Dr George Ofosu

This course is available on the BA in Social Anthropology, BSc in History and Politics, BSc in International Social and Public Policy with Politics, BSc in Philosophy, Politics and Economics, BSc in Philosophy, Politics and Economics (with a Year Abroad), BSc in Politics, BSc in Politics and Data Science, BSc in Politics and Economics, BSc in Politics and History, BSc in Politics and International Relations, BSc in Politics and Philosophy and BSc in Social Anthropology. This course is not available as an outside option. This course is available with permission to General Course students.

This course is capped at 1 group.

Students must have completed Introduction to Political Science (GV101).

Comfort with basic statistics as covered by Research Design in Political Science (GV249) or an equivalent course in research design or introductory statistics (such as ST102, ST107, ST108, GY140, SA201) is recommended but not required.

The extent to which electoral competition motivates elected officials to respond to the needs of citizens determines the quality of a democratic political system. This course examines the theoretical and practical challenges to how elections promote democratic responsiveness and accountability. The course will cover contemporary political science research on a series of topics. How do elections incentivize political responsiveness? How do politicians campaign and distribute state resources to win elections? Why do some voters support corrupt, underperforming politicians while others choose effective leaders? Why are some elections rigged while others are free and fair? Why do some elections spark violence while others are peaceful? Which interventions can make democratic institutions work? Readings will draw on empirical cases from many world regions, including Africa, Latin America, the post-Soviet countries, South Asia, and the historical United States. Students are expected to be active participants in this course and will participate in several class debates and writing exercises.

This course provides a minimum of 20 hours of seminars in the Winter Term. There will be a reading week in WT Week 6.

There are two pieces of formative coursework: 2 presentations in the WT and a short proposal (800 -1000 words) for a final project in week 7.

The first formative coursework involves two-class group presentations. The assignment will help students to connect empirical work in the field of electoral accountability to the theories introduced in the first part of the course.

The second formative assignment will help students prepare an outline for their final essay. The short essay will comprise a research question, an overview of the argument, a draft structure and an indicative reading list. Feedback will be provided via email and/or individual sessions with students.

1. Przeworski, Manin and Stokes (eds), Democracy, Accountability and Representation, Cambridge UP.
2. Diamond and Morlino (eds), Assessing the Quality of Democracy, A Journal of Democracy Book; Johns Hopkins University Press, 2005.
3. Ferejohn J. 1986. “Incumbent Performance and Electoral Control.” Public Choice 50:5-26.
4. Besley, T. 2005. “Political Selection.” Journal of Economic perspectives 19(3): 43-60.
5. Achen and Bartels. 2016. Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton Studies in Political Behavior. Princeton University Press.
6. Simpser. 2013. Why Governments and Parties Manipulate Elections: Theory, Practice, and Implications. Cambridge University Press.
7. Stokes et al., 2013, Brokers, Voters, and Clientelism: The Puzzle of Distributive Politics, Cambridge University.
8. Ferraz and Finan, 2008, “Exposing Corrupt Politicians: The Effects of Brazils Publicly Released Audits on Electoral Outcomes,” Quarterly Journal of Economics.
9. Grossman and Michelitch. 2018. “Information Dissemination, Competitive Pressure, and Politician Performance between Elections: A Field Experiment in Uganda.” American Political Science Review.
10. George Kwaku Ofosu (2019). Do Fairer Elections Increase the Responsiveness of Politicians? American Political Science Review.

Essay (80%, 3000 words) in the ST.
In-class assessment (20%).

For the in-class assessment: Students will be asked to serve as a seminar discussant during the term. On these weeks the discussant will write a two or three-page memo that discusses the readings in a comparative perspective. In the last class meeting, each student will give a 5-minute overview of his/her plans for the final course essay.

GENERAL COURSE STUDENTS ONLY:

The Class Summary Grade for General Course students will be based on 75% formative coursework (25% for each presentation and 25% for the short proposal) and 25% class participation (including attendance).