Skip to main content Accessibility help

Mandates, Geography, and Networks: Diffusion of Criminal Procedure Reform in Mexico

  • Matthew C. Ingram (a1)


Why have some Mexican states proceeded faster than others in the revolutionary transformation of overhauling criminal procedure? Contributing an original index of criminal procedure reform across Mexico's 32 states from 2002 to 2011 and building on existing research on policy diffusion, this article seeks to answer this question. It finds that the 2008 constitutional reform at the federal level exerts a strong positive effect (federal mandate); being situated in a neighborhood of states that have reformed has a counterintuitive negative effect (spatial proximity); and having a governor from the same party as governors of other states that have reformed has a positive influence (network affinity). These findings yield a better understanding of the vertical, cross-level and horizontal, cross-unit diffusion of reform, with implications for understanding how to overcome challenges to criminal justice reform in Mexico, Latin America, and elsewhere.



Hide All
Achen, Christopher H. 2000. Why Lagged Dependent Variables Can Suppress the Explanatory Power of Other Independent Variables. Paper prepared for the Annual Meeting of the Political Methodology Section of the American Political Science Association, UCLA, July 20–22.
Amodio, Ennio. 2004. The Accusatorial System Lost and Regained: Reforming Criminal Procedure in Italy. American Journal of Comparative Law 52: 489500.
Beck, Nathaniel, and Katz, Jonathan. 1995. What to Do (and Not to Do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data. American Political Science Review 89: 634–47.
Beer, Caroline C. 2003. Electoral Competition and Institutional Change in Mexico. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Beer, Caroline C. 2006. Judicial Performance and the Rule of Law in the Mexican States. Latin American Politics and Society 48, 3 (Fall): 3361.
Beer, Caroline C., and Mitchell, Neil. 2004. Democracy and Human Rights in the Mexican States: Elections or Social Capital? International Studies Quarterly 48: 293312.
Boyce, Daniel. 2005. Political Influences on Fiscal Performance in the Mexican States. Ph.D. diss., University of California, Los Angeles.
Brinks, Daniel, and Coppedge, Michael. 2006. Diffusion Is No Illusion: Neighbor Emulation in the Third Wave of Democracy. Comparative Political Studies 39, 4: 463–89.
Bruhn, Kathleen. 1999. PRD Local Governments in Michoacán: Implications for Mexico's Democratization Process. In Subnational Politics and Democratization in Mexico, ed. Cornelius, Wayne, Eisenstadt, Todd, and Hindley, Jane. La Jolla: Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies, University of California, San Diego. 1948.
Cleary, Matthew R. 2007. Electoral Competition, Participation, and Government Responsiveness in Mexico. American Journal of Political Science 51, 2: 283–99.
Coppedge, Michael. 1997. A Classification of Latin American Parties. Kellogg Institute Working Paper Series no. 244. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame.
Epp, Charles. 1998. The Rights Revolution: Lawyers, Activists, and Supreme Courts in Comparative Perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Finkel, Jodi S. Judicial Reform as Political Insurance: Argentina, Peru, and Mexico in the 1990s. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Flamand, Laura. 2006. The Allocation Game in a Federal System: the Influence of Vertically Divided Government on the Allocation of Federal Transfers to the Mexican States. Política y Gobierno 13, 2: 315–59.
Fuentes, Víctor. 2013. Apremia ministro la reforma penal. Reforma (Mexico City), February 18, Sección Nacional, 4.
Geddes, Barbara. 1996. Initiation of New Democratic Institutions in Eastern Europe and Latin America In Institutional Design in New Democracies: Eastern Europe and Latin America, ed. Lijphart, Arend J. and Waisman, Charles. Boulder: Westview Press. 1541.
Gillman, Howard. 2002. How Political Parties Can Use the Courts to Advance Their Agendas: Federal Courts in the United States, 1875–1891. American Political Science Review 96: 511–24.
Gillman, Howard. 2008. Courts and the Politics of Partisan Coalitions. In The Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics, ed. Whittington, Keith E., Daniel Kelemen, R., and Caldeira, Gregory A.. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 644–62.
Giraudy, Agustina. 2010. The Politics of Subnational Undemocratic Regime Reproduction in Argentina and Mexico. Journal of Politics in Latin America 2: 5384.
Grande, Elisabetta. 2000. Italian Criminal Procedure: Borrowing and Resistance. American Journal of Comparative Law 48: 227–60.
Harbers, Imke, and Ingram, Matthew C.. 2014. Politics in Space: Methodological Considerations for Taking Space Seriously in Subnational Comparative Research. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC, August 28–31.
Hecock, R. Douglas. 2006. Electoral Competition, Globalization, and Subnational Education Spending in Mexico, 1999–2004. American Journal of Political Science 50: 950–61.
Huber, Evelyne, and Stephens, John D.. 2001. Development and Crisis of the Welfare State: Parties and Policies in Global Market. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Huber, Evelyne, Nielsen, François, Pribble, Jennifer, and Stephens, John D.. 2006. Politics and Inequality in Latin America and the Caribbean. American Sociological Review 71: 943–63.
Ingram, Matthew C. 2012. Crafting Courts in New Democracies: Ideology and Judicial Council Reforms in Three Mexican States. Comparative Politics 44, 4 (July): 439–58.
Ingram, Matthew C. 2013. Elections, Ideology, or Opposition? Assessing Competing Explanations of Judicial Spending in the Mexican States, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 29, 1: 178209.
Ingram, Matthew C. 2016. Crafting Courts in New Democracies: The Politics of Subnational Judicial Reform in Brazil and Mexico. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ingram, Matthew C., and Shirk, David A.. 2010. Judicial Reform in Mexico: Towards a New Criminal Justice System. Special Report. San Diego: Trans-Border Institute, University of San Diego.
Ingram, Matthew C., Rodríguez-Ferreira, Octavio, and Shirk, David A.. 2011. Justiciabarómetro: Survey of Judges, Prosecutors, and Public Defenders in Nine Mexican States. Final Report. May. San Diego: Justice in Mexico Project, Trans-Border Institute, University of San Diego.
Laakso, Murkuu, and Taagepera, Rein. 1979. “Effective” Number of Parties: a Measure with Application to West Europe. Comparative Political Studies 12, 1: 327.
Langer, Máximo. 2007. Revolution in Latin American Criminal Procedure: Diffusion of Legal Ideas from the Periphery. American Journal of Comparative Law 55: 617–76.
Liang, Kung-Yee, and Zeger, Scott L.. 1986. Longitudinal Data Analysis Using Generalized Linear Models. Biometrika 73: 1322.
Long, J. Scott, and Ervin, Laurie H.. 2000. Using Heteroskedasticity: Consistent Standard Errors in Linear Regression Model. American Statistician 54, 3: 217–24.
Mainwaring, Scott, 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. 134.
Messner, Steven F., Anselin, Luc, Baller, Robert D., Hawkins, Darnell F., Deane, Glenn, and Tolnay, Stewart E.. 1999. The Spatial Patterning of County Homicide Rates: an Application of Exploratory Spatial Data Analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 15, 4: 423–50.
Mizrahi, Yemile. 1999. Los determinantes del voto en Chihuahua: evaluación del gobierno, identidad partidista, y candidatos. CIDE Working Paper No. SDTDP-106. Mexico City.
Mizrahi, Yemile. 2003. From Martyrdom to Power: The Partido Acción Nacional in Mexico. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Molinar, Juan. 1991. Counting the Number of Parties: an Alternative Index. American Political Science Review 85: 1383–91.
Morton, F. L., and Knopf, Rainer. 2000. The Charter Revolution and the Court Party. Petersborough, Ontario: Broadview Press.
Negretto, Gabriel L. 2006. Choosing How to Choose Presidents: Parties, Military Rulers, and Presidential Elections in Latin America. Journal of Politics 68: 421–33.
Plümper, Thomas, Manow, Philip, and Troeger, Vera. 2005. Panel Data Analysis in Comparative Politics: Linking Method to Theory. European Journal of Political Research 44: 327–54.
Pozas-Loyo, Andrea, and Ríos-Figueroa, Julio. 2010. Enacting Constitutionalism: the Origins of Independent Judicial Institutions in Latin America. Comparative Politics 42, 3: 293311.
Presidencia de la República. 2004. Reforma integral al sistema de justicia, anuncia el Presidente Vicente Fox. Press release. March 10. Mexico City: Presidencia.
R Core Team. 2015. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Reynoso, Diego. 2005. Competición electoral y deshegemonización en los estados mexicanos. In Después de la alternancia: elecciones y nueva competitividad, ed. Espinoza, Víctor and Miguel Rionda, Luis. Tijuana, Mexico: EL Colegio de la Frontera Norte/Sociedad Mexicana de Estudios Electorales. 165–95.
Ríos Espinosa, Carlos, and Cerdio, Jorge, eds. 2012. Las reformas de la reforma procesal penal en Chihuahua. Mexico City: Tirant lo blanch/ITAM.
Ríos-Figueroa, Julio. 2007. Fragmentation of Power and the Emergence of an Effective Judiciary in Mexico, 1994–2002. Latin American Politics and Society 49, 1 (Spring): 3157.
Rogers, Everett M. 2003 [1962]. Diffusion of Innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press.
Schedler, Andreas. 2005. Patterns of Interparty Competition in Electoral Autocracies. Documento de Trabajo SDTEP No. 173. Mexico City: División de Estudios Políticos, CIDE.
Shipan, Charles R., and Volden, Craig. 2008. The Mechanisms of Policy Diffusion. American Journal of Political Science 52, 4: 840–57.
Shipan, Charles R., and Volden, Craig. 2012. Policy Diffusion: Seven Lessons for Scholars and Practitioners. Public Administration Review 72, 6: 788–96.
Shirk, David A. 2005. Mexico's New Politics: The PAN and Democratic Change. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Shirk, David A. 2010. Criminal Justice Reform in Mexico: an Overview. Mexican Law Review 3, 2: 189228.
Shirk, David A., and Cázares, Alejandra Ríos. 2007. Introduction: Reforming the Administration of Justice in Mexico. In Reforming the Administration of Justice in Mexico, ed. Cornelius, Wayne A. and Shirk, . San Diego: Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies, University of California. 149.
Simmons, Beth A., and Elkins, Zachary. 2004. The Globalization of Liberalization: Policy Diffusion in the International Political Economy. American Political Science Review 98, 1: 171–89.
Simmons, Beth A., Dobbin, Frank, and Garrett, Geoffrey, eds. 2008. The Global Diffusion of Markets and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Solt, Frederick. 2004. Electoral Competition, Legislative Pluralism, and Institutional Development: Evidence from Mexico's States. Latin American Research Review 39: 155–67.
Staton, Jeffrey K. 2010. Judicial Power and Strategic Communication in Mexico. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tiede, Lydia Brashear. 2012. Chile's Criminal Law Reform: Enhancing Defendants' Rights and Citizen Security. Latin American Politics and Society 54, 3 (Fall): 6593.
Tobler, Waldo. 1970. A Computer Movie Simulating Urban Growth in the Detroit Region. Economic Geography 46, 2: 234–40.
Tsebelis, George. 2002. Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Vermeule, Adrian. 2001. Veils of Ignorance: Rules in Constitutional Law. Yale Law Journal 111, 2: 399433.
Wasserman, Stanley, and Faust, Katherine. 1994. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Weyland, Kurt. 2005. Theories of Policy Diffusion: Lessons from Latin American Pension Reform. World Politics 57, 2: 262–95.
Zorn, Christopher J.W. 2001. Generalized Estimating Equations for Correlated Data: a Review with Applications. American Journal of Political Science 45, 2: 470–90.
Zwier, Paul, and Barney, Alexander. 2012. Moving to an Oral Adversarial System in Mexico: Jurisprudential, Criminal Procedure, Evidence, and Trial Advocacy Implications. Emory International Law Review 26: 189225.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Mandates, Geography, and Networks: Diffusion of Criminal Procedure Reform in Mexico

  • Matthew C. Ingram (a1)


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.