THE LEGISLATIVE CONNECTION: THE POLITICS OF REPRESENTATION IN KENYA, KOREA, AND TURKEY Chong Lim Kim Joel D. Barkan Ilter Turan Malcolm E. Jewel1 Duke University Press Durhnm, North Carolina 1984 To G. L Magnanimous colleague, pioneer in comparative legislative research o 1984 Duke University Press, all rights reserved Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper Library of Congress Ca(alogin(l in Publicalion Data Main entry under title: The Lepidative eonnstion. Includes bibliographii references and index. I. Legislative bodies-Developing muntrieo-Cau studies. 2. Legislative bodies-Kenya. 3. Legislative bodies-Korea (South) 4. Legislative bodies-Turkey. I. Kim. Chong Lim. JF60.L43 1984 328'.3'091724 83-20725 ISBN 0-8223-0534-8 PUBLICATIONS OF THE CONSORTIUM FOR COMPARATIVE LEGISLATIVE STUDIES Lloyd D. Musolf General Editor G. R. Boynton and Chong Lim Kim, editors, Legislative Systems in Devel- oping Countries Abdo 1. Baaklini, Legislative and Political Development: Lebanon, 1842- 1972 Allan Kornberg and William Mishler, Injluence in Parliament: Canada Peter Vanneman, The Supreme Soviet: Politics and the Legislative Process in the Soviet Political System Albert F. Eldridge, editor, Legislatures in Plural Societies: The Search for Cohesion in National Development Michael L. Mezey, Comparative Legislatures John D. Lees and Malcolm Shaw, editors, Committees in Legislatures: A Comparative Analysis Joel Smith and Lloyd D. Musolf, editors, Legislatures in Development: Dynamics of Change in New and Old States Chong Lim Kim, Joel D. Barkan, llter Turan, and Malcolm E. Jewell, The Legislative Connection: The Politics of Representation in Kenya, Korea, and Turkey THE LEGISLATIVE CONNECTION This book examines the key functions of parliamentary in- stitutions in the representative developing nations of Kenya, Korea, and Turkey. Using a crossnational comparative survey designed on the basis of the differences among the three coun- tries involved, the authors focus on the nature of political representation, the allocative role of parliaments, and the level of support given by the citizens of each nation to their parlia- mentary institutions. CONTENTS List of Tables and Figures vii Foreword ix Acknowledgments xv Part I. Introduction 1. Legislatures, Legislators, and Political Development 3 2. Research Design and Organization 15 3. The National Settings 24 Part 11. Legislators and Political Representation 4. The Members of the Legislature 53 5. Legislators and Representation 68 6. Constituents and Representation 87 Part 111. Resource Allocation 7. General Resource Allocation: The Role of the Legislature and Legis- lators 1 19 8. Specific Resource Allocation: The Legislators*Role 141 Part IV. Public Support for the Legislature 9. Levels and Sources of Support 159 10. Salience, Satisfaction, and Support 173 1 1. Multivariate Analysis of Legislative Support 184 Part V. Summary and Conclusions 12. The Legislature and Political Development 207 Notes 223 Index 233 TABLES AND FIGURES Tables Demographic and Social Background Characteristics of Legislators 54 Socioeconomic Background of Legislators' Fathers 55 Type of District (Constituency) Legislator Was Elected to Represent 56 Party Affiliation of Legislators by Type of Constituency 58 Occupation of MPs at the Time of Their Election to Parliament 59 Number of Terms Elected to the Legislature 61 M Ps' Conceptions of Economic and Political Development 66 MPs' Descriptions of Their Purposive Roles 69 Activities to which Legislators Devote Most of Their Time 73 Most lmportant Activities: First Choice by Second Choice 74 A Typology of Legislators' Behavioral Roles by Country 76 MPs' Descriptions of the Role of the Legislator by the Roles Legisla- tors Actually Play 79 Legislators' Most Important Activity when Visiting District 8 1 Who Legislator Sees when Visiting District 82 Topics of Discussion when Visiting District 83 Legislators' Focus of Representation 85 Level of Knowledge about the Legislative Institution 90 Level of Knowledge about Individual MPs 92 lmportant Personal Qualities that Local Notables and Constituents Expected of Their MPs 94 Role Expectations: Aspects of Legislative Activities Regarded as Important by MPs, Local Notables, and Constituents 95 Role Expectations: Representational Focus Considered Very lmpor- tant by Local Notables and Constituents 97 Role Expectations: Representational Styles 99 Shortcomings in the Personal Qualities of MPs as Perceived by Local Notables and Constituents 100 How Well Does the Public Think the MPs Are Doing Their Jobs 102 Concurrence on Key Developmental Policies 105 Role Congruence 107 [viii] THE LEGISLATIVE CONNECTION Forms of Representative Linkages Forged in Each Constituency 1 12 Sources of Conflict within Legislature 13 1 Legislators' Perceptions of the Hardest Job for Parliament 132 What Problems Legislature Had to Deal with 134 Who Brought Problems to Legislature 135 What the Legislator Has Done 137 How Satisfied Legislator Is with Legislative Outcome 139 Letters and Visitors per Week ~iceivedby Legislators 144 Perceptions of Most Important Community Problems 146 Legislators' Sources of Information on District Problems 147 How Many Times Legislator Seen in Last Six Months 150 Have You Ever Talked to an M P about Any Problem? 15 1 What Problem Have You Talked about with Legislator? 151 Has Your Legislator Done Something for You? 153 Responses to Support Questions in Kenya, Korea, and Turkey 166 Level of Legislative Support Based on Scale Positions in Kenya, Korea, and Turkey 167 Relationships between Modernity and Stratification Variables 171 Elite Status and Legislative Support 172 Correlates of Institutional and Individual Salience in Kenya, Korea, and Turkey 175 Salience and Legislative Support among Constituents 177 The Results of Regression Analysis on Legislative Support in Kenya, Korea, and Turkey 185 Minimal (6-Variable) Path Model: Path Coefficients (Betas) for Support in Kenya, Korea, and Turkey 189 Path Coefficients for Legislative Support in Local Elite Strata in Kenya, Korea, and Turkey 195 Figures Forms of Representative Linkages 1 10 Variables Influencing Representative Linkages 1 15 A Conceptual Framework of the Diverse Sources of Legislative Support 161 Minimal Path Model for Three-country Data 187 Six-variable Path Model: A Typical Case (Korea) 188 A General Causal Model of Constituent Support for the Legisla- ture 190 Sectorial Variations in Legislative Support between Modern and Traditional Sectors in Kenya 193 Path Model for Legislative Support Based on Six Variables in Kenya, Korea, and Turkey 197 FOREWORD The study reported here occupies a distinctive place in the development of our ability to amass knowledge about the political world. Methodologically it represents the latest (but probably not the last) step in a generation-long development of the application of survey research tech- niques to the study of institutional bodies, and of legislative bodies in par- ticular. At the same time, it draws on knowledge accumulated from similar prior studies and from a wide range of theoretical and methodological litera- ture, especially as concerns problems of conceptual equivalence, to make the data elicited by the surveys relevant to the substantive research concerns. And it casts the comparative net more widely than have any previous studies of similar scope and kind, producing the broadest possible generalizations. In all these respects it constitutes a substantial step down the road of methodo- logical development begun over twenty years ago. The precursor of this study was, of course, V. 0.Key's pioneering exami- nation of politics in the American south, made through interviews with the politicians of the region. Most custodians of the then-prevailing paradigms of political research advised against the study, assuring Key that most pro- spective respondents would make themselves inaccessible for interviewing, and that the rest would be far less than candid in their responses. That Southern Politics, based heavily on numerous such interviews successfully completed by Key and Alexander Heard, made a landmark contribution to our political knowledge did not, however, immediately establish the respect- ability of this mode of research.' Early legislative studies of Vermont legisla- tors by Garceau and Silverman, of United States senators by Donald R. Matthews, and of legislators in four states by Wahlke, Eulau, Buchanan, and Ferguson as well as others, encountered similar warnings while in progress. These warnings were couched partly in terms of fears that higher level public officials might be less accessible than Key's southern politicians, and partly [XI THE LEGISLATIVE CONNECTION on rejection of the "behavioralist" notion of interviewing to obtain systematic and quantitative data about respondents' attitudes and behavior in the sys- tems where they ~perated.~Later proposals for similar study of European- and Western-style parliaments and politicians-for example, Hunt's con- cerning French parliamentarians-encountered the objection that systematic interview research might perhaps work with American representatives, whose culture socialized them to accept such procedures, but would surely be rejected by MPs and public officials brought up in cultures where those procedures were supposedly a1ien.j Nevertheless, over the almost thirty years following the earliest interview-based studies of representative bodies, in- creasing numbers of systems have been subjected to such examination-for example, Argentina,