Social capital and government performance：社会资本与政府绩效.ppt

Herhaling titel van presentatie The link between elections and government performance: The impact of social capital Bruno Heyndels Dimi Jottier * Pag. * Citizens’ preferences Policy Political system To restrain politicians from pursuing their self interest Implement a policy that reflects voters’ preferences Representative democracy To obtain the best policy Well informed Voting Instrumentally As an event in which they participate Ill- informed Voting Expressively Link between election and implemented policy weakens Disciplining effect of elections disappears Domain: policy parameters Domain: not restricted to a set of policy parameters Voting instrumentally or expressively depends on : Relative COSTS and BENEFITS Social capital Features of social organization, such as trust, norms and networks, that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions (Putnam, 1993) Connects people, bind society together Facilitates cooperation Better social outcomes Measured by: Number of associations, turnout, trust (via survey) Costs Benefits Social Capital Social interaction as a source of information (Coleman, 1988) Voters feel part of the community: Benefits are defined for the whole community A community has an impact on election results. ??Sophisticated consumers of politics?? (Boix Posner, 1998) Social capital makes instrumental voting more attractive Empirical investigation Vote function: V = β1 V-1+ β2 Qual + β3 (SC . Qual) + β4 (Pol . Qual) Qual: Survey SC: Associations, turnout, crime Is their a link between quality of government and election outcome? Is this link stronger in municipalities with high levels of social capital? OLS -Results N = 144 of 308 Flemish municipalities Vote function: V = 0.84*** V-1+ 9.85*** Qual + 0.23** (SC . Qual) + - (Pol . Qual) * Pag.