Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T21:27:08.528Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

All by Myself: Personal Qualifications versus Party Affiliation in Colombian Mayoral Elections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Claudia N. Avellaneda  and
Maria C. Escobar-Lemmon
Claudia N. Avellaneda
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Charlotte
Maria C. Escobar-Lemmon
Affiliation:
Texas A&M University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Political decentralization has been promoted as a way to devolve responsibility, bring government closer to citizens, and improve accountability. The shift prompted new local elections, but were the elected officials responsive to citizens or to national party elites? This study examines unique survey data from 125 Colombian mayors to identify the factors they believe were critical in their victories and thereby to identify the people to whom they believe they owe loyalty: citizens or party leaders. Examining the relative value mayors assign to their own actions versus those of the party, combined with information on how they financed campaigns, sheds important light on subnational electoral dynamics in Colombia.

Type
Research Article
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 54 , Issue 2 , Summer 2012 , pp. 109 - 132
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alesina, Alberto, Carrasquilla, Alberto, and José Echavarría, Juan. 2005. Decentralization in Colombia. In Institutional Reforms: The Case of Colombia, ed. Alesina, . Cambridge : MIT Press. 175–208.Google Scholar
Ames, Barry. 1995a. Electoral Strategy under Open-List Proportional Representation. American Journal of Political Science 39: 406–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ames, Barry. 1995b. Electoral Rules, Constituency Pressures, and Pork Barrel: Bases of Voting in the Brazilian Congress. Journal of Politics 57: 324–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, Iyengar, Shanto, Simon, Adam, and Valentino, Nicholas. 1994. Does Attack Advertising Demobilize the Electorate? American Political Science Review 88, 4 (December): 829–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blais, André, Gidendil, Elisabeth, Dobrzynska, Agnieszka, Nevitte, Neil, and Nadeau, Richard. 2003. Does the Local Candidate Matter? Candidate Effects in the Canadian Election of 2000. Canadian Journal of Political Science 36, 3: 657–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burki, Shahid Javed, Perry, Guillermo E., and Dillinger, Willian R.. 1999. Beyond the Center: Decentralizing the State. Washington, DC : World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calvert, Randall L., and Ferejohn, John A.. 1983. Coattail Voting in Recent Presidential Elections. American Political Science Review 77, 2: 407–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, John M., and Shugart, Matthew S.. 1995. Incentives to Cultivate a Personal Vote: A Rank Ordering of Electoral Formulas. Electoral Studies 14: 417–39.Google Scholar
Chhibber, Pradeep, and Kollman, Ken. 2004. The Formation of National Party Systems: Federalism and Party Competition in Canada, Great Britain, India, and the United States. Princeton : Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Conaghan, Catherine. 1996. A Deficit of Democratic Authenticity: Political Linkage and the Public in Andean Polities. Studies in Comparative International Development (SCID) 31, 3: 32–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crisp, Brian F., Escobar-Lemmon, María, Jones, Bradford S., Jones, Mark P., and Taylor-Robinson, Michelle M.. 2004. Vote-Seeking Incentives and Legislative Representation in Six Presidential Democracies. Journal of Politics 66, 3: 823–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Departamento Nacional de Planeación. Unidad Administrativa Especial de Desarrollo Territorial. 1998. ¿Cómo va la descentralización? 1998. Bogotá : Departamento Nacional de Planeación.Google Scholar
Díaz, Christopher 2005 Electoral Competition in Mexico and Career Trajectories of Pri Gubernatioral Candidates, 1991–2001. Politics and Policy 33, 1: 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillinger, William, and Webb, Steven B.. 1999. Decentralization and Fiscal Management in Colombia. Policy Research Working Paper no. 2122. Washington, DC : World Bank.Google Scholar
Di Tella, Torcuato. 1997. The Transformations of Populism in Latin America. Journal of International Cooperation Studies 5, 1 (June): 47–78.Google Scholar
Domínguez, Jorge. 1997. Latin America's Crisis of Representation. Foreign Affairs 76, 1: 100–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dugas, John, Ocampo, Angélica, Orjuela, Luis Javier, and Ruiz, Germán. 2000. Diversidad y retos de la descentralización local en Colombia. America Latina Hoy 24 (April): 45–54.Google Scholar
Ferreira Rubio, Delia M. 1997. Financiamiento de partidos políticos. Buenos Aires : Ciedla.Google Scholar
Finkel, Steve, and Geer, John G.. 1998. A Spot Check: Casting Doubt on the Demobilization Hypothesis. American Journal of Political Science 43, 4: 573–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaitán Pavía, Pilar, and Ospina, Carlos Moreno. 1992. Poder local: realidad y utopia de la descentralización en Colombia. Bogotá : Tercer Mundo.Google Scholar
Geer, John G. 1998. Campaigns, Party Competition, and Political Advertising. In Politicians and Party Politics, ed. Geer, . Washington, DC : Johns Hopkins University Press. 186–217.Google Scholar
Griner, Steven, and Zovatto, Daniel. 2005. From Norms to Good Practices: A Comparative Regional Analysis of the Funding of Political Parties and Election Campaigns in Latin America. In Funding of Political Parties and Election Campaigns in the Americas, ed. Griner, and Zovatto, . San José, Costa Rica : Organization of American States/International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. 17–85.Google Scholar
Henao Hidrón, Javier. 1998. El poder municipal. Bogotá : Temis.Google Scholar
Jones, Mark P. 2002. Explaining the High Level of Party Discipline in the Argentine Congress. In Legislative Politics in Latin America, ed. Morgenstern, Scott and Nacif, Benito. New York : Cambridge University Press. 147–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Mark P. 2007. Political Parties and Party Systems in Latin America. Paper prepared for the symposium “Prospects for Democracy in Latin America,” Department of Political Science, University of North Texas, April 5–6.Google Scholar
Jones, Mark P., and Mainwaring, Scott. 2003. The Nationalization of Parties and Party Systems: An Empirical Indicator and an Application to the Americas. Party Politics 9: 139–66.Google Scholar
Krasinsky, Michael, and Milne, William. 1983. Some Evidence on the Effect of Incumbency in Canadian Elections. Canadian Journal of Political Science 16: 489–500.Google Scholar
Krasinsky, Michael, and Milne, William. 1985. Additional Evidence on the Effect of Incumbency in Canadian Elections. Canadian Journal of Political Science 18: 155–65.Google Scholar
Krasinsky, Michael, and Milne, William. 1986. The Effect of Incumbency in the 1984 Federal and 1985 Ontario Elections. Canadian Journal of Political Science 19: 337–43.Google Scholar
Langston, Joy. 1997. Why Rules Matter: the Formal Rules of Candidate Selection and Leadership Selection in the Pri, 1978–1996. Working Paper no. 58. Mexico City: CIDE, División de Estudios Políticos.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott P. 1998. Rethinking Party Systems Theory in the Third Wave of Democratization: the Importance of Party System Institutionalization. Kellogg Institute Working Paper no. 260. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott P. 1999. Rethinking Party Systems in the Third Wave of Democratization. Stanford : Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott P., and Scully, Timothy R.. 1995. Introduction: Party Systems in Latin America. In Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America, ed. Mainwaring, and Scully, . Stanford : Stanford University Press. 1–35.Google Scholar
Manor, James. 1999. The Political Economy of Democratic Decentralization. Washington, DC : World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mizrahi, Yemile. 2000. La alternancia política en Chihuahua: el regreso del PRI. In Alternancia y transición política. ¿Cómo gobierna la oposición en México? ed. Espinoza, Víctor Alejandro. México City : ColefTPlaza y Valdés. 185–206.Google Scholar
Moreno, Erika. 2005. Whither the Colombian Two-party System? an Assessment of Political Reforms and Their Limits. Electoral Studies 24, 3: 485–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, Erika, and Escobar-Lemmon, María. 2008. Mejor Solo Que Mal Acompañado: Political Entrepreneurs and List Proliferation in Colombia. In Pathways to Power: Political Recruitment and Democracy in Latin America, ed. Siavelis, Peter M. and Morgenstern, Scott. University Park : Pennsylvania State University Press. 119–42.Google Scholar
Mulgan, Richard. 2000. Accountability: an Ever-Expanding Concept? Public Administration 78, 3: 555–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickson, R. Andrew. 1995. Local Government in Latin America. Boulder : Lynne Rienner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Donnell, Guillermo A. 1994. Delegative Democracy. Journal of Democracy 5, 1: 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pachón, Mónica. 2002. El partido conservador y sus dinámicas políticas. In Degradación o cambio: evolución del sistema político colombiano, ed. Gutiérrez, Francisco. Bogotá : Editorial Norma. 79–130.Google Scholar
Peterson, George E. 1997. Decentralization in Latin America: Learning Through Experience. Washington, DC : World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Proyecto de Elites Latinoamericanas (PELA). Various years. Proyecto de Elites Latinoamericanas, 1994–2005. Salamanca : Universidad de Salamanca.Google Scholar
Raymond, Paul. 1992. The American Voter in a Nonpartisan, Urban Election. American Politics Research 20, 2 (April): 247–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuels, David J. 1999. Incentives to Cultivate a Party-Centric Vote in Candidate-Centric Electoral Systems: Evidence from Brazil. Comparative Political Studies 32, 4: 487–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schattschneider, Elmer E. 1960. The Semi-Sovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America. New York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Shugart, Matthew Soberg, and Mainwaring, Scott P.. 1997. Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America: Rethinking the Terms of the Debate. In Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America, ed. Mainwaring, and Shugart, . New York : Cambridge University Press. 12–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siavelis, Peter M. 2009. Elite-Mass Congruence, Partidocracia and the Quality of Chilean Democracy. Journal of Politics in Latin America 1, 3: 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siavelis, Peter, and Morgenstern, Scott. 2008. Political Recruitment and Candidate Selection in Latin America: A Framework for Analysis. In Pathways to Power: Political Recruitment and Democracy in Latin America, ed. Siavelis, and Morgenstern, . University Park : Pennsylvania State University Press. 3–38.Google Scholar
Stokes, Donald E., and Miller, Warren E.. 1962. Party Government and the Saliency of Congress. Public Opinion Quarterly 26, 4: 531–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Michelle M. 1992. Formal Versus Informal Incentive Structures and Legislator Behavior: Evidence from Costa Rica. Journal of Politics 54: 1053–71.Google Scholar
Taylor, Steve L. 2009. Voting amid Violence: Electoral Democracy in Colombia. Boston : Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
Willis, Eliza, da C. B. Garman, Christopher, and Haggard, Stephan. 1999. The Politics of Decentralization in Latin America. Latin American Research Review 34, 1: 7–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zovatto, Daniel, and del Castillo, Pilar. 1998. La financiación de la política en Iberoamérica. San José, Costa Rica : IIDH/CAPEL.Google Scholar