While scholarship on “retrospective voting” has found that incumbent politicians can be punished for a range of events outside their control, the literature has paid scant attention to the role of political alignment between the different levels of government in disaster responses and its implications for voting decisions. We argue that retrospective voters punish only opposition incumbents (candidates in office but not aligned with the government leader), who have limited access to government resources for relief, for natural disasters. We use monthly data on precipitation and evaporation to capture droughts and floods in India’s four thousand State Assembly electoral constituencies over the years 1977–2007. Consistent with our hypothesis, we find that Members of State Assembly from the party of the Prime or Chief Minister do not face an electoral backlash under bad weather conditions during the monsoon season, whereas opposition politicians face major losses.
AldrichD. P. (2012). Building resilience: Social capital in post-disaster erecovery. The University of Chicago Press.
2.
ArceneauxK. (2006). The federal face of voting: Are elected officials held accountable for the functions relevant to their office?Political Psychology, 27(5), 731–754.
3.
ArceneauxK.SteinR. M. (2006). Who is held responsible when disaster strikes? The attribution of responsibility for a natural disaster in an urban election. Journal of Urban Affairs, 28(1), 43–53.
4.
ArulampalamW.DasguptaS.DhillonA.DuttaB. (2009). Electoral goals and center-state transfers: A theoretical model and empirical evidence from India. Journal of Development Economics, 88(1), 103–119.
5.
AshworthS.de MesquitaE. B.FriedenbergA. (2017). Accountability and information in elections. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 9(2), 95–138.
6.
BanerjeeA.GreenD. P.McManusJ.PandeR. (2014). Are poor voters indifferent to whether elected leaders are criminal or corrupt? A vignette experiment in rural India. Political Communication, 31(3), 391–407.
BechtelM. M.HainmuellerJ. (2011). How lasting is voter gratitude? An analysis of the short- and long-term electoral returns to beneficial policy. American Journal of Political Science, 55(4), 851–867.
BegueriaS.Vicente-SerranoS. M.ReigF.LatorreB. (2014). Standardized Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI) revisited: Parameter fitting, evapotranspi- ration models, tools, datasets and drought monitoring. International Journal of Climatology, 34(10), 3001–3023.
11.
BhavnaniR. R.LacinaB. (2017). Fiscal federalism at work? Central responses to internal migration in India. World Development, 93, 236–248.
12.
BlakesleeD. S.FishmanR. (2018). Weather shocks, agriculture, and crime evidence from India. Journal of Human Resources, 53(3), 750–782.
13.
BlankenshipB.KennedyR.UrpelainenJ.YangJ. (2020). Replication data for barking up the wrong tree: How political alignment shapes electoral backlash from natural disasters (Comparative Political Studies Dataverse). https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/NDHS9Q
14.
BrolloF.NanniciniT. (2012). Tying your enemy’s hands in close races: The politics of federal transfers in Brazil. American Political Science Review, 106(4), 742–761.
CarlinR. E.LoveG. J.ZechmeisterE. J. (2014). Natural disaster and demo- cratic legitimacy the public opinion consequences of Chile’s 2010 earthquake and tsunami. Political Research Quarterly, 67(1), 3–15.
17.
CarseyT. M.WrightG. C. (1998). State and national factors in gubernatorial and senatorial elections. American Journal of Political Science, 42, 994–1002.
18.
ChandraK. (2007). Why ethnic parties succeed: Patronage and ethnic head counts in India. Cambridge University Press.
19.
ChenJ. (2013). Voter partisanship and the effect of distributive spending on political participation. American Journal of Political Science, 57(1), 200–217.
20.
ChhibberP.JenseniusF. R.SuryanarayanP. (2014). Party organization and party proliferation in India. Party Politics, 20(4), 489–505.
21.
ChopraV. K. (1996). Marginal players in marginal assemblies: The Indian MLA. Orient Longman.
22.
ClevelandW. S. (1979). Robust locally weighted regression and smoothing scatterplots. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74(368), 829–836.
23.
CloggC. C.PetkovaE.HaritouA. (1995). Statistical methods for comparing regression coefficients between models. American Journal of Sociology, 100(5), 1261–1293.
24.
CohenC.WerkerE. D. (2008). The political economoy of “natural” disasters. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 52(6), 795–819.
25.
ColeS.HealyA.WerkerE. (2012). Do voters demand responsive governments? Evidence from Indian disaster relief. Journal of Development Economics, 97(2), 167–181.
26.
ConleyT. G. (1999). GMM estimation with cross sectional dependence. Journal of Econometrics, 92(1), 1–45.
27.
CórdovaA.SeligsonM. A. (2010). Economic shocks and democratic vulnerabilities in latin America. Latin American Politics and Society, 52(2), 1–35.
28.
DasU. (2015). Does political activism and affiliation affect allocation of benefits in the rural employment guarantee program: Evidence from West Bengal, India. World Development, 67, 202–217.
29.
DrezeJ.SenA. K. (1991). Hunger and public action. Clarendon.
30.
EfronB.TibshiraniR. J. (1993). An introduction to the bootstrap. Chapman and Hall.
31.
FairC. C.KuhnP. M.MalhotraN.ShapiroJ. N. (2015). Natural disasters and political engagement: Evidence from the 2010-11 Pakistani floods (Working paper). Georgetown University. http://dro.dur.ac.uk/21820/1/21820.pdf
32.
FieldC. B.BarrosV.StockerT. F.DaheQ. (2012). Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation: Special report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press.
33.
FiorinaM. P. (1981). Retrospective voting in American national elections. Yale University Press.
FouirnaiesA.Mutlu-ErenH. (2015). English bacon: Copartisan bias in inter- governmental grant allocation in England. Journal of Politics, 77(3), 805–817.
36.
GasperJ. T.ReevesA. (2011). Make it rain? Retrospection and the attentive electorate in the context of natural disasters. American Journal of Political Science, 55(2), 340–355.
37.
GoldenM.MinB. (2013). Distributive politics around the world. Annual Review of Political Science, 16, 73–99.
38.
GolubG. H.HeathM.WahbaG. (1979). Generalized cross-validation as a method for choosing a good ridge parameter. Technometrics, 21(2), 215–223.
39.
GulzarS.PasqualeB. J. (2017). Politicians, bureaucrats, and development: Evidence from India. American Political Science Review, 111(1), 162–183.
40.
HansenJ.SatoM.RuedyR. (2012). Perception of climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(37), E2415–E2423.
41.
HealyA.MalhotraN. (2009). Myopic voters and natural disaster policy. American Political Science Review, 103(3), 387–406.
42.
HealyA.MalhotraN. (2010). Random events, economic losses, and retrospective voting: Implications for democratic competence. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 5, 193–208.
43.
HealyA.MalhotraN. (2013). Retrospective voting reconsidered. Annual Review of Political Science, 16, 285–306.
44.
JayachandranS. (2006). Selling labor low: Wage responses to productivity shocks in developing countries. Journal of Political Economy, 114, 538–575.
KeyV. O. (1966). The responsible electorate: Rationality in presidential voting, 1936–1960. Harvard University Press.
48.
LindJ. T.MehlumH. (2010). With or without U? The appropriate test for a U-shaped relationship. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 72(1), 109–118.
49.
LobellD. B.SchlenkerW.Costa-RobertsJ. (2011). Climate trends and global crop production since 1980. Science, 333(6042), 616–620.
50.
MalhotraN.KuoA. G. (2008). Attributing blame: The public’s response to hurricane katrina. Journal of Politics, 70(1), 120–135.
51.
MyersR. H. (1990). Classical and modern regression with applications (2nd ed.). Duxbury Press.
52.
PaternosterR.BrameR.MazerolleP.PiqueroA. (1998). Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology, 36(4), 859–866.
53.
PozziW.SheffieldJ.StefanskiR.CripeD.PulwartyR. (2013). Toward global drought early warning capability: Expanding international cooperation for the development of a framework for monitoring and forecasting. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 94(6), 776–785.
54.
PrabhakarS. V. R. K.ShawR. (2008). Climate change adaptation implications for drought risk mitigation: A perspective for India. Climatic Change, 88(2), 113–130.
55.
RajeevanM.UnnikrishnanC. K.BhateJ.Niranjan KumarK.SreekalaP. P. (2012). North- east monsoon over India: Variability and prediction. Meteorological Applications, 19(2), 226–236.
56.
RathoreM. S. (2004). State level analysis of drought policies and impacts in Rajasthan, India (Working paper 84). International Water Management Institute.
57.
RavishankarN. (2009). The cost of ruling: Anti-incumbency in elections. Economic and Political Weekly, 44, 92–98.
58.
ReevesA. (2011). Political disaster: Unilateral powers, electoral incentives, and presidential disaster declarations. Journal of Politics, 73(4), 1142–1151.
59.
StokesL. C. (2016). Electoral backlash against climate policy: A natural experiment on retrospective voting and local resistance to public policy. American Journal of Political Science, 60, 958–974. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12220
60.
TurnerA. G.AnnamalaiH. (2012). Climate change and the South Asian summer monsoon. Nature Climate Change, 2(8), 587–595.
61.
UppalY. (2009). The disadvantaged incumbents: Estimating incumbency effects in Indian state legislatures. Public Choice, 138(1–2), 9–27.
62.
VatsaK. S. (2006). Employment guarantee scheme in Maharashtra: Its impact on drought, poverty, and vulnerability. The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 49(3), 429–452.
63.
VermaR. (2012). What determines electoral outcomes in India? Caste, class, or voters’ satisfaction with government performance?Asian Survey, 52(2), 270–297.
64.
Vicente-SerranoS. M.BegueríaS.Lorenzo-LacruzJ.CamareroJ. J.López-MorenoJ. I.Azorin-MolinaC.RevueltoJ.Morán-TejedaE.Sanchez-LorenzoA. (2012). Performance of drought indices for ecological, agricultural, and hydrological applications. Earth Interactions, 16(10), 1–27.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
