Whole Dissertation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Copyright by Luis Antonio Camacho Solís 2012 The Dissertation Committee for Luis Antonio Camacho Solís certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation (or treatise): The Political Origins of Support for Redistribution: Argentina and Peru in Comparative Perspective Committee: Kurt Weyland, Supervisor Zachary Elkins Kenneth Greene Raul L. Madrid Nicholas Valentino The Political Origins of Support for Redistribution: Argentina and Peru in Comparative Perspective by Luis Antonio Camacho Solís, B.A.; M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin December 2012 Dedication To my grandparents: Mami Dori, Tata Lucho, Mami Rosi, and Tata Adolfo. Acknowledgements I have to thank many individuals and institutions for their contributions to this dissertation. First, I must thank my supervisor, Kurt Weyland. Since my first days in graduate school, he offered thoughtful advice and constructive criticism. Kurt’s detailed comments and suggestions have made this dissertation better than it would have otherwise been. I am also thankful to the other members of my dissertation committee. Raul Madrid was always willing to provide general advice about graduate school and career development as well as specific feedback on the dissertation. Ken Greene was especially helpful at the earlier stages of this project, while I tried to secure funding for my field research. Nick Valentino challenged me to think critically as I developed this project and provided very detailed comments on the final draft of the dissertation. Zack Elkins was a great source of encouragement, ideas, and practical advice. I must also thank Zack for bringing me on board the Comparative Constitutions Project as a research assistant. I would also like to acknowledge the generous support of various institutions throughout my years in graduate school. Various fellowships and teaching assistantships from the Department of Government at The University of Texas at Austin supported my studies and dissertation field research. A Dissertation Proposal Development Fellowship from the Social Science Research Council and a research grant from the Lozano Long Institute of Latin American Studies at The University of Texas at Austin allowed me to v carry out pre-dissertation field research. The Centro de Investigación at Universidad del Pacífico provided office space during my extended stays in Lima, Peru. Finally, I would like to thank Ipsos Apoyo Opinión y Mercado, the Latin American Public Opinion Project, the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, and the World Values Survey for making available the survey data I use throughout the dissertation. I also owe special thanks to many other individuals at the Department of Government for their support throughout my graduate studies. Henry Dietz was a great source of academic advice and encouragement. As a professor and then as graduate adviser, Robert Moser was always available to talk with me and provide guidance on academic and professional development issues. I am also thankful to Annette Carlile, the Department’s graduate coordinator. Annette answered countless questions and provided invaluable assistance on administrative and procedural matters, especially during the time I spent away from Austin. I would also like to thank many other people that helped me in various ways throughout these years. The good friends I made in Austin kept me sane and entertained during the most challenging years of graduate school. Some also provided academic advice, insights on my work, and support during my field research. Thanks to Paul Alonso, Manuel Balán, Eduardo Dargent, Austin Hart, Laura Field, Nora Keane, Paula Muñoz, Solange Muñoz, Rodrigo Nunes, Laura Sylvester, Randy Uang, Celina Van Dembroucke, and Kristin Wylie. Old friends I made in Lima provided much needed emotional support. I am especially grateful to Ursula Franco, Félix Lossio, Eduardo Nakasone, Rodrigo Salcedo, Milagros Sandoval, and Verónica Frisancho. I am also vi thankful to Felipe Portocarreo and Cynthia Sanborn, my professors, colleagues, and friends at Universidad del Pacífico. Finally, I am very grateful to my family. I am particularly indebted to my parents, Nancy and Toño, for their support and encouragement throughout these years. My sisters and their families, aunts and uncles, and grandparents in Peru were a great source of motivation. And so were my in-laws and the rest of my family in the U.S. My wife, Mary, deserves special recognition. She has been my “partner in crime” throughout this journey, from discussions in seminar rooms and long nights writing papers, to moving to Washington, DC to pursue our interests and completing our dissertations. Her love and support carried me through the toughest times of this process. And her thoughts and suggestions helped me improve this dissertation. I am really looking forward to the start of our next adventure! I dedicate this dissertation to my grandparents, Mami Dori, Tata Lucho, Mami Rosi, and Tata Adolfo. I will always be amazed by what they have been through and achieved in their lifetimes. Their relentless effort and love for their families set me on a path to pursuing and completing my doctorate. vii The Political Origins of Support for Redistribution: Argentina and Peru in Comparative Perspective Luis Antonio Camacho Solís, Ph.D. The University of Texas at Austin, 2012 Supervisor: Kurt Weyland Why do some individuals endorse public policies aimed at reducing income inequality while others oppose them? Why is there widespread support for such policies in certain countries, but not in others? This dissertation advances scholarship toward a general theory of support for redistribution by analyzing variation in redistributive attitudes within and across two developing democracies, Argentina and Peru. Support for redistribution is higher in the former country. It examines existing theories based on interests and group identity, explanations whose predictions have been almost exclusively evaluated in the context of advanced industrial democracies. It also introduces and assesses a belief-based explanation that focuses on inequality frames, simplified mental models of the issue of inequality comprised of individuals’ beliefs about the causes of economic outcomes, about the extent to which society provides equal opportunities, and about the nature of wealth viii accumulation. This dissertation argues that these theories are complementary and identifies the contextual factors that condition the extent to which the considerations emphasized by these accounts inform redistributive attitudes. Interests and group identity are salient in contexts where individuals have access to material and informational resources that make them more cognizant of their position along economic and ethnic cleavages. In contrast, inequality frames inform redistributive attitudes regardless of context because of their inside-the-head nature. This study shows that the relative dominance of redistributive beliefs in Argentina and self-reliance beliefs in Peru help explain why support for redistribution is higher in the former country. Finally, this dissertation develops a politico-historical explanation for why and how these frames became relatively dominant. This account argues that individuals’ inequality frames are relatively stable during times of normal politics, but malleable during certain critical political junctures brought about by major events like mass political incorporation or economic crises. During such times, individuals are particularly receptive to elite cues and messages that are transmitted not only via rhetoric but also via public policies. Redistributive beliefs become dominant wherever political actors whose discourse features elements consistent with the redistributive frame are able to implement successful comprehensive social policies. The self-reliance frame becomes dominant in countries where this combination of rhetoric and policies does not take place during a critical juncture. ix Table of Contents List of Tables ....................................................................................................... xiii! List of Figures...................................................................................................... xvi! Chapter 1 Introduction .............................................................................................1! Main Argument......................................................................................4! Research Design.....................................................................................9! Plan of the Dissertation........................................................................12! Chapter 2 Toward a General Theory of Support for Redistribution......................14! Interest-Bases Theories........................................................................16! Theories Based on Group Identity .......................................................20! A Belief-Based Theory of Redistributive Attitudes.............................24! Toward a General Theory of Support for Redistribution.....................31! The Political Origins of Inequality Frames..........................................34! Conclusion ...........................................................................................39! Chapter 3 Redistributive Attitudes and Policies in Argentina