Property Rights Without Democracy: How Post-Bellum Southern Institutions Explain Contemporary Regulatory Capacity

Property Rights Without Democracy: Replication Data and Code Abstract We document a robust empirical regularity: U.S. states with more severe Jim Crow histories exhibit superior contemporary regulatory efficiency despite—or because of—their authoritarian past. Using Doing Business in North America rankings for 83 cities, we show Border South states (mean rank: 22.82) significantly outperform both non-South states (46.39) and Deep South states (56.25). This pattern reflects institutional persistence: Jim Crow required sophisticated legal mechanisms to maintain hierarchy through formally neutral procedures, creating state capacity for regulatory administration that persists today. Contents Code and Analysis CROW.ipynb - Complete Jupyter notebook containing all empirical analysis, statistical tests, and visualizations Data Files DBNA_2022_Complete_Rankings.xlsx - Doing Business in North America rankings for 83 U.S. cities IPRI- 2007 - 2025 data[25].xlsx - International Property Rights Index data (2007-2025) hypothesis_test_results.xlsx - Statistical test results (ANOVA, Spearman correlation) Visualizations jim_crow_analysis.png - Main visualization showing non-linear relationship between Jim Crow intensity and regulatory efficiency jim_crow_detailed.png - Detailed breakdown by region and Jim Crow classification Documentation DBNA 2022 Report v2.pdf - Methodology report for Doing Business in North America rankings 2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf - Project 2025 document (Heritage Foundation) used for qualitative analysis Key Findings Empirical Pattern Border South (High Jim Crow): Mean rank 22.82 (BEST regulatory efficiency) Upper South (Moderate Jim Crow): Mean rank 36.07 Non-South (No Jim Crow): Mean rank 46.39 Deep South (Severe Jim Crow): Mean rank 56.25 (WORST regulatory efficiency) Statistical Significance ANOVA: F=4.08, p=0.0095 (significant regional differences) Spearman correlation: ρ=0.054, p=0.78 (NO linear relationship between Jim Crow intensity and outcomes) Interpretation The statistical pattern proves institutional FORM (sophisticated legal mechanisms vs. arbitrary authority) matters more than INTENSITY: Border South states developed sophisticated legal frameworks maintaining hierarchy through formally neutral procedures Deep South states relied on arbitrary personal authority and extreme violence, which disrupted institutional capacity This institutional capacity for regulatory administration persists into contemporary business regulation rankings Replication Instructions Prerequisites Python 3.8+ Jupyter Notebook Required packages: pandas, numpy, matplotlib, seaborn, scipy Running the Analysis Download all files from this repository Open CROW.ipynb in Jupyter Notebook Run all cells in sequence Analysis generates: Descriptive statistics by region ANOVA test results Spearman correlation analysis Visualizations (saved as PNG files) Expected Output The notebook produces: Regional breakdown of DBNA rankings Statistical test results validating regional differences Confirmation that Jim Crow intensity does NOT linearly predict regulatory burden Visualizations demonstrating the non-linear pattern Data Classification Jim Crow Intensity Categories Cities classified into four categories based on state-level Jim Crow severity: None (Non-South): States with no Jim Crow history Includes all non-Southern states Moderate (Upper South): States with moderate Jim Crow intensity North Carolina, Oklahoma, Kentucky, Arkansas, Texas High (Border South): States with high Jim Crow intensity Virginia, Tennessee, Missouri, Maryland, Delaware, West Virginia Severe (Deep South): States with most severe Jim Crow intensity Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina Research Contributions Institutional Persistence: Documents how Jim Crow's legal innovations persist as contemporary state capacity for regulatory administration Political Economy Logic: Demonstrates regulatory preferences depend on institutional control (who operates machinery) rather than ideological principles about government size Contemporary Relevance: Links findings to Project 2025's governing blueprint, showing how Jim Crow's institutional template has been nationalized as conservative policy framework Theoretical Innovation: Establishes "property rights without democracy" as viable institutional equilibrium challenging assumptions about complementarity of property rights and democratic participation Keywords Institutional persistence; Regulatory federalism; Jim Crow; Property rights; State capacity; American conservatism; Political economy; Legal institutions JEL Classification Codes N42; P16; K40; H70; O17 License This dataset is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). You are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made Use of AI Tools During the preparation of this work, the author used a large language model to assist with various aspects of manuscript preparation, including generating initial drafts, refining prose for clarity and conciseness, summarizing key arguments, and structuring sections. The author reviewed, edited, and validated all AI-generated content as needed and takes full responsibility for the content of the published article. Acknowledgments This research was conducted independently. The author takes full responsibility for all analysis, interpretation, and conclusions. All data sources are properly attributed and cited in the accompanying paper. Version History v1.0 (December 24, 2025): Initial release with complete replication materials