Critical Citizens and Political Participation in Latin America: Critical Citizens and Political Participation in Latin America Ryan Carlin
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Overarching Concern: Overarching Concern What kinds of citizens enrich and sustain democracy?
Research Questions: Research Questions How can we identify democratic citizens?
Does democratic support (or lack thereof) influence political participation? If so, how?
Critical Citizens: Critical Citizens Support for Democracy +
Distrust in Political Institutions =
Political Participation
Norris 1999, Pharr & Putnam 2000 Cain, Norris 2002, Dalton & Scarrow 2003, Dalton 2004
Outline: Outline New Measurement Approach
Analyses
Cluster Analysis: Profiles of Democratic Support
Model: Protest Activism
Model: Electoral Participation
Theoretical Contributions
Future Payoffs
Case Selection: Chile: Case Selection: Chile
Like Europe
Like Latin America
Quality of Democracy high for Latin America, low for Europe
Profiles of Democratic Support: Profiles of Democratic Support Procedural Democracy, Polyarchy Dahl 1971
Objects of Support
“Democratic” Governance
Political Rights & Procedures
Civil Liberties
Orientations of Support
Democratic vs. Authoritarian
Democratic vs. Contingent
Data: Data AmericasBarometer 2006 (LAPOP)
Highest quality national sample (n = 1517)
Rich & Multiple Measures
Operationalization: Operationalization
Democratic vs. Authoritarian: Democratic vs. Authoritarian Democratic Governance
A/D: “Democracy may have problems but it is still the best form of government”
Political Rights & Procedures α=.91
A/D: “Do you think people who speak poorly of the government should be able to (1) vote, (2) run for office, (3) express political views in peaceful protests, (4) voice political views on TV
Civil Liberties α=.84
A/D: “Would you support a law…?”
(1) banning all public protests,
(2) prohibiting dissenters from associating
(3) censoring (a) TV programs, (b) library books, (c) media criticizing the government
Democratic vs. Contingent: Democratic vs. Contingent Democratic Governance α=.81
A/D: “Would a military coup be justified under high levels of: Unemployment, social protests, crime, inflation, corruption?”
Political Rights & Procedures α=.86
“Would support a government that…?”
½ unemployment but suspends elections
½ crime but suspends elections
½ unemployment but disregards congress & judiciary
½ crime but disregards congress & judiciary
Civil Liberties
(a) “Our president must have the necessary power to act in the national interest”
(b) “Our presidents’ power must be limited so as not to put our liberties at risk”
Profiles of Democratic Support: Cluster Analysis: classify data on multiple dimensions
Agglomerative Hierarchical CA, Ward’s Method
Max similarity within, max dissimilarity between clusters
ANOVA minimizes SS difference any 2 (potential) clusters
5-cluster solution
Validity checks Profiles of Democratic Support Squared Euclidean distance(x,y) =
Results: Results Cluster means (s.d.’s) across
3 objects
Democratic vs. Authoritarian Orientations
Democratic vs. Contingent Orientations
Coding
Higher scores = more democratic
Standardized, mean = 0
Contingent civil liberties: 0/1
Liberals: Liberals
Hyper-Presidentials: Hyper-Presidentials
Delegatives: Delegatives
Instrumentals: Instrumentals
Authoritarians: Authoritarians
Research Questions: Research Questions How do we identify democratic citizens?
How does democratic support (or lack thereof) influence political participation?
Political Participation: Political Participation Citizen “voice” Hirschman 1970
Protest Activism
Social Accountability Smulovitz & Peruzotti 2000: “watch-dog role”
Electoral Participation
Vertical Accountability O’Donnell 1999:
“throw the rascals out”
Institutional Trust : Institutional Trust Independent Variable
“To what extent do you have confianza in political parties?”
confianza = “trust” & “confidence”
Coded: 1 = “Nada” to 7 = “Mucha”
Model: Protest Activism: Model: Protest Activism Base Model: Norris 1999
Ordered Logit
DV: Protest Activism
(3) Frequent participation in last year
(2) Infrequent participation in last year
(1) Participation ever
(0) Participation never
IVs: Party Trust, Support Profile Dummies, Interactions (Party Trust*Support Profile Dummies)
Controls: Education, income, woman, married, age children, interpersonal trust, political interest, Left-Right, civic participation
Protest Activism: Protest Activism Liberals Hyper-Presidentials
Protest Activism: Protest Activism Liberals Instrumentals
Regression Results: Protest: Regression Results: Protest
Model: Electoral Participation : Model: Electoral Participation Base Model: Carlin 2006
Multinomial Logit
DV: Electoral Participation
(base) Voted for a Candidate
(2) Not Registered to Vote***Reported
(3) Abstained
(4) Cast Blank/Null Ballot
IVs: Party Trust, Support Profile Dummies, Interactions (Party Trust*Support Profile Dummies)
Controls: Education, income, woman, married, age cohorts, children, interpersonal trust, political interest, Left-Right, civic participation
Electoral Participation: Liberals Delegatives Electoral Participation
Regression Results: Voting: Regression Results: Voting
Theoretical Contributions: Theoretical Contributions Substantive: Democratic Support Conditional effect on Political Participation
Liberal Support + Party Distrust = Protest
Hyper-Presidential & Instrumental Support +
Party Trust = Protest
Liberal Support + Party Trust = Vote
Delegative Support + Party Distrust = Vote
Methodological: Profiles of Democratic Support
Hypothesis Generating Case Study
Future Payoff: Future Payoff
Micro-Macro linkages: Democratic Quality
Micro-Macro linkages: Democratic Stability
Thank you: Thank you
Implications: Implications Implications for Quality of Democracy
Electoral reform, Moral Cleavage Hagopian 2004
Issues & Preferences: Development &Welfare state
Bulwark against candidate-centered politics
Socialization: Socialization
Citizens & Democracy: Citizens & Democracy Psychopathology and Politics Lasswell 1930
Political Man Lipset 1961
The American Voter Campbell et al. 1961, 1980
The Civic Culture Almond & Verba 1963
The Crisis of Democracy Crozier, Huntington & Watanuki 1975
Political Action Study Barnes & Kaase 1979
Making Democracy Work Putnam 1993
Beliefs in Government Kaase & Newton 1995
Modernization & Postmodernization Inglehart 1997
Case Selection: Chile: Case Selection: Chile Pinochet’s 1980 Constitution
“modern and protected democracy”
demobilize, de-polarize, neoliberalism
Authoritarian enclaves
Binomial Majoritarian Electoral System (M=2)
1 seat for each of top-2 lists
Representation, cleavage
Voluntary registration, Compulsory voting
Measurement: Measurement Single survey items: the “d-word”
Vacuous conceptions of democracy
Social desirability
Contested conceptions of democracy
Conflicting values & norms
Uni-dimensional scales of survey items
Compound problems
Multidimensional concept
Drop “d-word”, focus on democratic values
Measurement: Measurement Advantages of Definition
Combats contested & vacuous conceptions
Embraces conflicting values & norms
Matches indicators at regime level (FH)
Distinguishes outright & conditional support
Disadvantages of Definition
Democracy “essentially contested” Gallie 1959
More relevant conceptualization?
Indifference
Insignificant Means: Insignificant Means Measures: Tukey & Fisher’s LSD
Liberal Support: Liberal Support Clearly prefer democratic governance
Most unwavering support for political rights
Champion checking presidential power to preserve civil liberties
16.5% of respondents, smallest cluster
Hyper-Presidential Support: Hyper-Presidential Support Prefer democratic governance (highest)
Score democratically on political rights
But would accept President acting in national interest at expense of civil liberties
17.3% of respondents
Delegative Support: Delegative Support Little respect for democratic governance, political rights, civil liberties
Delegate power to president to act in national interest at expense of individual liberties
Neither pro- nor anti-military intervention
27.4% of respondents, largest category
Instrumental Support: Instrumental Support Democracy not necessarily the best form of government
Support status quo political rights/procedures & civil liberties
Military intervention justifiable (closer to min. than mean)
Waver on granting President more power
17.1% of respondents
Instrumental Support: Instrumental Support
Authoritarian Support: Authoritarian Support Weak rejection of democracy
Support limiting political rights/procedures & civil liberties
Hold no contingencies
Authoritarian logic different under democracy
Maintain voting rights
Restrict presidential power
21.8% of respondents
Authoritarian Support: Authoritarian Support
Regression Results: Protest: Regression Results: Protest Operationalization
Political Parties***Reported
Congress
Political Institutions index α=.86
Political Parties, Congress, National Government, Municipal Government, Supreme Court, Civil Service
Distrust in parties drives protest among liberals
No consistent relationship among other profiles
No consistent relationship among common measures of democratic support
Parallel Regression Assumption: Parallel Regression Assumption “Proportional odds assumption”
A change in IV has same effect on the odds of answering each of the ordered categories (m) of the DV (Frequent, Infrequent, Ever, Never)
Wald test Brant 1990
Overall test that βm’s are equal
Individual test that βm’s are equal for IVs
Brant Test: Brant Test
Regression Results: Voting: Regression Results: Voting Distrust in parties drives democrats away from electoral politics
No consistent relationship among other profiles
No consistent relationship among common measures of democratic support
Trust & Distrust in Parties: Trust & Distrust in Parties Domain of trust: Representation
Trust: Citizen A’s belief that political parties B1…n will represent A’s interests X1…n
Distrust: Citizen A’s belief that political parties B1…n will not represent A’s interests X1…n
GSS-style measure captures lack of trust Cleary & Stokes 2006
Party Trust & Participation: Delegative (N/S): Party Trust & Participation: Delegative (N/S)
Party Trust & Protest Activism: Authoritarian (z=1.67): Party Trust & Protest Activism: Authoritarian (z=1.67)
Regression Results: Protest: Regression Results: Protest
Regression Results: Voting: Regression Results: Voting
“Linzian” Support for Democracy: “Linzian” Support for Democracy With which of the following phrases do you most agree?
(a) Democracy is always the best form of government
(b) In certain circumstances, an Authoritarian government may be preferable to a democratic one
(c) It doesn’t make any difference to me
61% agree with (a)
“What is the most effective way you can influence how things change?” Participate in protest movements and demand change directly Latinobarómetro 2006, n = 20,234: “What is the most effective way you can influence how things change?” Participate in protest movements and demand change directly Latinobarómetro 2006, n = 20,234
“What is the most effective way you can influence how things change?” Vote for a party that defends my position Latinobarómetro 2006, n = 20,234: “What is the most effective way you can influence how things change?” Vote for a party that defends my position Latinobarómetro 2006, n = 20,234
“Democracy creates conditions so people like me can prosper by way of my own efforts” Agree+Strong Agree Latinobarómetro 2006, n = 20,234: “Democracy creates conditions so people like me can prosper by way of my own efforts” Agree+Strong Agree Latinobarómetro 2006, n = 20,234
“How democratic is this country?” Latinobarómetro 2006, n = 20,234: “How democratic is this country?” Latinobarómetro 2006, n = 20,234
“How would you evaluate the job that the national congress is doing?” Good + Very Good Latinobarómetro 2006, n = 20,234: “How would you evaluate the job that the national congress is doing?” Good + Very Good Latinobarómetro 2006, n = 20,234
“How would you evaluate the job that the political parties are doing?” Good + Very Good Latinobarómetro 2006, n = 20,234: “How would you evaluate the job that the political parties are doing?” Good + Very Good Latinobarómetro 2006, n = 20,234
“How would you evaluate the job that the judiciary is doing?” Good + Very Good Latinobarómetro 2006, n = 20,234: “How would you evaluate the job that the judiciary is doing?” Good + Very Good Latinobarómetro 2006, n = 20,234
Inter-Correlation & Reliability: Inter-Correlation & Reliability ** p ≤ .001, * p ≤ .01
Robustness Checks:Alternative Linkages: Robustness Checks: Alternative Linkages
Robustness Checks:Alternative Linkages: Robustness Checks: Alternative Linkages
Polyarchy: Polyarchy Control over government policy decisions is constitutionally vested in elected officials
Elected officials chosen in frequent & fair election in which coercion is uncommon
All adults have rights to vote & run for office
Right to expression on political matters without fear of severe punishment
Right to seek alternative information sources; must exist and be protected by law
Right to form relatively independent associations or organizations, including independent political parties and interest groups Dahl 1971
Measurement: Measurement Cluster Analysis & Exploratory Factor Analysis
Similarities
Exploratory
Insight into data structure
Cannot confirm a priori defined data structure
Differences
FA assume continuous underlying dimensions
CA assume categorical underlying dimensions
FA’s linearity obscures meaningful combinations
Alternative linkages for robustness, face valid
Quality of Democracy: Quality of Democracy “We consider a quality democracy to be one that provides its citizens a high degree of freedom, political equality, and popular control over public policies and policy makers through the legitimate and lawful functioning of stable institutions.”
Diamond & Morlino 2005, xi
Distrusting Hyper-Presidential Quote: Distrusting Hyper-Presidential Quote Las cosas se van a poner graves en Chile a la larga si la Concertación o el presidente de turno no da un golpe fuerte presidencial y termina con estas amarras perversas. La derecha política que representa un 40 por ciento, con suerte, en el Parlamento está sobre representada. Esa es la tranca por la que no se pueden hacer los cambios que el país quiere, requiere y exige. Estamos viendo protestas, huelgas y cada vez el problema social se va a ir agravando, en la medida que no se le dé solución a esto. Roberto Thieme, 9-10-07 www.terra.cl
Delegative Quote: Delegative Quote “Since the days of the Conquest we Chileans have been a subjugated race. And culturally speaking, frankly, you get used to it! We Chileans are a people who respond to strictness! (Somos los chilenos gente de rigor!) We need order and rules to keep us in check. Sometimes it is necessary for a few people to suffer so that a country can move forward and not live in fear. Thanks to Pinochet, today I can ride the subway without worrying that some extremist revolutionary is going to plant a bomb and kill me.” Carlos, 50 yrs, Las Condes
Citizen Participation Initiated from above: Citizen Participation Initiated from above 1980 Constitution
Separates political rights & civil liberties from social rights
Individualistic, no class actions; suspicious of collective rights & action
Aylwin
National agencies for women, indigenous, environment
Decentralization
Rindefjäll 2005
Citizen Participation Initiated from above: Citizen Participation Initiated from above Lagos: 2001 IADB funding ($15 million) Program for Strengthening partnerships between civil society and the state
Promote citizen participation in public admin
Stimulate civil society
Rights-based language: from consumers & beneficiaries to citizens & users
Vague: Increase quality of democracy, i.e. accountability, deepening rights
Citizen Participation Initiated from above: Citizen Participation Initiated from above Citizen Council for the Strengthening of Civil Society
Elaborate proposals to strengthen civil society & promote citizen participation
Restricted role of Citizen Council: consultation not decision-making
Lacked legitimacy b/c could not address all ideas and concerns; pre-determined spaces
Bordered on encroachment of autonomy
Citizen Participation Initiated from above: Citizen Participation Initiated from above Citizen Participation Law 2004
“inform, discuss and consult leaders and representatives from civil society organizations from all over the country with regard to the legislative initiatives elaborated by the government” (DOS 2003)
Capacity building of core groups, which in turn capacitated other smaller groups
6000+ leaders from 5000+ groups
5 dimensions: legal changes on freedoms of association; establish & fund to strengthen public interest organizations; legal framework for voluntary work; changes in wording in legal norms
Protest Activism: Full Model w/Interactions: Protest Activism: Full Model w/Interactions
Protest Activism: Liberal Interaction: Protest Activism: Liberal Interaction
Protest Activism: Linz Interaction: Protest Activism: Linz Interaction
Protest Activism: Churchill Interaction: Protest Activism: Churchill Interaction
Electoral Participation: Full Model w/Interactions: Electoral Participation: Full Model w/Interactions
Electoral Participation: Linz Democrat Interaction: Electoral Participation: Linz Democrat Interaction
Electoral Participation: Churchill Democrat Interaction: Electoral Participation: Churchill Democrat Interaction
Implications: Implications What if Distrusting Liberals
(a) maintain protest pressure
(b) enter the electorate ?
Electoral reform, Moral Cleavage Hagopian 2004
Issues & Preferences
Development
Welfare state
Bulwark against candidate-centered politics
Slide107: Cited in Kurtz 2004. Source: International Labor Organization (strikes), Morley, Machado & Pettinato (economic liberalization)
Q-Sort, 36 Items: Q-Sort, 36 Items -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 Disagree Agree
Q-Sorts: Liberal: Q-Sorts: Liberal
Q-Sorts: Delegative: Q-Sorts: Delegative
Q-Sorts: Instrumental: Q-Sorts: Instrumental
Q-Sorts: Authoritarian: Q-Sorts: Authoritarian