Suchergebnisse

The issue of public support for a democratic form of government in countries undergoing a political transition is approached from two perspectives. On a substantive level, in countries that have experienced dramatically different forms of government in a relatively short period of time, the meaning of democracy for the mass public may be subject to considerable variation across individuals. Related to the rationale underlying citizen views of democracy as a form of government is the methodological issue of the impact that different alternatives to democracy have on levels of support for democracy as measured through standard 'best form of government' survey items. Capitalizing on a variation in response choices for two identical 'best form of government' questions included in a 1994 survey of the Nicaraguan mass public, this paper explores the consequences of pitting 'democracy' against abstract & 'name-brand' alternatives. The paper finds that the methodological choice of which alternatives to use alongside the democracy option has a substantial effect on what citizens view as their 'preferred form of government.'. 2 Tables, 4 Figures, 35 References. Adapted from the source document.

Promises filled the air during the honeymoon years of trade liberalization in the early 1990s. Announcing his Enterprise for the Americas Initiative (EAI) in 1990, President George Bush proclaimed, "prosperity in our hemisphere depends on trade, not aid...the future of Latin America lies with free government and free markets." Likewise, a Mexico trade official lobbying for the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1991 asked critics of the agreement to "just imagine how Mexico could help the U.S. economy recover when our own economy improves, and with it the standard of living of Mexicans." On the other side of the debate, critics of the NAFTA, and any other hemispheric free trade initiatives, promised, among other things, a "giant sucking sound."

The dramatic rise of democratic regimes around the world has coincided with an equally significant increase in migration, characterized by an unprecedented movement of people from emerging to established democracies. Through analysis of survey data from six Latin American countries, we offer an empirical evaluation of theoretical mechanisms through which migration can shape the political behaviors of non-migrants in sending nations. We find that individuals who have strong cross-border ties that connect them with relatives living in the United States are more likely to participate in local politics, sympathize with a political party, and persuade others to vote for a party. Those effects are influenced by the positive impact of cross-border ties on civic community involvement, political interest, and political efficacy. Moreover, the evidence suggests that frequent usage of the Internet among non-migrants with strong cross-border ties results in increased political knowledge, which contributes to their greater political interest and efficacy.

Scholars have long recognized the impact transformative political events have had on migration patterns in individual countries, but few have extended these ideas to the current period of political transition taking place across Latin America. Through analysis of data from the Latin American Migration Project (LAMP) and the Mexican Migration Project (MMP) from across Peru, Nicaragua, and the Mexican states of Guerrero and Oaxaca, the authors offer cross-national and subnational evidence of the role political "shocks" play in determining the demographic and socioeconomic profiles of migrants from these areas over the past twenty years. The results suggest that even in times of democratic opening, citizens' migration decisions are in part driven by political considerations.

Scholars have long recognized the impact transformative political events have had on migration patterns in individual countries, but few have extended these ideas to the current period of political transition taking place across Latin America. Through analysis of data from the Latin American Migration Project (LAMP) & the Mexican Migration Project (MMP) from across Peru, Nicaragua, & the Mexican states of Guerrero & Oaxaca, the authors offer cross-national & subnational evidence of the role political "shocks" play in determining the demographic & socioeconomic profiles of migrants from these areas over the past twenty years. The results suggest that even in times of democratic opening, citizens' migration decisions are in part driven by political considerations. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc., copyright The American Academy of Political and Social Science.]

The third wave of democratization has profoundly affected national political institutions and procedures throughout the developing world. In many nations, however, local political institutions and actors also hold considerable power. Democratic reforms at the national level are not necessarily replicated at the local level, yet democratization is inherently incomplete if a nation is speckled with scores of authoritarian local political enclaves. It follows that the process of subnational political change is of vital importance. In this article this process is examined, focusing on Mexico. The question is what dynamic has led to the erosion of the PRI's dominance at the municipal level since the mid-1980s. Two theoretical models, a diffusion model and a realignment model, are proposed. Empirical tests centre on data from municipal elections in four states for the period 1985 to 1998. Using event history analysis, substantial support for the diffusion model is discovered. In contrast, evidence consistent with the realignment model emerges in only one context – a state in which a new opposition party enjoyed unusual strength.

While democratization is often seen as a national‐level process, we argue that there is important scope for local effects. Through analysis of Mexican public opinion data collected on the eve of that country's historic 2000 elections, we demonstrate that local context greatly affects evaluations of the legitimacy of the system, and these evaluations, in turn, help to shape the willingness of citizens to engage with the system. Citizens are more willing to participate in politics if they think the process is fair, and direct evidence of the fairness of the system is provided by the local political context. This local connection, then, becomes critical in the process of individuals becoming, in Almond and Verba's classic term, "participatory" citizens (1963).

Across the developing world, many governments have implemented political reforms - heavily promoted by international donors - designed to transfer greater power to subnational levels of government and to provide a more substantial policymaking and oversight role to citizens. Based on an analysis of two large national public-opinion surveys from Bolivia, a country that has recently implemented one of the most comprehensive decentralization reforms yet attempted in Latin America, the authors analyze the role decentralized local institutions are playing in shaping citizen attitudes toward their political system. (InWent/DÜI)