According to some recent expert surveys, the experts estimate that north korea has a winning coalition of 73 people! (this is down from several hundred a few decades ago.) this means that the w/s ratio is very, very small compared with almost any other country. based on the selectorate theory, what kind of government performance should we expect to see in north korea? group of answer choices

We should expect a low level of public goods provision and a low rate of economic-growth.

Explanation:

In political science, the selectorate theory starts from the premise that whoever holds political power in a country wants to stay in power, and that in order to do so, it must win over those who have a say on whether they will continue to stay in power. According to this theory, there are two groups that can influence it: the selectorate, which includes all the people who have some say over who is going to hold political power, and the winning coalition, which are those who have the final say over who gets to hold power. The political group in power can win these groups over either by the provision of private goods (which can't be shared outside of those who receive them), and public goods (which are available for everybody).

Under this theory, generally speaking western democratic regimes have a very large selectorate (all the voters), and so are the winning coalitions (the voters on swing states or those whose votes can give a decisive advantage). Given that they're appealing to a very large selectorate (thousands or millions of people), western leaders will favor the provision of public goods to convince voters to pick them. However, according to some surveys, supposedly in North Korea there's only 73 people who are part of the winning coalition. If this is true, this means that the North Korean leadership needs only the support of these 73 people to stay in power, so it's better to do so by providing them with private goods. This means that a low level of public goods and a low rate of economic-growth will follow because of this preference of private goods over the provision of public goods.