Ethnic Voting in the Andes: How Ethnicity and Ethnic Attitudes Shape Voters' Presidential Vote Choice Sam G W Kelly University College London PhD Latin American Politics 1 Declaration I, Sam G W Kelly, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. 2 Abstract The rise of ethnic politics has been a prominent feature of Latin America’s recent history, particularly in the Andes where much of the population claim some indigenous descent. Prominent politicians use ethnicity to frame important aspects of their political projects and identities, survey data show an emerging ethnic voting gap in several countries, and political protests, debates, and media coverage periodically expose strong ethnic undercurrents. Yet existing scholarship has not examined the precise nature or implications of ethnicity’s role in electoral processes, and thus key questions about ethnic politics in Latin America remain unanswered. How and why do voters use ethnic information in their decision-making? What is the impact of ethnic voting on both the quality and terms of democratic representation? And how do wider contextual factors affect the occurrence and nature of ethnic voting? These questions have important implications for assessing how (and how well) elections fulfil their representational and accountability functions, how candidates can and do appeal to different sectors of the electorate, and the wider prospects for democratic stability in the region. This thesis addresses these questions through a comparative study of ethnic politics and electoral democracy in Bolivia, Ecuador, and Peru, with a focus on presidential voting. The research design combines statistical analysis of nationally representative survey data, a computer-based ‘mock election’ experiment, and a range of materials from candidates’ campaign publicity, mainstream and social media, and other sources. By examining the ways in which ethnicity shapes the preferences and electoral decision-making of individual voters, the thesis aims to provide new insight into the underlying processes that drive such political behaviour. Although the empirical focus is on three Latin American countries, the thesis has broader theoretical ambitions, and its analysis builds on, and seeks to contribute to, a wider comparative politics literature. 3 Table of Contents List of Tables 5 List of Figures 6 List of Abbreviations 7 Chapter 1 Ethnicity, Elections, and Democracy in Latin America 9 Chapter 2 Research Design 42 Chapter 3 Bolivia 62 Chapter 4 Ecuador 123 Chapter 5 Peru 164 Chapter 6 How Voters Decide: Ethnic Voting at the Micro Level in Peru 226 Chapter 7 Conclusion 267 Works Cited 282 Appendix A: Bolivia (Chapter Three) 297 Appendix B: Ecuador (Chapter Four) 327 Appendix C: Peru (Chapter Five) 335 Appendix D: Peruvian Voting Experiment (Chapter Six) 352 Appendix E: Orginal LAPOP Survey Questions and New Variable Coding 359 4 List of Tables TABLE 3.1: Ethnicity and Vote Choice, Bolivia 2005 (with generic self- 74 identification) TABLE 3.2: Ethnicity and Vote Choice, Bolivia 2005 (with cultural 75 identification) TABLE 3.3: Voter Characteristics and Vote Choice, Bolivia 2005 81 TABLE 3.4 : General Ethnic Attitudes and Vote Choice, Bolivia 2005 90 TABLE 3.5: Attitudes Towards Specific Ethnic Groups and Vote Choice, 91 Bolivia 2005 TABLE 3.6: Summary of Mediation Analysis, Bolivia 2005 95 TABLE 3.7: Ethnicity and Vote Choice, Bolivia 2009 (with generic self- 100 identification) TABLE 3.8: Ethnicity and Vote Choice, Bolivia 2009 (with generic self- 101 identification) TABLE 3.9: Voter Characteristics and Vote Choice, Bolivia 2009 105 TABLE 3.10: Ethnic Attitudes and Vote Choice, Bolivia 2009 116 TABLE 3.11: Summary of Mediation Analysis, Bolivia 2009 119 TABLE 4.1: Ethnicity and Vote Choice, Ecuador 2002 142 TABLE 4.2: Voter Characteristics and Vote Choice, Ecuador 2002 144 TABLE 4.3: Ethnicity and Vote Choice, Ecuador 2006 149 TABLE 4.4: Voter Characteristics and Vote Choice, Ecuador 2006 152 TABLE 4.5: Ethnicity and Vote Choice, Ecuador 2009 157 TABLE 4.6: Voter Characteristics and Vote Choice, Ecuador 2009 159 TABLE 5.1: Ethnicity and Vote Choice, Peru 2006 183 TABLE 5.2: Voter Characteristics and Vote Choice, Peru 2006 187 TABLE 5.3: Summary of Mediation Analysis, Peru 2006 198 TABLE 5.4: Ethnicity and Vote Choice, Peru 2011 205 TABLE 5.5: Voter Characteristics and Vote Choice, Peru 2011 209 TABLE 5.6: Voter Characteristics and Vote Choice, Peru 2011: Kuczynski 210 over Toledo TABLE 5.7: Summary Mediation Analysis, Peru 2011 224 TABLE 6.1: Experimental Set-up 233 TABLE 6.2: Hypotheses 234 TABLE 6.3: Effects of Voter Ethnicity on Candidate Feeling Thermometers 237 after Phase One TABLE 6.4: Effects of Experimental Group on Perceived Candidate Stands 239 after Phase One 5 List of Figures FIGURE 3.1: Predicted Probability of Vote Choice, by Linguistic Group, Bolivia 2005 85 FIGURE 3.2: Predicted Probability of Vote Choice, by Ethnic Self-Identification, 86 Bolivia 2005 FIGURE 3.4: Predicted Probability of Vote Choice, by Linguistic Group, Bolivia 2009 111 FIGURE 3.5: Predicted Probability of Vote Choice, by Self-Identified Group, Bolivia 112 2009 FIGURE 5.1: Predicted Probability of Vote Choice, by Linginguistic Group, Peru 2006 191 FIGURE 5.2 : Predicted Probability of Vote Choice, by Self-Identified Group Peru 2006 192 FIGURE 5.3: Predicted Probability of Vote Choice, by Linguistic Group, Peru 2011 215 FIGURE 5.4: Predicted Probability of Vote Choice, by Self-Identified Group, Peru 217 2011 FIGURE 6.1: Perceived Programmatic Stands after Phase One 239 FIGURE 6.2: Perceived Social-Group Associations after Phase One 241 FIGURE 6.3: Perceived Personal Characteristic after Phase One 242 FIGURE 6.4: Perceived Candidate Stand on Nationalisations after Phase 1, 2, and 3 245 FIGURE 6.5: Perceived Candidate Stand on Presidential Powers at Phase 1, 2, and 3 246 FIGURE 6.6: Perceived Candidate Stand On Public Spending at Phase 1, 2, and 3 247 FIGURE 6.7: Perceived Candidate Ideology at Phase 1, 2, and 3 248 FIGURE 6.8: Stereotype-Conistent (P1) and Correct Candidate Placement (P2 and P3) 249 FIGURE 6.9: Perceived Social-Group Associations after Phase Three 253 FIGURE 6.10: Perceived Personal Characteristics after Phase Three 255 FIGURE 6.11: Voter Issue Position and Vote Choice: Combined Measure 259 FIGURE 6.12 : Voter-Candidate Affinity and Vote Choice: Combined Measure 260 FIGURE D1: The Effect of Ascribed Personal Characteristics on Final Vote Choice 358 6 List of Abbreviations ADN Acción Democrática Nacionalista (Nationalist Democratic Action) AF Alianza por el Futuro (Alliance for the Future) AME Average Marginal Effects (Statistical) AP Acción Popular (Popular Action) APGC Alianza por el Gran Cambio (Alliance for Great Change) APR Adjusted Probability at Representative Values (Statistical) APRA Partido Aprista Peruano (Peruvian Aprista Party) ASP Asamblea de la Soberanía de los Pueblos (Assembly for the Sovereignty of the Peoples) CIDOB Confederación Indígena del Oriente Boliviano (Indigenous Confederation of Eastern Bolivia) CMS Coordinadora de Movimientos Sociales (Coordinator of Social Movements) CNE Corte Nacional Electoral (National Electoral Court) CONAIE Confederación de Nacionalidades Indígenas del Ecuador (Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador) CONFENAIE Confederación de Nacionalidades Indígenas de la Amazonía Ecuatoriana (Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of the Ecuadorian Amazon) CSUTCB Confederación Sindical Única de Trabajadores Campesinos de Bolivia (Unique Confederation of Peasant Workers of Bolivia) DINEIB Dirección Nacional de Educación Intercultural (National Interculrural Education Directorate) DPTE Dynamic Process Tracing Environment ECUARUNARI Ecuador Runacunapac Riccharimui (Awakening of Ecuadorian People) FC Frente de Centro (Centre Front) FEINE Federación Ecuatoriana de Iglesias Evangélicas (Ecuadorian Federation of Evangelical Churches) FENOCIN Federación Nacional de Organizaciones Campesinas, Indígenas y Negras (National Federation of Peasant, Indigenous, and Black Organisations) FTA Free-Trade Agreement F11 Fuerza11 (Force 11) ID Izquierda Democrática (Democratic Left) IMF International Monetary Fund ISPS Instrumento Político por la Soberanía de los Pueblos (Political Instrument for the Sovereingty of the Peoples) 7 LAPOP Latin American Public Opinion Project MAS Movimiento al Socialismo (Movement towards Socialism) MCNP Movimiento Ciudadano Nuevo País (Citizen Movement New Country) MNR Movimiento Nacionalista Revolucionario (Revolutionary Nationalist Movement) MUPP Movimiento Unidad Plurinacional Pachakutik (Pachakutik Plurinational Unity Movement) NFR Nueva Fuerza Republicana (New Republican Force) NP Nuevo País (New Country) ONPE Oficina Nacional de Procesos Electorales (National Office of Electoral Processes) PNP Partido Nacionalista Peruano (Peruvian Nationalist Party) PODEMOS Poder Democrático y Social (Social and Democratic Power) PP Perú Posible (Peru Possible) PPB-CN Plan Progreso para Bolivia – Convergencía Nacional (Plan Progress for Bolivia – National Convergence) PPC Partido Popular Cristiano (Popular Christian Party) PRIAN Partido Renovador Institucional Acción Nacional (Institutional Renewal Party of National Action) PSC Partido Social Cristiano (Social Christian Party) PS-FA Partido Socialista – Frente Amplio (Socialist Party – Broad Front) PSP Partido Sociedad Partiótica, 21 de Enero (Patriotic Society Party, 21st