooted families and politically influential circles. 

How do these findings travel to other Gulf states? Blaydes ran an online survey of Arab Gulf nationals from May 2018 to September 2022. Participants were asked if their parents and grandparents were born in the country, a measure of “all-local lineage.” They were also asked how easy they felt it was to obtain state-sponsored services, if the government had a positive impact, and if the government did a good job on the economy. Those with “all-local lineage” consistently reported higher scores for all the above, with a widening gap between them and those with some non-local lineage during periods when the government faced challenges like the COVID-19 pandemic. 

These findings demonstrate that while all Arab Gulf citizens enjoy access to generous public services, citizens with “all-local lineage” are more likely to believe that they hold access to positive economic outcomes compared to those with some non-local lineage.