Coercive Electoral Governance

Abstract

This chapter explains the hypotheses regarding state violence, with respect to the choice situations faced by leaders at election time. State and state-affiliated actors, including incumbent political leaders, have the greatest degree of latitude in selecting electoral strategies, and in particular deciding whether to use violence. The hypotheses are tested empirically on the basis of global data sets of electoral violence and covariates drawn from a variety of sources, supplemented by case studies based on qualitative data. The quantitative analyses confirm the connection between the structure of power (the relative strength of democratic and informal institutions) and electoral violence, and find also a strong empirical link between state-initiated violence and electoral misconduct in contexts where democratic constraints are lacking. Case studies of Zimbabwe, Syria, Belarus, and Paraguay show how state-initiated electoral violence forms part of political economies regulated by informal institutions of corruption and patronage.