Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-8bbf57454-7zlxw Total loading time: 0.293 Render date: 2022-01-26T00:12:04.153Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Information and Self-Enforcing Democracy: The Role of International Election Observation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2014

Get access

Abstract

This article argues that when democracy is not yet institutionalized, leaders have little incentive to push for clean elections, in part because they are likely to face accusations of fraud from domestic opposition groups regardless of their true behavior. Reputable international election observers can facilitate self-enforcing democracy by providing credible information about the quality of elections, thus increasing citizens’ ability to coordinate against the regime when election fraud occurs, and discrediting “sore loser” protests. Patterns of postelection protests are consistent with the argument, including that postelection protests are more likely and last longer following negative reports from international observers. International election observers help promote democracy by making postelection protest more accurate in the short term, thereby increasing incentives for leaders to hold democratic elections in the long term.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 2014 

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

Alvarez, R. Michael, Hall, Thad E., and Hyde, Susan D., eds. 2008. Election Fraud: Detecting and Deterring Electoral Manipulation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, Christopher J., Blais, André, Bowler, Shaun, Donovan, Todd, and Listhaug, Ola. 2005. Loser's Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aronow, Peter M., Carnegie, Allison Sovey, and Marinov, Nikolay. 2012. The Effects of Aid on Rights and Governance: Evidence from a Natural Experiment. Available at Social Science Research Network. <http://ssrn.com/abstract=2124994>. Accessed 15 February 2013..+Accessed+15+February+2013.>Google Scholar
Beaulieu, Emily. 2006. Protesting the Contest: Election Boycotts Around the World, 1990–2002. PhD diss., University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Beigbeder, Yves. 1994. International Monitoring of Plebisrefs, Referenda, and National Elections: Self-determination and Transition to Democracy. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Beissinger, Mark R. 2011. Mechanisms of Maidan: The Structure of Contingency in the Making of the Orange Revolution. Mobilization: An International Quarterly 16 (1):2543.Google Scholar
Berry, William D., DeMeritt, Jacqueline H.R., and Esarey, Justin. 2010. Testing for Interaction in Binary Logit and Probit Models: Is a Product Term Essential? American Journal of Political Science 54 (1):248–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birch, Sarah. 2008. Electoral Institutions and Popular Confidence in Electoral Processes: A Cross-National Analysis. Electoral Studies 27 (2):305–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birch, Sarah. 2011. Electoral Malpractice. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjornlund, Eric C. 2004. Beyond Free and Fair: Monitoring Elections and Building Democracy. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.Google Scholar
Brancati, Dawn. 2013. Pocketbook Protests: Explaining the Emergence of Pro-Democracy Protests Worldwide. Comparative Political Studies (19 December). doi:10.1177/0010414013512603.Google Scholar
Bunce, Valerie J., and Wolchik, Sharon L.. 2006. International Diffusion and Postcommunist Electoral Revolutions. Communist and Post-Communist Studies 39 (3):283304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bunce, Valerie J., and Wolchik, Sharon L.. 2011. Defeating Authoritarian Leaders in Postcommunist Countries. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bush, Sarah Sunn. 2011. International Politics and the Spread of Quotas for Women in Legislatures. International Organization 65 (1):103–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carothers, Thomas. 1997. The Observers Observed. Journal of Democracy 8 (3):1731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corstange, Daniel, and Marinov, Nikolay. 2012. Taking Sides in Other People's Elections: The Polarizing Effect of Foreign Intervention. American Journal of Political Science 56 (3):655–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, Gary. 2009. Authoritarian Elections and Leadership Succession, 1975–2000. Paper presented at the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Donno, Daniela. 2013. International Actors and the Politics of Electoral Misconduct. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Donno, Daniela. 2010. Who Is Punished? Regional Intergovernmental Organizations and the Enforcement of Democratic Norms. International Organization 64 (4):593625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drake, Paul W. 1998. The International Causes of Democratization, 1974–1990. In The Origins of Liberty: Political and Economic Liberalization in the Modern World, edited by Drake, Paul W. and McCubbins, Mathew, 7091. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Dreher, Axel, Sturm, Jan-Egbert, and Vreeland, James. 2009. Development Aid and International Politics: Does Membership on the UN Security Council Influence World Bank Decisions? Journal of Development Economics 88 (1):118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunning, Thad. 2004. Conditioning the Effects of Aid: Cold War Politics, Donor Credibility, and Democracy in Africa. International Organization 58 (2):409–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James D. 2011. Self-Enforcing Democracy. Quarterly Journal of Economics 126 (4):1661–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkel, Steven E., Pérez-Liñán, Aníbal S., and Seligson, Mitchell A.. 2007. The Effects of US Foreign Assistance on Democracy Building, 1990–2003. World Politics 59 (3):404–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gandhi, Jennifer, and Lust-Okar, Ellen. 2009. Elections Under Authoritarianism. Annual Review of Political Science 12:403–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geisler, Gisela. 1993. Fair? What Has Fairness Got to Do with It? Vagaries of Election Observation and Democratic Standards. Journal of Modern African Studies 31 (4):613–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gleditsch, Kristian Skrede, and Ward, Michael D.. 2006. Diffusion and the International Context of Democratization. International Organization 60 (4):911–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gourevitch, Peter. 1978. The Second Image Reversed: The International Sources of Domestic Politics. International Organization 32 (4):881912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hermet, Guy, Rouquie, Alain, and Rose, Richard, eds. 1978. Elections Without Choice. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huntington, Samuel. 1991. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Hyde, Susan D. 2007. The Observer Effect in International Politics: Evidence from a Natural Experiment. World Politics 60 (1):3763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyde, Susan D. 2008. How International Election Observers Detect and Deter Election Fraud. In Election Fraud: Detecting and Deterring Electoral Manipulation, edited by Alvarez, R. Michael, Hall, Thad E., and Hyde, Susan D., 201–15. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Hyde, Susan D. 2011. The Pseudo-Democrat's Dilemma: Why Election Observation Became an International Norm. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyde, Susan D. 2012. Why Believe International Election Monitors? In The Credibility of Transnational NGOs: When Virtue Is Not Enough, edited by Gourevitch, Peter A., Lake, David A., and Stein, Janice Gross, 3761. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hyde, Susan D., and Marinov, Nikolay. 2011. Codebook for National Elections Across Democracy and Autocracy (NELDA). New Haven, CT: Yale University. Available at <http://hyde.research.yale.edu/nelda>..>Google Scholar
Hyde, Susan D., and Marinov, Nikolay. 2012. Which Elections Can Be Lost? Political Analysis 20 (2):191210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, Judith. 2008. Assessing the Complex Evolution of Norms: The Rise of International Election Monitoring. International Organization 62 (2):221–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, Judith. 2009. D-Minus Elections: The Politics and Norms of International Election Observation. International Organization 63 (4):765–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, Judith. 2012a. International Influence on Elections in New Multiparty States. Annual Review of Political Science 15:203–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, Judith. 2012b. Monitoring Democracy: When International Election Observation Works, and Why It Often Fails. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
King, Gary, Tomz, Michael, and Wittenberg, Jason. 2000. Making the Most of Statistical Analyses: Improving Interpretation and Presentation. American Journal of Political Science 44 (2):347–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kulov, Emir. 2008. March 2005: Parliamentary Elections as a Catalyst of Protests. Central Asian Survey 27 (3–4):337–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuntz, Philipp, and Thompson, Mark R.. 2009. More than Just the Final Straw: Stolen Elections as Revolutionary Triggers. Comparative Politics 41 (3):253–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuran, Timur. 1989. Sparks and Prairie Fires: A Theory of Unanticipated Political Revolution. Public Choice 61 (1):4147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehoucq, Fabrice. 2003. Electoral Fraud: Causes, Types, and Consequences. Annual Review of Political Science 6:233–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitsky, Steven, and Way, Lucan A.. 2005. International Linkage and Democratization. Journal of Democracy 16 (3):2034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitsky, Steven, and Way, Lucan A.. 2006. Linkage Versus Leverage: Rethinking the International Dimension of Regime Change. Comparative Politics 38 (4):379400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitsky, Steven, and Way, Lucan A.. 2010. Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindberg, Staffan. 2006a. Democracy and Elections in Africa. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Levitsky, Steven, and Way, Lucan A.. 2006b. Tragic Protest: Why Do Opposition Parties Boycott Elections? In Electoral Authoritarianism: The Dynamics of Unfree Competition, edited by Schedler, Andreas, 149–63. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Levitsky, Steven, and Way, Lucan A.., ed. 2009. Democratization by Elections: A New Mode of Transition. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Linz, Juan J., and Stepan, Alfred. 1996. Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Lohmann, Susanne. 1994. The Dynamics of Informational Cascades: The Monday Demonstrations in Leipzig, East Germany, 1989–91. World Politics 47 (1):42101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupia, Arthur, and McCubbins, Mathew Daniel. 1998. The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need to Know? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Magaloni, Beatriz. 2006. Voting for Autocracy: Hegemonic Party Survival and Its Demise in Mexico. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupia, Arthur, and McCubbins, Mathew Daniel. 2010. The Game of Electoral Fraud and the Ousting of Authoritarian Rule. American Journal of Political Science 54 (3):751–65.Google Scholar
Mansfield, Edward D., and Pevehouse, Jon C.. 2006. Democratization and International Organizations. International Organization 60 (1):137–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marinov, Nikolay, and Goemans, Hein. 2013. Coups and Democracy. British Journal of Political Science FirstView:127.Google Scholar
Meirowitz, Adam, and Tucker, Joshua A.. 2013. People Power or a One-Shot Deal? A Dynamic Model of Protest. American Journal of Political Science 57 (2):478–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mir-Ismail, Alman. 2005. Azerbaijan's Post-Election Situation: A Lose-Lose Situation. Washington, DC: Central Asia-Caucasus Institute/Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar
Mittal, Sonia, and Weingast, Barry R.. 2013. Self-Enforcing Constitutions: With an Application to Democratic Stability in America's First Century. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 29 (2):278302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myagkov, Mikhail, Ordeshook, Peter, and Shakin, Dimitri. 2009. The Forensics of Election Fraud: Russia and Ukraine. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Democratic Institute and Carter Center. 1992. The October 31, 1991 National Elections in Zambia. Atlanta, GA: Carter Center.Google Scholar
Obserschall, Anthony R. 1995. Rational Choice in Collective Protests. Rationality and Society 6 (1):79100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, Mancur. 1971 [1965]. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). 2006. Republic of Azerbaijan Parliamentary Elections, 6 November 2005, OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission Final Report. 1 February, Warsaw, Poland.Google Scholar
Pevehouse, Jon C. 2002. Democracy from the Outside-In? International Organizations and Democratization. International Organization 56 (3):515–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pevehouse, Jon C. 2005. Democracy from Above: Regional Organizations and Democratization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, Adam. 1991. Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, Adam. 2005. Democracy as an Equilibrium. Public Choice 123 (3):253–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, Adam. 2008. Self-Enforcing Democracy. In The Oxford Handbook of Political Economy, edited by Weingast, Barry R. and Wittman, Donald, 312–28. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Santa-Cruz, Arturo. 2005a. Constitutional Structures, Sovereignty, and the Emergence of Norms: The Case of International Election Monitoring. International Organization 59 (3):663–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santa-Cruz, Arturo. 2005b. International Election Monitoring, Sovereignty, and the Western Hemisphere Idea: The Emergence of an International Norm. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schedler, Andreas. 2002a. Elections Without Democracy: The Menu of Manipulation. Journal of Democracy 13 (2):3650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schedler, Andreas. 2002b. The Nested Game of Democratization by Elections. International Political Science Review 23 (1):103122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schedler, Andreas., ed. 2006. Electoral Authoritarianism: The Dynamics of Unfree Competition. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Schedler, Andreas. 2009. Sources of Competition under Electoral Authoritarianism. In Democratization by Elections: A New Mode of Transition, edited by Lindberg, Staffan I., 180201. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph. 1962 [1942]. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
Simpser, Alberto. 2013. Why Parties and Governments Manipulate Elections: Theory, Practice, and Implications. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Tony. 1994. America's Mission: The United States and the Worldwide Struggle for Democracy in the Twentieth Century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Starr, Harvey. 1991. Democratic Dominoes: Diffusion Approaches to the Spread of Democracy in the International System. Journal of Conflict Resolution 35 (2):356–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svolik, Milan W., and Chernykh, Svitlana. 2012. Third-Party Actors and the Success of Democracy: How Electoral Commissions, Courts, and Observers Shape Incentives for Election Manipulation and Post-Election Protest. Unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign/Oxford University, Urbana-Champaign/Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
Tucker, Joshua. 2007. Enough! Electoral Fraud, Collective Action Problems and Post Communist Colored Revolutions. Perspectives on Politics 5 (3):535–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vachudova, Milada. 2005. Europe Undivided: Democracy, Leverage, and Integration After Communism. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weingast, Barry. 1997. The Political Foundations of Democracy and the Rule of Law. American Political Science Review 91 (2):245–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weingast, Barry. 2004. Constructing Self-Enforcing Democracy in Spain. In Politics from Anarchy to Democracy: Rational Choice in Political Science, edited by Morris, Irwin L., Oppenheimer, Joe A., and Soltan, Karol Edward, 161–95. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Whitehead, Laurence, ed. 1996. The International Dimensions of Democratization: Europe and the Americas. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
60
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@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 sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent 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.

Information and Self-Enforcing Democracy: The Role of International Election Observation
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send 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 use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Information and Self-Enforcing Democracy: The Role of International Election Observation
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send 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 use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Information and Self-Enforcing Democracy: The Role of International Election Observation
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? *