Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T01:57:25.993Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Challenge or Consent? Understanding Losers’ Reactions in Mass Elections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 February 2016

Ignacio Lago  and
Ferran Martinez i Coma
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The conditions under which losers are willing to challenge the results of elections remain an open question. Using data from the Electoral Integrity Project for 66 democratic and non-democratic countries in 2012 and 2013, we measure how parties or candidates react once votes have been cast and one of them is declared the winner. Do they accept or challenge the results? This measure allows us to examine the causal mechanisms that account for the self-enforcing nature of democracies. Our findings show that losers’ consent increases with free and fair elections and in more economically developed countries, while income inequality is not relevant. Additionally, the impact of free and fair elections is particularly important in more economically developed countries.

Keywords

democracydictatorshipelectionslosers’ consent
Type
Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 52 , Issue 3 , July 2017 , pp. 412 - 436
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s). Published by Government and Opposition Limited and Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Ignacio Lago is Associate Professor of Political Science at Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona. Contact email: [email protected].

Ferran Martinez i Coma is a Research Associate in the Department of Government and International Relations at the University of Sydney. Contact email: [email protected].

References

REFERENCES

Acemoglu, D. and Robinson, J.A. (2006), Economic Origins of Dictatorships and Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Alesina, A. and Spolaore, E. (2003), The Size of Countries (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).Google Scholar
Amnesty International. (2013), ‘Turkmenistan: An “Era of Happiness” or More of the Same Repression?’, 12 December, www.amnesty.org/en/documents/EUR61/005/2013/en/.Google Scholar
Anderson, C.J., Blais, A., Bowler, S., Donovan, T. and Listhaug, O. (2005), Losers’ Consent. Elections and Democratic Legitimacy (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
BBC (2013), ‘Rights Groups Criticise Turkmenistan Elections’, BBC News, 13 December, www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-25362792.Google Scholar
Boix, C. (2003), Democracy and Redistribution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Chacón, M., Robinson, J.A. and Torvik, R. (2011), ‘Why is Democracy an Equilibrium? Theory and Evidence from Colombia’s La Violencia’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 55: 366–396.Google Scholar
Chernykh, S. (2014), ‘When Do Political Parties Protest Elections Results?’, Comparative Political Studies, 47: 1359–1383.Google Scholar
Diamond, L. (1999), Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press).Google Scholar
Ellsworth, B. (2013), ‘Analysis: Venezuela’s Capriles Faces Tough Battle to Challenge Election’, Reuters, 18 April, www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/18/us-venezuela-election-capriles-idUSBRE93H10P20130418.Google Scholar
Fearon, J. (2011), ‘Self-enforcing Democracy’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126: 1661–1708.Google Scholar
Freedom House (2015), ‘Freedom in the World’, www.freedomhouse.org/report-types/freedom-world#.UyFA0PmSxic.Google Scholar
Gasiorowski, M.J. and Power, T. (1998), ‘The Structural Determinants of Democratic Consolidation: Evidence from the Third World’, Comparative Political Studies, 31: 740–771.Google Scholar
Gandhi, J. (2008), Political Institutions under Dictatorship (New York: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Gandhi, J. and Lust-Okar, E. (2009), ‘Elections under Authoritarianism’, Annual Review of Political Science, 12: 403–422.Google Scholar
Gurt, M. (2013), ‘No Whiff of Dissent in Turkmenistan’s First Multi-party Vote’, Reuters, 15 December, http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/12/15/uk-turkmenistan-election-idUKBRE9BE06I20131215.Google Scholar
Hyde, S. and Marinov, N. (2014), ‘Information and Self-Enforcing Democracy: The Role of International Election Observation’, International Organization, 68: 329–359.Google Scholar
Kindzeka, M.E. (2013), ‘Cameroon Opposition Says Biya Manipulating Elections’, Voice of America News, 15 August, www.voanews.com/content/cameroon-opposition-says-biya-manipulating-elections/1730632.html.Google Scholar
Lindberg, S.I. (2006), ‘The Surprising Significance of African Elections’, Journal of Democratization, 17: 139–151.Google Scholar
Lindberg, S.I (2009), ‘A Theory of Elections as a Mode of Transition’, in S.I. Lindberg (ed.), Democratization by Elections: A New Mode of Transition’ (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press): 314–341.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, S. and Pérez-Liñán, A. (2013), ‘Lessons from Latin America: Democratic Breakdown and Survival’, Journal of Democracy, 24: 123–137.Google Scholar
Martinez i Coma, F. and van Ham, C. (2015), ‘Can Experts Judge Elections? Testing the Validity of Expert Judgments for Measuring Election Integrity’, European Journal of Political Research, 54: 305–325.Google Scholar
Musa, T. (2013), ‘Biya Keeps Grip on Cameroon with Landslide Vote Win’, Reuters, 17 October, www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/17/cameroon-election-idUSL6N0I733F20131017.Google Scholar
Nadeau, R. and Blais, A. (1993), ‘Accepting the Election Outcome: The Effect on Participation on Losers’ Consent’, British Journal of Political Science, 23: 553–563.Google Scholar
Norris, P. (2013), ‘Does the World Agree about Standards of Electoral Integrity? Evidence for the Diffusion of Global Norms’, Electoral Studies, 32: 576–588.Google Scholar
Norris, P., Frank, R.W. and Martinez i Coma, F. (2013), ‘Evaluating the Quality of Elections’, Journal of Democracy, 24: 124–135.Google Scholar
Norris, P., Frank, R.W. and Martinez i Coma, F. (2014), The Expert Survey of Perceptions of Electoral Integrity, Release 2, (PEI_2). February 2014, https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/24781.Google Scholar
Norris, P., Frank, R.W. and Martinez i Coma, F. (2015), Contentious Elections (New York: Routledge).Google Scholar
ODIHR (Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights) (2013), Turkmenistan Parliamentary Elections, OSCE/ODIHR Needs Assessment Mission Report, www.osce.org/odihr/elections/turkmenistan/104831.Google Scholar
ODIHR (Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights) (2014), Turkmenistan Parliamentary Elections, OSCE/ODIHR Election Assessment Mission Final Report, www.osce.org/odihr/elections/116011.Google Scholar
Powell, J. (2012), ‘The Determinants of the Attempting and Outcome of Coups d’Etat’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 56: 1017–1040.Google Scholar
Powell, J and Thyne, C.L. (2010), ‘Global Instances of Coups from 1950 to 2010: A New Dataset’, Journal of Peace Research, 48: 249–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, A. (1991), Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Przeworski, A (2005), ‘Democracy as an Equilibrium’, Public Choice, 123: 253–273.Google Scholar
Przeworski, A (2006), ‘Self-Enforcing Democracy’, in B.R. Weingast and D.A. Wittman (eds), Oxford Handbook of Political Economy’ (New York: Oxford University Press): 312–328.Google Scholar
Przeworski, A., Alvarez, M.E., Cheibub, J.A. and Limongi, F. (2000), Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-being in the World, 1950–1990 (New York: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Schedler, A. (2002), ‘The Nested Game of Democratization by Elections’, International Political Science Review, 23: 103–122.Google Scholar
Schedler, A (2009), ‘The Contingent Power of Authoritarian Elections’, in S.I. Lindberg (ed.), Democratization by Elections: A New Mode of Transition (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press): 179–201.Google Scholar
Serra, G. (2014), ‘The 2012 Elections in Mexico: Return of the Dominant Party’, Electoral Studies, 34: 291–379.Google Scholar
Solt, F. (2013), ‘The Standardized World Income Inequality Database’, working paper. SWIID version 4.0, September 2013, https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=hdl:1902.1/11992.Google Scholar
Svolik, M.W. (2008), ‘Authoritarian Reversals and Democratic Consolidation’, American Political Science Review, 102: 153–168.Google Scholar
Svolik, M.W (2015), ‘Which Democracies Will Last? Coups, Incumbent Takeovers, and the Dynamic of Democratic Consolidation’, British Journal of Political Science, 45: 715–738.Google Scholar