Research Field: Comparative Politics


“Religious Institutions and Collective Action: The Catholic Church and Political Activism in Indigenous Chiapas and Yucatán.” Journal Article

Author(s): Christopher W. Hale

  Abstract Why do religious organizations facilitate secular political activism in some settings but not others? I contend that where religious institutions are characterized by decentralized local governance, they are more likely to facilitate political activism. Drawing on nine months of field research and 60 interviews, I conduct a qualitative comparison between the Mexican states of Chiapas and Yucatán. I argue Chiapas exhibits highly decentralized governance by the Catholic Church whereas Yucatán exhibits centralized clerical management. This difference accounts for […]

Read More from “Religious Institutions and Collective Action: The Catholic Church and Political Activism in Indigenous Chiapas and Yucatán.”

“The Fulfillment of Parties’ Election Pledges: A Comparative Study on the Impact of Power Sharing.” Journal Article

Author(s): Terry Royed, Robert Thomson, Elin Naurin, and Mark Ferguson

Abstract Why are some parties more likely than others to keep the promises they made during previous election campaigns? This study provides the first large-scale comparative analysis of pledge fulfillment with common definitions. We study the fulfillment of over 20,000 pledges made in 57 election campaigns in 12 countries, and our findings challenge the common view of parties as promise breakers. Many parties that enter government executives are highly likely to fulfill their pledges, and significantly more so than parties […]

Read More from “The Fulfillment of Parties’ Election Pledges: A Comparative Study on the Impact of Power Sharing.”

“From Disaffection to Desertion: How Networks Facilitate Military Insubordination in Civil Conflict.” Journal Article

Author(s): Holger Albrecht, Kevin Koehler and Dorothy Ohl

Abstract Scholarship on intrastate conflict and civil-military relations has largely ignored individual desertions during civil war. We show that high-risk behavior, such as desertion, is best thought of as coordinated action between individual decision-makers and their strong network ties. Soldiers hold preexisting opinions on whether high-risk action is worthwhile, but it is their networks that persuade them to act. Specifically, it is the content of strong network ties (rather than their mere existence) and the ability to interpret information (rather […]

Read More from “From Disaffection to Desertion: How Networks Facilitate Military Insubordination in Civil Conflict.”