Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T00:15:30.703Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

When is “Delivering the Goods” Not Good Enough?

How Economic Disparities in Latin American Neighborhoods Shape Citizen Trust in Local Government

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 December 2015

Abby Córdova  and
Matthew L. Layton
Get access

Extract

This article develops and tests a theory to explain why perceptions of good government performance are a necessary but insufficient condition for the poor to trust their local government. The authors theorize that independent of partisan sympathies, the poor evaluate local government on the basis of government performance and the economic disparities that they observe in their neighborhood of residence. Accordingly, even if the poor hold positive perceptions of government performance, they are less likely to trust their local government when they live in a context of high economic inequality. To test their theory, the authors rely on census, public opinion, and systematic observation data collected within resident-identified neighborhood borders in each of seventy-one neighborhoods sampled from six municipalities in El Salvador. The findings are consistent with the hypotheses and indicate that economic inequality at the neighborhood level may produce a reservoir of distrust in local government among the poor. The results further highlight the political relevance of neighborhoods for the formation of citizen attitudes toward local government in the Latin American context.

Type
Research Article
Information
World Politics , Volume 68 , Issue 1 , January 2016 , pp. 74 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 2015 

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

Adato, Michelle, and Hoddinott, John. 2010. “Conditional Cash Transfer Programs: A ‘Magic Bullet’?” In Adato, Michelle and Hoddinott, John, eds., Conditional Cash Transfers in Latin America. Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, Christopher J., Blais, André, Bowler, Shaun, Donovan, Todd, and Lishaug, Ola. 2005. Losers’ Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azevedo, Viviane, and Robles, Marcos. 2013. “Multidimensional Targeting: Identifying Beneficiaries of Conditional Cash Transfer Programs.” Social Indicators Research 112, no. 2: 447–75.Google Scholar
Baker, Andy, Ames, Barry, and Renno, Lucio R.. 2006. “Social Context and Campaign Volatility in New Democracies: Networks and Neighborhoods in Brazil's 2002 Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 50, no. 2: 382–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardhan, Pranab. 1996. “Efficiency, Equity, and Poverty Alleviation in Less Developed Countries.” Economic Journal 106, no. 438: 1344–56.Google Scholar
Bardhan, Pranab K., and Mookherjee, Dilip. 2006. Decentralization and Local Governance in Developing Countries: A Comparative Perspective. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Birdsall, Nancy, Lustig, Nora, and McLeod, Darryl. 2011. “Declining Inequality in Latin America: Some Economics, Some Politics.” Working Paper no. 251. Washington, D.C.: Center for Global Development.Google Scholar
Booth, John A., and Seligson, Mitchell A.. 2009. The Legitimacy Puzzle in Latin America: Democracy and Political Support in Eight Nations. New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bratton, Michael. 2012. “Citizen Perceptions of Local Government Responsiveness in Sub-Saharan Africa.” World Development 40, no. 3: 516–27.Google Scholar
Brehm, John, and Rahn, Wendy. 1997. “Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital.” American Journal of Political Science 41, no. 3: 999–1023.Google Scholar
Campbell, Tim. 2003. The Quiet Revolution: Decentralization and the Rise of Political Participation in Latin American Cities. Pitt Latin American Series. Pittsburgh, Pa.: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Canache, Damarys. 1996. “Looking Out My Back Door: The Neighborhood Context and Perceptions of Relative Deprivation.” Political Research Quarterly 49, no. 3: 547–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canel, Eduardo. 2010. Barrio Democracy in Latin America: Participatory Decentralization and Community Activism in Montevideo. University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Cleary, Matthew R., and Stokes, Susan Carol. 2006. Democracy and the Culture of Skepticism: Political Trust in Argentina and Mexico. New York, N.Y.: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Cleary, Matthew R., and Stokes, Susan Carol. 2009. “Trust and Democracy in Comparative Perspective.” In Cook, Karen S., Levi, Margaret, and Hardin, Russell, eds., Whom Can We Trust? How Groups, Networks, and Institutions Make Trust Possible. New York, N.Y.: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Cordóva, Abby, and Layton, Matthew L.. 2015. Supplementary material. At http://dx.doi.org.10.1017/S0043887115000441.Google Scholar
Eaton, Kent. 2012. “Decentralization and Federalism.” In Kingstone, Peter and Yashar, Deborah J., eds., Routledge Handbook of Latin American Politics. New York, N.Y.: Routledge.Google Scholar
Elbers, Chris, Lanjouw, Peter, Mistiaen, Johan, Özler, Berk, and Simler, Kenneth R.. 2004. “On the Unequal Inequality of Poor Communities.” World Bank Economic Review 18, no. 3: 401–21.Google Scholar
Elbers, Chris, Lanjouw, Peter, Mistiaen, Johan, Özler, Berk, and Simler, Kenneth R.. 2005. “Are Neighbours Equal? Estimating Local Inequality in Three Developing Countries.” In Ravi Kanbur, S. M. and Venables, Anthony, eds., Spatial Inequality and Development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Espinal, Rosario, Hartlyn, Jonathan, and Kelly, Jana Morgan. 2006. “Performance Still Matters. Explaining Trust in Government in the Dominican Republic.” Comparative Political Studies 39, no. 2: 200–23.Google Scholar
Faguet, Jean-Paul. 2012. Decentralization and Popular Democracy: Governance from Below in Bolivia. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and Hill, Jennifer. 2007. Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models. Analytical Methods for Social Research. New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Graham, Carol, and Felton, Andrew. 2005. “Inequality and Happiness: Insights from Latin America.” Journal of Economic Inequality 4, no. 1: 107–22.Google Scholar
Gurr, Ted Robert. 1970. Why Men Rebel. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hetherington, Marc J. 1998. “The Political Relevance of Political Trust.” American Political Science Review 92, no. 4: 791–808.Google Scholar
Hetherington, Marc J.. 2005. Why Trust Matters: Declining Political Trust and the Demise of American Liberalism. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hibbing, John R., and Theiss-Morse, Elizabeth. 1995. Congress as Public Enemy: Public Attitudes toward American Political Institutions. Cambridge Studies in Political Psychology and Public Opinion. New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hibbing, John R., and Theiss-Morse, Elizabeth. 2002. Stealth Democracy: Americans' Beliefs about How Government Should Work. New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hiskey, Jonathan T., and Bowler, Shaun. 2005. “Local Context and Democratization in Mexico.” American Journal of Political Science 49, no. 1: 57–71.Google Scholar
Huber, Evelyne, and Stephens, John D.. 2012. Democracy and the Left: Social Policy and Inequality in Latin America. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Huckfeldt, R. Robert. 1986. Politics in Context: Assimilation and Conflict in Urban Neighborhoods. New York, N.Y.: Agathon Press.Google Scholar
Huckfeldt, R. Robert, and Sprague, John D.. 1995. Citizens, Politics, and Social Communication: Information and Influence in an Election Campaign. Cambridge Studies in Political Psychology and Public Opinion. New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jamal, Amaney, and Nooruddin, Irfan. 2010. “The Democratic Utility of Trust: A Cross-National Analysis.” Journal of Politics 72, no. 1: 45–59.Google Scholar
Kam, Cindy. 2005. “Who Toes the Party Line? Cues, Values, and Individual Differences.” Political Behavior 27, no. 2: 163–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kubal, Mary Rose. 2006. “Contradictions and Constraints in Chile's Health Care and Education Decentralization.” Latin American Politics and Society 48, no. 4: 105–35.Google Scholar
Labonne, Julien, and Chase, Robert S.. 2009. “Who Is at the Wheel When Communities Drive Development? Evidence from the Philippines.” World Development 37, no. 1: 219–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latin America Public Opinion Project. 2015. AmericasBarometer Survey 2010. Nashville, Tenn.: Vanderbilt University. At http://www.vanderbilt.edu/lapop/, accessed June 24, 2015.Google Scholar
Levi, Margaret. 1988. Of Rule and Revenue. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Levi, Margaret. 1998. “A State of Trust.” In Braithwaite, V. A. and Levi, Margaret, eds., Trust and Governance. New York, N.Y.: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Levi, Margaret, and Stoker, Laura. 2000. “Political Trust and Trustworthiness.” Annual Review of Political Science 3:475–507.Google Scholar
López-Calva, Luis Felipe, and Lustig, Nora. 2010. Declining Inequality in Latin America: A Decade of Progress? Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Lustig, Nora. 1995. Coping with Austerity: Poverty and Inequality in Latin America. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Luttmer, Erzo F. P. 2005. “Neighbors as Negatives: Relative Earnings and Well-Being.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 120, no. 3: 963–1002.Google Scholar
Machado, Fabiana. 2013. “Decentralization and Accountability: The Curse of Local Underdevelopment.” Working Paper no. 397. Washington, D.C.: Inter-American Development Bank.Google Scholar
McKenzie, David J. 2005. “Measuring Inequality with Asset Indicators.” Journal of Population Economics 18, no. 2: 229–60.Google Scholar
Méndez, Floribel, and Trejos, Juan Diego. 2004. “Costa Rica: Un Mapa De Carencias Críticas Para El Año 2000” [Costa Rica: A map of critical needs for the year 2000]. In Bixby, Luis Rosero, ed., Costa Rica a La Luz Del Censo Del 2000 [Costa Rica in light of the 2000 census]. San José, Costa Rica: Centro Centroaméricano de Población de la Universidad de Costa Rica.Google Scholar
Mishler, William, and Rose, Richard. 2001. “What Are the Origins of Political Trust?” Comparative Political Studies 34, no. 1: 30–62.Google Scholar
Montalvo, Daniel. 2010. “Understanding Trust in Municipal Governments.” AmericasBarometer Insights Series, no. 35. Nashville, Tenn.: Latin American Public Opinion Project, Vanderbilt University. At http://www.vanderbilt.edu/lapop/insights/I0835en.pdf, accessed March 31, 2015.Google Scholar
Putnam, Robert D. 1993. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rahn, Wendy M., and Rudolph, Thomas J.. 2002. “Trust in Local Governments.” In Norrander, Barbara and Wilcox, Clyde, eds., Understanding Public Opinion. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Rahn, Wendy M., and Thomas J., Rudolph. 2005. “A Tale of Political Trust in American Cities.” Public Opinion Quarterly 69, no. 4: 530–60.Google Scholar
Rothstein, Bo, and Uslaner, Eric M.. 2005. “All for All: Equality, Corruption, and Social Trust.” World Politics 58, no. 1: 41–72.Google Scholar
Sampson, Robert J., and Raudenbush, Stephen W.. 1999. “Systematic Social Observation of Public Spaces: A New Look at Disorder in Urban Neighborhoods.” American Journal of Sociology 105, no. 3: 603–51.Google Scholar
Sampson, Robert J., Raudenbush, Stephen W., and Earls, Felton. 1997. “Neighborhoods and Violent Crime: A Multilevel Study of Collective Efficacy.” Science 277, no. 5328:918–24.Google Scholar
Scholz, John T., and Lubell, Mark. 1998. “Trust and Taxpaying: Testing the Heuristic Approach to Collective Action.” American Journal of Political Science 42, no. 2: 398–417.Google Scholar
Selee, Andrew. 2004. “Exploring the Link between Decentralization and Democratic Governance.” In Tulchin, Joseph S. and Selee, Andrew, eds., Decentralization and Democratic Governance in Latin America. Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center.Google Scholar
Slothuus, Rune, and de Vreese, Claes H.. 2010. “Political Parties, Motivated Reasoning, and Issue Framing Effects.” Journal of Politics 72, no. 3:630–45.Google Scholar
Taber, Charles S., and Lodge, Milton. 2006. “Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs.” American Journal of Political Science 50, no. 3: 755–69.Google Scholar
Torres, Raúl, and López, Oscar H.. 2008. Mecanismos de participación ciudadana y transparencia en la gestión municipal[Mechanisms for citizen participation and transparency in municipal administration]. San Salvador, El Salvador: Fundación Nacional para el Desarrollo.Google Scholar
Tost, Leigh Plunkett, and Lind, Allan. 2010. “Sounding the Alarm: Moving from System Justification to System Condemnation in the Justice Judgment Process.” In Mannix, Elizabeth, Neale, Margaret, and Mullen, Elizabeth, eds., Fairness and Groups. Vol. 13, Research on Managing Groups and Teams. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom. 2001. “The Psychology of Public Dissatisfaction with Government.” In Hibbing, John R. and Theiss-Morse, Elizabeth, eds., What Is It about Government that Americans Dislike? Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom, and van der Toorn, Jojanneke. 2013. “Social Justice.” In Huddy, Leonie, Sears, David O., and Levy, Jack S., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. 2013. Global Study on Homicide. Vienna, Austria: UNODC.Google Scholar
Uslaner, Eric. 2002. The Moral Foundations of Trust. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Ryzin, Gregg. 2011. Outcomes, Process, and Trust in Civil Servants. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory , no. 4: 745–60.Google Scholar
Van den Bos, Kees, Allan Lind, E., Wilke, Henk A. M.. 1998. “When Do We Need Procedural Fairness?The Role of Trust in Authority.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75, no. 6: 1449–58.Google Scholar
Van den Bos, Kees, Allan Lind, E., Wilke, Henk A. M.. 2001. “The Psychology of Procedural and Distributive Justice Viewed from the Perspective of Fairness Heuristic Theory.” In Cropanzano, Russell, ed., Justice in the Workplace: From Theory to Practice. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Van de Walle, Steven, and Bouckaert, Geert. 2003. “Public Service Performance and Trust in Government: The Problem of Causality.” International Journal of Public Administration 29, 8-9: 891–913.Google Scholar
Wampler, Brian. 2007. Participatory Budgeting in Brazil: Contestation, Cooperation, and Accountability. University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Wilder, Margaret, and Romero, Patricia. 2006. “Paradoxes of Decentralization: Water Reform and Social Implications in Mexico.” World Development 34, no. 11: 1977–95.Google Scholar
Wolak, Jennifer, and Palus, Christine Kelleher. 2010. “The Dynamics of Public Confidence in U.S. State and Local Government.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 10, no. 4: 421–45.Google Scholar
Wong, Cara, Bowers, Jake, Williams, Tarah, and Simmons, Katherine Drake. 2012. “Bringing the Person Back In: Boundaries, Perceptions, and the Measurement of Racial Context.” Journal of Politics 74, no. 4: 1153–70.Google Scholar
Yang, Kaifeng, and Holzer, Marc. 2006. “The Performance-Trust Link: Implications for Performance Measurement.” Public Administration Review 66, no. 1: 114–26.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Córdova and Layton Supplementary Material

Tables

Download Córdova and Layton Supplementary Material(PDF)
PDF 358.6 KB