Editing Mares Young 2016
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
*Main Topic: Explores the complex dynamics of electoral influence worldwide, examining how voters are influenced by both threats and promises based on their vote. | *Main Topic: Explores the complex dynamics of electoral influence worldwide, examining how voters are influenced by both threats and promises based on their vote. | ||
**Clientelism Evolution: Details the progression of clientelism, highlighting the variety of intermediaries involved in the electoral process and the different tactics they employ. | **Clientelism Evolution: Details the progression of clientelism, highlighting the variety of intermediaries involved in the electoral process and the different tactics they employ. | ||
**Types of Clientelism: Distinguishes between positive inducements (rewards) and negative inducements (threats). | **Types of Clientelism: Distinguishes between positive inducements (rewards) and negative inducements (threats). | ||
Line 17: | Line 15: | ||
*Types of Inducements: | *Types of Inducements: | ||
##Positive Inducements: Tangible rewards like money, goods, or favors exchanged for votes. | ##Positive Inducements: Tangible rewards like money, goods, or favors exchanged for votes. | ||
##Negative Inducements: Threats of economic or physical harm used to influence voting behavior,including withdrawal of benefits, eviction, or violence. | ##Negative Inducements: Threats of economic or physical harm used to influence voting behavior,including withdrawal of benefits, eviction, or violence. | ||
*Challenges in Measurement: Difficulty in measuring inducements due to their illegal nature and the mutual desire to conceal these transactions, especially where vote-buying is illegal. | *Challenges in Measurement: Difficulty in measuring inducements due to their illegal nature and the mutual desire to conceal these transactions, especially where vote-buying is illegal. | ||
Line 100: | Line 92: | ||
*3 factors lower the costs of economic intimidation in localities with high levels of concentration | *3 factors lower the costs of economic intimidation in localities with high levels of concentration | ||
**Owing to their scale, larger firms incur lower costs in carrying out political activities, such as control of electoral turnover or the distribution of political material on behalf of a particular candidate. | |||
**In concentrated localities, workers have fewer employment opportunities outside the firm. | **Owing to their scale, larger firms incur lower costs in carrying out political activities, such as control of electoral turnover or the distribution of political material on behalf of a particular candidate. | ||
**The concentration of employment in the hands of small members of actors reduces the possible coordination problems faced by employers in punishing workers with “dangerous” political views by denying them employment opportunities. | **In concentrated localities, workers have fewer employment opportunities outside the firm. | ||
**The concentration of employment in the hands of small members of actors reduces the possible coordination problems faced by employers in punishing workers with “dangerous” political views by denying them employment opportunities. | |||
*The willingness of employers to engage in electoral intimidation is also affected by labor market conditions such as labor scarcity | *The willingness of employers to engage in electoral intimidation is also affected by labor market conditions such as labor scarcity |