Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

Incumbency Effects in a Comparative Perspective: Evidence from Brazilian Mayoral Elections

  • Leandro De Magalhaes (a1)

Abstract

High rerunning rates among incumbents and among the two major parties allow studies of U.S. incumbency advantage to bypass the selection problem of who chooses to rerun. In countries where rerunning is not widespread among individuals or parties, estimation using methods developed for the United States may result in a sample selection bias. In countries with party switching, there may be a disconnect between party and individual estimates. This article proposes a definition of incumbency advantage that is valid for countries that present any of these characteristics and that is valid for cross-country comparison: the effect of incumbency for an individual politician on the unconditional probability of winning. I illustrate the issues raised in this article with evidence from Brazilian mayoral elections.

Copyright

References

Hide All
Angrist, J. D., and Pischke, J.-S. 2009. Mostly Harmless Econometrics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Ansolabehere, S., Snyder, J., and Stewart, C. 2000. Old voters, new voters, and the personal vote: Using redistricting to measure the incumbency advantage. American Journal of Political Science 44(1): 1734.
Brambor, T., and Ceneviva, R. 2011. Incumbency advantage in Brazilian mayoral elections. Working Paper.
Brollo, F., and Troiano, U. 2012. What happens when a woman wins a close election? Evidence from Brazil. Working Paper, University of Alicante.
Caughey, D. M., and Sekhon, J. S. 2011. Elections and the regression-discontinuity design: Lessons from U.S. House races, 1942–2008. Political Analysis 19(4): 385408.
Cox, G. W., and Katz, J. N. 1996. Why did the incumbency advantage in U.S. House elections grow? American Journal of Political Science 40(2): 478497.
De Magalhaes, L. 2014. Replication data for: Incumbency effects in a comparative perspective: Evidence from Brazilian mayoral elections. IQSS Dataverse Network: http://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/25719 (accessed September 12, 2014).
De Magalhaes, L., and Hirvonen, S. 2014. Incumbency effects on political careers: Evidence from Brazil. Mimeo, University of Bristol.
Desposato, S. W. 2006. Parties for rent? Ambition, ideology, and party switching in Brazil's chamber of deputies. American Journal of Political Science 50(1): 6280.
Diermeier, D., Keane, M., and Merlo, A. 2005. A political model of congressional careers. American Economic Review 95(1): 347373.
Erikson, Robert S., 1971. The advantage of incumbency in congressional elections. Polity 3(3): 395405.
Ferreira, F., and Gyourko, J. 2009. Do political parties matter? Evidence from U.S. cities. Quarterly Journal of Economics 124(1): 399422.
Fowler, A., and Hall, A. B. 2012. The incumbency advantage is personal: Evidence from regression discontinuity and term limits in state legislatures. Working Paper, Harvard.
Gelman, A., and King, G. 1990. Estimating incumbency advantage without bias. American Journal of Political Science 34(4): 11421164.
Gordon, S. C., Huber, G. A., and Landa, D. 2007. Challenger entry and voter learning. American Political Science Review 101(2): 303320.
Jacobson, G. C. 1987. The marginals never vanished: Incumbency and competition in elections to the U.S. House of Representatives, 1952–82. American Journal of Political Science 31(1): 126141.
Lee, D. S. 2008. Randomized experiments from non-random selection in U.S. House elections. Journal of Econometrics 142:675697.
Leoni, E., Pereira, C., and Rennó, L. 2004. Political survival strategies: Political career decisions in the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies. Journal of Latin America Studies 36:109130.
Levitt, S. D., and Wolfram, C. D. 1997. Decomposing the sources of incumbency advantage in the U.S. House. Legislative Studies Quarterly 22(1): 4560.
Linden, L. L. 2004. Are incumbents advantaged? The preference for non-incumbents in Indian national elections. MIT Working Paper.
Mayhew, D. R. 1974. Congresssional elections: The case of the vanishing marginals. Polity 6(3): 295317.
Morgan, S. L., and Winship, C. 2007. Counterfactuals and Causal Inference: Methods and Principles for Social Research. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Rubin, D. B. 2005. Causal inference using potential outcomes: Design, modeling, decisions. Journal of the American Statistical Association 100(469): 322331.
Samuels, D. J. 2003. Ambition, Federalism, and Legislative Politics in Brazil. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Sekhon, J. S., and Titiunik, R. 2012. When natural experiments are neither natural nor experiments. American Political Science Review 106(1): 3557.
Titiunik, R. 2009. Incumbency advantage in Brazil: Evidence from municipal mayor elections. Working Paper.
Uppal, Y. 2008. The disadvantaged incumbents: estimating incumbency effects in Indian state legislatures. Public Choice 138(1–2): 927.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Political Analysis
  • ISSN: 1047-1987
  • EISSN: 1476-4989
  • URL: /core/journals/political-analysis
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
MathJax

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

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