Subnational Authoritarianism Research Articles

The Institutionalization of the Party System in Russia: Opportunities and Threats at the Elections of Governors

Does the level of party system institutionalization influence high-level incumbents’ electoral support within subnational authoritarianism? Is it possible to ensure incumbent electoral success only with manipulative electoral practices? To what extent does this and other factors contribute to the incumbents’ landslide victory? Contrary to scholarly thought in this field, this paper argues that manipulative practices are not the only determinant of incumbents’ electoral success in an authoritarian regime. They are also insufficient. The research is based on the results Russian gubernatorial elections in 2012-2013.

Boundary control: subnational authoritarianism in federal democracies

The democratization of a national government is only a first step in the diffusion of democracy throughout a country's territory. Even after a national government is democratized, subnational authoritarian enclaves often continue to deny rights to citizens of local jurisdictions. Edward L. Gibson offers new theoretical perspectives for the study of democratization in his exploration of this phenomenon. His theory of captures the conflict pattern between incumbents and oppositions when a national democratic government exists alongside authoritarian provinces (or states). He also reveals how federalism and the territorial organization of countries shape how subnational authoritarian regimes are built and how they unravel. Through a novel comparison of the late nineteenth-century American Solid South with contemporary experiences in Argentina and Mexico, Gibson reveals that the mechanisms of boundary control are reproduced across countries and historical periods. As long as subnational authoritarian governments coexist with national democratic governments, boundary control will be at play.

Boundary Control: Subnational Authoritarianism in Federal Democracies, by Edward Gibson.

Boundary Control: Subnational Authoritarianism in Federal Democracies, by Edward Gibson.

Book Review: Other Areas: The Politics of Sub-national Authoritarianism in Russia

Book Review: Other Areas: The Politics of Sub-national Authoritarianism in Russia

Economic foundations of subnational authoritarianism: insights and evidence from qualitative and quantitative research

A growing body of subnational comparative research on democracy has focused attention on ‘subnational authoritarianism’, in tandem with increasing interest in local politics across the developing world. Unsurprisingly, this evolving field of study has been characterized by a diversity – if not a dichotomy – of approaches, with quantitative and qualitative research proceeding along parallel and sometimes intersecting tracks. But scholars working in diverse contexts and with diverging approaches have begun to converge on a set of explanations for the patterns of variance observed in subnational authoritarianism within and across national settings. Drawing on studies of Russia, the United States, southern Italy, Argentina and West Africa, this article shows how scholarship has identified the underlying economic foundations of subnational authoritarianism. Combining the findings of recent qualitative and quantitative studies with the author's own research in the Philippines, this article spells out a set of hypotheses which may help to explain patterns of variance in subnational authoritarianism. Variance in subnational authoritarianism, it is suggested, stems from varying local economic conditions and possibilities for accumulation and maintenance of control over local economies. Further ‘mapping’ of subnational authoritarianism thus requires local fieldwork to complement the strengths – and overcome the limitations – of quantitative research.

Using formal theory in mutli-method research: National democratic support for subnational authoritarianism

Using formal theory in mutli-method research: National democratic support for subnational authoritarianism

States and strategy in new federal democracies

A growing body of research demonstrates that parties are vital for the health of democracy. While party activities are therefore increasingly supported by direct public subsidies, we know relatively little about the ways in which parties spend this money. Using an original dataset of intra-party cash transfers, this article examines resource allocation in three major Mexican parties. The analysis demonstrates that parties’ spending patterns differ. Decentralization, which has increased the power and prestige of subnational office, prompts all parties to focus spending on states holding local elections. Parties with a regionalized support base, however, invest primarily in states where they are competitive. This tendency to favour party strongholds has important implications for party system development, particularly for party system nationalization, as well as for emerging work on subnational authoritarianism.

Political Factionalism in Southern Mexico: The Case of Oaxaca (2000–2006)

This article provides an explanation of major civil upheaval and violent political turmoil – hereinafter referred to as “active political factionalism” – that take place in the Mexican state of Oaxaca. More specifically, this work identifies the main causes of extra-institutional protest politics or uncivil modes of political action that seriously affect political stability and undermine democratic advancement. The analysis focuses on the effects of two groups of explanatory factors: i) deteriorated socioeconomic conditions (such as poverty and inequality), and ii) institutional limitations (corruption, electoral exclusion, a weak rule of law, among others) in a context of “sub-national authoritarianism.” The study also examines some of the mechanisms through which these variables operate and interact with other factors (resources, opportunities, government actions, etc.) to generate political factionalism. This work finally assesses the relative importance of these two groups of explanatory factors. Evidence presented here shows that institutional factors are the primary sources of political factionalism in Oaxaca, while socioeconomic factors are quite significant but not predominant.

The Unevenness of Democracy at the Subnational Level: Provincial Closed Games in Argentina

Democratization studies initially focused on processes at the national level, but in recent years, there has been a growing interest in the spatially uneven nature of democracy at the subnational level. This article draws on examples from Argentina and develops an analytical framework of closed games to analyze the functioning of subnational democracy. It argues that the less democratic provinces or states of nationally democratic countries are not necessarily authoritarian and that the concept of subnational authoritarianism prevents us from seeing political dynamics that may arise in the context of a reasonably well-functioning electoral democracy and may result in subnational closed games. The article takes into ac- count the role of political families, media ownership, control of access to business opportunities, and control of the provincial state.

Neo-Patrimonialism and Subnational Authoritarianism in Mexico. The Case of Oaxaca

How do subnational authoritarian enclaves emerge (or survive) in a democratic transition at the federal level? How can they endure large-scale social protests, like the one that shook Oaxaca in 2006? While federal tolerance for subnational authoritarian practices is a necessary condition, it is insufficient in itself to explain why subnational political systems sustain and eventually reproduce authoritarian practices in the first place. In this article, therefore, I focus on the internal dimension of subnational authoritarianism. I argue that, because of its reliance on two distinct sources of legitimacy, Oaxaca's neo-patrimonial domination system was able to respond to the formal democratizing pressures emanating from the federal transition without losing its authoritarian nature. This process of hybridization transformed Oaxacan institutions, but left social structures and the political dynamics that emerge from them – the sources of subnational authoritarianism – almost intact. By exploring the evolution of neo-patrimonialism and hybridization in Oaxaca from a theoretical perspective, I address the issues of change and continuity in the emergence of subnational authoritarian enclaves, in Mexico and elsewhere.

Politics of the Periphery: An Introduction to Subnational Authoritarianism and Democratization in Latin America

The article is an introduction to the topic featured in JPLA 2/2010 Subnational Authoritarianism and Democratization in Latin America. It discusses the papers by Carlos Gervasoni, Agustina Giraudy, Julian Durazo Herrmann, Alfred P. Montero, and Tracy Beck Fenwick that follow in this issue. Why feature the topic “subnational authoritarianism and democratization” in the Journal of Politics in Latin America ? Because despite widespread agreement that subnational jurisdictions in Latin America vary considerably in the democratic character of their politics, political scientists are still largely in the dark about how to conceptualize and measure this situation, and have scant knowledge about mechanisms that sustain and undermine it. This collection of articles makes major headway toward clearing our methodological and theoretical ignorance of these topics.

Measuring Variance in Subnational Regimes: Results from an Expert-Based Operationalization of Democracy in the Argentine Provinces

This paper presents an expert-based operationalization strategy to measure the degree of democracy in the Argentine provinces. Starting with a mainstream and “thick” definition of regime type, I assess each of its aspects using a subjective or perception-based approach that taps the knowledge of experts on the politics of each province. I present and justify the methodological design of the resulting Survey of Experts on Provincial Politics (SEPP) and conduct a preliminary analysis of its results. Some aspects of the provincial regimes appear to be clearly democratic, while others are mixed or even leaning towards authoritarianism. Moreover, some show little inter-provincial variance, while others vary considerably from province to province. An analysis of the central tendency and dispersion of the survey items allows for a general description of the Argentine provincial regimes. Inclusion is the most democratic dimension, while the effectiveness of institutional constraints on the power of the Executive is the most deficient. Electoral contestation is generally free of traditional forms of fraud, but incumbents often command far more campaign resources and media attention than do their challengers. Physical repression is rare, but opponents in some provinces face subtler forms of punishment. While the survey does not uncover any clear cases of subnational authoritarianism, stricto sensu, provincial regimes do vary significantly from basically democratic to clearly hybrid.

Boundary Control: Subnational Authoritarianism in Democratic Countries

This article considers the political situation of an authoritarian province in a nationally democratic country. The objective is to uncover strategies that incumbents (in this article, governors) pursue to perpetuate provincial authoritarian regimes, as well as dynamics that can undermine such regimes. A central insight is that controlling the scope of provincial conflict (that is, the extent to which it is localized or nationalized) is a major objective of incumbents and oppositions in struggles over local democratization. Authoritarian incumbents will thus pursue “boundary control” strategies, which are played out in multiple arenas of a national territorial system. The articlefleshesout these processes via comparative analysis of two conflicts over subnational democratization in 2004: the state of Oaxaca in Mexico and the province of Santiago del Estero in Argentina.