Replication Data for: Endogenous Political Change: How Different Authoritarian Regimes Trigger Collective Action that Harm Themselves

In this paper, we replicate and extend Jeremy Wallace's ``Cities, Redistribution, and Authoritarian Regime Survival\", originally published in \textit{The Journal of Politics} (2013). Using cross-national time series data, we re-examine the durability of authoritarian regimes by exploring the relationship between regime types and collective action. First, we find that certain regime types are associated with an increased propensity of collective action. Elite-level collective action is more prevalent under military regimes, and less so under monarchic and single-party regimes. Second, under different types of dictatorship, the threat to regime longevity posed by collective action varies. We show that military and single-party regimes are more vulnerable to \textit{elite}-level conflict. Our study further suggests that military dictatorships are the most fragile type of authoritarian regime. These regimes are associated with a higher likelihood of elite-level collective action, which in turn significantly harms their longevity. Single-party regimes, on the other hand, are more resilient to both mass- and elite-level collective action events. Finally, monarchic regimes, in addition to experiencing higher rates of mass-level action, are more likely to collapse when faced with mass-level uprisings, suggesting a reduced capacity to control large-scale events.