Lecture 12: Representation Flashcards
Representative Democracy and the Role of Politicians
Trustee vs. Delegate Model:
Politicians are seen as trustees, not mere delegates.
A trustee uses their judgment to make decisions for the public, even if it conflicts with popular opinion.
Example: “Your representative owes you their judgment, not just their allegiance to your opinion.”
Median Voter Theorem:
Suggests that representation doesn’t matter because politicians will always aim to represent the median voter (the one in the middle of the political spectrum).
Politicians as ‘chameleons’: Politicians change their policies to appeal to the median voter, regardless of their personal beliefs or characteristics.
Reality of Politics:
In practice, parties do not converge to the median voter.
Factors affecting this:
Polarization: Extreme political positions create division.
Low turnout: Voter apathy leads to a skewed representation of the electorate.
Ethnicity: Voters often vote based on ethnic lines, not purely ideological preferences.
Clientelism: Politicians offer direct benefits to win votes, undermining representation of the median.
Politicians’ personal preferences: Politicians may prioritize their own views over the median voter’s needs.
Multi-party systems: A fragmented system leads to less central convergence.
Substantive Representation
Does representation really matter?
Definition: Substantive Representation
Politicians advocate and implement the policy preferences of their voters, regardless of personal characteristics.
Example: A politician who may not share the same gender, ethnicity, or background as their constituents still represents their policy choices (focuses on substance, not just identity).
Challenges in Practice:
Credibility Issues:
It is difficult for certain groups (e.g., men) to credibly represent the interests of others (e.g., women).
Similarly, the rich may struggle to genuinely represent the interests of the poor, particularly when it involves redistribution of resources.
Key Insight:
Representation is about policy preferences, not necessarily about shared identity.
Substantive representation aims to ensure that the policy reflects the will of the people, even if the representative differs personally from their electorate.
Female Leaders and Development
Do women make better leaders for development?
Women’s Preferences:
Female leaders tend to prioritize social investment in areas like health and education.
In the USA, when women gained the vote, social investment increased rapidly.
In Africa, female leaders often empower women through social accountability.
Evidence from Brazil:
Women Mayors:
Less corruption: Women mayors engage in 29-35% less corruption.
Less clientelism: 64 fewer temporary employees hired.
Health impact: 1% fewer premature births under female mayors.
Challenges for Re-election:
Women mayors half as likely to be re-elected: 18% vs. 38% for male mayors.
Descriptive Representation
What does it mean for a politician to represent you?
Politicians share characteristics (e.g., gender, ethnicity, class) with their constituents.
Confidence in Representation: If a politician shares my identity, I am more confident they understand and share my interests.
Why are female leaders less likely to be re-elected despite performing well?
Honesty vs. Corruption:
Female leaders are less likely to engage in corruption or clientelism to win votes, which are often more effective methods for male candidates.
Voters’ expectations: Corruption and clientelism work for men, and without them, women leaders face penalties (lower re-election chances).
Challenges for Female Mayors:
Women receive less financial support from their party for re-election.
Voters discriminate against equally qualified female candidates.
What are the limitations and risks of using gender quotas to improve female representation?
Challenges in India:
Female candidates are less likely to run in unreserved (non-quota) seats.
Husbands control elected women: In some cases, powerful husbands (e.g., ‘Mukhiya patis’/’Sarpanch patis’) dominate the decision-making of female politicians.
Backlash:
Men’s resistance: A backlash occurs when men feel their identity is threatened by empowered women and gendered policies.
Caste quotas: In India, caste quotas have led to increased violence against lower-caste individuals (e.g., more murders).
Reinforcing gender cleavages: Quotas may reinforce gender divisions, creating a divisive identity cleavage.
How can we promote female political leadership?
Changing Social Norms:
Addressing societal bias against female politicians.
Gender Quotas & Affirmative Action:
Quotas: Set a required percentage of female leaders (e.g., 33% female village leaders in India since 1993).
Impact of Female Leadership:
Better implementation of projects that meet women’s preferences.
Female leaders better protect property rights, especially for women.
Girls and their families become more ambitious when their village is run by women.
Why is institutionalization and nationalization of political parties important for development?
Institutionalization of political parties leads to more credible long-term policies.
Programmatic parties (focused on ideology and policies) are more stable and promote long-term growth.
Clientelist parties (focused on personal relationships) are less stable and hinder development.
Institutionalized parties are more effective at managing economic policies and implementing loans.
Nationalization ensures that political parties compete nationwide, which leads to:
More efficient provision of public goods.
Better health outcomes and more investment because parties cater to a broader voter base.
What types of political party systems are most likely to promote development?
Number of Parties:
Two-party systems balance credibility and decisiveness, leading to more stable policies.
More parties → More veto players, which can complicate decision-making.
Institutionalization:
Stable, organized, disciplined, and rooted parties promote faster economic growth.
Programmatic parties are more effective for development (e.g., Workers’ Party in Brazil).
Clientelist parties are less effective and focus on short-term benefits, reducing long-term growth.
Institutionalized parties tend to implement World Bank loans more effectively.
Nationalization:
Parties that compete nationally provide more public goods.
National competition leads to better health outcomes and more investment by targeting broader voter bases.
Which party system is best for development?
Two-party systems:
Balance credibility and decisiveness
Fewer veto players; clearer choices for voters
Stability promotes long-term policies
Institutionalization:
More credible long-term policies
Promotes programmatic over clientelist politics
Clearer accountability, reduces short-term bias
Nationalization:
Leads to more public goods
Better health outcomes and investment
Broader target of voters, more efficient public service delivery
