2016
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2841566
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Effect of Incumbency in National and Local Elections: Evidence from South Korea

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In contrast, the South Korean case demonstrates a distinct path, taking the country from grassroots movements and local pressures to more extensive nationwide decentralization reforms (Bae and Kim 2013). This in turn has led to a system in which local elites foster closer ties with constituents, helping them translate local incumbency status to an electoral advantage at national level elections (Kang, Park, and Song 2018), and where trust in government emerges as a byproduct of fiscal decentralization (Kim, Lee, and Kim forthcoming). Yet South Korea remains one of the less decentralized states in Asia, and so it is unclear the degree to which these findings are reflective of broader trends in the region.…”
Section: Decentralization and Political Representationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast, the South Korean case demonstrates a distinct path, taking the country from grassroots movements and local pressures to more extensive nationwide decentralization reforms (Bae and Kim 2013). This in turn has led to a system in which local elites foster closer ties with constituents, helping them translate local incumbency status to an electoral advantage at national level elections (Kang, Park, and Song 2018), and where trust in government emerges as a byproduct of fiscal decentralization (Kim, Lee, and Kim forthcoming). Yet South Korea remains one of the less decentralized states in Asia, and so it is unclear the degree to which these findings are reflective of broader trends in the region.…”
Section: Decentralization and Political Representationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous studies have tested this assumption in a variety of electoral settings. For the validity of the RD design for the offices used in this study, see Anagol and Fujiwara (2016), Ariga (2015), Ariga et al (2016), Eggers et al (2015), Kang, Park and Song (2018), and Klašnja (2015).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%