Does Participation Make Up for the Democratic Deficit? Evidence from Brazil

• In Event: Emerging Trends in the Study of Bureaucracy in the Developing World

Abstract

Administrative regulations are an important tool for modern governments, but there are concerns about their legitimacy because they are often crafted by unelected bureaucrats in the executive branch instead of the legislature, creating the perception of a democratic deficit. Currently, we know little about how citizens view such processes. To what extent do citizens view laws made in the legislature as more legitimate than those crafted by unelected bureaucrats? Do citizens view executive policymaking as having a democratic deficit? If so, what factors might influence citizens’ views of state legitimacy? Some scholars suggest that policies created by unelected officials have less public support and other scholars argue that procedural processes such as participatory institutions matter, but empirical support for both arguments are lacking. Our contribution is twofold: First, we evaluate how citizens view policy-making in elected versus unelected bodies. Second, we evaluate the extent to which procedures – participatory institutions and impartiality of officials – can make up for the democratic deficit among bureaucrats. We test our hypotheses through an experiment in Brazil to understand how citizens view policymaking across different domains.

Authors

• Katherine Bersch, Davidson College

• Zi En Kimberly Peh, University of Notre Dame

• Luiz Vilaça, University of Notre Dame