Alternation or permanence: tendencies in Latin American presidential elections
By Amanda Murillo, Student of Political Science and Economics at the Universidad del Rosario; Research Resident at the Observatory of Latin American Political Reforms in Latin America.
Power alternation is often regarded as a key indicator of democratic health, reflecting the ability of voters to hold leaders accountable and demand political change. In Latin America, this phenomenon is particularly significant as shifts in leadership often coincide with economic downturns, political discontent, and broader social transformations. Scholars such as O'Donnell (2001) have emphasized the role of vertical accountability in democracies, where elections provide citizens with the opportunity to sanction underperforming governments and reward alternatives. This dynamic highlights the intricate relationship between electoral outcomes and the socio-economic context in the region.
Inflation in Latin America not only destabilizes economies but also generates an immediate political impact. Lora and Olivera (2005, as cited in Murillo, 2010) found that voters respond negatively to poor economic performance, particularly in cases of high inflation. An example of this is Argentina, where inflationary crisis over the past few decades have played a decisive role in the defeat of incumbent governments. This phenomenon reflects how voters react to economic changes that directly affect their consumption capacity and daily well-being, prioritizing immediate sanctions over long-term assessments of economic growth.
Alternation in power can also serve as evidence of voters' ability to replace underperforming incumbents with challengers from the opposite ideological spectrum, indicating that ideology functions as an effective signaling tool (Murillo, 2010). These behaviors are closely linked to ideological polarization, reflecting an increasingly marked political and social divide. In many countries across the region voters have turned to alternation as a way of expressing discontent with the current government, electing candidates from opposing ideological backgrounds. This dynamic has been evident in recent presidential elections, such as in Colombia, where Gustavo Petro's election marked a shift to the left after years of conservative rule. Similarly, in Mexico, the rise of Andrés Manuel López Obrador represented a significant shift towards a more progressive approach. These shifts are suggested not only as a response to dissatisfaction with the incumbent's term but also as part of a broader process of radicalization, where voter preferences become more polarized and diametrically opposed to those of the ruling government.
As we have seen, the ability of voters to monitor and evaluate government performance is crucial for the functioning of electoral accountability. The map below illustrates that 64.7% of the countries analyzed experienced a shift in the presidential elections, with a challenger emerging victorious.
Figure 1. Presidential election winner in Latin America (2020-2024)
Note: The map was made using the Observatory of Political Reforms’ database ‘‘Incumbents y resultados en elecciones presidenciales en América Latina’’ and the labels in each country refer to the year the election was held.
Alternation in power can also be a proxy or indicator for democratic health. Nonetheless, it does not always imply political stability. In some cases, these kinds of alternation may reflect an unstable democracy, where constant changes of government are indicative of a lack of political cohesion and an inability to implement long-term policies. For example, in countries such as Peru, where alternation has occurred frequently in recent decades, changes of government have often failed to consolidate a coherent agenda, generating a cycle of distrust and polarization. This case shows how alternation can make democratic institutions weaker and can even contribute to a political fragmentation. However, in other contexts, alternation can contribute to the process of democratic consolidation, especially when accompanied by electoral reforms, transparency and strengthened citizen participation. In these cases, democracy is able to create pathways to resolve conflicts in a peaceful, inclusive and legitimate way.
One of the key factors in ensuring that power alternation leads to democratic consolidation is the role of strong, independent institutions. In many Latin American countries, the effectiveness of elections as a tool of accountability relies heavily on the integrity of electoral institutions. When these institutions are weak or compromised, as seen in the last elections in Venezuela, elections can become little more than symbolic exercises, undermining the legitimacy of the alternation process itself. It is necessary to strengthen the different checks and balances in order to ensure that the alternation really serves the purpose of supporting democratic stability.
The discussion of alternation must also consider the subnational perspective. While the map above clearly illustrates that alternation is predominantly observed at the presidential level, a shift at this scale does not necessarily imply a similar shift at the provincial or subnational level. This observation suggests that local politics may not always align with national politics, highlighting the possibility that political dynamics at the national level do not fully translate to subnational units. This raises the question of whether vertical accountability functions similarly at the local level.
In conclusion, power alternation in Latin America is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon that reflects both the strengths and challenges of democratic processes. While it serves as a crucial mechanism for holding governments accountable and expressing voter dissatisfaction, it does not always guarantee political stability or effective governance. The relationship between economic performance, voter behavior, and ideological shifts highlights the importance of context when evaluating the democracies in the region. Moreover, the disconnection between national and subnational politics further complicates the assessment of political change. Ultimately, for alternation to contribute positively to democratic consolidation, it must be supported by institutional reforms, effective communication, and a commitment to both national and local governance that reflects the needs of all citizens.
References
O'Donnell, G. (1994). Delegative democracy. Journal of Democracy, 5(1), 55-69. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.1994.0010
Murillo, M. V., Oliveros, V., & Vaishnav, M. (2010). Electoral revolution or democratic alternation? Latin American Research Review, 45(3), 87-114. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0023879100011122
Freidenberg, Flavia. Dir., 2024, “Incumbents y resultados en elecciones presidenciales en América Latina”. Observatorio de Reformas Políticas en América Latina (1978-2024). Ciudad de México: Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas (IIJ-UNAM) y Washington, D.C.: Secretaría para el Fortalecimiento de la Democracia de la Organización de los Estados Americanos (SFD/OEA), V1.
How to cite:
Murillo, Amanda (10 de diciembre del 2024). Alternation or permanence: tendencies in Latin American presidential elections . Blog #LABdata, Observatorio de Reformas Políticas en América Latina. https://observatorioreformas.substack.com/p/b0025d3b-40de-4332-9204-b09a45b07eeb
Download the dataset "Incumbents y resultados en elecciones presidenciales en América Latina” [Base de datos]