Electoral Autocracies Research Articles

A Loyal Base: Support for Authoritarian Regimes in Times of Crisis

Does citizen belief in the non-instrumental principles of the political regime, such as strongman leadership, patriotism, or attachment to a charismatic leader, collectively known as normative support, help stabilize authoritarian regimes? While a large literature recognizes that authoritarian regimes depend on popular support to lower the costs of staying in power, existing research mainly views mass support for these regimes as instrumental, fuelled by performance. Using novel experimental evidence from two original online surveys fielded in Turkey and observational data, we find high levels of normative support for Turkey’s authoritarian rule. Further, our results demonstrate that instrumental and normative dimensions of support may be more closely related than previously theorized. Importantly, we show that both forms of support prevent voter defections in times of crisis. These findings, which revisit the importance of citizens’ support for regime resilience, have implications for research on mass opinion and defection cascades in electoral autocracies.

Democracy Revised: Democratic Imaginary and Emerging Autocracy in Post-Soviet Russia

Contemporary autocracies often maintain a connection with democracy. They do not entirely dismantle the democratic structures established within unfinished modernization projects. Instead, they emerge as “electoral autocracies” and manipulate the concept of democracy offering alternative interpretations and meanings to further their illiberal agenda. The paper delves into the revision of democracy and how the democratic imaginary is utilized in the context of emerging autocracy in post-Soviet Russia. While the post-Soviet Russian autocracy adjusted democratic institutions for its own objectives, it also intended to appropriate the concept of democracy at the semantic and symbolic levels. The rise of Putin’s autocracy is characterized by the radicalization of cultural-civilizational particularism endorsing anti-democratic illiberal arguments. Through this adaptable hermeneutic framework, the Russian authorities tend to relativize the concept of democracy, criticizing, and dismissing the relevance of liberal democracy. Simultaneously, they articulate a distinct “sovereign” version of democracy and claim that non-liberal regimes are legitimate forms of political modernity. The autocratic political discourse on democracy is intrinsically non-democratic, as the lack of intellectual autonomy, control, and closure of discourse constrain the scope of meaning. The resulting heteronomous conception of democracy presents a static and ahistorical society predestined to (re)produce a single pro-authoritarian cultural-political pattern.

Populist autocratization and populist electoral autocracies: towards a unified conceptual framework

AbstractAlthough the research subjects of populism and autocratization studies are interconnected, the full potential of combining their focuses—the dynamic elements of political systems and institutional dimensions—into a comprehensive and systematic conceptual framework remains underexploited. This study makes a stride in this direction by reviewing and connecting these areas through the concepts of populist autocratization and populist electoral autocracies. These concepts aim to deepen our understanding of the nature of contemporary autocratization and the stability of autocracies. While the study is primarily theoretical-conceptual in nature, it also engages with methodological and operationalization considerations, and outlines a brief research agenda to demonstrate the empirical applicability of the analytical framework and lays the foundation for future research.

Autocratic Genderwashing: Gender‐Equality Reforms in Serbia

While gender equality is usually linked with democracy, autocratic regimes frequently take the lead in such reforms. Focusing on the case of Serbia, this article demonstrates how gender equality reforms can be used as instruments of autocratic regimes. As electoral autocracies nowadays depend on international legitimation and support, they need to present a democratic image to the international audience. Very often they achieve this by introducing gender-sensitive policies and increasing the public visibility of women. This study shows that the democratic backsliding evidenced in Serbia since 2016 has been followed by increased attention to gender equality. In recent years, the Serbian parliament has increased the gender quota for national and local parliaments to 40% and passed several important pieces of legislation, including the Law on Prevention of Domestic Violence (2016) and the Gender Equality Law (2021). Additionally, the regime has appointed a record number of women to executive government positions. Since 2017, Serbia has had a lesbian woman serving as a prime minister and the government formed in 2020 was labelled a “women’s government,” with 40% of ministerial positions held by women. This article argues that the regime tends to adopt these democratic reforms while, at the same time, manipulating their meaning to advance a conservative agenda and bolster anti-gender mobilizations. These different—often contradictory—strategies help the regime address a variety of audiences—both international and domestic—and gain their recognition.

Resistance under confinement: resilience of protests and their limits in authoritarian Turkey

In this paper, we examine the relationship between the process of autocratisation and protests, and argue that scholarship on electoral autocracies should not only focus on major protest cycles but also examine ‘ordinary’ protests to understand how social and political actors resist and push back against autocratisation. Using an original dataset of protest events from 2015 to 2021, we analyse the transformation of protests in Turkey as it experienced gradual but significant autocratisation. We discuss two mechanisms through which autocratisation might affect levels, actors and repertoires of protesting: first, via increasing repression; and, second, via the policy choices of the authoritarian regime. Our findings indicate that protests continued even under the state of emergency in Turkey, but with significant changes in levels and repertoires of protesting. The protest scene was dominated by protests using tactics that rely on a small number of individuals and are contained in their spatial reach and disruptiveness. This research underlines the importance of examining ordinary protests to analyse how autocratisation transforms protests, using original data from local sources.

Institutions as predictors of government discrimination

AbstractExclusion of some groups caused by the misuse of government power remains a major problem across the world. We propose that market‐oriented institutions and policies have the capacity to reduce such exclusion. To test this, we use an overall measure derived from the V‐Dem dataset, capturing government discrimination based on political group, social group, socio‐economic group, and gender, which we combine with the Fraser Institute's Economic Freedom of the World index. The sample consists of 153 countries for 1970–2020, which we organize in a panel consisting of consecutive, non‐overlapping 5‐year periods, rendering up to about 1,200 observations. Our estimates show a clear negative association between the rule of law and government discrimination in electoral democracies and electoral autocracies but not in single‐party autocracies. There are, however, reasons for not considering the finding for electoral autocracies causal. Two further areas of economic freedom seem to matter: free trade is negatively related to government exclusion in electoral democracies, while regulatory freedom is so in both types of autocracies. Thus, it seems as if a market‐economic system may be able to constrain public officials in the direction of non‐discrimination.

Charter–manifesto congruence as a signal for issue salience: democratic innovations within political parties in Hungary

ABSTRACT This article proposes a proxy for issue salience via studying congruence between parties’ organizational structure and the policies they promote to their voters. This charter-manifesto congruence, i.e. institutionalizing the same democratic innovations at the intra-party level and advocating for their adoption at the national level, is particularly useful to demarcate party profiles in dominant party systems and electoral autocracies. To demonstrate how such congruence can be measured, we analyse the credibility of the commitments made by opposition parties in Hungary to a variety of democratic innovations. Drawing on novel survey data, we further substantiate our argument by showing high support for these innovations among party members and voters. The analysis identifies gender quotas as the most congruent innovation. Our longitudinal research design also reveals a recent breakthrough of e-democracy in party manifestos. We then discuss how preferences for various innovations are potentially shaped by membership size, party founders’ political socialization or organizational learning. At the normative level, the analysis suggests that some forms of democratic innovations are better suited for intra-party organizations than for party manifestos. These implications might be relevant for those committed to promoting deliberation, gender equality and (re-)engagement of the youth in politics.

Partisanship and Political Socialization in Electoral Autocracies

In electoral autocracies, why do some people actively support political parties while others choose to not get involved in politics? Further, what differentiates those who choose to support the ruling party from those who support the opposition? Existing research has proposed that people support ruling parties primarily to extract economic benefits from the state while people support opposition parties primarily for ideological reasons. However, we lack a unified theory of partisanship, leading to indeterminant predictions about the individual predictors of partisanship. This article instead considers the social nature of partisanship in authoritarian regimes. Qualitative data collected in Cameroon highlight different processes of political socialization in an autocratic context, and data from an original survey show not only that partisan homogeneity in social networks is highly predictive of individual-level partisanship but also, at least to some extent, that partisanship can be contagious through the process of socialization within these networks.

The Turkish Constitutional Court and Turkey’s Democratic Breakdown: Judicial Politics Under Pressure

Abstract Under Turkey’s democratic breakdown, the Turkish Constitutional Court offers a case study to identify the dynamics of judicial politics in electoral autocracies. Although the Court has been subject to criticism regarding its low commitment to the political pluralism and rights-based approach previously, the current situation presents itself differently. It is marked by a massive erosion in democratic qualities including an abuse of the judiciary against dissents in an unprecedented manner. Yet, the Court is still formally independent and empowered through constitutional norms such as the fixed tenure, retirement age, and jurisdiction in crucial matters. Since the institutional guarantees of the Constitutional Court are untouched, it has still the potential to become a major political player. Therefore, its study may also contribute to the comparative scholarship on the role of constitutional review under new pressures of the third wave autocratization that contraction and expansion dynamics of judiciaries can be better understood. The present study aims to feature the judicial politics of the Court under Turkey’s current democratic regression by conceptualizing a resistance-deference paradox on the ground politically significant cases.

Proportional representation and party fragmentation in electoral autocracies

ABSTRACT What is the relationship between the type of electoral system and the degree of party fragmentation in electoral autocracies? According to Duverger’s hypothesis, proportional representation (PR) is positively associated with party fragmentation. This study investigates whether this hypothesis holds true in non-democratic political systems that hold elections. I propose that, unlike in democracies, PR is negatively correlated with the level of party fragmentation in electoral autocracies. To test this hypothesis, I utilize panel data encompassing 37 non-democratic nations that held elections from 1975 to 2010. The results demonstrate that PR is inversely linked to both the number and size of political parties. The effective number of parties (ENP) is employed as a measure of party fragmentation, estimating the weighted size and quantity of political parties.

Substantive Representation, Women’s Health, and Regime Type

A large body of literature investigates whether increasing the number of women in legislative office translates into policies that benefit women in society. This research builds upon theories about descriptive and substantive representation. However, these theories may not travel well to authoritarian contexts, where we see some of the largest gains in women legislators in recent years. This article unpacks the link between women’s descriptive representation, healthcare spending, and health outcomes by regime type. Using a sample of 169 countries from 2000 to 2018, we find that the percentage of women legislators is associated with increased healthcare spending across all regimes. However, women’s health outcomes do not improve with women’s descriptive representation in closed autocracies. Meanwhile, the results for democracies and electoral autocracies are similar, suggesting that even limited vertical accountability through semi-competitive elections may facilitate substantive representation of women.

Substituting the Opposition under Electoral Authoritarianism: The Case of the Russian Regional Parliamentary Elections in 2021

Abstract Political scientists have long known that modern electoral autocracies can use quasi-democratic institutions to neutralize the danger posed by the opposition. Participation in elections by completely controlled spoiler parties proved to be an effective tool for maintaining authoritarian stability. However, researchers know few cases of how aging authoritarian regimes create systemic semi-independent opposition in order to increase turnout and split the votes of the systemic opposition. Based on a database of candidates from single-member districts (SMD) in the 2021 regional parliamentary elections in Russia with more than 2,200 unique observations, we show how the participation of candidates from the newly created New People, Green Alternative, and the Russian Party of Freedom and Justice affected the electoral results of United Russia and two parties of the ‘old’ systemic opposition.

Candidate Debates and Partisan Divisions Evidence From Malawi’s 2019 Presidential Elections

Candidate debates are increasingly organized during elections in democracies and electoral autocracies. How do debates impact partisan divisions and preferences in these contexts? One theoretical perspective suggests that debates should amplify these preferences and divisions, while another implies debates should attenuate them. This paper evaluates these expectations by studying presidential debates organized during Malawi’s May 2019 elections. With an experiment and national panel survey, the paper provides evidence consistent with attenuation: debate watchers were substantially more likely to vote across partisan lines (cross-party voting), became more favorable toward out-partisan candidates, and became less favorable toward co-partisans. Suggestive evidence on causal mechanisms shows that these effects were driven by policy persuasion and debates’ impact on perceptions of the candidates’ policies and qualities. Results advance debates about information processing, campaign effects, and voting behavior in new democracies and electoral autocracies, and have implications for electoral institutions’ impact on partisan divisions.

"This Rally is Not Authorized": Preventive Repression and Public Opinion in Electoral Autocracies

"This Rally is Not Authorized": Preventive Repression and Public Opinion in Electoral Autocracies

К оценке траекторий трансформаций постсоветских политических систем

Introduction. The article examines the formation and development of political systems in the former eleven republics of the USSR from the standpoint of the institutional transformations taking place there. The struggle for power between various elite groups and citizens’ identities and the dynamics of citizens’ identities were also the basis for comparison. The authors consider the parameters mentioned to make the comparison and typology of the modern post-Soviet states’ development more effective. Methods and Materials. The neoinstitutional, sociological, and political-cultural approaches were used in the research, as were the comparative-historical and comparative-typological methods, which made it possible to scrutinize the available facts and draw respective conclusions. Analysis. It was stated that starting in the 1980s, the transformation of the typical Soviet republics took place in two directions. The first included the formation of the electoral autocracies, institutional design, and social and cultural image, which were determined by the “nucleus” – the president-leader. Such political dynamics turned out to be characteristic of Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, and Belarus. The formation of the “front-end democracies” was the second direction. These democracies are characterized by institutional, social, and identity fragmentation hiding behind the glass cases of democratic structures and practices borrowed from the West. Kirghizia, Georgia, Armenia, Ukraine, and Moldavia have moved in this direction. Results. The authors’ conclusion is that both the first and second directions do not ensure the stable development of new independent states in the foreseeable future. Authors’ contribution. A.V. Abramov formulated the concept of the article, developed the comparison parameters, and studied the post-Soviet elites’ and citizens’ struggle for power and their identity evolution. R.A. Alekseev analyzed the transformation of the political institutions in the post-Soviet political systems in the context of their constitutional reforms.

Debating voter defection in Turkey

ABSTRACT This study examines patterns of voter defection from Turkey’s incumbent AKP amid major economic and democratic decline. As in other electoral autocracies, defectors constitute a small but politically significant group in Turkey, where the opposition’s ability to secure a transition from authoritarianism depends on reducing the incumbent’s vote share. Based on survey data gathered in November 2021 and February 2022, we find that while the high level of partizanship among AKP voters hinders defection, persistent economic and democratic decline still reduces incumbent support. We also found that defections are higher outside of the lowest income group. Our findings have important implications for opposition strategies in electoral autocracies. Directing public debate away from identity issues to economic and democratic problems increases the likelihood of defection. In addition, offering voters clear superior alternatives decreases the cost of uncertainty that comes with change and increases the likelihood of defection.

Popular Dictatorships: Crises, Mass Opinion, and the Rise of Electoral Authoritarianism by Aleksander Matovski

In Popular Dictatorships, Alexander Matovski examines the emergence and durability of electoral authoritarian regimes in societies undergoing political, social, or economic turmoil. Strongman electoral autocracies, he argues, are uniquely able to leverage shared collective trauma and to provide credibility to claims that a hybrid system—one which exists between open democracy and closed authoritarianism—is “the safest and most pragmatic governing system for troubled societies” (73). These hybrid regimes profess to offer the best of both worlds and focus their legitimation efforts on the premise that they are most suited to maintaining order and stability. While Matovski situates his argument as a corrective to the literature on electoral authoritarianism, this book fits well with the robust scholarly examination of popular support, legitimacy, and legitimation in authoritarian regimes. Popular Dictatorships provides a compelling theory of how electoral authoritarian regimes balance between more traditional authoritarian tactics, such as coercion and cooptation, and mass support. In doing so, this book will be of interest to audiences interested in the emergence of electoral authoritarian regimes, the ways in which they maintain power, and the reasons they may fall.

Staying on top: Political cycles in private bank lending

The incentives for state-owned banks to boost lending before elections in order to improve the re-election odds of incumbent politicians are well recognized. We hypothesize that political influence on lending behavior in electoral autocracies extends to all banks, irrespective of ownership or political connections. Employing monthly data on individual banks, we consider the lending behavior of Russian banks in the four presidential elections held between 2004 and 2019. We find that both state-owned and private banks increased their lending before these presidential elections. Controlling for economic fluctuations, the pre-election lending surge is followed by a deterioration of loan quality the following year. We show that private banks are rewarded for boosting their lending before an election with government deposits after the election. Our findings support the view that the authorities in electoral autocracies such as Russia have the capacity and means to influence lending of private and state-owned banks in pursuit of favorable election outcomes.

Delivering the Vote: Community Politicians and the Credibility of Punishment Regimes in Electoral Autocracies

How do authoritarian regimes punish ordinary opposition voters? I argue that elected community politicians help make "punishment regimes," which discourage opposition support, credible. Strengthened by decentralization reforms, community politicians have information and leverage necessary to identify and punish opposition supporters. When the regime wins community elections, these politicians extend the regime's reach deep into communities. When opposition parties win, their reach is constrained weak- ening their electoral control. Using mixed-methods evidence from Tanzania, I show regime-loyal community politicians use their distributive and legal-coercive powers to "deliver the vote" leading voters in these communities to fear individual reprisals for opposition support. In contrast, voters fear individual punishment in opposition-run communities significantly less. This study demonstrates the importance of local institutions and elections when understanding regime durability.

Masking the Strangulation of Opposition Parties as Pandemic Response: Austerity Measures Targeting the Local Level in Hungary

AbstractWhile a large literature studies the various tools of autocratic survival, targeting opposition actors with austerity measures in electoral autocracies is hitherto understudied. This paper argues that the COVID-19 pandemic has provided a rare opportunity for Hungary’s Fidesz party to disarm opposition parties via cutting off resources of municipalities led by opposition mayors and eliminating any remnants of local governments’ fiscal autonomy. Analysing original data from government decrees on local transfers, this study contributes to the existing literature by conceptualising fiscal strangulation as part of electoral authoritarian regimes’ toolbox to discredit opposition parties and their ability to govern locally.