Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T03:16:14.440Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Dilemmas of Democracy in the Open Economy: Lessons from Latin America

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2011

Marcus J. Kurtz
Marcus J. Kurtz
Affiliation:
Ohio State University
Get access

Abstract

Scholars have usually understood the problem of democratic consolidation in terms of the creation of mechanisms that make possible the avoidance of populist excesses, polarized conflicts, or authoritarian corporatist inclusion that undermined free politics in much of postwar Latin America. This article makes the case that, under contemporary liberal economic conditions, the nature of the challenge for democratization has changed in important ways. Earlier problems of polarization had their roots in the long-present statist patterns of economic organization. By contrast, under free-market conditions, democratic consolidation faces a largely distinct set of challenges: the underarticulation of societal interests, pervasive social atomization, and socially uneven political quiescence founded in collective action problems. These can combine to undermine the efficacy of democratic representation and, consequently, regime legitimacy. The article utilizes data from the Latin American region since the 1970s on development, economic reform, and individual and collective political participation to show the effects of a changing state-economy relationship on the consolidation of democratic politics.

Type
Research Article
Information
World Politics , Volume 56 , Issue 2 , January 2004 , pp. 262 - 302
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 2004

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

1 Classic studies of such collapses include Valenzuela, Arturo, The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979)Google Scholar; Collier, David, ed., The New Authoritarianism in Latin America (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979)Google Scholar; and O'Donnell, Guillermo, Modernization and Bureaucratic Authoritarianism: Studies in South American Politics (Berkeley: Institute of Internationa Studies Press, 1973)Google Scholar.

2 The following have focused on the importance of pacts and elite political bargains in stabilizing democratic regimes: Gunther, Richard, Puhle, Hans-Jürgen, and Diamandouros, P. Nikiforos, “Introduction,” in Gunther, Richard, Diamandouros, P. Nikiforos, and Puhle, Hans-Jürgen, eds., The Politics of Democratic Consolidation: Southern Europe in Comparative Perspective (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995)Google Scholar; and Encarnacion, Omar, “Labor and Pacted Democracy: Post-Franco Spain in Comparative Perspective,” Comparative Politics 33 (April 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Others have emphasized institutional design and its effect of the structure of political conflict and the efficacy of representation; see, for example, Siavelis, Peter, The President and Congress in Postauthoritarian Chile: Institutional Constraints to Democratic Consolidation (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2000)Google Scholar; Mainwaring, Scott and Valenzuela, Arturo, Politics, Society, and Democracy: Latin America (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1998)Google Scholar; and Linz, Juan and Valenzuela, Arturo, The Failure of Presidential Democracy: Comparative Perspectives (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994)Google Scholar. And yet others investigate the role that the structure of political institutions have in driving severe ethnic conflict in democratic contexts; see Saideman, Stephen, Lanoue, David, Campenni, Michael, and Stanton, Samuel, “Democratization, Institutions, and Ethnic Conflict: A Pooled Time-Series Analysis, 1985–1998,” Comparative Political Studies 35 (February 2002)Google Scholar. For an investigation of the possibility that particular electoral systems may contribute to regime instability through the incentives they create for parties, see Siavelis, Peter and Valenzuela, Arturo, “Electoral Engineering and Democratic Stability: The Legacy of Authoritarian Rule in Chile,” in Lijphart, Arend and Waisman, Carlos, eds., Institutional Design in New Democracies: Eastern Europe and Latin America (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1996)Google Scholar. Mitchell Seligson and Ana Carrion emphasize instead the role of mass attitudes in making democratic breakdowns likely; see , Seligson and , Carrion, “Political Support, Political Skepticism, and Political Stability in New Democracies: An Examination of Mass Support for Coups D'Etat in Peru,” Comparative Political Studies 35 (February 2002)Google Scholar. Finally, for Adam Przeworski, the institutionalization of economic conflict—that is, its containment within moderate and predictable boundaries—is a key issue for the consolidation of democracy; see , Przeworski, “The Games of Transition,” in Mainwaring, Scott, O'Donnell, Guillermo, and Valenzuela, J. Samuel, eds., Issues in Democratic Consolidation: The New South American Democracies in Comparative Perspective (Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1992), 126–27Google Scholar.

3 Weyland, Kurt, “Neoliberal Populism in Latin America and Eastern Europe,” Comparative Politics 31 (July 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Roberts, Kenneth, Deepening Democracy: The Modern Left and Social Movements in Chile and Peru (Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press, 1998)Google Scholar; Collier, David and Levitsky, Steven, “Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research,” World Politics 49 (April 1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hagopian, Frances, Traditional Politics and Regime Change in Brazil (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; O'Donnell, Guillermo and Llosa, Mario Vargas, “Privatization Is Not Democratization,” New Perspectives Quarterly 10 (Fall 1996)Google Scholar; O'Donnell, Guillermo, “Illusions about Consolidation,” Journal of Democracy 7 (January 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Schmitter, Philippe, “The Irony of Modern Democracy and Efforts to Improve Its Practice,” Politics and Society 20 (December 1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 The point here is not that there is no response by society but, rather, that it is far weaker than might be anticipated based on past experience and that in general it does not threaten the democratic regime. Protest is, however, occasionally threatening to the political fortunes of particular incumbent officials or political parties. The recent turmoil in Argentina is a case in point: while living standards have been reduced to their lowest levels in fifty years, the resultant political protests have not shaken the democratic regime, even if they have shaken incumbent presidents. During the statist era, by contrast, far less severe economic downturns repeatedly sparked political conflicts that destroyed democracy.

5 Others have noted this same surprising outcome. See Weyland, Kurt, “The Political Fate of Market Reform in Latin America, Africa, and Eastern Europe,” International Studies Quarterly 42 (December 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Stokes, Susan, ed., Public Support for Market Reforms in New Democracies (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Collier and Levitsky (fn. 3); Dahl, Robert, Democracy and Its Critics (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), 219Google Scholar.

7 Doorenspleet, Renske, “Reassessing the Three Waves of Democratization,” World Politics 52 (April 2000), 387CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Oxhorn, Philip and Ducatenzeiler, Graciela, eds., What Kind of Democracy? What Kind of Market? Latin America in the Age of Neoliberalism (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1998)Google Scholar, chap. 1; Schmitter (fn. 3).

9 Austen-Smith, David, “Allocating Access for Information and Contributions,” Journal of Law, Economics, and Oragnization 14 (October 1998), 277–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 McKelvey, Richard and Ordeshook, Peter, “Information, Electoral Equilibria, and the Democratic Ideal,” Journal of Politics 48 (November 1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Potters, Jan and Sloof, Randolph, “Interest Groups: A Survey of Empirical Models That Try to Assess Their Influence,” European Journal of Political Economy 12 (November 1996), 426–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Manin, Bernard, Przeworski, Adam, and Stokes, Susan, “Elections and Representation,” in Przeworski, Adam, Stokes, Susan, and Manin, Bernard, eds., Democracy, Accountability, and Representation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 50Google Scholar; Jose Antonio Cheibub and Adam Przeworski, “Democracy, Elections, and Accountability for Economic Outcomes,” also in Przeworski, Stokes, and Manin (p. 237).

13 Delmer Dunn, “Mixing Elected and Nonelected Officials in Democratic Policy Making: Fundamentals of Accountability and Representation,” in Przeworski, Stokes, and Manin (fn. 12), 334.

14 Mueller, John, “Democracy and Ralph's Pretty Good Grocery: Elections, Equality, and the Minimal Human Being,” American Journal of Political Science 36 (November 1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 Lindblom, Charles, “The Market as Prison,” Journal of Politics 44 (May 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, Politics and Markets: The World's Political Economic Systems (New York: Basic Books, 1977)Google Scholar; Offe, Claus and Wiesenthal, Helmut, “Two Logics of Collective Action: Theoretical Notes on Social Class and Organizational Form,” in Zeitlin, Maurice, ed., Political Power and Social Theory (Greenwich: JAJ Press, 1980)Google Scholar.

16 Schmitter (fn. 3). On the socially uneven effects of economic reform on labor, see Oxhorn and Ducatenzeiler (fn. 8); and Petras, James and Leiva, Fernando Igancio, Democracy and Poverty in Chile: The Limits to Electoral Politics (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1994)Google Scholar. For small industry, see Shadlen, Kenneth, “Orphaned by Democracy: Small Industry in Contemporary Mexico,” Comparative Politics 35 (January 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For peasants, see Kurtz, Marcus, “Free Markets and Democratic Consolidation in Chile: The National Politics of Rural Transformation,” Politics and Society 27 (June 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 For a discussion of the former, see Crisp, Brian, “Lessons from Economic Reform in the Venezuelan Democracy,” Latin American Research Review 33 (1998)Google Scholar; for the latter, see Dornbusch, Rudiger and Edwards, Sebastian, eds., The Macroeconomics of Populism in Latin America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Valenzuela (fn. 1).

18 Cardoso, Fernando and Faletto, Enzo, Dependency and Development in Latin America, trans. Urquidi, Marjory Mattingly (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979)Google Scholar; O'Donnell (fn. 1); Collier (fh. 1).

19 Friedrich, Carl and Brzezinski, Zbigniew K., Totalitarian Dictatorship andAutocracy (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1956)Google Scholar.

20 Krueger, Anne, “The Political Economy of the Rent-Seeking Society,” American Economic Review 64 (June 1974)Google Scholar; and Olson, Mancur, The Rise and Decline of Nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation, and Social Rigidities (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982)Google Scholar.

21 Crisp (fn. 17).

22 Hirschman, Albert, “The Political Economy of Import-Substituting Industrialization in Latin America,” Quarterly Journal of Economics 82 (February 1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Robert Kaufman and Barbara Stallings, “The Political Economy of Latin American Populism,” in Dornbusch and Edwards (fn. 17), 20–21.

23 Eliana Cardoso and Ann Helwege, “Populism, Profligacy, and Redistribution,” in Dornbusch and Edwards (fn. 17); Waterbury, John, “The Long Gestation and Brief Triumph of Import-Substituting Industrialization,” World Development 27 (February 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 See Huntingdon, Samuel, Political Order in Changing Societies (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969)Google Scholar. By way of example, the central criticism of the highly statist pre-1973 Chilean democratic regime was that it was too inclusive. Politics was pervaded by an enormous number of conflicting interests, with the result that intense and often contradictory demands were placed on the state. See Büchi, Hernán, La transformación económica de Chile: Del estatismo a la libertad económica (Barcelona: Group Editorial Norma, 1993)Google Scholar; and Piñera, José, La revolución laboral en Chile (Santiago, Chile: ZigZag, 1990)Google Scholar. Even in the Mexican case, where societal organization along corporatist lines had since the 1940s been seen as a mechanism of social control, frequent outbursts of political demand making recurred both within and without the official apparatus of the state and party during this period. See Hellman, Judith Adler, Mexico in Crisis (New York: Holmes and Meier, 1983)Google Scholar. But merely because free-market policies undermine the ability of states to pursue these forms of social control does not imply that the reforms are democratizing in and of themselves.

25 Domínguez, Jorge, “Free Politics and Free Markets in Latin America,” Journal of Democracy 9 (October 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Huntington, Samuel, “After Twenty Years: The Future of the Third Wave,” Journal of Democracy 8 (October 1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26 Sheahan, John, Patterns ofDevelopment in Latin America: Poverty, Repression, and Economic Strategy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987)Google Scholar; Petras and Leiva (fn. 16); Lustig, Nora, Coping with Austerity: Poverty and Inequality in Latin America (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1995)Google Scholar.

27 Piñera(fn.24).

28 Houtzager, Peter and Kurtz, Marcus, “The Institutional Roots of Popular Mobilization: State Transformation and Rural Politics in Brazil and Chile,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 42 (April 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kurtz (fn. 16).

29 Barham, Bradford, Clark, Mary, Katz, Elizabeth, and Schurman, Rachel, “Nontraditional Agricultural Exports in Latin America,” Latin American Research Review 27, no. 2 (1992), 53Google Scholar.

30 Roberts, Kenneth, “Social Inequalities without Class Cleavages in Latin America's Neoliberal Era,” Studies in Comparative International Development 36 (Winter 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31 Lüders, Rolf, “Did Privatization Raise Enterprise Efficiency in Chile,” in Glade, William, ed., Bigger Economies, Smaller Governments: The Role of Privatization in Latin America (Boulder, Colo.: West-view, 1996), 222Google Scholar.

32 Banco Central de Chile, Indicadores económicos y sociales, 1960–1988 (Santiago: Banco Central de Chile, 1989), 22Google Scholar.

33 Instituto Nacional de Estadistica, Panorama económico y social: Las regiones de Chile, 1990–1999 (Santiago: INE, 2001), 258Google Scholar.

34 International Labor Organization, LABORSTA database (www.ilo.org/public/english/support/lib/dblist.htm, last accessed September 2003).

35 World Bank, World Development Indicators 2003 CD/ROM.

36 International Labor Organization (fn. 34).

37 Instituto de Capacitación e Investigación en Reforma Agraria (ICIRA), Análhis de la situación de los asignatarios de tierras a junto de 1978 (Santiago: Ministerio de Agricultura, 1979)Google Scholar.

38 Cereceda, Luz Eugenia and Dahse, Fernando, Dos décadas de cambios en el agro chileno (Santiago: Instituto de Sociologia de la Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, 1980)Google Scholar; World Bank, Chile: Estrategia para elevar la competitividad agrícola y aliviar la pobreza rural (Washington, D.C.: IBRD, 1995)Google Scholar.

39 Calculated from Patricia Provoste and Cantoni, Wilson, Descripción numérica de la organization sindical chilena, 1968–1969 (Santiago: FEES, 1971)Google Scholar; Ministerio de Trabajo y Previsión Social, “Data on Agricultural Unionization” (Manuscript, Ministerio de Trabajo, 1992); and Instituto Nacional de Estadistica, Censo de población y vivienda: Resultados generates, Chile 1992 (Santiago: INE, 1993)Google Scholar.

40 Harvey, Neil, “Impact of Reforms to Article 27 on Chiapas: Peasant Resistance in the Neoliberal Public Sphere,” in Randall, Laura, ed., Reforming Mexico's Agrarian Reform (Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe, 1996)Google Scholar.

41 For a state-level analysis of Mexican rural politics, see Snyder, Richard, Politics after Neoliberalism: Reregulation in Mexico (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

42 It is notable that the most threatening recent case of polarized mobilization occurred in Hugo Chavez's Venezuela—the most statist political economy on the South American continent.

43 Lustig(fn.26).

44 Banco Central de Chile, Indicadores económicos — Empleo y desocupación (Data are calculated by the University of Chile, http://sie.aphcaciones.cl/basededatoseconomicos/900base.asp?usuIdioma=E, accessed May 29,2002).

45 Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos, Tasa de desocupación abierta en los principales aglomerados and Tasa de desempleo, October 2001 (http://www.indec.mecon.ar/default.htm, accessed May 27, 2002).

46 The “before” period is defined as the five years prior to the achievement of a level of liberalization equivalent to the midpoint for the population of countries (0.587). Consolidation is measured as the five years after the reform index passes the level of 0.7 (on a [0,1] interval). In no case did a country rum away from liberalization once this level was achieved. Data on liberalization are from Morley, Samuel, Machado, Roberto, and Pettinato, Stefano, “Indexes of Structural Reform in Latin America,” Serie Reformas Económicas 12 (Santiago: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, 1999)Google Scholar.

47 Organización Internacional del Trabajo, Panorama laboral (Lima: Oficina Regional para las Américas, 2000)Google Scholar, chap. 2.

48 Przeworski, Adam, Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

49 Williamson, John, “In Search of a Manual for Technopols,” in Williamson, John, ed., The Political Economy of Policy Reform (Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics, 1994)Google Scholar.

50 Haggard, Stephan and Kaufman, Robert, “Economic Adjustment in New Democracies,” in Nelson, Joan, ed., Fragile Coalitions: The Politics of Economic Adjustment (New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books, 1989), 74Google Scholar.

51 Hellman, Joel S., “Winners Take All: The Politics of Partial Reform in Postcommunist Transitions,” World Politics 50 (January 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

52 Rodrik, Dani, Has Globalization Gone Too Far? (Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics, 1997)Google Scholar.

53 Haggard, Stephan and Kaufman, Robert, The Political Economy of Democratic Transitions (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995), 334Google Scholar.

54 Ibid., chap. 10.

55 Linz and Valenzuela (fn. 2).

56 Bresser-Pereira, Luiz Carlos, Maravall, José María, and Przeworski, Adam, Economic Reforms in New Democracies :A Social-Democratic Approach (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 199Google Scholar.

57 Geddes, Barbara, “The Politics of Economic Liberalization,” Latin American Research Review 30 (1995), 205Google Scholar.

58 I do not contend that these data are perfect measures of the actual incidence of strikes. At least in Mexico the requirements for the initiation of a strike are complex, and legal approval is frequently blocked by the authorities. Nevertheless, I see no reason why underreporting or strike repression would be correlated with time period or level of economic liberalization. Given this, the trends in measured strike activity across time provide useful information.

59 Chile is the exception here, since most liberalization was undertaken principally between 1975 and 1979, a period during which all labor movement activity was illegal and savagely repressed.

60 Kurtz, Marcus, Free Market Democracy and the Chilean and Mexican Countryside (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

61 The data are taken from the dataset used by Mike Alvarez, Jose Antonio Cheibub, Fernando Limongi, and Adam Przeworski [ACLP], ACLP Political and Economic Database Codebook (Codebook and data set are available online at http://www.ssc.upenn.edu/~cheibub/data/Default.htm, accessed March, 2002).

62 Long, J. Scott, Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables (Thousand Oaks Calif.: Sage Publications, 1997)Google Scholar. All the results in Table 5 were generated using Stata 8's cross-sectional, time-series negative binomial estimator (xtnbreg). In the estimation, the dispersion parameter was allowed to vary randomly across countries, and country dummy variables were included to account for potential unmeasured characteristics of each country that could affect the parameter estimates. As a check on the robustness of the results, parallel models were estimated without the inclusion country dummy variables. These analyses made clear that the results in Table 5 are not driven by the presence of the dummy variables; the same patterns emerge in both sets of analyses, and indeed the robustness check was often more supportive of the liberalization-quiescence hypothesis. The data used in this analysis will be available at the ICPSR website.

63 The control for size of the urban sector is included in model 1b since the measure of protest—demonstrations—is likely to be urban biased. This is true because reporting of urban protests is more likely and because the organization of collective action is in general much less difficult in such settings.

64 Radcliff, Benjamin and Davis, Patricia, “Labor Organization and Electoral Participation in Industrial Democracies,” American Journal of Political Science 44 (January 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gray, Mark and Caul, Miki, “Declining Voter Turnout in Advanced Industrial Democracies, 1950 to 1997: The Effects of Group Mobilization,” Comparative Political Studies 33 (November 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

65 By “basically open” I mean all elections occurring in countries coded in the Polity IV data set as minimally free, achieving a score on the [-10,10] combined polity score ≥ 0. The data are described in Marshall, Monty and Jaggers, Keith, Polity IV Project: Dataset Users Manual (College Park, Md.: Center for International Development and Conflict Management, 2000)Google Scholar.

66 Measures of compulsory voting and these dummy variables could not both be included because the former is a linear combination of the latter. Nevertheless, the effects of compulsory voting laws should be represented in the dummy-variable coefficients, alongside the other country-specific effects.

67 For a selection model of market-oriented pension reform, see Brooks, Sarah M., “Social Protection and Economic Integration: The Politics of Pension Reform in an Era of Capital Mobility,” Comparative Political Studies 35 (June 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

68 Polanyi, Karl, The Great Transformation (Boston: Beacon Press, 1944)Google Scholar.