This article explores which factors enable or hinder populist presidents in Latin America to pursue a radical strategy of institutional change and induce the erosion of horizontal checks and balances. Applying an actor-centred approach, the article focuses on specific constellations in the political arena that shape populist presidents’ incentives and their ability to engage in institutional change. Three conditions are considered to be most decisive: the absence of unified government between the executive and the legislature, the existence of a ‘power vacuum’ in the political arena and the distribution of public support. Using configurational analyses, different causal paths explaining the presence or absence of the erosion of horizontal accountability are identified.
BreuerA (2009) The Use of Government-Initiated Referendums in Latin America: Towards a Theory of Referendum Causes. Revista de Ciencia Política29 (1): 23–55.
7.
CanovanM (1999) Trust the People! Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy. Political Studies47 (1): 2–16.
8.
CareyJM (2003) Presidentialism and Representative Institutions. In: DomínguezJIShifterM (eds) Constructing Democratic Governance in Latin America. Baltimore, MD; London: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp.11–42.
9.
CareyJMShugartMS (1998) Calling out the Tanks or Filling out the Forms? In: CareyJMShugartMS (eds) Executive Decree Authority. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.1–29.
10.
CarlinREHartlynJHellwigTet al. (2016) Executive Approval Database 1.0. Available at: http://www.executiveapproval.org (accessed 31 August 2017).
11.
CarlinREMartínez-GallardoCHartlynJ (2012) Executive Approval under Alternative Democratic Regime Types. In: ChalmersDAMainwaringS (eds) Problems Confronting Contemporary Democracies: Essays in Honor of Alfred Stepan. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, pp.203–226.
12.
ColburnFDArturo CruzS (2012) Personalism and Populism in Nicaragua. Journal of Democracy23 (2): 104–118.
13.
ConaghanC (2011) Ecuador: Rafael Correa and the Citizens’ Revolution. In: LevitskySRobertsKM (eds) The Resurgence of the Latin American Left. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp.260–282.
14.
ConniffML (1999) Populism in Latin America. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.
15.
CorralesJ (2016) Can Anyone Stop the President? Power Asymmetries and Term Limits in Latin America, 1984–2016. Latin American Politics and Society58 (2): 3–25.
16.
CrabtreeJ (1993) The Peruvian Congressional Elections of 1992. Electoral Studies12 (3): 264–267.
17.
DahlR (1971) Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
18.
DavilaLR (2000) The Rise and Fall and Rise of Populism in Venezuela. Bulletin of Latin American Research19 (2): 223–238.
19.
de la TorreC (2000) Populist Seduction in Latin America: The Ecuadorian Experience. Athens, OH: Ohio University Center for International Studies.
20.
DiamondLPlattnerMFSchedlerA (1999) Introduction. In: SchedlerADiamondLPlattnerMF (eds) The Self-Restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, pp.1–10.
21.
DugasJC (2003) The Emergence of Neopopulism in Colombia? The Case of Álvaro Uribe. Third World Quarterly24 (6): 1117–1136.
22.
ElgieR (2001) What Is Divided Government. In: ElgieR (ed.) Divided Government in Comparative Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.1–20.
23.
Fernández AlonsoJ (2010) La política hacia las inversiones extranjeras del gobierno de Néstor Kirchner: tras los rasgos de un populismo atemperado. Sociedade e Cultura13 (2): 201–210.
24.
García BelaundeD (2006) Las Constituciones del Perú. Segunda edición revisada y ampliada. Lima: Fondo Editorial de la Universidad San Martin de Porres.
25.
GrahamC (1990) Peru’s APRA Party in Power: Impossible Revolution, Relinquished Reform. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs32 (3): 75–115.
26.
GrofmanBSchneiderCQ (2009) An Introduction to Crisp Set QCA, with a Comparison to Binary Logistic Regression. Political Research Quarterly62 (4): 662–672.
27.
HagopianFMainwaringS (eds) (2005) The Third Wave of Democratization in Latin America: Advances and Setbacks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28.
HawkinsK (2009) Is Chávez Populist? Measuring Populist Discourse in Comparative Perspective. Comparative Political Studies42 (8): 1040–1067.
29.
HawkinsK (2010) Venezuela’s Chavismo and Populism in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30.
HawkinsKRovira KaltwasserC (in press) The Ideational Approach to Populism. Latin American Research Review.
31.
HochstetlerK (2006) Rethinking Presidentialism: Challenges and Presidential Falls in South America. Comparative Politics38 (4): 401–418.
32.
HouleCKennyPD (2016) The Political and Economic Consequences of Populist Rule in Latin America. Government and Opposition. Cambridge University Press, pp.1–32. DOI: 10.1017/gov.2016.25.
33.
HuberRASchimpfCH (2016) Friend or Foe? Testing the Influence of Populism on Democratic Quality in Latin America. Political Studies64 (4): 872–889.
34.
KrogslundCChoiDDPoertnerM (2015) Fuzzy Sets on Shaky Ground: Parameter Sensitivity and Confirmation Bias in fsQCA. Political Analysis23 (1): 21–41.
35.
LaclauE (2005) On Populist Reason. London: Verso.
36.
LaclauEMouffeC (1985) Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London: Verso.
37.
LevitskySCameronMA (2003) Democracy without Parties? Political Parties and Regime Change in Fujimori’s Peru. Latin American Politics and Society45 (3): 1–33.
38.
LevitskySLoxtonJ (2013) Populism and Competitive Authoritarianism in the Andes. Democratization20 (1): 107–136.
39.
LevitskySMurilloMV (2008) Argentina: From Kirchner to Kirchner. Journal of Democracy19 (2): 16–30.
40.
LevitskySWayLA (2002) Elections without Democracy: The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy13 (2): 51–65.
41.
LinzJJ (1994) Presidential or Parliamentary Democracy: Does It Make a Difference? In: LinzJJValenzuelaA (eds) The Failure of Presidential Democracy. London: Boulder, pp.3–91.
42.
LongestKCVaiseyS (2008) Fuzzy: A Program for Performing Qualitative Comparative Analyses (QCA) in Stata. The Stata Journal8 (1): 79–104.
43.
López MayaM (2011) Venezuela: Hugo Chávez and the Populist Left. In: LevitskySRobertsKM (eds) The Resurgence of the Latin American Left. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp.213–238.
44.
LupuN (2012) The 2011 General Elections in Peru. Electoral Studies31 (3): 621–624.
45.
McConnellSA (2014) The 2011 Presidential and Legislative Elections in Nicaragua. Electoral Studies34: 300–303.
46.
MadridR (2008) The Rise of Ethnopopulism in Latin America. World Politics60 (3): 475–508.
47.
MadridR (2011) Bolivia: Origins and Policies of the Movimiento al Socialismo. In: LevitskySRobertsKM (eds) The Resurgence of the Latin American Left. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp.239–259.
48.
MahoneyJThelenK (eds) (2010) Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
49.
MainwaringSShugartMS (1997) Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
50.
MarshallMJaggersKGurrTR (2016) Polity IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800–2015. In: Dataset Users’ Manual. Center for Systemic Peace, pp.1–86. Available at: http://www.systemicpeace.org/inscr/p4manualv2015.pdf (accessed 31 August 2017).
51.
Martí i PuigS (2010) The Adaptation of the FSLN: Daniel Ortega’s Leadership and Democracy in Nicaragua. Latin American Politics and Society52 (4): 79–106.
52.
MartzJD (1983) Populist Leadership and the Party Caudillo: Ecuador and the CFP, 1962–81. Studies in Comparative International Development18 (3): 22–49.
53.
MayorgaRA (2006) Outsiders and Neopopulism: The Road to Plebiscitarian Authoritarianism. In: MainwaringSBejaranoAMLeongómezEP (eds) The Crisis of Democratic Representation in the Andes. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, pp.132–167.
54.
Mejía AcostaAPolga-HecimovichJ (2010) Parliamentary Solutions to Presidential Crisis in Ecuador. In: LlanosMMarsteintredetL (eds) Presidential Breakdowns in Latin America: Causes and Outcomes of Executive Instability in Developing Democracies. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.73–90.
55.
MolinaJEPérezC (2004) Radical Change at the Ballot Box: Causes and Consequences of Electoral Behavior in Venezuela’s 2000 Elections. Latin American Politics and Society46 (1): 103–134.
56.
MuddeC (2004) The Populist Zeitgeist. Government and Opposition39 (4): 541–563.
57.
MuddeCRovira KaltwasserC (2012a) Populism and (Liberal) Democracy: A Framework for Analysis. In: MuddeCRovira KaltwasserC (eds) Populism in Europe and the Americas: Threat or Corrective for Democracy?Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.1–26.
58.
MuddeCRovira KaltwasserC (eds) (2012b) Populism in Europe and the Americas: Threat or Corrective for Democracy?Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
59.
MuddeCRovira KaltwasserR (2013) Exclusionary vs. Inclusionary Populism: Comparing Contemporary Europe and Latin America. Government and Opposition48 (2): 147–174.
60.
MuellerJE (1970) Presidential Popularity from Truman to Johnson. American Political Science Review64 (1): 18–34.
61.
NegrettoGL (1999) Constitution-Making and Institutional Design: The Transformations of Presidentialism in Argentina. European Journal of Sociology40 (2): 193–232.
62.
NegrettoGL (2009) Political Parties and Institutional Design: Explaining Constitutional Choice in Latin America. British Journal of Political Science39 (1): 117–139.
63.
O’DonnellG (1994) Delegative Democracy. Journal of Democracy5 (1): 55–69.
64.
O’DonnellG (1999) Horizontal Accountability in New Democracies. In: SchedlerADiamondLPlattnerMF (eds) The Self-Restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, pp.27–51.
65.
PanizzaF (2000) Neopopulism and Its Limits in Collor’s Brazil. Bulletin of Latin American Research19 (2): 177–192.
66.
Peréz-LiñanAS (2007) Presidential Impeachment and the New Political Instability in Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
67.
Pérez-LiñanASRodríguez-RagaJC (2009) Veto Players in Presidential Regimes: Institutional Variables and Policy Change. Revista de Ciencia Política29 (3): 693–720.
68.
PlattnerMF (2010) Populism, Pluralism, and Liberal Democracy. Journal of Democracy21 (1): 81–92.
69.
RaginC (1987) The Comparative Method: Moving beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
70.
RaginC (2006) Set Relations in Social Research: Evaluating Their Consistency and Coverage. Political Analysis14 (3): 291–310.
71.
RooduijnM (2014) The Nucleus of Populism: In Search of the Lowest Common Denominator. Government and Opposition49 (4): 573–599.
72.
Rovira KaltwasserC (2012) The Ambivalence of Populism: Threat and Corrective for Democracy. Democratization19 (2): 184–208.
73.
Rovira KaltwasserCTaggartP (2016) Dealing with Populists in Government: A Framework for Analysis. Democratization23 (2): 201–220.
74.
RuhlJM (2010) Honduras Unravels. Journal of Democracy21 (2): 93–107.
75.
RuthSPHawkinsK (2017) Populism and Democratic Representation in Latin America. In: Holtz-BachaCMazzoleniOHeinischR (eds) Handbook on Political Populism. Baden-Baden: Nomos, pp.255–273.
76.
SagásE (2003) Elections in the Dominican Republic, May 2002. Electoral Studies22 (4): 792–798.
77.
SagásE (2005) The 2004 Presidential Election in the Dominican Republic. Electoral Studies24 (1): 156–160.
78.
SchedlerA (1996) Anti-Political-Establishment Parties. Party Politics2 (3): 291–312.
79.
SchmidtGD (2007) Back to the Future? The 2006 Peruvian General Election. Electoral Studies26 (4): 813–819.
80.
SchneiderCQWagemannC (2012) Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
81.
ShugartMS (1995) The Electoral Cycle and Institutional Sources of Divided Presidential Government. American Political Science Review89 (2): 327–343.
82.
ShugartMSCareyJM (1992) Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
83.
SkaaningS-E (2011) Assessing the Robustness of Crisp-Set and Fuzzy-Set QCA Results. Sociological Methods & Research40 (2): 391–408.
84.
SmulovitzCPeruzzottiE (2000) Societal Accountability in Latin America. Journal of Democracy11 (4): 147–158.
85.
van KesselS (2015) Populist Parties in Europe: Agents of Discontent?Basingstoke; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
86.
WerlichDP (1988) Peru: García Loses His Charm. Current History87 (525): 13–16; 36–37.
87.
WeylandK (2001) Clarifying a Contested Concept: Populism in the Study of Latin American Politics. Comparative Politics34 (1): 1–22.
88.
WeylandK (2009) The Rise of Latin America’s Two Lefts: Insights from Rentier State Theory. Comparative Politics41 (2): 145–164.
89.
Wills-OteroL (2009) Electoral Systems in Latin America: Explaining the Adoption of Proportional Representation Systems during the Twentieth Century. Latin American Politics and Society51 (3): 33–58.
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.
