Research has shown that citizens’ economic perceptions heavily influence their political support, both support for the incumbent government and support for the political system. Yet, inadequate attention has been paid to how the economic roles of the government shape the economic basis of political support. We argue that the extent to which the government is engaged in the economy determines how people attribute economic success or failure to the government and thus moderates the effect of economic perceptions. Focusing on one widely researched measurement of political support in a democratic setting, democratic satisfaction, we analyze the moderating effect of government economic engagement on the effect of economic perceptions among eighteen Latin American democracies. A consistent finding yielded in our study is that with a higher level of economic engagement of the government, there is a stronger association between citizens’ perceptions of economic conditions and their satisfaction with democracy.
AcemogluDaron. 2005. “Politics and Economics in Weak and Strong States.” Journal of Monetary Economics52 (7): 1199–1226.
2.
AlcañizIsabellaHellwigTimothy. 2011. “Who’s to Blame? The Distribution of Responsibility in Developing Democracies.” British Journal of Political Science41 (2): 389–411.
3.
AlesinaAlbertoRoubiniNourieiCohenGerald D.1997. Political Cycles and the Macroeconomy. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
4.
AndersonCameron D.2006. “Economic Voting and Multilevel Governance: A Comparative Individual-Level Analysis.” American Journal of Political Science50 (2): 449–63.
5.
AndersonChristopher J.2000. “Economic Voting and Political Context: A Comparative Perspective.” Electoral Studies19 (2–3): 151–70.
6.
AndersonChristopher J.2007. “The End of Economic Voting? Contingency Dilemmas and the Limits of Democratic Accountability.” Annual Review of Political Science10 (1): 271–96.
7.
AndersonChristopher J.GuilloryChristine A.1997. “Political Institutions and Satisfaction with Democracy: A Cross-National Analysis of Consensus and Majoritarian Systems.” American Political Science Review91 (1): 66–81.
8.
BecherMichaelDonnellyMichael. 2013. “Economic Performance, Individual Evaluations, and the Vote: Investigating the Causal Mechanism.” The Journal of Politics75 (4): 968–79.
9.
BellinEva. 2000. “Contingent Democrats: Industrialists, Labor and Democratization in Late-Developing Countries.” World Politics52 (2): 175–205.
10.
BrattonMichaelMattesRobert. 2001. “Support for Democracy in Africa: Intrinsic or Instrumental?” British Journal of Political Science31 (3): 447–74.
11.
BrattonMichaelMattesRobertGyimah-BoadiE.2005. Public Opinion, Democracy, and Market Reform in Africa. New York: Cambridge University Press.
12.
Bueno de MesquitaBruceDownsGeorge. 2005. “Development and democracy.” Foreign Affairs84 (5): 77–86.
13.
CampbellRoss. 2015. “Winners, Losers, and the Grand Coalition: Political Satisfaction in the Federal Republic of Germany.” International Political Science Review36 (2): 168–84.
14.
ChuYun-hanBrattonMichaelLagosMartaShastriSandeep. 2008. “Public Opinion and Democratic Legitimacy.” Journal of Democracy19 (2): 74–87.
15.
CitrinJack. 1974. “The Political Relevance of Trust in Government.” American Political Science Review68 (3): 973–88.
16.
CitrinJackGreenDonald. 1986. “Presidential Leadership and the Resurgence of Trust in Government.” British Journal of Political Science16 (3): 431–53.
17.
CuriniLuigiJouWillyMemoliVincenzo. 2012. “Satisfaction with Democracy and the Winner/Loser Debate: The Role of Policy Preferences and Past Experience.” British Journal of Political Science42 (2): 241–61.
18.
DuchRaymond M.1993. “Tolerating Economic Reform: Popular Support for Transition to a Free Market in the Former Soviet Union.” American Political Science Review87:590–608.
19.
DuchRaymond M.StevensonRandy. 2008. The Economic Vote. New York: Cambridge University Press.
20.
EastonDavid. 1965. A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
21.
EastonDavid. 1975. “A Re-assessment of the Concept of Political Support.” British Journal of Political Science5 (4): 435–57.
22.
EvansGeoffreyAndersenRobert. 2006. “The Political Conditioning of Economic Perceptions.” The Journal of Politics68 (1): 194–207.
23.
EvansGeoffreyWhitefieldStephen. 1995. “The Politics and Economics of Democratic Commitment: Support for Democracy in Transition Societies.” British Journal of Political Science25 (4): 485–514.
24.
EvansPeter. 1995. Embedded Autonomy: States and Industrial Transformation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
25.
FinkelSteven E.MullerEdward N.SeligsonMitchell A.1989. “Economic Crisis, Incumbent Performance and Regime Support: A Comparison of Longitudinal Data from West Germany and Costa Rica.” British Journal of Political Science19 (3): 329–51.
26.
HallPeterSoskiceDavid. 2001. Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27.
HellwigTimothy. 2012. “Constructing Accountability: Party Position Taking and Economic Voting.” Comparative Political Studies45 (1): 91–118.
28.
HetheringtonMarc. 1998. “The Political Relevance of Political Trust.” American Political Science Review92 (4): 791–808.
29.
HibbsDouglas A.1982. “On the Demand for Economic Outcomes: Macroeconomic Performance and Mass Political Support in the United States, Great Britain, and Germany.” The Journal of Politics44 (2): 426–62.
30.
JosephRichard. 1997. “Democratization in Africa after 1989: Comparative and Theoretical Perspectives.” Comparative Politics29 (3): 363–82.
31.
KeeferPhilip. 2007. “Clientelism, Credibility, and the Policy Choices of Young Democracies.” American Journal of Political Science51 (4): 804–21.
32.
KitscheltHerbert. 1992. “The Formation of Party Systems in East Central Europe.” Politics & Society20 (1): 7–50.
33.
KohliAtul. 2004. State Directed-Development: Political Power and Industrialization in the Global Periphery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34.
LagosMarta. 2003. “A Road with No Return?” Journal of Democracy14 (2): 163–73.
35.
Lewis-BeckMichael S.StegmaierMary. 2000. “Economic Determinants of Electoral Outcomes.” Annual Review of Political Science3:183–219.
36.
Lewis-BeckMichael S.StegmaierMary. 2013. “The VP-Function Revisited: A Survey of the Literature on Vote and Popularity Functions after over 40 Years.” Public Choice157:367–85.
37.
LipsetSeymour M.SchneiderWilliam. 1987. The Confidence Gap: Business, Labor, and Government in the Public Mind. Revised ed. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
38.
ListhaugOla. 1995. “The Dynamics of Trust in Politicians.” In Citizens and the State, edited by KlingemannHans-DieterFuchsDieter, 261–97. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
39.
LockerbieBrad. 1993. “Economic Dissatisfaction and Political Alienation in Western Europe.” European Journal of Political Research23 (4): 281–93.
40.
LohmannS.1999. “What Price Accountability? The Lucas Island Model and the Politics of Monetary Policy.” American Journal of Political Science43 (2): 396–430.
41.
LühisteKadri. 2014. “Social Protection and Satisfaction with Democracy: A Multi-level Analysis.” Political Studies62 (4): 784–803.
42.
MagalhãesPedro C.2016. “Economic Evaluations, Procedural Fairness, and Satisfaction with Democracy.” Political Research Quarterly69 (3): 522–34.
43.
MigdalJoel. 1988. Strong Societies and Weak States: State-Society Relations and State Capabilities in the Third World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
44.
MillerArthur H.1974. “Political Issues and Trust in Government: 1964–1970.” American Political Science Review68 (3): 951–72.
45.
MishlerWilliamRoseRichard. 2001a. “Political Support for Incomplete Democracies: Realist vs. Idealist Theories and Measures.” International Political Science Review22 (4): 303–20.
46.
MishlerWilliamRoseRichard. 2001b. “What Are the Origins of Political Trust? Testing Institutional and Cultural Theories in Post-communist Societies.” Comparative Political Studies34 (1): 30–62.
47.
MohtadiHamidRoeTerry L.2003. “Democracy, Rent Seeking, Public Spending and Growth.” Journal of Public Economics87 (3–4): 445–66.
48.
MullerEdward N.JukamThomas O.1977. “On the Meaning of Political Support.” American Political Science Review71 (4): 1561–95.
49.
NewtonKenneth. 2006. “Political Support: Social Capital, Civil Society and Political and Economic Performance.” Political Studies54 (4): 846–64.
50.
NorrisPippa, ed. 1999. Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
51.
NorthDouglass. 1981. Structure and Change in Economic History. New York: W.W. Norton.
52.
PeffleyMark. 1985. “The Voter as Juror: Attributing Responsibility for Economic Conditions.” In Economic Conditions and Electoral Outcomes: The United States and Western Europe, edited by EulauHeinzLewis-BeckMichael S., 187–206. New York: Agathon Press.
53.
PowellG. BinghamJr.WhittenGuy D.1993. “A Cross-National Analysis of Economic Voting: Taking Account of the Political Context.” American Journal of Political Science37 (2): 391–414.
54.
PrzeworskiAdam. 1991. Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.
55.
PrzeworskiAdam. 1996. “What Makes Democracies Endure?” Journal of Democracy7 (1): 39–55.
56.
RemmerKaren L.1996. “The Sustainability of Political Democracy.” Comparative Political Studies29 (6): 611–34.
57.
RemmerKaren L.1999. “Regime Sustainability in the Latin Caribbean, 1944–1994.” The Journal of Developing Areas33 (3): 331–54.
58.
RoseRichardShinDohChull. 2001. “Democratization Backwards: The Problem of Third-Wave Democracies.” British Journal of Political Science31 (2): 331–54.
59.
RudolphThomas J.2003. “Who’s Responsible for the Economy? The Formation and Consequences of Responsibility Attributions.” American Journal of Political Science47 (4): 698–713.
60.
SteenbergenMarcoJonesBradford. 2002. “Modeling Multilevel Data Structures.” American Journal of Political Science46 (1): 218–37.
61.
StreeckWolfgangYamamuraKozo. 2003. The End of Diversity? Prospects for German and Japanese Capitalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
62.
SvolikMilan W.2013. “Learning to Love Democracy: Electoral Accountability and the Success of Democracy.” American Journal of Political Science57 (3): 685–702.
63.
TangMinHuheNarisongZhouQiang. 2017. “Contingent Democratization: When Do Economic Crises Matter?” British Journal of Political Science47 (1): 71–90.
64.
TangMinWoodsDwayne. 2014. “Conditional Effect of Economic Development on Democracy—The Relevance of the State.” Democratization21 (3): 411–33.
65.
TilleyJamesHoboltSara B.2011. “Is the Government to Blame? An Experimental Test of How Partisanship Shapes Perceptions of Performance and Responsibility.” The Journal of Politics73 (2): 316–30.
66.
WadeRobert. 1990. Governing the Market: Economic Theory and the Role of Government in East Asian Industrialization. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
67.
WagnerAlexander F.SchneiderFriedrichHallaMartin. 2009. “The Quality of Institutions and Satisfaction with Democracy in Western Europe—A Panel Analysis.” European Journal of Political Economy25 (1): 30–41.
68.
Waldron-MoorePamela. 1999. “Eastern Europe at the Crossroads of Democratic Transition: Evaluating Support for Democratic Institutions, Satisfaction with Democratic Government, and Consolidation of Democratic Regimes.” Comparative Political Studies32:32–62.
69.
WeatherfordM. Stephen. 1984. “Economic ‘Stagflation’ and Public Support for the Political System.” British Journal of Political Science14 (2): 187–205.
70.
WeatherfordM. Stephen. 1987. “How Does Government Performance Influence Political Support?” Political Behavior9 (1): 5–28.
71.
WellsJason M.KrieckhausJonathan. 2006. “Does National Context Influence Democratic Satisfaction? A Multi-Level Analysis.” Political Research Quarterly59(4): 569–78.
72.
WeylandKurt. 1998. “The Politics of Corruption in Latin America.” Journal of Democracy9 (2): 108–21.
73.
WhiteheadL.1993. “The Alternatives to ‘Liberal Democracy’: A Latin American Perspective.” In Prospects for Democracy: North, South, East, West, edited by HeldDavid, 312–29. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
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.
