Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-59b7f5684b-frvt8 Total loading time: 0.765 Render date: 2022-09-25T12:32:38.006Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": false, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

Challenge or Consent? Understanding Losers’ Reactions in Mass Elections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 February 2016

Abstract

The conditions under which losers are willing to challenge the results of elections remain an open question. Using data from the Electoral Integrity Project for 66 democratic and non-democratic countries in 2012 and 2013, we measure how parties or candidates react once votes have been cast and one of them is declared the winner. Do they accept or challenge the results? This measure allows us to examine the causal mechanisms that account for the self-enforcing nature of democracies. Our findings show that losers’ consent increases with free and fair elections and in more economically developed countries, while income inequality is not relevant. Additionally, the impact of free and fair elections is particularly important in more economically developed countries.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s). Published by Government and Opposition Limited and Cambridge University Press 2016 

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.)

Footnotes

*

Ignacio Lago is Associate Professor of Political Science at Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona. Contact email: ignacio.lago@upf.edu.

Ferran Martinez i Coma is a Research Associate in the Department of Government and International Relations at the University of Sydney. Contact email: ferran.martinezcoma@sydney.edu.au.

References

REFERENCES

Acemoglu, D. and Robinson, J.A. (2006), Economic Origins of Dictatorships and Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Alesina, A. and Spolaore, E. (2003), The Size of Countries (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).Google Scholar
Amnesty International. (2013), ‘Turkmenistan: An “Era of Happiness” or More of the Same Repression?’, 12 December, www.amnesty.org/en/documents/EUR61/005/2013/en/.Google Scholar
Anderson, C.J., Blais, A., Bowler, S., Donovan, T. and Listhaug, O. (2005), Losers’ Consent. Elections and Democratic Legitimacy (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BBC (2013), ‘Rights Groups Criticise Turkmenistan Elections’, BBC News, 13 December, www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-25362792.Google Scholar
Boix, C. (2003), Democracy and Redistribution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chacón, M., Robinson, J.A. and Torvik, R. (2011), ‘Why is Democracy an Equilibrium? Theory and Evidence from Colombia’s La Violencia’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 55: 366396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chernykh, S. (2014), ‘When Do Political Parties Protest Elections Results?’, Comparative Political Studies, 47: 13591383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diamond, L. (1999), Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press).Google Scholar
Ellsworth, B. (2013), ‘Analysis: Venezuela’s Capriles Faces Tough Battle to Challenge Election’, Reuters, 18 April, www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/18/us-venezuela-election-capriles-idUSBRE93H10P20130418.Google Scholar
Fearon, J. (2011), ‘Self-enforcing Democracy’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126: 16611708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freedom House (2015), ‘Freedom in the World’, www.freedomhouse.org/report-types/freedom-world#.UyFA0PmSxic.Google Scholar
Gasiorowski, M.J. and Power, T. (1998), ‘The Structural Determinants of Democratic Consolidation: Evidence from the Third World’, Comparative Political Studies, 31: 740771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gandhi, J. (2008), Political Institutions under Dictatorship (New York: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gandhi, J. and Lust-Okar, E. (2009), ‘Elections under Authoritarianism’, Annual Review of Political Science, 12: 403422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gurt, M. (2013), ‘No Whiff of Dissent in Turkmenistan’s First Multi-party Vote’, Reuters, 15 December, http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/12/15/uk-turkmenistan-election-idUKBRE9BE06I20131215.Google Scholar
Hyde, S. and Marinov, N. (2014), ‘Information and Self-Enforcing Democracy: The Role of International Election Observation’, International Organization, 68: 329359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kindzeka, M.E. (2013), ‘Cameroon Opposition Says Biya Manipulating Elections’, Voice of America News, 15 August, www.voanews.com/content/cameroon-opposition-says-biya-manipulating-elections/1730632.html.Google Scholar
Lindberg, S.I. (2006), ‘The Surprising Significance of African Elections’, Journal of Democratization, 17: 139151.Google Scholar
Lindberg, S.I (2009), ‘A Theory of Elections as a Mode of Transition’, in S.I. Lindberg (ed.), Democratization by Elections: A New Mode of Transition’ (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press): 314341.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, S. and Pérez-Liñán, A. (2013), ‘Lessons from Latin America: Democratic Breakdown and Survival’, Journal of Democracy, 24: 123137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinez i Coma, F. and van Ham, C. (2015), ‘Can Experts Judge Elections? Testing the Validity of Expert Judgments for Measuring Election Integrity’, European Journal of Political Research, 54: 305325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musa, T. (2013), ‘Biya Keeps Grip on Cameroon with Landslide Vote Win’, Reuters, 17 October, www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/17/cameroon-election-idUSL6N0I733F20131017.Google Scholar
Nadeau, R. and Blais, A. (1993), ‘Accepting the Election Outcome: The Effect on Participation on Losers’ Consent’, British Journal of Political Science, 23: 553563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, P. (2013), ‘Does the World Agree about Standards of Electoral Integrity? Evidence for the Diffusion of Global Norms’, Electoral Studies, 32: 576588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, P., Frank, R.W. and Martinez i Coma, F. (2013), ‘Evaluating the Quality of Elections’, Journal of Democracy, 24: 124135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, P., Frank, R.W. and Martinez i Coma, F. (2014), The Expert Survey of Perceptions of Electoral Integrity, Release 2, (PEI_2). February 2014, https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/24781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, P., Frank, R.W. and Martinez i Coma, F. (2015), Contentious Elections (New York: Routledge).Google Scholar
ODIHR (Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights) (2013), Turkmenistan Parliamentary Elections, OSCE/ODIHR Needs Assessment Mission Report, www.osce.org/odihr/elections/turkmenistan/104831.Google Scholar
ODIHR (Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights) (2014), Turkmenistan Parliamentary Elections, OSCE/ODIHR Election Assessment Mission Final Report, www.osce.org/odihr/elections/116011.Google Scholar
Powell, J. (2012), ‘The Determinants of the Attempting and Outcome of Coups d’Etat’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 56: 10171040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, J and Thyne, C.L. (2010), ‘Global Instances of Coups from 1950 to 2010: A New Dataset’, Journal of Peace Research, 48: 249259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, A. (1991), Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, A (2005), ‘Democracy as an Equilibrium’, Public Choice, 123: 253273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, A (2006), ‘Self-Enforcing Democracy’, in B.R. Weingast and D.A. Wittman (eds), Oxford Handbook of Political Economy’ (New York: Oxford University Press): 312328.Google Scholar
Przeworski, A., Alvarez, M.E., Cheibub, J.A. and Limongi, F. (2000), Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-being in the World, 1950–1990 (New York: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schedler, A. (2002), ‘The Nested Game of Democratization by Elections’, International Political Science Review, 23: 103122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schedler, A (2009), ‘The Contingent Power of Authoritarian Elections’, in S.I. Lindberg (ed.), Democratization by Elections: A New Mode of Transition (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press): 179201.Google Scholar
Serra, G. (2014), ‘The 2012 Elections in Mexico: Return of the Dominant Party’, Electoral Studies, 34: 291379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solt, F. (2013), ‘The Standardized World Income Inequality Database’, working paper. SWIID version 4.0, September 2013, https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=hdl:1902.1/11992.Google Scholar
Svolik, M.W. (2008), ‘Authoritarian Reversals and Democratic Consolidation’, American Political Science Review, 102: 153168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svolik, M.W (2015), ‘Which Democracies Will Last? Coups, Incumbent Takeovers, and the Dynamic of Democratic Consolidation’, British Journal of Political Science, 45: 715738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Challenge or Consent? Understanding Losers’ Reactions in Mass Elections
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Challenge or Consent? Understanding Losers’ Reactions in Mass Elections
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Challenge or Consent? Understanding Losers’ Reactions in Mass Elections
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *