Do you want to stay informed about this journal? Click the buttons to subscribe to our alerts.
Varieties of Clientelism in Comparative Democracies: Power, State Formation and Citizenship in the Philippines, Bosnia and Herzegovina
In: BandungAbstract
Clientelism in comparative democracies have evolved through time within informal and formal institutions. Using the book by Brkovic, that follows the tradition of challenging the unidimensional view of clientelism in Bosnia and Herzegovina, this essay provides the Philippine case as contrast and comparison. The article examines how both countries’ experience can open new avenues for us to understand the durability of clientelism and its relationship with formal and informal institutions. Brokovic’s agency and personhood within clientelistic relationships accounts for the endurance of this practice in democratic societies that experienced transition. Clientelism persists in part due to the reliability of personal relations over the ability of public institutions to deliver. This review article will probe clientelism, as it manifests in the politics of the Philippines and its democratic institutions. Among the multiple types of clientelistic relationship in the Philippines, some emphasize the role of machine politics, corruption, and coercion. Brković’s book provides a new lens of analysis by looking at clientelism through personhood and agency as power. The contribution of the book on the discourse of clientelism can deepen the understanding of Philippine politics because it encourages an analysis that looks at the exercise of democracy through personhood, agency, and informal institutions. It invites us to view clientelism not just through corruption and violence. By combining the analysis that utilizes formal and informal institutions, personhood and structuralist, this essay explains why some countries that have transitioned into democracies remain ambiguous states and explain the persistence of clientelism.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Bustikova, Lenka, and Cristina Corduneanu-Huci. 2017. “Patronage, Trust, and State Capacity: The Historical Trajectories of Clientelism.” World Politics 69, no. 2: 277–326.
-
Brković, Č., 2017. Managing ambiguity: How clientelism, citizenship, and power shape personhood in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Vol. 31). Berghahn Books.
-
Calimbahin, Cleo. 2018. “An Ambivalent State: The Crossover of Corruption and Violence in the Philippines.” In Handbook on the Geographies of Corruptionedited by Barney Warf. Edward Elgar Publishing.
-
Calimbahin, Cleo. 2019. “First District of Makati: Signs of Electoral Backslide and Challenges to a Dynasty.” In Electoral Dynamics in the Philippines: Money Politics, Patronage and Clientelism at the Grassrootsedited by Allen Hicken, Meredith Weiss and Edward Aspinall. National University of Singapore Press.
-
Canare, Tristan, Mendoza, Ronald. and Lopez, Mario. 2018. An empirical analysis of vote buying among the poor: Evidence from elections in the Philippines. South East Asia Research, 26(1), pp.58–84.
-
Grossholtz, Jean. 1964. Politics in the Philippines: A Country Study. Little, Brown.
-
Grzymala-Busse, Anna. 2008. “Beyond Clientelism: Incumbent State Capture and State Formation.” Comparative Political Studies 4, nos. 4–5: 638–673.
-
Hedman, Eva-Lotta, and John Sidel. 2005. Philippine Politics and Society in the Twentieth Century: Colonial Legacies, Post-Colonial Trajectories. Routledge.
-
Helmke, Gretchen, and Steven Levitsky. 2004. “Informal Institutions and Comparative Politics: A Research Agenda.” Perspectives on Politics 2, no. 4: 725–740.
-
Helmke, Gretchen, and Steven Levitsky, eds. 2006. Informal Institutions and Democracy: Lessons from Latin America. Johns Hopkins Press.
-
Hicken, Allen. 2011. “Clientelism.” Annual Review of Political Science 14: 289–310.
-
Hilgers, Tina. 2009. “‘Who is Using Whom?’ Clientelism from the Client’s Perspective.” Journal of Iberian and Latin American Research 15, no. 1: 51–75.
-
Johnston, Michael. 2010. Syndromes of Corruption: Wealth, Power, and Democracy. Cambridge University Press.
-
Kerkvliet, Benedict. 1990. Everyday politics in the Philippines: Class and status relations in a Central Luzon Village. New Day Publishers.
-
Kimura, Masataka. 1997. Elections and politics Philippine style: A Case in Lipa. De La Salle University Press.
-
Kitschelt, Herbert, and Steven Wilkinson, eds. 2007. Patrons, Clients and Policies: Patterns of Democratic Accountability and Political Competition. Cambridge University Press.
-
Landé, Carl. 1965. Leaders, Factions, and Parties: The Structure of Philippine Politics (No. 6). Southeast Asia Studies, Yale University.
-
Landé, Carl. 1973. Networks and groups in Southeast Asia: some observations on the group theory of politics. The American Political Science Review, 67(1), pp.103–127.
-
Lauth, Hans-Joachim 2000. “Informal Institutions and Democracy.” Democratization 7, no. 4: 21–50.
-
Machado, K.G. 1974. From Traditional Faction to Machine: Changing patterns of political leadership and organization in the rural Philippines. The Journal of Asian Studies, pp.523–547.
-
Merton, Robert. 1976. Sociological Ambivalence and Other Essays. Simon and Schuster.
-
Scott, J.C., 1972. Patron-client politics and political change in Southeast Asia. American political science review, 66(1), pp. 91–113.
-
Sidel, John. 1999. Capital, Coercion, and Crime: Bossism in the Philippines. Stanford University Press.
-
Sikkink, Kathryn. 1991. Ideas and Institutions: Developmentalism in Brazil and Argentina (Vol. 4). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 944 | 399 | 41 |
| Full Text Views | 25 | 8 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 36 | 15 | 1 |
Varieties of Clientelism in Comparative Democracies: Power, State Formation and Citizenship in the Philippines, Bosnia and Herzegovina
In: BandungAbstract
Clientelism in comparative democracies have evolved through time within informal and formal institutions. Using the book by Brkovic, that follows the tradition of challenging the unidimensional view of clientelism in Bosnia and Herzegovina, this essay provides the Philippine case as contrast and comparison. The article examines how both countries’ experience can open new avenues for us to understand the durability of clientelism and its relationship with formal and informal institutions. Brokovic’s agency and personhood within clientelistic relationships accounts for the endurance of this practice in democratic societies that experienced transition. Clientelism persists in part due to the reliability of personal relations over the ability of public institutions to deliver. This review article will probe clientelism, as it manifests in the politics of the Philippines and its democratic institutions. Among the multiple types of clientelistic relationship in the Philippines, some emphasize the role of machine politics, corruption, and coercion. Brković’s book provides a new lens of analysis by looking at clientelism through personhood and agency as power. The contribution of the book on the discourse of clientelism can deepen the understanding of Philippine politics because it encourages an analysis that looks at the exercise of democracy through personhood, agency, and informal institutions. It invites us to view clientelism not just through corruption and violence. By combining the analysis that utilizes formal and informal institutions, personhood and structuralist, this essay explains why some countries that have transitioned into democracies remain ambiguous states and explain the persistence of clientelism.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 944 | 399 | 41 |
| Full Text Views | 25 | 8 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 36 | 15 | 1 |