Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-pwrkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-06T15:37:13.613Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pursuing Costly Reform: The Case of Ecuadorian Natural Resource Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2022

Craig M. Kauffman  and
Will Terry
Craig M. Kauffman
Affiliation:
University of Oregon
Will Terry
Affiliation:
University of Oregon
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.

Why do politicians pursue policy reforms to improve government performance when these are perceived to be costly, both materially and politically? Theories based on advanced democracies stress electoral accountability mechanisms rooted in programmatic parties with strong ties to society. Empirically, these are largely absent in less developed democracies, and this often leads to poor public goods provision. To better understand the incentives for local policy reform in developing democracies, we constructed a comprehensive data set of local natural resource management reforms in Ecuador's cantons during 1997–2008. We find that the presence of “organic” political parties, legitimate participatory decision-making institutions, and high levels of civic engagement increased the incidence of reform. Our findings suggest that even in environments marked by clientelist politics and weak, elite-based party systems, institutions linking politicians with a mobilized civil society (e.g., organic parties and participatory decision-making institutions) can incentivize elected officials to pursue performance-enhancing reforms.

Resumen

Resumen

¿Por qué los políticos reforman políticas para mejorar el desempeño del gobierno cuando las mismas reformas se perciben a ser costosas, tanto en lo material como políticamente? Las teorías derivadas de las democracias avanzadas enfatizan los mecanismos de rendición de cuentas, basados en elecciones y partidos programáticos con fuertes vínculos a la sociedad. Empíricamente, estas características frecuentemente están ausentes en las democracias menos desarrolladas, lo cual resulta en la falta de provisión de bienes públicos. Para mejor entender los incentivos para reformar políticas públicas a nivel local en democracias menos desarrolladas, construimos una base de datos de reformas de la gestión de los recursos naturales locales en los cantones del Ecuador durante el periodo 1997–2008. La presencia de partidos políticos “orgánicos”, la presencia de instituciones de participación ciudadana y un alto nivel de participación ciudadana aumentaron la incidencia de reformas. Los resultados sugieren que incluso en condiciones marcadas por clientelismo y sistemas débiles de los partidos políticos, instituciones que hacen vínculos entre los políticos y la sociedad civil movilizada —como partidos “orgánicas” e instituciones de participación ciudadana— pueden incentivar a los funcionarios que lleven a cabo reformas.

Type
Research Article
Information
Latin American Research Review , Volume 51 , Issue 4 , 2016 , pp. 163 - 185
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 by the Latin American Studies Association

Footnotes

Funding for the research in this article was generously provided by the Inter-American Foundation's Grassroots Development Fellowship. Institutional support was provided by the Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales Sede Ecuador (FLACSO-Ecuador).

References

Asociación de Municipalidades Ecuatorianas (AME) 2004 Premio a las mejores prácticas de la gestión pública seccional, primera edición (2003–2004). Quito: AME.Google Scholar
Avritzer, Leonardo 2009 Participatory Institutions in Democratic Brazil Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Barragán, Lourdes, and Chamorro, Carlos 2007 Premio a las mejores prácticas seccionales, 2005–2006. Quito: Asociación de Municipalidades Ecuatorianas.Google Scholar
Bebbington, Anthony, Ramón, Galo, Carrasco, Hernán, Torres, Víctor Hugo, Peralvo, Lourdes, and Trujillo., Jorge 1992 Actores de una década ganada: Tribus, comunidades y campesinos en la modernidad. Quito: COMUNIDEC.Google Scholar
Besley, Timothy, Pande, Rohini, and Rao, Vijayendra 2007 “Political Economy of Panchayats in South India.” Economic and Political Weekly, February 24, 661–666.Google Scholar
Cameron, John 2005 “Municipal Democratization in Rural Latin America: Methodological Insights from Ecuador.” Bulletin of Latin America Research 24 (3): 367–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Tim, and Fuhr, Harald, eds. 2004 Leadership and Innovation in Subnational Government: Case Studies from Latin America. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
Carrión, Fernando, ed. 2007 La descentralización en el Ecuador: Opciones comparadas. Quito: FLACSO Ecuador.Google Scholar
Dietz, Thomas, and Stern, Paul C., eds. 2009 Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Eaton, Kent 2014 “Recentralization and the Left Turn in Latin America: Diverging Outcomes in Bolivia, Ecuador, and Venezuela.” Comparative Political Studies 47 (8): 1130–1157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foley, Michael W., and Edwards, Bob 1996 “The Paradox of Civil Society.” Journal of Democracy 7 (3): 38–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, Archon 2001 “Accountable Autonomy: Toward Empowered Deliberation in Chicago Schools and Policing.” Politics and Society 29 (1): 73–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, Archon, and Wright, Erik Olin 2003 “Thinking about Empowered Participatory Governance.” In Deepening Democracy: Institutional Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance: The Real Utopias Project IV, edited by Fung, A. and Wright, E. O., 3–44. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Garzón, Andrea 2009 “Estado de la acción sobre los mecanismos de financiamiento de la protección y recuperación de los servicios ambientales hidrológicos.” In Informe final de la síntesis regional sobre servicios ambiental hídricos en Los Andes. Lima: Consorcio para el Desarrollo Sostenible de la Ecorregión Andina.Google Scholar
German Development Service 2008 “Experiencias de participación ciudadana y Defensoría del Pueblo en Ecuador.” Quito: Servicio Alemán de Cooperación Social-Técnica (DED).Google Scholar
Goetz, Anne Marie, and Jenkins, Rob 2001 “Hybrid Forms of Accountability: Citizen Engagement in Institutions of Public-Sector Oversight in India.” Public Management Review 3 (3): 363–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, Michael 2009 “Water for All! The Phenomenal Rise of Transnational Knowledge and Policy Networks.” In Environmental Governance: Power and Knowledge in a Local-Global World, edited by Kutting, G. and Lipschutz, R. D., 145–169. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Grindle, Merilee S. 2007 Going Local: Decentralization, Democratization, and the Promise of Good Governance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hoelscher, David, and Quintyn, Marc 2003 “Managing Systemic Banking Crises.” Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.Google Scholar
Hosmer, David W. Jr., and Lemeshow, Stanley 2000 Applied Survival Analysis. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Jacome, Luis 2004 The Late 1990s Financial Crisis in Ecuador: Institutional Weaknesses, Fiscal Rigidities, and Financial Dollarization at Work. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.Google Scholar
Keefer, Philip 2007 “Clientelism, Credibility, and the Policy Choices of Young Democracies.” American Journal of Political Science 51 (4): 804–821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keefer, Philip, and Khemani, Stuti 2005 “Democracy, Public Expenditures, and the Poor: Understanding Political Incentives for Providing Public Services.” World Bank Research Observer 20 (1): 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, Valdimer O. 1964 Politics, Parties, and Pressure Groups. 6th ed. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company.Google Scholar
Long, J. Scott, and Freese, Jeremy 2006 Regression Models for Categorical Variables Using Stata. 2nd ed. College Station, TX: Stata Press.Google Scholar
López, Hernando 2005 Estado de concreción del proceso de descentralización en el Ecuador: Línea base de la descentralización a julio de 2004. Quito: Consejo Nacional de Modernización del Estado, Programa de Modernización y Descentralización.Google Scholar
Lucero, José Antonio 2008 Struggles of Voice: The Politics of Indigenous Representation in the Andes. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott, and Torcal, Mariano 2006 “Party System Institutionalization and Party System Theory after the Third Wave of Democratization.” In Handbook of Political Parties, edited by Katz, R. S. and Crotty, W., 204–227. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manin, Bernard, Przeworski, Adam, and Stokes, Susan Carol 1999 “Elections and Representation.” In Democracy, Accountability, and Representation, edited by Przeworski, A., Stokes, S. C., and Manin, B., 29–54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mejía Acosta, Andrés 2007 Countries at the Crossroads 2007: Ecuador. http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/countries-crossroads/2007/ecuador.Google Scholar
Montúfar, César, and Bonilla, Adrián 2008 “Two Perspectives on Ecuador: Rafael Correa's Political Project.” Washington, DC: Inter-American Dialogue.Google Scholar
Moreno-Jaimes, Carlos 2007 “Do Competitive Elections Produce Better-Quality Governments? Evidence from Mexican Municipalities, 1990–2000.” Latin American Research Review 42 (2): 136–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, Mancur 1965 The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ospina, Pablo, Larrea, Carlos, Arboleda, María, and Santillana, Alejandra 2006 En las fisuras del poder. Quito: Instituto de Estudios Ecuatorianos.Google Scholar
Pachano, Simón 2007 “Partidos y sistema de partidos en el Ecuador.” In La política por dentro, edited by Roncagliolo, R. and Meléndez, C., 161–212. Bogotá: Ágora Democrática.Google Scholar
Panebianco, Angelo 1988 Political Parties: Organization and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Payne, J. Mark, Zovatto, Daniel, Flórez, Fernando Carrillo, and Zavala, Andrés Allamand 2002 Democracies in Development: Politics and Reform in Latin America. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank.Google Scholar
Putnam, Robert D. 1993 Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Quintero, Rafael 2005 Electores contra partidos en un sistema político de mandas. Quito: Abya-Yala.Google Scholar
Radcliffe, Sarah A. 2001 “Indigenous Municipalities in Ecuador and Bolivia: Transnational Connections and Exclusionary Political Cultures.” Paper presented at the workshop “Beyond the Lost Decade: Indigenous Movements and the Transformation of Development and Democracy in Latin America,” Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, March 2–3.Google Scholar
Ramón Valarezo, Galo, and Dávila, Victor Hugo Torres 2004 El desarrollo local en el Ecuador: Historia, actores y métodos. Quito: Abya-Yala.Google Scholar
Roberts, Kenneth M. 1998 Deepening Democracy? The Modern Left and Social Movements in Chile and Peru. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni 1976 Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Schedler, Andreas 1999 “Las comisiones y la pirámide: Notas sobre la conflictiva recentralización del poder en el IFE.” Política y Gobierno 6 (1): 187–222.Google Scholar
Seligson, Mitchell A. 2003 “Democracy Audit: Ecuador 2001.” Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh and Latin America Public Opinion Project.Google Scholar
Tomz, Michael, Wittenberg, Jason, and King, Gary 2003 “Clarify: Software for Interpreting and Presenting Statistical Results.” Stanford, CA; Stanford University; Madison: University of Wisconsin; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tribunal Supremo Electoral 2007 Listado de organizaciones políticas. Quito: Tribunal Supremo Electoral.Google Scholar
True, Jacqui, and Mintrom, Michael 2001 “Transnational Networks and Policy Diffusion: The Case of Gender Mainstreaming.” International Studies Quarterly 45 (1): 27–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsai, Lily 2007 Accountability without Democracy: Solidary Groups and Public Goods Provision in Rural China. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Nations Development Programme 2006 “Elementos para un modelo de gestión municipal transparente.” Quito: UN Development Programme.Google Scholar
Van Cott, Donna Lee 2008 Radical Democracy in the Andes. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wampler, Brian 2007 Participatory Budgeting in Brazil: Contestation, Cooperation, and Accountability. University Park, PA: Penn State Press.Google Scholar
Weingast, Barry 1997 “The Political Foundations of Democracy and the Rule of Law.” American Political Science Review 91 (2): 245–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Woodrow 1885 Congressional Government. New York: Riverside Press.Google Scholar