Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T15:27:03.968Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Informal Customary Institutions, Collective Action, and Submunicipal Public Goods Provision in Mexico

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 August 2021

Mart E. Trasberg Open the ORCID record for Mart E. Trasberg [Opens in a new window]
Mart E. Trasberg*
Affiliation:
Mart E. Trasberg is a visiting assistant professor in the Department of Politics and International Affairs, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA. [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article explores the role of informal customary institutions (usos y costumbres) in local public goods provision in Mexico. It argues that the presence of informal customary institutions offers submunicipal village communities considerable advantages in local distributive politics. Hamlet communities with dense customary institutions have higher collective action capacity to organize their citizens for small-scale protests in municipal centers, which grants them access to more social infrastructure projects controlled by municipal politicians. This article therefore suggests a novel theoretical mechanism through which customary institutions affect development outcomes: collective contentious action. The study tests the main empirical implications of this theory, drawing on an original survey of submunicipal community presidents in the states of Puebla and Tlaxcala and qualitative interviews.

Keywords

Customary institutionsprotestslocal developmentMexico
Type
Research Article
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 63 , Special Issue 3: The Grassroots Right in Latin America , August 2021 , pp. 146 - 170
Copyright
© The Author 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the University of Miami

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

Conflicts of interest: Mart Trasberg declares none.

References

Acemoglu, Daron, Reed, Tristan, and Robinson, James. 2014. Chiefs: Economic Development and Elite Control of Civil Society in Sierra Leone. Journal of Political Economy 122, 2: 319–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auerbach, Adam Michael. 2016. Clients and Communities. World Politics 68, 1: 111–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayala Martínez, Aranzazú. 2019. Gasoducto Tuxpan-Tula sigue sin un futuro definido. Lado B (Puebla), September 5. https://ladobe.com.mx/2019/09/gasoducto-tuxpan-tula-sigue- sin-un-futuro-definido. Accessed March 12, 2020.Google Scholar
Bailón Corres, Jaime, and Polo, Carlos Sorroza. 2019. Mujeres, avecindados, migrantes y pobladores de las agencias municipales: derechos humanos y participación política en los municipios de usos y costumbres de Oaxaca. Mexico City: Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos.Google Scholar
Baldwin, Kate. 2015. The Paradox of Traditional Chiefs in Democratic Africa. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Beck, Nathaniel. 2001. Time-series Cross Section Data: What Have We Learned in the Past Few Years? Annual Review of Political Science 4: 271–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benton, Allyson. 2016. How Participatory Governance Strengthens Authoritarian Regimes: Evidence from Electoral Authoritarian Oaxaca, Mexico. Journal of Politics in Latin America 8, 2: 37–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benton, Allyson. 2017. Configuring Authority over Electoral Manipulation in Electoral Authoritarian Regimes: Evidence from Mexico. Democratization 24, 3: 521–43.Google Scholar
Brandes, Stanley. 1988. Power and Persuasion: Fiestas and Social Control in Rural Mexico. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brollo, Fernanda, and Tommaso, Nannicini. 2012. Tying Your Enemy’s Hands in Close Races: The Politics of Federal Transfers in Brazil. American Political Science Review 106, 4: 742–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Tom, and Drew, Linzer. 2015. Should I Use Fixed or Random Effects? Political Science Research and Methods 3, 2: 399–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cleary, Matthew. 2012. Indigenous Governance in Puebla and Oaxaca. Paper presented at the 30th Latin American Studies Association Congress, San Francisco, May 25.Google Scholar
Cleary, Matthew. 2010. The Sources of Democratic Responsiveness in Mexico. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Community Councilmember of San Pablito (Pahuatlán, State of Puebla). 2019. Author interview. San Pablito, May 3.Google Scholar
Community President of San Pablito (Pahuatlán, State of Puebla). 2019. Author interview. San Pablito, May 3.Google Scholar
Community President of Xolotla (Pahuatlán, State of Puebla). 2019. Author interview. Pahuatlán, May 2.Google Scholar
Consejo Nacional, de Población (CONAPO). 2010. Índice de marginación por entidad federativa y municipio. Accessed June 1, 2019.Google Scholar
Cox, Gary W., and McCubbins, Matthew D.. 1986. Electoral Politics as a Redistributive Game. Journal of Politics 48, 2: 370–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davenport, Christian. 2007. State Repression and Political Order. Annual Review of Political Science 10: 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Díaz-Cayeros, Alberto, Estévez, Federico, and Magaloni, Beatriz. 2016. The Political Logic of Poverty Relief: Electoral Strategies and Social Policy in Mexico. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Díaz-Cayeros, Alberto, Magaloni, Beatriz, and Ruiz-Euler, Alexander. 2014. Traditional Governance, Citizen Engagement, and Local Public Goods: Evidence from Mexico. World Development 53: 80–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixit, Avinash, and John, Londregan. 1996. The Determinants of Success of Special Interests in Redistributive Politics. Journal of Politics 58, 4: 1132–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenstadt, Todd. 2011. Politics, Identity, and Mexico's Indigenous Rights Movements. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenstadt, Todd, and Viridiana, Ríos. 2014. Multicultural Institutions, Distributional Politics, and Postelectoral Mobilization in Indigenous Mexico. Latin American Politics and Society 56, 2: 70–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Escobar Carrasco, Oscar. 2019. Adjunct Secretary, PAN Tlaxcala. Author interview. City of Tlaxcala, May 16.Google Scholar
Fox, Jonathan. 2007. Accountability Politics: Power and Voice in Rural Mexico. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García, Olga Montes, and Néstor, Montes García. 2013. La mayordomia en un barrio de Ciudad de Oaxaca. Frontera Norte 26, 52: 85–108.Google Scholar
Hernández-Díaz, Jorge, and Víctor, Leonel Juan Martínez. 2007. Dilemas de la institución municipal: una incursión en la experiencia oaxaqueña. Mexico City: Porrua.Google Scholar
Hernández-Trillo, Fausto, and Brenda, Jarillo-Rabling. 2008. Is Local Beautiful? Fiscal Decentralization in Mexico. World Development 36, 9: 1547–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Instituto Nacional, de Estadística, Geografía e Informática (INEGI). 2019. Censo general de población y vivienda 2010. https://www.inegi.org.mx/programas/ccpv/2010. Accessed June 1, 2019.Google Scholar
Juárez, Víctor Hugo. 2018. Logra junta de Pahuatlán autonomía presupuestal. El Sol de Puebla, July 31. https://www.elsoldepuebla.com.mx/local/estado/logra-junta-de-pahu- atlan-autonomia-presupuestal-puebla-1881044.html. Accessed April 15, 2020.Google Scholar
Lee, Ching Kwan, and Yonghong, Zhang. 2013. The Power of Instability: Unraveling the Microfoundations of Bargained Authoritarianism in China. American Journal of Sociology 118, 6: 1475–1508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattingly, Daniel. 2016. Elite Capture: How Decentralization and Informal Institutions Weaken Property Rights in China. World Politics 68, 3: 383–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAdam, Doug. 1999. Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930–1970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montiel, Maguez, Jorge, Anton. 2019. Former, Juridical Director, Electoral Institute, Tlaxcala (1999-2003). Author interview. City of Tlaxcala, April 21.Google Scholar
Municipal Attorney (Síndico municipal) of Pahuatlán (State of Puebla). 2019. Author interview. Pahuatlán, May 2.Google Scholar
Municipal Councilmember of Pahuatlán (State of Puebla). 2019. Author interview. Pahu- atlán, May 2.Google Scholar
Murtazashvili, Jennifer. 2014. Informal Federalism: Self-Governance and Power Sharing in Afghanistan. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 11, 4: 167–201.Google Scholar
Nathan, Noah. 2019. Electoral Consequences of Colonial Invention: Brokers, Chiefs, and Distribution in Northern Ghana. World Politics 71, 3: 417–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pskowski, Martha. 2019. How Indigenous Mexicans Took on Big Energy and Won. The Nation, August 12. https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/mexico-transcanada- pipeline-puebla-indigenous-rights/. Accessed April 15, 2020.Google Scholar
Recondo, David. 2007. La política del gatopardo: multiculturalismo y democracia en Oaxaca. Mexico City: CIESAS.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez-Castelán, Carlos, Cadena, Kiyomi, and Moreno, Laura. 2017. Efectos Distributivos y en Desarrollo Regional del Fondo de Aportaciones para la Infraestructura Social. Washington, DC: World Bank Group.Google Scholar
Scott, James C. 1977. The Moral Economy of the Peasant: Rebellion and Subsistence in Southeast Asia. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Secretaría, de Bienestar. 2019. Base de datos de matriz de inversión para el desarrollo social. https://www.gob.mx/bienestar/documentos/fondo-de-aportaciones-para-la-infraestructura-social-fais. Accessed June 1, 2019.Google Scholar
Trejo, Guillermo. 2012. Popular Movements in Autocracies: Religion, Repression, and Indigenous Collective Action in Mexico. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trujillo, José Miguel. 2019. Congress Member, Congress of Puebla. Author interview. Puebla, April 26.Google Scholar
Tsai, Lily. 2007. Solidary Groups, Informal Accountability, and Local Public Goods Provision in Rural China. American Political Science Review 101, 2: 355–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar