Poor People’s Participation

Neoliberal Institutions or Left Turn

Bibliographic Data

ID6245486
AuthorsEmmerich Davies (0000-0002-9686-9960, Harvard Graduate School of Education), Tulia Gabriela Falleti (0000-0002-0995-4682, University of Pennsylvania, corresponding author)
Year2017
Volume50
Issue12
Pages1699-1731
Publication date2017-10-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueComparative Political Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0010-4140 • E-ISSN: 1552-3829
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0010414016688002
OpenAlexW2581899806
LanguageEN
Citations received6
References cited65

While comparative political studies of voting and protest abound, little attention has been paid to nonelectoral and noncontentious participation, particularly at the local level. Who participates in local associations and why? We study the individual-level determinants of local civic participation in Bolivia to ask: Does local engagement reproduce the high socioeconomic bias predicted by resource theory? Did the left turn in government change the predictors of participation? Contrary to expectations, we find there is no high-class bias in Bolivia’s local civic engagement. Moreover, the levels and predictors of local civic engagement have not changed after the left turn. We contribute to the comparative politics literature by conceptualizing local programmatic participation and showing that the resource theory does not apply to this type of participation in a developing context. We argue that need—rather than plenty—prompts people to participate. Our findings are relevant to participation studies in developing societies

Civic engagement · Context (archaeology · Geography · Local government · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Population · Socioeconomic status · Sociology · Voting · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Law · Political Conflict and Governance · Politics and Society in Latin America · Public Administration

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub