Contained or represented? The varied consequences of reserved seats for emigrants in the legislatures of Ecuador and Colombia

Pau Palop-García

doi:10.1186/s40878-018-0101-7

Abstract

The legislatures of Colombia and Ecuador have reserved seats for their non-resident citizens (emigrants). This paper analyses the relationship between the formal, descriptive, and substantive dimensions of emigrant representation in their homeland legislatures. The analysis compares the legislative work of emigrant MPs (EMPs) with the legislative work of non-emigrant MPs (NEMPs) in Ecuador and Colombia. It presents a mixed methods approach that combines a quantitative text analysis based on an original dataset –composed of 35,446 floor speeches– with in-depth interviews with six EMPs. The results show that emigrant-related issues are significantly more salient in the legislature of Ecuador and Colombia suggesting that the effect of emigrant-reserved seats is correlated to the size of the external district. Furthermore, the analysis reveals that EMPs have a ‘mixed agenda’ composed by emigrant and domestic-related issues. Finally, the article shows that the probability of classifying a speech as emigrant-related increases when it is given by an EMP and not a NEMP. This effect is stronger in Ecuador than in Colombia. All in all, the article shows evidence that configurations that allocate several EMPs are more efficient in achieving substantive representation.

Highlights

In 1991, Colombia included a provision in its new Constitution that granted non-resident citizens the possibility to elect their own representatives in the lower legislative house
Does the special representation of emigrants guarantee the inclusion of non-resident citizens into their homeland political legislatures? Or, on the contrary, are emigrant special seats a mechanism designed to contain the political influence of non-resident citizen populations?
Drawing upon the study of Østergaard-Nielsen and Ciornei (2017), when deciding which issues to include in the ‘emigrant agenda’, I include (1) the status of non-resident citizens, for instance, the regulation of dual nationality; (2) policies that aim at assisting non-residents abroad, such as the improvement in consular services; (3) policies that foster the integration of emigrants in the state of origin, for example, the creation of a consultative body to discuss emigrant issues, and (4) policies oriented to foster the return of migrants

Summary

Introduction

In 1991, Colombia included a provision in its new Constitution that granted non-resident citizens the possibility to elect their own representatives in the lower legislative house. In 2008, almost two decades after Colombia’s constitutional change, Ecuador extended active and passive electoral rights to non-residents, reserving six special seats for emigrants MPs (hereafter, EMPs) in the National Assembly. The inclusion of non-resident citizens into the homeland legislative houses constitutes a major innovation in terms of how states conceive the boundaries of their polity and how they shape their relationship. Does the special representation of emigrants guarantee the inclusion of non-resident citizens into their homeland political legislatures? On the contrary, are emigrant special seats a mechanism designed to contain the political influence of non-resident citizen populations? Does the special representation of emigrants guarantee the inclusion of non-resident citizens into their homeland political legislatures? Or, on the contrary, are emigrant special seats a mechanism designed to contain the political influence of non-resident citizen populations?

Methods

Results

Conclusion