Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T18:35:27.349Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Natural Experiment in Political Decentralization: Local Institutions and Citizens' Political Engagement in Uruguay

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Fernando Rosenblatt ,
Germán Bidegain ,
Felipe Monestier  and
Rafael Piñeiro Rodríguez
Fernando Rosenblatt
Affiliation:
Escuela de Ciencia Política, Universidad Diego Portales. [email protected]
Germán Bidegain
Affiliation:
Instituto de Ciencia Política, Pontificia Universidad Católica, Chile. [email protected]
Felipe Monestier
Affiliation:
Instituto de Ciencia Política, Universidad de la República, Uruguay and PUC, Chile and Instituto de Ciencia Política, PUC, Chile. [email protected]
Rafael Piñeiro Rodríguez
Affiliation:
Departamento de Ciencias Sociales y Políticas, Universidad Católica del Uruguay. [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The potential democratizing effect of political decentralization reforms has been a matter of substantial theoretical and empirical debate. This article analyzes the effect of local democratic institution building on the political attitudes and behavior of citizens living in small towns in Uruguay. More specifically, using a natural experiment design, this research seeks to establish the causal impact of recently established elections of local authorities on individuals' political engagement. It develops a comparative case study analyzing the consequences of this institutional innovation in two towns. It shows that individuals from the town where citizens have the opportunity to elect their local authorities have more positive attitudes toward politics than those from the town without such elections.

Type
Research Article
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 57 , Issue 2 , Summer 2015 , pp. 91 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 2015

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.)

References

Bardhan, Pranab K, and Mookherjee, Dilip, eds. 2006. Decentralization and Local Governance in Developing Countries: A Comparative Perspective. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, Tim. 2003. Quiet Revolution: Decentralization and the Rise of Political Participation in Latin American Cities. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Connerley, Ed, Eaton, Kent, and Smoke, Paul J.. 2010. Making Decentralization Work: Democracy, Development, and Security. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A., and Tufte, Edward R.. 1973. Size and Democracy. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Diamond, Larry, and Tsalik, Svetlana. 1999. Size and Democracy: The Case For Decentralization. In Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation, ed. Diamond, . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. 117–60.Google Scholar
Dunning, Thad. 2012. Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences: A Design-Based Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eaton, Kent. 2004a. Designing Subnational Institutions: Regional and Municipal Reforms in Postauthoritarian Chile. Comparative Political Studies 37, 2: 218–44.Google Scholar
Eaton, Kent. 2004b. Risky Business: Decentralization from above in Chile and Uruguay. Comparative Politics 37, 1: 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eaton, Kent. 2006. Decentralization's Nondemocratic Roots: Authoritarianism and Subnational Reform in Latin America. Latin American Politics and Society 48, 1 (Spring): 1–26.Google Scholar
Eaton, Kent, and Connerley, Ed. 2010. Democracy, Development, and Security as Objectives of Decentralization. In Connerley et al. 2010. Boulder: Lynne Rienner. 1–24.Google Scholar
Falleti, Tulia G. 2005. A Sequential Theory of Decentralization: Latin American Cases in Comparative Perspective. American Political Science Review 99, 3: 327–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falleti, Tulia G. 2010. Decentralization and Subnational Politics in Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fox, Jonathan. 1994. Latin America's Emerging Local Politics. Journal of Democracy 5, 2: 105–16.Google Scholar
George, Alexander L., and Bennett, Andrew. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Goldfrank, Benjamin. 2006. Los procesos de presupuesto participativo en América Latina: éxito, fracaso y cambio. Revista de Ciencia Política 26, 2: 3–28.Google Scholar
Goldfrank, Benjamin. 2011. Deepening Local Democracy in Latin America: Participation, Decentralization, and the Left. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Greaves, Edward F. 2004. Municipality and Community in Chile: Building Imagined Civic Communities and Its Impact on the Political. Politics & Society 32, 2: 203–30.Google Scholar
Grindle, Merilee S. 2007. Going Local: Decentralization, Democratization, and the Promise of Good Governance. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hagopian, Frances, and Mainwaring, Scott. 2005. Introduction: The Third Wave of Democratization in Latin America. In The Third Wave of Democratization in Latin America: Advances and Setbacks, ed. Hagopian, and Mainwaring, . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1–13.Google Scholar
Hansen, Steven, Palfrey, Thomas, and Rosenthal, Howard. 1987. The Downsian Model of Electoral Participation: Formal Theory and Empirical Analysis of the Constituency Size Effect. Public Choice 52 (Spring): 15–33.Google Scholar
Harbers, Imke. 2010. Decentralization and the Development of Nationalized Party Systems in New Democracies: Evidence from Latin America. Comparative Political Studies 43, 5: 606–27.Google Scholar
Hiskey, Jonathan T., and Seligson, Mitchell A.. 2003. Pitfalls of Power to the People: Decentralization, Local Government Performance, and System Support in Bolivia. Studies in Comparative International Development 37, 4: 64–88.Google Scholar
Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas de Uruguay (INE). 2004. Censos 2004. www.ine.gub.uy Google Scholar
Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas de Uruguay (INE). 2011. Censos 2011.Google Scholar
Johnson, Craig. 2001. Local Democracy, Democratic Decentralisation and Rural Development: Theories, Challenges and Options for Policy. Development Policy Review 19, 4: 521–32.Google Scholar
Lassen, David D., and Serritzlew, Soren. 2011. Jurisdiction Size and Local Democracy: Evidence on Internal Political Efficacy from Large-scale Municipal Reform. American Political Science Review 105, 2: 238–58.Google Scholar
Latin American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP). Various dates. AmericasBarometer. Uruguay 2006, 2008, 2010, and 2012 rounds. Nashville: Vanderbilt University. http://datasets.americasbarometer.org/database-login/usersearch.php Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott, and Scully, Timothy, eds. 2010. Democratic Governance in Latin America. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott, María Bejarano, Ana, and Pizarro, Eduardo. 2006. The Crisis of Democratic Representation in the Andes. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Manor, James. 1999. The Political Economy of Democratic Decentralization. Directions in Development—General. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
Meguid, Bonnie M. 2007. Bringing Government Back to the People? the Impact of Political Decentralization on Voter Engagement in Western Europe. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, April.Google Scholar
Montero, Alfred P., and Samuels, David, eds. 2004. Decentralization and Democracy in Latin America. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Morgan, Jana. 2011. Bankrupt Representation and Party System Collapse. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Oliver, J. Eric. 2000. City Size and Civic Involvement in Metropolitan America. American Political Science Review 94, 2: 361–73.Google Scholar
O'Neill, Kathleen. 2003. Decentralization as an Electoral Strategy. Comparative Political Studies 36, 9: 1068–91.Google Scholar
Posner, Daniel N. 2004. The Political Salience of Cultural Difference: Why Chewas and Tumbukas Are Allies in Zambia and Adversaries in Malawi. American Political Science Review 98, 4: 529–45.Google Scholar
Rhodes-Purdy, Matthew. 2013. Participatory Populism: Understanding the Role of Communal Councils in Bolivarian Venezuela. Unpublished mss.Google Scholar
Rodden, Jonathan. 2004. Comparative Federalism and Decentralization: on Meaning and Measurement. Comparative Politics 36, 4: 481–500.Google Scholar
Ryan, Jeffrey J. 2004. Decentralization and Democratic Instability: the Case of Costa Rica. Public Administration Review 64, 1: 81–91.Google Scholar
Sabatini, Christopher. 2003. Decentralization and Political Parties. Journal of Democracy 14, 2: 138–50.Google Scholar
Schneider, Aaron. 2003. Decentralization: Conceptualization and Measurement. Studies in Comparative International Development 38, 3: 32–56.Google Scholar
Schönleitner, Gunther. 2006. Between Liberal and Participatory Democracy: Tensions and Dilemmas of Leftist Politics in Brazil. Journal of Latin American Studies 38, 1: 35–63.Google Scholar
Treisman, Daniel. 2007. The Architecture of Government: Rethinking Political Decentralization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Uruguay. Corte Electoral. Various dates. Election statistics. www.corteelectoral.gub.uy/gxpsites/page.aspx Google Scholar
Wampler, Brian. 2007. Participatory Budgeting in Brazil: Contestation, Cooperation, and Accountability. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Willis, Eliza, Garman, Christopher da C. B., and Haggard, Stephan. 1999. The Politics of Decentralization in Latin America. Latin American Research Review 34, 1: 7–56.Google Scholar