I’m primarily in Bolivia to (attempt to) finish data collection for the NSF project I’m working on w/ Matt Shugart & several others. The project is relatively simple: To test a corollary of Duverger’s Law to see if parties change their candidate recruitment strategies in the face of electoral reforms. We’re collecting candidate data across multiple elections from about a dozen countries; I’m in charge of the Bolivia data collection (which is proving more difficult even than I had imagined). Nevertheless, I’m also trying to start a new research project.
I want to branch out from looking primarily at Bolivian elections—to start looking both at other issues & other cases (but still w/in an institutionalist framework). Right now that interest is in regionalism/autonomy/federalism. I have two very general comparative questions:
- Comparing Bolivia & Ecuador (two similar cases that faced political crisis & presidential overthrows by popular pressure), why did a [successful] regionalist autonomy movement develop in Bolivia, but not Ecuador? Especially since, like Bolivia, Ecuador has two historically rival cities (Quito vs. Guayaquil). I want to understand under what conditions a regionalist autonomy movement emerges.
- Comparing two rival groups of social movements (the social movements that gave rise to MAS vs. those that aligned themselves w/ regional autonomy movement), why did one manage to build a successful “political instrument” (as MAS calls itself in relation to its social movements), but the other did not. I want to understand under what conditions social movements are able to (successfully) generate a “political instrument” (i.e. a political party).
This is obviously a long term project, not something that can be done in a few weeks. But it’s the direction of my next research agenda, as we like to call it. Eventually, I’d look at other cases (both in terms of countries w/ or w/o autonomy movements & in terms of movements that do/don’t create “political instruments”). In the meantime, I’m having some success w/ preliminary interviews w/ people on both sides of the political fence, trying to “orient myself” (to use the Bolivian expression) to the issue’s complexity. Tomorrow I go back to La Paz, hoping to line up more interviews there.
The purpose of this post? I guess mostly I’m thinking out loud. But also curious to know what any of my colleagues who might be reading my blog think of the two basic research questions (preliminary as they might be).
Hey,
Interesting research agenda. I did a lot of research on the same topics, granted I'm still a lowly undergrad. In regards to topic #1, you should read Kent Eaton's research if you haven't already.
"Conservative Autonomy Movements:
Bolivia and Ecuador in Comparative Perspective" Prepared for delivery at the 2008 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 28-31, 2008
I have read some of Kent's earlier work, but wasn't aware of this paper. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I agree that there's a strong conservative element to the Santa Cruz autonomy movement. My interest is more on the social movement element (since I believe that movement also falls into the category of a "social movement" as defined by Charles Tilly).
However, I also think Kent is sometimes too quickly dismissive of the autonomy movement by wanting to emphasize it as a "backlash" against Evo Morales. In some ways it is, but in other's it's not. The autonomy movement took off in 2004, almost two years before Evo was elected president. So it's a little more complex than simply a "reaction to" the rise of Evo Morales. I actually argue that both Evo Morales (or, rather, the social movements that put him in power) *and* the autonomy movements are products of the same institutional-political process that privileges identity construction.
But I'll look for Kent's paper on Bolivia/Ecuador. Thanks!
I think the important thing about Eaton's article is that he identifies that there is/was a small autonomy movement in Ecuador. Also, when I was working on that project I found that demands for region autonomy in Bolivia began slightly prior to the law of popular participation. If i remember correctly Kathleen O'Neill had something about that in "Decentralizing the State..." However, it seems to me that a coherent movement didn't begin until 2004 as you said.
Again, I'm curious to read Easton's paper, especially if he found there was a recent autonomy movement in Ecuador. From what I know, the two cities (Quito & Guayaquil) have a long history of animosity, including some armed confrontations in the distant past.
Similarly, Santa Cruz has pushed for autonomy throughout its history, including several major uprisings in 1876, 1899, and 1957 -- not including an earlier effort in the 1830s. (Not surprisingly, there's a renaissance of cruceño historiography lately. The return to democracy also fueled some autonomy movements, but these were sidestepped in large measure by the LPP (which was their intent, as I argue elsewhere).
But this most recent "wave" of began shortly after October 2003, when the crisis of the state & political parties left a vacuum into which the Comite Cívico stepped in.
A little Google search led me to this shorter article by Kent Easton: "Power to the Left, Autonomy for the Right?" http://www.clas.berkeley.edu/Publications/Review/Fall2008/pdf/BRLAS-Fall2008-Eaton.pdf