Political Attitudes and Participation of Informal and Formal Sector Workers in Mexico

Thornton, D. S.

doi:10.1177/0010414000033010002

Cited by 12 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Kenney 2004), and the expansion of clientelism to mobilize voters whom unions used to service (Levitsky 2003). A handful of surveys examine whether informal workers have low levels of trust in democracy and political efficacy and lower propensities to participate in politics due to their poverty and exclusion from traditional unions (Davis et al 1999;Thornton 2000). Yet very little individuallevel work has looked at the electoral behavior of the informal sector directly.…”

Section: Informal Employment and Politicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Informal Sector Work and Evaluations of the Incumbent: The Electoral Effect of Vulnerability on Economic Voting

Singer

2016

Lat. Am. polit. soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Economically vulnerable voters are expected to hold politicians accountable for their management of the economy because these voters are more likely to be personally affected by economic shocks and less able to cope with the resulting dislocation. Evidence from the informal sector in Argentina, where the lack of formal registration increases income volatility and denies unemployment benefits, is consistent with this hypothesis. Data from Argentina from 2005 to 2006 show that the association between evaluations of the economy and evaluations of President Néstor Kirchner was stronger among those working without formal employment guarantees. The implication is that the electoral support of Latin America's many informal workers may very well be fickle and dependent on economic performance.

show abstract

Section: Informal Employment and Politicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Informal Sector Work and Evaluations of the Incumbent: The Electoral Effect of Vulnerability on Economic Voting

Singer

2016

Lat. Am. polit. soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to Portes and Hoffman (2003), the informal sector presents one of the largest groups in the Latin American class structure. It is also a politically active group (see Thornton 2000) despite the possible lack of collective action capacity (Tanaka 2010). The academic debate has produced several definitions of the informal economy; these range from Hart (1973), who defined informality by the labor market status of selfemployment, to more fine-grained definitions that include the regulatory framework (see Gerxhani 2004: 269).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Preferences on Redistribution in Fragmented Labor Markets in Latin America and the Caribbean

Berens

2015

Journal of Politics in Latin America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the extent to which labor market dualization polarizes preferences on redistribution between formal and informal sector workers in Latin America and the Caribbean. Differences in welfare state costs and benefits for these labor market groups are likely to fuel diverging incentives regarding welfare consumption. The article tests whether or not informal workers are driven mainly by economic self-interest to increase gains from public welfare goods. The study employed a hierarchical model on pooled survey data from the Latin American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP) 2008 and 2010 to analyze the risk exposure of formal and informal workers and, subsequently, their preferences on redistribution. The analysis reveals that while economic self-interest is an influential factor for formal workers, it is (unexpectedly) much less so for informal workers. Also, an increased economically insecure environment, reflected by high unemployment rates, does not motivate informal workers to an exceptional degree to turn towards the state for redistribution, despite greater exposure to economic risk. Labor market dualization does not translate into polarization at the individual level regarding redistributive preferences in Latin America and the Caribbean.

show abstract

“…But results are mixed and at times mutually contradictory. For instance, Ronconi and Zarazaga (2015) find that informal workers are less likely to vote, while Thornton (2000) finds that Mexico's informal workers are more likely to vote than their formal compatriots. Similarly, Singer (2016) alone finds that the effect of informality on voting for the left can be positive or negative, depending on workers' attitudes toward the macroeconomy.…”

Section: Wrestling With the Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Labor Informality and the Vote in Latin America: A Meta-analysis

Baker¹,

Dorr²

2022

Lat Am Polit Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conventional wisdom among scholars of Latin American politics holds that informal workers are less participatory and less left-leaning than formal workers. Relevant empirical findings, however, are mixed and in need of synthesis. This article provides that synthesis by conducting meta-analyses on the universe of previous quantitative studies of informality and the vote. It finds that informal workers are indeed less likely to vote than formal workers, but the effect of informality is small—just four to seven percentage points. It further finds that informal workers are more likely to vote for the left, not the right, but here the effect size is even smaller. Meta-regression analyses reveal that in countries where organized professional activity among informal workers is high, gaps in turnout between the two sectors are minimal. The article concludes that the conventional wisdom over-states the individual-level political consequences of labor informality in Latin America.

show abstract

Political Attitudes and Participation of Informal and Formal Sector Workers in Mexico

Cited by 12 publications

References 8 publications

Informal Sector Work and Evaluations of the Incumbent: The Electoral Effect of Vulnerability on Economic Voting

Informal Sector Work and Evaluations of the Incumbent: The Electoral Effect of Vulnerability on Economic Voting

Preferences on Redistribution in Fragmented Labor Markets in Latin America and the Caribbean

Labor Informality and the Vote in Latin America: A Meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About