Inequality in democracy: Insights from an empirical analysis of political dynasties in the 15th Philippine Congress

Beja Jr, Edsel and Mendoza, Ronald U. and Venida, Victor S. and Yap, David B. (2012): Inequality in democracy: Insights from an empirical analysis of political dynasties in the 15th Philippine Congress.

Abstract

This paper presents metrics to estimate the size of political dynasties in the 15th Congress of the Republic of the Philippines and analyze the relationship between political dynasty and socio-economic outcomes. Results show that political dynasties comprise 70 percent of jurisdiction-based legislators in the current Congress. They possess higher net worth and win elections by larger margins of victory compared to not political dynasties. Jurisdictions of political dynasties are characterized by lower standards of living, lower human development, and higher levels of deprivation and inequality.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Democracy; political dynasty; Philippines; Philippine Congress
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D70 - General; D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D63 - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement; P - Economic Systems > P0 - General > P00 - General; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O5 - Economywide Country Studies > O53 - Asia including Middle East; D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D72 - Political Processes: Rent-Seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior; H - Public Economics > H0 - General > H00 - General

References

Acemoglu, D. and J. Robinson. 2006. Economic origins of dictatorship and democracy. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Asako, Y., T. Iida, T. Matsubayashi, and M. Ueda. 2010. Dynastic legislators: Theory and evidence from Japan. Mimeo. University of Wisconsin-Madison. http://www.psci.unt.edu/~tmatsubayashi/research/seshu.pdf.

Balisacan, A. and N. Fuwa. 2004. Going beyond cross-country averages: Growth, inequality and poverty reduction in the Philippines. World Development 32:1891-1907.

Burkhart, R. 1997. Comparative democracy and income distribution. Journal of Politics 59: 148-164.

Coronel, S. 2007. The seven Ms of dynasty building. Online article. Manila: Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. http://pcij.org/stories/the-seven-ms-of-dynasty-building.

Cullinane, M. 1994. Patron as client: Warlord politics and the Duranos in Davao, in A. McCoy (ed.), An anarchy of families: State and family in the Philippines. Manila: Ateneo de Manila University Press.

Dal Bo, E., P. Dal Bo, and J. Snyder. 2009. Political dynasties. Review of Economic Studies 76: 115-142.

Doucouliagos, H. and M. Ulubasoglu. 2008. Democracy and economic growth: A meta-analysis. American Journal of Political Science 52: 61-83.

Fegan, B. 1994. Entrepreneurs in votes and violence: Three generations of a peasant political family, in A. McCoy (ed.), An anarchy of families: State and family in the Philippines. Manila: Ateneo de Manila University Press.

Hutchcroft, P. and J. Rocamora. 2003. Strong demands and weak institutions: The origins and evolution of the democratic deficit in the Philippines. Journal of East Asian Studies 3: 259-292.

Lacey, R. 1983. Aristocrats. London: Hutchinson and Co.

Lee, C.-S. 2005. Income inequality, democracy, and public sector size. American Sociological Review 70: 158-181.

Manacsa, R. and A. Tan. 2005. Manufacturing parties. Party Politics 11:748-765.

McCoy, A. 1994. Rent-seeking families and the Philippine state: A history of the Lopez family, A. McCoy (ed.), An anarchy of families: State and family in the Philippines. Manila: Ateneo de Manila University Press

Morrisson, C. and F. Murtin. 2009. The century of education. Journal of Human Capital 3: 1-42.

Murtin, F. and R. Wacziarg. 2011. The democratic transition. Working Paper No. 17432. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

Olson, M. 1993. Dictatorship, democracy, and development. American Political Science Review 87: 567-576.

Parreño, E. 1998. Pork, in S. Coronel (ed.), Pork and other perks: Corruption and governance in the Philippines. Pasig: Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism.

Plümper, T. and C., Martin. 2003. Democracy, government spending, and economic growth: A political-economic explanation of the Barro-effect. Public Choice 117: 27-50.

Proud’homme, R. 1995. On the dangers of decentralization. World Bank Economic Observer 2: 201-220.

Querubin, P. 2010a. Family and politics: Dynastic persistence in the Philippines. Mimeo. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. https://sites.google.com/site/pabloquerubin/research

Querubin, P. 2010b. Political reform and elite persistence: Term limits and political dynasties in the Philippines. Mimeo. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. https://sites.google.com/site/ pabloquerubin/research.

Rivera, T. 2011. In search of credible elections and parties: The Philippine paradox, in F. Miranda, T. Rivera, M. Ronas and R. Holmes (eds.), Chasing the wind: Assessing Philippine democracy. Quezon City: Commission on Human Rights, Philippines.

Rodrik, D. 2007. One economics, many recipes: Globalization, institutions and economic growth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Rossi, M. 2009. The causes of political dynasties in democratic countries. Universidad de los Andes. https://economia.uniandes.edu.co/content/.../29957/.../Political_Dynasties_Rossi.pdf.

Sidel, J. 1997. Philippine politics in town, district, and province: Bossism in Cavite and Cebu. Journal of Asian Studies 56: 947-966.

Solon, O., R. Fabella, and J. Capuno. 2009. Is local development good politics? Local government expenditures and the re-election of governors in the Philippines in the 1990s. Asian Journal of Political Science 17: 265-284.

Teehankee, J. 2007. And the clans play on. Online article. Manila: Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. http://pcij.org/stories/and-the-clans-play-on/.