Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T11:07:28.876Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Do Competitive Elections Produce Better-quality Governments?: Evidence from Mexican Municipalities, 1990-2000

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2022

Carlos Moreno-Jaimes
Carlos Moreno-Jaimes*
Affiliation:
Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Occidente (ITESO)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Electoral theories of governmental accountability assume that competitive elections produce responsive governments because they allow voters to punish or reward the performance of incumbent politicians at the ballot box. This research note investigates whether the increasing competitiveness of municipal elections in Mexico during the 1990s has improved the performance of local governments by focusing on the provision of potable water and drainage. The empirical evidence does not seem to support the electoral accountability hypothesis, but rather suggests that municipal governments are more responsive to the influence of socioeconomic modernity, as well as to the direct pressure of politically mobilized citizens. The findings cast doubts on the idea that competitive elections, by themselves, will significantly improve the quality of local governments in the country.

Resumo

Resumo

Las teorías electorales de la rendición de cuentas suponen que las elecciones competitivas producen gobiernos eficaces porque permiten que los votantes castiguen o premien el desempeño de las autoridades en las urnas. Esta nota de investigación analiza si el aumento en la competitividad de las elecciones municipales en México mejoró el desempeño de los gobiernos locales durante la década de los noventa en lo referente a la provisión de agua potable y drenaje. La evidencia empírica no parece apoyar la hipótesis electoral de la rendición de cuentas, pero sugiere que los gobiernos locales han respondido más a la influencia de la modernidad socioeconómica, así como a la presión directa de ciudadanos movilizados. Estos hallazgos ponen en duda la idea que las elecciones competitivas pueden mejorar, por sí mismas, la calidad de los gobiernos locales en el país.

Type
Research Reports and Notes
Information
Latin American Research Review , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , June 2007 , pp. 136 - 153
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 by the University of Texas Press

References

Beer, Caroline C. 2003 Electoral Competition and Institutional Change in Mexico. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, Tim, and Fuhr, Harald, eds. 2004 Leadership and Innovation in Subnational Government. Case Studies from Latin America. Washington, DC: World Bank Institute.Google Scholar
Cornelius, Wayne 1999 “Subnational Politics and Democratization: Tensions between Center and Periphery in the Mexican Political System.” In Subnational Politics and Democratization in Mexico, edited by Cornelius, Wayne, Eisenstadt, Todd, and Hindley, Jane. La Jolla, CA: Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies. University of California in San Diego.Google Scholar
Courchene, Thomas, Díaz-Cayeros, Alberto, and Webb, Steven B. 2000 “Historical Forces: Geographical and Political.” In Achievements and Challenges of Fiscal Decentralization. Lessons from Mexico, edited by Giugale, Marcelo M. and Webb, S. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
Cox, Gary 1988 “Closeness and Turnout: A Methodological Note.” Journal of Politics 50:768–75.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert 1989 Democracy and its Critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Díaz-Cayeros, Alberto, and Magaloni, Beatriz 2003 “The Politics of Public Spending. Part II—The Programa Nacional de Solidaridad (PRONASOL) in Mexico” Background Paper for the World Development Report 2004 (World Bank).Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris 1981 Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Heinrich, C. J., and Laurence, E. L. Jr. 2000 “Means and Ends: A Comparative Study of Empirical Methods for Investigating Governance and Performance.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 11:109–38.Google Scholar
Hiskey, Jonathan 2005 “The Political Economy of Subnational Economic Recovery in Mexico.” Latin American Research Review 40 (1): 30–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huntington, Samuel 1975 “The Democratic Distemper.” Public Interest 41:9–38.Google Scholar
INEGI 1990 XI Censo General de Población y Vivienda. Aguascalientes and Mexico City: INEGI.Google Scholar
INEGI 1991 Finanzas Públicas Estatales y Municipales de México, 1979–1988. Aguascalientes, Mexico: INEGI.Google Scholar
INEGI 2000 XII Censo General de Población y Vivienda. Aguascalientes and Mexico City: INEGI.Google Scholar
Key, V. O. Jr. 1966 The Responsible Electorate: Rationality in Presidential Voting 1936–1960. Cambridge, Mass: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Laakso, Markku, and Taagepera, Rein 1979 “‘Effective’ Number of Parties: A Measure with Applications to West Europe.” Comparative Political Studies 12:3–27.Google Scholar
Langston, Joy 2001 “Why Rules Matter: Changes in Candidate Selection in Mexico's PRI, 1988–2000.” Journal of Latin American Studies 33 (3): 485–511.Google Scholar
Langston, Joy and Cayeros, Alberto Diaz 2003 “The Consequences of Competition: Gubernatorial Nominations in Mexico, 1994–2000,” CIDE (Documento de trabajo SDTEP 160).Google Scholar
Lujambio, Alonso 2000 El poder compartido. Un ensayo sobre la democratización mexicana. Mexico: Editorial Océano.Google Scholar
Manin, Bernard, Przeworski, Adam, and Stokes, Susan 1999 “Elections and Representation.” Democracy, Accountability, and Representation, edited by Manin, Bernard, Przeworski, A., and Stokes, S., 29–54. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsen, Marvin E. 1972 “Social Participation and Voting Turnout: A Multivariate Analysis.” American Sociological Review 37 (3): 317–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, Robert 1993 Making Democracy Work. Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, Mark 1999 “Democracy, Participation, and Public Policy: The Politics of Institutional Design.” In The Democratic Developmental State: Political and Institutional Design, edited by Robinson, Mark and White, Gordon, 150–86. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rodríguez, Victoria E., and Ward, Peter M. 1992 Policymaking, Politics, and Urban Governance in Chihuahua: The Experience of Recent Panista Governments. Austin TX: LBJ School of Public Affairs, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Rodríguez, Victoria E., and Ward, Peter M. 1994 Political Change in Baja California: Democracy in the Making? Monograph Series, No. 40, San Diego CA: Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Rodríguez, Victoria E., and Ward, Peter M. 1995 Opposition Governments in Mexico. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
Schmitter, Philip, and Karl, Terry 1991 “What Democracy Is ... and Is Not.” Journal of Democracy 2 (3): 75–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, Peter M. 1998 “From Machine Politics to the Politics of Technocracy: Charting Changes in Governance in the Mexican Municipality.” Bulletin of Latin American Research 17 (3): 341–65.Google Scholar