Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T18:36:56.781Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Macro-Political Origins of Micro-Political Differences: A Comparison of Eleven Societies in East and South Asia1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2007

TAKASHI INOGUCHI
Affiliation:
Chou University, Tokyo
SANJAY KUMAR
Affiliation:
Chou University, Tokyo
SATORU MIKAMI
Affiliation:
Chou University, Tokyo

Abstract

This article examines the cross-level causal relationship between macro-political settings and micro-political attitudes in eleven Asian societies using the 2006 AsiaBarometer Survey (China, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan) and the 2006 South Asian Survey (Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka). After extracting the four underlying dimensions of political attitudes from the broadly comparable questions used in the two surveys, the study first detects national differences in terms of (1) citizens' attitudes toward political activities other than voting, (2) their commitment to a democratic system, (3) their political frustration, and (4) their confidence in their ability to govern themselves. Then, regression analysis examines the possibility that the micro-level variations in each of the four dimensions of political attitudes are related to the abundant macro-level variations found in these Asian countries. The results show that although the country-level predictors for citizens' attitudes toward direct political actions are common to both regions (ethno-linguistic fractionalization and the degree of institutionalization of preference articulation), factors influencing the variations in other dimensions are different. Specifically, the effects of political competitiveness and inclusiveness are more salient in South Asia than in East Asia.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alesina, Alberto, Devleeschauwer, ArvindEasterly, WilliamKurlat, Sergio and , Romain Wacziarg (2003), ‘Fractionalization’, Journal of Economic Growth, 8: 155194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
AsiaBarometer, AsiaBarometer 2006, available online at www.asiabarometer.org/Google Scholar
Carlson, Matthew and Listhaug, Ola (2006), ‘Public Opinion on the Role of Religion in Political Leadership: A Multi-level Analysis of Sixty-three Countries’, Japanese Journal of Political Science, 7 (3): 251271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Center for the Study of Developing Societies, South Asia Survey 2006, available online at www.lokniti.org/Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. (1971), Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition, New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Duch, Raymond M. and Stevenson, Randy (2005), ‘Context and the Economic Vote: A Multilevel Analysis’, Political Analysis, 13: 387409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freedom House, Freedom in the World, available online at www.freedomhouse.org/Google Scholar
Jusko, Karen Long and Shively, W. Phillips (2005), ‘Applying a Two-Step Strategy to the Analysis of Cross-National Public Opinion Data’, Political Analysis, 13: 327344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polity IV Project, Polity IV, availability online at www.cidcm.umd.edu/polity/Google Scholar
Steenbergen, Marco R. and Jones, Bradford S. (2002), ‘Modeling Multilevel Data Structures’, American Journal of Political Science, 46 (1): 218237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Republic of China, National Statistics, available online at http://eng.stat.gov.tw/Google Scholar
United Nations Development Program, Human Development Index, available online at www.undp.org/Google Scholar
World Bank, World Development Indicators 2007, available online at http://web.worldbank.org/Google Scholar