• About us
  • GSDRC Publications
  • Research Helpdesk
  • E-Bulletin
  • Privacy policy

GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Governance
    • Democracy & elections
  • Social Development
    • Social protection
  • Humanitarian Issues
    • Humanitarian financing
    • Humanitarian response
  • Conflict
    • Conflict analysis
    • Conflict prevention
    • Conflict response
    • Conflict sensitivity
    • Impacts of conflict
  • Development Pressures
    • Climate change
    • Food security
    • Fragility
  • Approaches
    • Complexity & systems thinking
  • Aid Instruments
    • Budget support & SWAps
    • Capacity building
    • Civil society partnerships
  • M&E
    • Indicators
    • Learning
    • M&E approaches
Home»GSDRC Publications»Direct elections and responsiveness in Indonesia

Direct elections and responsiveness in Indonesia

Helpdesk Report
  • Anna Strachan
February 2014

Question

Are directly elected subnational executives more responsive to citizens’ needs than indirectly elected subnational executives? If not, what development interventions make directly elected subnational executives more likely to be responsive to citizens?

Summary

According to Rodden and Wibbels (2012, p. 4), responsiveness refers to a situation where “candidates offer, and then implement, distinctive platforms that reflect constituent preferences or demands.” This is the definition that is used for the purpose of this report.

It is difficult to establish whether direct elections are the main driver of responsiveness. This is because even if a political actor’s level of responsiveness changes as a result of direct elections, this is hard to prove because such changes can be difficult to attribute.

Direct elections in Indonesia were introduced in 2004. As a result the impact of direct elections on responsiveness has not been rigorously assessed to date. The existing literature on direct elections and responsiveness is divided. While some authors find that direct elections have had a significant impact on responsiveness, others find that direct elections have had no effect. In some cases direct elections have had a negative impact on responsiveness, reversing improvements in public services.

file type icon See Full Report [PDF]

Enquirer:

  • Australian Government

Related Content

Donor Support to Electoral Cycles
Helpdesk Report
2021
Donor support for post-conflict elections
Helpdesk Report
2017
Religious leaders and the prevention of electoral violence
Helpdesk Report
2016
Voluntary voter registration
Helpdesk Report
2015
birminghamids hcri

gro.crdsg@seiriuqne Feedback Disclaimer

Outputs supported by FCDO are © Crown Copyright 2022; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2022; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2022
Connect with us: facebooktwitter

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2022; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2022; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2022