Elections
-

Abstract:

Civic engagement underpins a healthy democracy when it provides channels outside of elections for citizens to express preferences and demands to politicians. This mechanism of democratic accountability is undermined when groups of citizens face differential access or barriers to participation. It is well-documented that marginalized groups participate less, particularly in developing countries where economic and social inequalities are higher. I discuss two primary constraints: marginalized groups face higher material and social costs, and they are less likely to have the information and knowledge necessary for engagement. I test the second of these two explanations in the West African country of Mali with a field experiment that randomly assigned an information intervention to some localities and not others. An exogenous increase in civic and political information had no net effect on treated communities, but had significant effects conditional on gender: men participated significantly more in civic activity while women participated less. I show this disparity is not driven by pre-existing differences in knowledge or skills but rather higher social costs faced by women. However, it appears the increase in civic activity among men is driven by individuals more dissatisfied with government and the decrease among women is driven by more satisfied individuals dropping out. Together, these findings suggest that citizens face an information constraint to civic participation that can be addressed, in part, by improving information, but that information alone cannot overcome inegalitarian social norms – and may even exacerbate them.

Speaker bio:

Jessica Gottlieb is a 2012-2013 CDDRL pre-doctoral fellow and a PhD Candidate at Stanford University. She studies political behavior, institutions, and government performance in developing countries with a regional focus on sub-Saharan Africa. Her dissertation demonstrates how low voter expectations, collusion among political parties, and social inequalities together undermine electoral accountability in Mali. In her past and current research, Gottlieb combines extensive field work, sound research design and rigorous methods such as field, survey and behavioral experiments. She received an MA in Economics from Stanford in 2011 and expects to complete the PhD in Political Science by June 2013.

Encina Ground Floor Conference Room

Encina Hall
616 Serra Street
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

0
CDDRL Pre-doctoral Fellow 2012-13
Gottlieb_HS2.jpg

Jessica Gottlieb is a 2012-2013 CDDRL pre-doctoral fellow and a PhD Candidate at Stanford University. She studies political behavior, institutions, and government performance in developing countries with a regional focus on sub-Saharan Africa. Her dissertation demonstrates how low voter expectations, collusion among political parties, and social inequalities together undermine electoral accountability in Mali. In her past and current research, Gottlieb combines extensive field work, sound research design and rigorous methods such as field, survey and behavioral experiments. She received an MA in Economics from Stanford in 2011 and expects to complete the PhD in Political Science by June 2013.

CV
Jessica Gottlieb 2012-2013 CDDRL pre-doctoral fellow and a PhD Candidate Speaker Stanford University
Seminars

Encina Hall
616 Serra Street
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

(650650) 724724-29962996
0
Visiting Student Researcher, Winter 2013
mseeberg.jpg

Merete Bech Seeberg holds an MSc in Comparative Politics from the London School of Economics and is a Ph.D. candidate at University of Aarhus in Denmark. Her dissertation explores the effect of elections on regime stability in authoritarian regimes. While authoritarian elections have been shown to work both as stabilizing tools underpinning the autocrat and as levers of democratization, Merete Seeberg argues that this apparent paradox is due to the variety of circumstances under which non-democratic elections play out. Where the authoritarian regime can draw on significant state capacity and an economic monopoly, elections are more likely to serve the dictators ends. Where structural conditions are not as favorable to the dictator and the international community steps in, elections are more likely to propel democratization.

-

Static websites, mailing lists and blogs propelled Howard Dean to the chair of the DNC in 2005.  Dean’s campaign heralded a new era in the use of digital technology in election campaigns.  Merely seven years later the role of technology in election campaigns has undergone a profound change. Digital strategy is so central to election campaigns today that it is difficult to imagine that it was only in the previous round of US presidential elections that a digital strategist became a part of the core campaign team for a candidate.  Digital strategists are no more a bunch of people in the sidelines of election campaigns: they drive it.  In a bid to understand this phenomenon we have invited key players from the Obama and Romney campaigns, and a Washington Post journalist who just published a book on this topic for a discussion on Feb 13, 2013.

The panel will explore the state of technology in election campaigns among Democrats and Republicans, its implication for democracy and how technology will shape campaigns in the near future.

 

Koret-Taube Conference Center
366 Galvez Street
Stanford University

Nathaniel Lubin Director of Digital Marketing Panelist Obama campaign 2012
Zac Moffatt Chief Digital Strategist Panelist Romney campaign 2012
Sasha Issenberg Author Panelist The Victory Lab
Conferences
-

During the past few years, the European Union has experienced one of the most difficult periods in its now sixty-year long process of unification. To fight the current eurocrisis, the EU has taken further steps toward integration that seemed unthinkable just a few years ago. In this seminar, we will discuss the challenges and opportunities the crisis offers for more European unification.

Ambassador Veestraeten has been the Belgian Consul General in Los Angeles since September 2012. Prior to his arrival in California he was Belgian Ambassador to Thailand. He has also held positions at the Belgian Embassies in Nigeria, Bulgaria, Kenya and Washington DC. Amb. Veestraeten holds a degree in Romance Literature from KU Leuven.

This event is part of The Europe Center's series on the "European and Global Economic Crisis."

Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room

Rudi Veestraeten Consul General to the US Speaker the Consulate General of Belgium in Los Angeles
Seminars
Paragraphs

Objective To examine the relationship between hospital volume and in-hospital adverse events. Data Sources Patient safety indicator (PSI) was used to identify hospital-acquired adverse events in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database in abdominal aortic aneurysm, coronary artery bypass graft, and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass from 2005 to 2008. Study Design In this observational study, volume thresholds were defined by mean year-specific terciles. PSI risk-adjusted rates were analyzed by volume tercile for each procedure. Principal Findings Overall, hospital volume was inversely related to preventable adverse events. High-volume hospitals had significantly lower risk-adjusted PSI rates compared to lower volume hospitals (p <.05). Conclusion These data support the relationship between hospital volume and quality health care delivery in select surgical cases. This study highlights differences between hospital volume and risk-adjusted PSI rates for three common surgical procedures and highlights areas of focus for future studies to identify pathways to reduce hospital-acquired events. © Health Research and Educational Trust.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Health Services Research
Authors
Paragraphs

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Patient safety is a national priority. Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs) monitor potential adverse events during hospital stays. Surgical specialty PSI benchmarks do not exist, and are needed to account for differences in the range of procedures performed, reasons for the procedure, and differences in patient characteristics. A comprehensive profile of adverse events in vascular surgery was created.

STUDY DESIGN:

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was queried for 8 vascular procedures using ICD-9-CM codes from 2005 to 2009. Factors associated with PSI development were evaluated in univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS:

A total of 1,412,703 patients underwent a vascular procedure and a PSI developed in 5.2%. PSIs were more frequent in female, nonwhite patients with public payers (p < 0.01). Patients at mid and low-volume hospitals had greater odds of developing a PSI (odds ratio [OR] = 1.17; 95% CI, 1.10-1.23 and OR = 1.69; 95% CI, 1.53-1.87). Amputations had highest PSI risk-adjusted rate and carotid endarterectomy and endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair had lower risk-adjusted rate (p < 0.0001). PSI risk-adjusted rate increased linearly by severity of patient indication: claudicants (OR = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.35-0.46), rest pain patients (OR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.69-0.90), ulcer (OR = 1.20; 95% CI, 1.07-1.34), and gangrene patients (OR = 1.85; 95% CI, 1.66-2.06).

CONCLUSIONS:

Patient safety events in vascular surgery were high and varied by procedure, with amputations and open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair having considerably more potential adverse events. PSIs were associated with black race, public payer, and procedure indication. It is important to note the overall higher rates of PSIs occurring in vascular patients and to adjust benchmarks for this surgical specialty appropriately.

Copyright © 2012 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
J Am Coll Surg
Authors

This two day workshop will bring together scholars whose research actively engages problems of electoral irregularities.  Irregularities range from high levels of pre-election violence to electoral fraud to vote-buying and patronage. All these tactics potentially affect the outcomes of elections and all disempower citizens in their attempts to have their voices heard in the polity. On the whole, scholars who have concentrated on understanding patronage and clientelism have not interacted with those working on electoral fraud, and neither group has talked at great length to those expert in electoral violence. This workshop will bring together scholars with specific expertise in each of these topics in order to establish a new dialogue across expertise. 

 

Agenda (subject to change):

Day One: April 12, 2013

8:30-9:00 am Breakfast

9:00-9:10 am—Welcoming Remarks Beatriz Magaloni, Stanford University; Miriam Golden, UCLA

9:10-10:30 am—Panel 1: Electoral Fraud, Integrity, and Violence (1)

  • Karen Ferree, UCSD: “Violating the Secret Ballot: The Political Logic of Fraud in Ghana’s 2008 Elections”
  • James Long, Harvard University: “Scalable Information and Communications Technology Reduces Electoral Fraud in Fragile Democracies
  • Discussant: Miriam Golden, UCLA

10:30-10:45 am Break

10:45-12:10 pm—Panel 2: Electoral Fraud, Integrity, and Violence (2) 

  • Isabela Mares, Columbia University: “The supply of electoral intimidation: Evidence from Imperial Germany”
  • Eric Kramon and Miriam Golden: “Electoral Violence and Fraud in the 2012 Ghanaian Elections: Polling Station Results”
  • Discussant: James Fearon, Stanford University 

12:10-2:00 pm Lunch

2:00-3:25 pm—Panel 3: Electoral Fraud, Integrity, and Violence (3)

  • George Ofosu, UCLA: “Transitional Multiparty Elections: Do Military Regimes Perform Better at Promoting Fair Elections?”
  • Joseph Asunka, UCLA: “Electoral investment through formal institutions”
  • Discussant: Beatriz Magaloni, Stanford University

3:25-3:40 pm Break

3:40-5:00 pm—Panel 4: Clientelism 

  • Mike Callen, UCSD, and Saad Gulzar, NYU: “Clientelism and Health Worker Absence: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Pakistan”
  • Nahomi Ichino, Harvard: “Crossing the Line: Local Ethnic Geography and Voting in Ghana”
  • Discussant: Barbara Geddes

Day Two: April 13, 2013

9:00-9:30 am Breakfast

9:30-11:00 am—Panel 5: Clientelism and Vote Buying 

  • Sarah Brierley, UCLA: “Buying votes or buying time? Gift giving as an extension of the political party network in Ghana”
  • Simeon Nichter, UCSD: “Voter Buying: Shaping the Electorate through Clientelism”
  • Discussant: Fred Finan, University of California, Berkeley 

11:00-11:15 am Break

11:15-11:45 am—Concluding Session and Discussion

 


 

CISAC Conference Room

Dept. of Political Science
Encina Hall, Room 436
Stanford University,
Stanford, CA

(650) 724-5949
0
Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Graham H. Stuart Professor of International Relations
Professor of Political Science
beatriz_magaloni_2024.jpg MA, PhD

Beatriz Magaloni Magaloni is the Graham Stuart Professor of International Relations at the Department of Political Science. Magaloni is also a Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute, where she holds affiliations with the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) and the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC). She is also a Stanford’s King Center for Global Development faculty affiliate. Magaloni has taught at Stanford University for over two decades.

She leads the Poverty, Violence, and Governance Lab (Povgov). Founded by Magaloni in 2010, Povgov is one of Stanford University’s leading impact-driven knowledge production laboratories in the social sciences. Under her leadership, Povgov has innovated and advanced a host of cutting-edge research agendas to reduce violence and poverty and promote peace, security, and human rights.

Magaloni’s work has contributed to the study of authoritarian politics, poverty alleviation, indigenous governance, and, more recently, violence, crime, security institutions, and human rights. Her first book, Voting for Autocracy: Hegemonic Party Survival and its Demise in Mexico (Cambridge University Press, 2006) is widely recognized as a seminal study in the field of comparative politics. It received the 2007 Leon Epstein Award for the Best Book published in the previous two years in the area of political parties and organizations, as well as the Best Book Award from the American Political Science Association’s Comparative Democratization Section. Her second book The Politics of Poverty Relief: Strategies of Vote Buying and Social Policies in Mexico (with Alberto Diaz-Cayeros and Federico Estevez) (Cambridge University Press, 2016) explores how politics shapes poverty alleviation.

Magaloni’s work was published in leading journals, including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Criminology & Public Policy, World Development, Comparative Political Studies, Annual Review of Political Science, Cambridge Journal of Evidence-Based Policing, Latin American Research Review, and others.

Magaloni received wide international acclaim for identifying innovative solutions for salient societal problems through impact-driven research. In 2023, she was named winner of the world-renowned Stockholm Prize in Criminology, considered an equivalent of the Nobel Prize in the field of criminology. The award recognized her extensive research on crime, policing, and human rights in Mexico and Brazil. Magaloni’s research production in this area was also recognized by the American Political Science Association, which named her recipient of the 2021 Heinz I. Eulau Award for the best article published in the American Political Science Review, the leading journal in the discipline.

She received her Ph.D. in political science from Duke University and holds a law degree from the Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México.

Director, Poverty, Violence, and Governance Lab
Co-director, Democracy Action Lab
CV
Date Label
Beatriz Magaloni Moderator Stanford
Miriam Golden Moderator UCLA
Workshops
Subscribe to Elections