6.4 Implication: The Role and Development of (Non-)State Institutions

"Electoral rules, administrative boundaries, and political parties are often viewed as state-based institutions; yet, as the aforementioned examples illustrate, they often are both shaped by and act as institutions in arenas outside the state. Electoral rules, for instance, can affect the extent to which individuals have incentives to demonstrate their allegiance to their tribe, locality, or other social group. Gender quotas can alter the rewards associated with following obligations for women to stay removed from the public sphere. So, too, actors and organizations associated with non-state arenas can act as substitutes for institutions associated with the state. The ability of tribal, religious, or other organizations to coordinate candidates and mobilize support undermines party development, but it also means that one finds the relevant institutions that shape electoral mobilization in tribes or other arenas, not in the state. Institutions associated with the state are often institutions of non-state arenas as well, and institutions in non-state arenas often shape engagement in the state. That is, institutions are not always either state or non-state institutions but may act in multiple arenas of authority at the same time."

Full Chapter via Cambridge Core: https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/everyday-choices/41C482AE689FE13A4A4A4EFA480032D3

This audiobook is produced by Mediateknik at the University of Gothenburg.

© Lust, E. (2022). Everyday Choices: The Role of Competing Authorities and Social Institutions in Politics and Development (Elements in the Politics of Development). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781009306164

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.