Advertisement

Community Size, Social Capital, and Political Participation in Latin America

Original Paper

Abstract

Political participation is often conceived of as a largely individual act. In this paper we emphasize the context in which that choice is made: features of that context make some choices more likely than others both in terms of the decision to participate but also in terms of the kinds of participation in which to engage. In particular, we examine the role that social capital plays in shaping political participation in Latin America. We show that higher levels of social capital promote more conventional forms of political participation such as voting and contacting elected representatives. Given marked differences in levels of social capital across rural and urban areas we are therefore able to show that there exists a geography of political participation across Latin America.

Keywords

Political participation Social capital Turnout Latin America 

Supplementary material

11109_2018_9470_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (389 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 389 kb)

References

  1. Adam, F., & Rončević, B. (2003). Social capital: Recent debates and research trends. Social Science Information, 42(2), 155–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Almeida, P. D. (2007). Defensive mobilization: Popular movements against economic adjustment policies in Latin America. Latin American Perspectives, 34(3), 123–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amato, P. R. (1993). Urban-rural differences in helping friends and family members. Social Psychology Quarterly, 56(4), 249–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ayres, R. L. (1998). Crime and violence as development issues in Latin America and the Caribbean. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Banerjee, R. (2016). Corruption, norm violation and decay in social capital. Journal of Public Economics, 137, 14–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual. Strategic, and Statistical Considerations Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bellinger, P. T., & Arce, M. (2011). Protest and democracy in Latin America’s market era. Political Research Quarterly, 64(3), 688–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bolzendahl, C., & Coffé, H. (2013). Are ‘good’ citizens ‘good’ participants? Testing citizenship norms and political participation across 25 nations. Political Studies, 61(S1), 45–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Booth, J. A., & Seligson, M. A. (2005). Political legitimacy and participation in Costa Rica: Evidence of arena shopping. Political Research Quarterly, 58(4), 537–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brady, H. E., Verba, S., & Schlozman, K. L. (1995). Beyond SES: A resource model of political participation. American Political Science Review, 89(2), 271–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brehm, J., & Rahn, W. (1997). Individual-level evidence for the causes and consequences of social capital. American Journal of Political Science, 41(3), 999–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bruhn, K. (2008). Urban Protest in Brazil and Mexico. New York: Cambridge.Google Scholar
  13. Campbell, D. E. (2013). Social networks and political participation. Annual Review of Political Science, 16, 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carlin, R. E., & Love, G. J. (2015). Who is the Latin American voter? In R. E. Carlin, M. M. Singer, & E. J. Zechmeister (Eds.), The Latin American voter: Pursuing representation and accountability in challenging contexts. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carlin, R. E., Singer, M. M., & Zechmeister, E. J. (Eds.). (2015). The Latin American voter: Pursuing representation and accountability in challenging contexts. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  16. Carreras, M. (2013). The impact of criminal violence on regime legitimacy in Latin America. Latin American Research Review, 48(3), 85–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Carreras, M. (2016). Compulsory voting and political engagement (beyond the ballot box): A multilevel analysis. Electoral Studies, 43, 158–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Carreras, M., & Castañeda-Angarita, N. (2014). Who votes in Latin America? A test of three theoretical perspectives. Comparative Political Studies, 47(8), 1079–1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Carreras, M., & Vera, S. (forthcoming). Do Corrupt Politicians Mobilize or Demobilize Voters? A Vignette Experiment in Colombia. Latin American Politics & Society.Google Scholar
  20. Carter, M. (2010). The landless rural workers movement and democracy in Brazil. Latin American Research Review, 45, 186–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ceobanu, A. M., Wood, C. H., & Ribeiro, L. (2011). Crime victimization and public support for democracy: Evidence from Latin America. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 23(1), 56–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Córdova, A., & Hiskey, J. (2015). Shaping politics at home: Cross-border social ties and local-level political engagement. Comparative Political Studies, 48(11), 1454–1487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Craig, S. C., & Maggiotto, M. A. (1982). Measuring political efficacy. Political Methodology, 8(3), 85–109.Google Scholar
  24. Cruz, J. M. (2000). Violencia, democracia y cultura política. Nueva Sociedad, 167, 132–146.Google Scholar
  25. Dahl, R. A., & Tufte, E. R. (1973). Size and democracy. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Dalton, R. J. (2008). Citizenship norms and the expansion of political participation. Political Studies, 56(1), 76–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dreyer Lassen, D., & Serritzlew, S. (2011). Jurisdiction size and local democracy: Evidence on internal political efficacy from large-scale municipal reform. American Political Science Review, 105(2), 238–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Durkheim, É. (1893/1984). The Division of Labour in Society. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  29. Eckstein, S. (2001). Power and popular protest: Latin American social movements. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  30. Evans, M. (2014). Operationalising the concept of social capital: New perspectives and new measures. In A. Christoforou & J. B. Davis (Eds.), Social capital and economics: Social values, power, and social identity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Finkel, S. E. (1985). Reciprocal effects of participation and political efficacy: A panel analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 29(4), 891–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Fisman, R., & Khanna, T. (1999). Is trust a historical residue? Information flows and trust levels. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 38(1), 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Fornos, C. A., Power, T. J., & Garand, J. C. (2004). Explaining voter turnout in Latin America, 1980 to 2000. Comparative Political Studies, 37(8), 909–940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2006). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Gerring, J., Palmer, M., Teorell, J., & Zarecki, D. (2015). Demography and democracy: A global, district-level analysis of electoral contestation. American Political Science Review, 109(3), 574–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Grootaert, C., Narayan, D., Nyhan Jones, V., & Woolcock, M. (2004). Measuring Social Capital: An Integrated Questionnaire. World Bank Working Paper 18. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.Google Scholar
  38. Hansen, S. W. (2013). Polity size and local political trust: A quasi-experiment using municipal mergers in Denmark. Scandinavian Political Studies, 36(1), 43–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hansen, S. W. (2015). The democratic costs of size: How increasing size affects citizen satisfaction with local government. Political Studies, 63(2), 373–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hofferth, S. L., & Iceland, J. (1998). Social capital in rural and urban communities. Rural Sociology, 63(4), 574–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Horton, L. R. (2013). From collectivism to capitalism: Neoliberalism and rural mobilization in Nicaragua. Latin American Politics & Society, 55(1), 119–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1981). Process analysis: Estimating mediation in treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5(5), 602–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kaasa, A., & Parts, E. (2008). Individual-level determinants of social capital in Europe: Differences between country groups. Acta Sociologica, 51(2), 145–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Karp, J. A., & Banducci, S. A. (2008). Political efficacy and participation in twenty-seven democracies: How electoral systems shape political behaviour. British Journal of Political Science, 38(2), 311–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Klesner, J. L. (2007). Social capital and political participation in Latin America: Evidence from Argentina, Chile, Mexico, and Peru. Latin American Research Review, 42(2), 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ley, S. (2017). To vote or not to vote: How criminal violence shapes electoral participation. Journal of Conflict Resolution.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002717708600.Google Scholar
  47. Lin, N. (2004). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Milgram, S. (1970). The experience of living in cities. Science, 167(3924), 1461–1468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Moseley, M. (2015). Contentious engagement: Understanding protest participation in Latin American democracies. Journal of Politics in Latin America, 7(3), 3–48.Google Scholar
  50. Mouritzen, P. E. (1989). City size and citizens’ satisfaction: Two competing theories revisited. European Journal of Political Research, 17(6), 661–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Niemi, R. G., Craig, S. C., & Mattei, F. (1991). Measuring internal political efficacy in the 1988 National Election Study. American Political Science Review, 85(4), 1407–1413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Oliver, J. E. (2000). City size and civic involvement in metropolitan America. American Political Science Review, 94(2), 361–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pallares, A. (2002). From peasant struggles to Indian resistance: The Ecuadorian Andes in the late twentieth century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
  54. Parkinson, C. (2014). Latin America is World’s Most Violent Region: UN. InSight Crime.Google Scholar
  55. Pérez-Liñán, A. (2007). Presidential impeachment and the new political instability in Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Portes, A. (2000). The two meanings of social capital. Sociological Forum, 15(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Prayitno, G., Matsushima, K., Jeong, H., & Kobayashi, K. (2014). Social capital and migration in rural area development. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 20, 543–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Preacher, K. J., & Kelley, K. (2011). Effect size measures for mediation models: Quantitative strategies for communicating indirect effects. Psychological Methods, 16(2), 93–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of american community. New york: Simon & Schuster.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Remmer, K. L. (2010). Political scale and electoral turnout: Evidence from the less industrialized world. Comparative Political Studies, 43(3), 275–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Roberts, B. R., & Portes, A. (2006). Coping with the free market city: Collective action in six Latin American cities at the end of the twentieth century. Latin American Research Review, 41(2), 57–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rothstein, B., & Eek, D. (2009). Political corruption and social trust: An experimental approach. Rationality and Society, 21(1), 81–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Salgado Bueno, N., & Mendes Fialho, F. (2009). Race, resources, and political participation in a Brazilian City. Latin American Research Review, 44(2), 59–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sampson, R. J. (1988). Local friendship ties and community attachment in mass society: A multilevel systemic model. American Sociological Review, 53(5), 766–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Seligson, A. L. (1999). Civic association and democratic participation in central America: A test of the putnam thesis. Comparative Political Studies, 32(3), 342–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Seligson, M. A. (2002a). The impact of corruption on regime legitimacy: A comparative study of four latin American Countries. Journal of Politics, 64(2), 408–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Seligson, M. A. (2002b). Trouble in paradise? The Erosion of system support in Costa Rica, 1978–1999. Latin American Research Review, 37(1), 160–185.Google Scholar
  70. Seligson, M. A., & Booth, J. A. (1976). Political participation in Latin America: An agenda for research. Latin American Research Review, 11(3), 95–119.Google Scholar
  71. Smith, A. E. (2009). Legitimate grievances: Preferences for democracy, system support, and political participation in Bolivia. Latin American Research Review, 44(3), 102–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Snijders, T. A., & Bosker, R. J. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  73. Solt, F., Kim, D., Lee, K. Y., Willardson, S., & Kim, S. (2014). Neoliberal reform and protest in Latin American democracies: A replication and correction. Research & Politics, 1(2), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Sørensen, J. F. L. (2012). Testing the hypothesis of higher social capital in rural areas: The case of Denmark. Regional Studies, 46(7), 873–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Stahler-Sholk, R., Vanden, H. E., & Kuecker, G. D. (2007). Introduction: globalizing resistance: The new politics of social movements in Latin America. Latin American Perspectives, 34(2), 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Tönnies, F. (1887/1957). Community and Society. New York: Harper Torchbook.Google Scholar
  77. Trelles, A., & Carreras, M. (2012). Bullets and votes: Violence and electoral participation in Mexico. Journal of Politics in Latin America, 4(2), 89–123.Google Scholar
  78. Valenzuela, A. (2004). Latin American presidencies interrupted. Journal of Democracy, 15(4), 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Verba, S., Burns, N., & Schlozman, K. L. (1997). Knowing and caring about politics: Gender and political engagement. Journal of Politics, 59(4), 1051–1072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Verba, S., & Nie, N. H. (1972). Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  81. Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  82. Vilalta, C. J., Castillo, J. G., & Torres, J. A. (2016). Violent crime in Latin American Cities. Washington, D.C.: Inter-American Development Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Wickham-Crowley, T. P., & Eckstein, S. (2015). The persisting relevance of political economy and political sociology in Latin American Social Movement Studies. Latin American Research Review, 50(4), 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wirth, L. (1938). Urbanism as a way of life. American Journal of Sociology, 44(1), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Ziersch, A. M., Baum, F., Ngurah Darmawanm, I. G., Kavanagh, A. M., & Bentley, R. J. (2009). Social capital and health in rural and urban communities in South Australia. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 33(1), 7–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUC RiversideRiversideUSA

Personalised recommendations