This study explores how economic performance prior to democratic transitions affects the fate of successors to authoritarian rulers in new democracies. It investigates 70 founding election outcomes, finding that successful economic performance under an authoritarian regime increases the vote share of successors. It also finds that the past economic performance of authoritarian rulers decreases the likelihood of government alternation to democratic oppositions. Interim governments that initiate democratic transition, however, are neither blamed nor rewarded for economic conditions during transition periods. This study concludes that electorates are not myopic and that economic voting is not a knee-jerk reaction to short-term economic performance in new democracies.
Adejumobi, S. (2000). Elections in Africa: A fading shadow of democracy ? International Political Science Review, 21, 59-73.
2.
Benoit, K. (2004). Models of electoral system change. Electoral Studies, 23, 363-389.
3.
Bielasiak, J., & Blunck, D. (2002). Past and present in transitional voting: Electoral choices in post-Communist Poland. Party Politics, 8, 563-585.
4.
Birch, S. (2003). Electoral systems and political transformation in post-Communist Europe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
5.
Bratton, M. (1997). Democratic experiments in Africa: Regime transitions in comparative perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press.
6.
Bratton, M., & Van De Walle, N. (1994). Neopatrimonial regimes and political transitions in Africa. World Politics, 46, 453-489.
7.
Diamond, L. (1999). Developing democracy. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press.
8.
Fidrmuc, J. (2000). Economic of voting in post-Communist countries . Electoral Studies, 19, 199-217.
9.
Harper, M.A. (2000). Economic voting in postcommunist Eastern Europe . Comparative Political Studies, 33(9), 1191-1227.
10.
Huntington, S. (1991). The third wave: Democratization in the late twentieth century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
11.
Huntington, S. (1996). Democracy for the long haul. Journal of Democracy, 7(2), 3-13.
12.
Ishiyama, J.T. (1999). The Communist successor parties and party organizational development in post-Communist politics. Political Research Quarterly, 52(1), 87-112.
13.
Ishiyama, J.T. (2001). Sickles into roses: The successor parties and democratic consolidation in post-Communist politics. In P. G. Lewis (Ed.), Party development and democratic change in post-Communist Europe (pp. 32-54). Portland, OR : Frank Cass.
14.
Lee, J. (2002). Primary causes of Asian democratization: Dispelling conventional myths. Asian Survey, 42(6), 821-837.
15.
Lewis, P.G. (2000). Political parties in post-Communist Eastern Europe . London/New York: Routledge.
16.
Markowski, R., & Toka, G. (1993). Left turn in Poland and Hungary. Sisyphus, 1(IX), 65-99.
17.
Marshall, M.G., & Jaggers, K. (2004). Polity IV project: Political regime characteristics and transitions, 1800-2002. College Park: University of Maryland, Center for International Development and Conflict Management.
18.
McFaul, M. (2002). The fourth wave of democracy and dictatorship: Noncooperative transitions in the postcommunist world, World Politics, 54(2), 212-244.
19.
Mulikita, N. (2003). A false dawn? Africa's post-1990 democratization waves. African Security Review, 12, 105-115.
20.
Nohlen, D., Krennerich, M., & Thibaut, B. (1999). Elections in Africa. Oxford , UK/New York: Oxford University Press.
21.
Oates, S., Miller, W.L., & Gordeland, A. (2001). Towards a Soviet past or a socialist future? In P. G. Lewis (Ed.), Party development and democratic change in post-Communist Europe (pp. 16-31). Portland, OR: Frank Cass.
22.
O'Donnell, G. & Schmitter, P. C. (Eds.). (1986). Transitions from authoritarian rule. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
23.
Pacek, A.C. (1994). Macroeconomic conditions and electoral politics in east central Europe. American Journal of Political Science , 38(3), 723-744.
24.
Political handbook of the world. (1999). Washington, DC: CQ Press. Available from http://phw.binghamton.edu/
25.
Powers, D.V., & Cox, J.H. (1997). Echoes from the past: The relationship between satisfaction with economic reforms and voting behavior in Poland. American Political Science Review, 91(3), 617-633.
26.
Przeworski, A., Alvarez, M., Cheibub, J.A., & Limongi, F. (2000). Democracy and development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
27.
Przeworski, A., & Limongi, F. (1997). Modernization: Theories and facts. World Politics, 49(2), 155-183.
28.
Reich, G.M. (2001). Coordinating party choice in founding elections: Why timing matters. Comparative Political Studies, 34(10), 1237-1263.
29.
Rose, R., Mishler, W., & Haerpfer, C. (1998). Democracy and its alternatives. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
30.
Tucker, J.A. (2001). Economic conditions and the vote for incumbent parties in Russia, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic from 1990-1996. Post Soviet Affairs, 17(4), 309-331.
31.
World Bank. (2004). World development indicators 2004 [CD-ROM]. Washington, DC: Author.
