Uniting Against Autocrats : Opposition Coordination, Turnovers and Democratization by Elections

As counter intuitive as it might sound, autocracy without elections is a rare combination today. Elections do not constitute democracy, but they can promote democratization. This dissertation studies the process of democratization through elections, focusing on the effect of opposition coordination. Several authors have stressed the importance of opposition coordination as an explanation for democratization by elections, emphasizing how a coordinated opposition increases the electoral pressure on incumbent regimes and enhances the probability of electoral turnovers. However, little research has been done investigating the causes for opposition coordination under electoral authoritarianism, or studying the more long-term consequences of coordination beyond the electoral outcome. This dissertation does so in four independent, but related, articles probing the overall question: How is democratization by elections achieved and what causal explanatory power can be attributed to opposition coordination for obtaining democratizing outcomes in authoritarian elections? Using statistical evidence from electoral authoritarian regimes around the globe, together with in-depth case studies of three African countries, Ghana, Kenya and Senegal, the findings diverge substantially from much of the previous research. The general causal relationship between opposition coordination and democratization by elections is questioned. It is argued that much of the previous literature has confused alternation with democratization. Oppositional politicians radically change their institutional preferences once they assume office, and although coordination increases the prospects for turnovers, it often does not result in long-term democratization. In cases where parties are poorly institutionalized and appeal to voters through patronage rather than through different distinguishable policy agendas, coordination often reflects the probability of election turnovers rather than causes democratization

Mapping the Unknown Terrain: Party Policy Mapping in Electoral Authoritarian Regimes

Oppositional pre-electoral coalition formation has, in a number of recent studies, been proven to have an important effect on the prospects for liberalizing electoral outcomes in authoritarian elections. Despite this recent recognition of oppositional coalitions as a trigger for democratization, almost nothing is known about when these coalitions are formed. An important explanation for the lack of cross-national large-N studies on this issue is the lack of sufficient data on party policy positions, among parties operating within these authoritarian systems. Policy differences between oppositional parties have been hypothesized to have a negative effect on the prospects for coalitions in the more studied Western democratic systems. In order to perform an exhaustive investigation of the prospects for oppositional coalitions in authoritarian elections, sufficient data on party policy differences would therefore be necessary. In this paper different strategies for party policy mapping is presented and assessed as methods for approximating policy distance between parties in authoritarian regimes. It is argued that a voter-based policy mapping (VPM) approach is the best strategy for this task, when considering both feasibility and validity aspects. In the later part of this paper an empirical comparison is performes between approximations made by VPM and the widely used Manifesto Research Group (MRG), using data for parties that contested post-communist authoritarian elections in the period 1990-2004. The comparison shows a significant correlation between the data produced with these two different strategies. Moreover, more qualitative comparisons of widely divergent cases in the VPM and MRG data, and a comparison with expert-survey data suggest that the VPM data is at least as reliable as the MRG data, in this particular context

Rural bias in African electoral systems: legacies of unequal representation in African democracies

Although electoral malapportionment is a recurrent theme in monitoring reports on African elections, few researchers have tackled this issue. Here we theorize the meaning and broader implications of malapportionment in eight African countries with Single Member District (SMD) electoral systems. Using a new dataset on registered voters and constituency level election results, we study malapportionment's magnitude, persistence over time, and electoral consequences. The analysis reveals that patterns of apportionment institutionalized in the pre-1990 era established a long-lasting bias in favor of rural voters. This "rural bias" has been strikingly stable in the post-1990 era, even where the ancien regime has been voted out of power. These findings underscore the importance of the urban-rural distinction in explaining electoral outcomes in Africa

#Zambia Presidential Elections: Why is it so hard to predict a potential winner?

Ahead of Zambia’s presidential by-election, LSE’s Catherine Boone and Michael Wahman look at reasons why incumbent political parties find it so hard to maintain their support in urban areas. This post is part of our African Elections series

#ZambiaDecides 2016 will not necessarily be a rerun of the 2015 presidential by-election

Hangala Siachiwena and Michael Wahman discuss four key factors that could determine the outcome of the 2016 Zambian elections

The presidential, parliamentary andlocal elections in Malawi, May 2014

On 20 May 2014, Malawi arranged tripartite elections for president, parliament and local councils. The elections were remarkable for several reasons, seen from both an African and a Malawian perspective. Despite an uneven electoral playing field, the elections were highly competitive, ultimately leading to the country’s second turnover of power when opposition challenger Peter Mutharika defeated the incumbent president, Joyce Banda. The electoral results also show a return to regionalistic voting patterns and a continuing weakening of political parties, as independent candidates emerged as the largest group in parliament. Although the results were generally credible, the election remains controversial. Several stakeholders questioned the general integrity of the process, and significant logistical problems on election day might have harmed public trust in the electoral authorities

Democracy in Reverse: The 2016 General Election in Zambia

Am 11. August 2016 fanden in Sambia gleichzeitig Präsidentschaftswahlen, Wahlen zum nationalen Parlament sowie Kommunal- und Bürgermeisterwahlen statt. Parallel dazu wurde ein Referendum zur Aufwertung der Grundrechte in der Verfassung abgehalten. Diese Wahlen waren aus mehreren Gründen von besonderer Bedeutung: Es handelte sich um den ersten Wahlgang unter einer kurz zuvor überarbeiteten Verfassung, in der die Rahmenbedingungen von Wahlen erheblich verändert worden waren. Der Wahlverlauf stand im Widerspruch zur historischen Erfahrung, dass Wahlen in Sambia friedlich verlaufen. Und schließlich war der Wahlkampf von einem beträchtlichen Ungleichgewicht zugunsten der Regierungspartei gekennzeichnet. Am Ende gelang es dem amtierenden Präsidenten der Patriotic Front, Edgar Lungu, den Herausforderer der Opposition, Hakainde Hichilema von der United Party for National Development, beiseite zu drängen. Das Wahlergebnis war umstritten. Die Opposition versuchte, die Endergebnisse juristisch anzufechten, hatte damit jedoch keinen Erfolg. So bedeuten die Wahlen von 2016 eine Wende im politischen System Sambias und stellen die demokratische Konsolidierung des Landes infrage.On 11 August 2016, Zambia held elections for the presidency, National Assembly, local councillors, and mayors. Concurrently, a referendum was held on whether to enhance the Bill of Rights in the Constitution of Zambia. The elections were significant for several reasons: It was the first contest under a newly amended Constitution, which introduced important changes to the electoral framework. It also marked a break with Zambia’s positive historical record of arranging generally peaceful elections. Moreover, the election featured an electoral playing field that was notably tilted in favour of the incumbent party. Ultimately, the incumbent president, Edgar Lungu of the Patriotic Front, edged out opposition challenger Hakainde Hichilema of the United Party for National Development. The election was controversial and the opposition mounted an unsuccessful legal challenge to the final results. The 2016 elections represent a reversal in the quality of Zambian democracy and raise questions about the country’s prospects for democratic consolidation