Critical Citizens and Political Participation in L

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