Elections in Cape Verde, 1991-2016: Testing the second-order election model in a consolidated semi-presidential African democracy

Cadernos de Estudos Africanos 38 | 2019 Three Decades of Elections in Africa: What have we learned about democracy? Elections in Cape Verde, 1991-2016: Testing the second-order election model in a consolidated semi-presidential African democracy Eleições em Cabo Verde, 1991-2016: Teste ao modelo de eleições de segunda ordem numa democracia semipresidencialista consolidada em África José Santana Pereira, Susana Rogeiro Nina and Danielton Delgado Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/cea/4331 DOI: 10.4000/cea.4331 ISSN: 2182-7400 Publisher Centro de Estudos Internacionais Printed version Date of publication: 1 December 2019 Number of pages: 67-91 ISSN: 1645-3794 ELECTRONIC REFERENCE José Santana Pereira, Susana Rogeiro Nina and Danielton Delgado, « Elections in Cape Verde, 1991-2016: Testing the second-order election model in a consolidated semi-presidential African democracy », Cadernos de Estudos Africanos [Online], 38 | 2019, Online since 09 March 2020, connection on 11 March 2020. URL : http:// journals.openedition.org/cea/4331 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/cea.4331 O trabalho Cadernos de Estudos Africanos está licenciado com uma Licença Creative Commons - Atribuição-NãoComercial-CompartilhaIgual 4.0 Internacional. 2 Cadernos de Estudos Africanos (2019) 38, 67-91 © 2019 Centro de Estudos Internacionais do Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL) Esta publicação é financiada por fundos nacionais através da FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia no âmbito do UID/CPO/03122/2013 Elections in Cape Verde, 1991-2016: Testing the second-order election model in a consolidated semi-presidential African democracy José Santana Pereira Centro de Investigação e Estudos de Sociologia (CIES-IUL) Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL) Av. das Forças Armadas 1649-026 Lisbon, Portugal [email protected] Susana Rogeiro Nina Instituto de Ciências Sociais da Universidade de Lisboa Av. Prof. Aníbal Bettencourt, 9 1600-189 Lisbon, Portugal [email protected] Danielton Delgado Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL) Av. das Forças Armadas 1649-026 Lisbon, Portugal dannysty[email protected] 68 Elections in Cape Verde, 1991-2016: Testing the second-order election model in a consolidated semi-presidential African democracy Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 Elections in Cape Verde, 1991-2016: Testing the second-order election model in a consolidated semi-presidential African democracy1 In this article, we analyse patterns of turnout and electoral choices of Cape Verde’s citizens in different types of elections, looking at all legislative, presidential and local elections held between 1991 and 2016, and testing four hypotheses derived from the second-order election model about differences in terms of turnout, number of spoiled/blank papers, results for the incumbent party and the electoral success of smaller parties. Our results show that, in what regards turnout and electoral behaviour, local elections present the features of second-order elections much more clearly than the presidential elections in this semi-presidential regime. However, this pattern does not necessarily mean that voters look at the latter as less second-order, but since they often took place in the honeymoon period of the legislative electoral cycle, it may only mean that there were lower incentives to punish the incumbent and/or disengage from political participation. Keywords: Cape Verde, second-order elections, turnout, local elections, semipresidentialism Eleições em Cabo Verde, 1991-2016: Teste ao modelo de eleições de segunda ordem numa democracia semipresidencialista consolidada em África Neste artigo, procuramos perceber os padrões de participação e as escolhas eleitorais dos cidadãos cabo-verdianos em diferentes tipos de eleições. Analisamos todas as eleições (legislativas, presidenciais e autárquicas) entre 1991 e 2016 para testar quatro hipóteses formuladas a partir do modelo de eleições de segunda ordem, relativas diferenças nos níveis de participação, número de votos inválidos/em branco, resultados do partido incumbente e sucesso eleitoral dos pequenos partidos. No que diz respeito à participação e comportamento eleitoral, os resultados revelam que há uma tendência para as eleições autárquicas apresentarem mais características de eleições de segunda ordem do que as eleições presidenciais neste regime semipresidencial. Contudo, tal não significa que os eleitores considerem as eleições presidenciais como menos de segunda ordem. Uma vez que as eleições presidenciais ocorreram durante o período de lua de mel do ciclo eleitoral legislativo, tal pode apenas significar que os eleitores têm tido menos incentivos para punir o partido incumbente e/ou absterem-se de votar. Palavras-chave: Cabo Verde, eleições de segunda ordem, participação eleitoral, eleições autárquicas, semipresidencialismo Recebido: 20 de junho de 2019 Aceite: 16 de outubro de 2019 1 Funds for the translation of this article were provided by the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia through the Strategic Financing of the R&D Unit UID/SOC/03126/2019. 69 José Santana Pereira, Susana Rogeiro Nina & Danielton Delgado Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 Not all elections have the same importance: not for parties and not for voters. The second-order election model by Reif and Schmitt (1980) and its subsequent empirical tests remind us of this. In parliamentary systems, the first-order elections are the national legislative elections, and, in presidential systems, the presidential races. The stakes in these elections are high, and voters understand their importance, since they determine the distribution of power at the most important level of political decision-making. Second-order elections, in turn, have little effect on who controls executive power. Examples of second-order elections are local elections, European parliament elections and presidential elections in weak semi-presidential regimes. The second-order election model has been extensively used in Europe but travelled little outside the European continent’s borders. Here we seek to fill this gap by conducting an analysis of the aggregate turnout and electoral behaviour patterns of Cape Verdean voters. It is now almost 30 years since the Cape Verde regime became a multi-party democracy, a process that was formalised by the 1991 legislative elections. These elections led to an immediate change in the incumbent and peaceful alternation in political power since then (Évora, 2001, 2009) – an important characteristic of consolidated democratic systems, which, along with other factors, causes Cape Verde to be portrayed often as a haven of democracy, an exception in the African panorama (Baker, 2006; Meyns, 2002). By applying a traditional model of aggregate electoral patterns to a recent democracy in Africa, we aim at contributing to the flourishing field of African electoral politics research by testing the explanatory power of a tool designed for consolidated democracies in their younger counterparts. The Cape Verdean context seems ideal for testing the assumptions made by the second-order elections model outside the European context in which it was initially developed. First, Cape Verde is a recent democracy, and this often means that second-orderness assumptions are less clearly confirmed due to the fluidity of party systems and attachments (e.g. Schmitt, 2005). Second, Cape Verde is an archipelago, which may mean that local elections could matter more than in continental democracies, merely due to the geographical distance from the central national government experienced by several islands; also, research has shown than in African polities local elections are often very participated, which would deny the idea that citizens look at them as less important (Bleck & van de Walle, 2019). Therefore, to what extent are local elections in Cape Verde indeed second-order? Third, the fact Cape Verde’s political system is semi-presidential (and hence the president has more powers than the head of state in parliamentary regimes) leads us to question whether voters actually consider presidential 70 Elections in Cape Verde, 1991-2016: Testing the second-order election model in a consolidated semi-presidential African democracy Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 elections to be second-order, especially in a region of the world in which both presidentialism and the president’s formal and informal powers are mainstream and paramount (Bleck & van de Walle, 2019; van de Walle, 2003). We set out four hypotheses derives from Reif and Schmitt’s (1980) second-order elections model. Thus we expect different electoral behaviour across parliamentary and presidential and local elections in Cape Verde. To test our expectations, we examined aggregate data regarding every presidential, legislative and local election that took place in the country since 1991. Some of the data used in this analysis was found on the official webpage of Cape Verde’s National Election Commission (CNE - Comissão Nacional de Eleições), while the older data was obtained at the CNE headquarters. This data is analysed as a whole and within specific electoral cycles determined by the legislative election, which provides the most appropriate context to test second-order election model-related hypotheses (e.g. Freire, 2005). This article is divided into six sections. The first is dedicated to the theoretical framework, namely the second-order election model assumptions and its test in new democracies. We then turn to a discussion of the presidential elections as second-order elections within semi-presidential regimes, with a special focus on the Cape Verdean context, and to what extent can local elections be defined as second-order elections within the African context. In the fourth section, we present our goals, the methodology adopted, and the hypotheses to be tested. We then test our hypotheses using the official aggregate data. The article concludes with a discussion of the main patterns identified through the empirical analysis. The second-order election model in old and new democracies In their seminal article on the European Parliament election, Reif and Schmitt (1980) called for the qualitative differentiation of election types and for a distinction between firstand second-order elections. At the heart of these two election types is the idea that voting behaviour and election results are determined by the perception voters have of what is at stake in the election. According to Reif and Schmitt (1980), legislative (in parliamentary and semi-presidential systems) and presidential elections (in presidential regimes) are first-order contests, since their result determines how national executive power will be allocated, with important consequences in terms of decision-making process (Reif & Schmitt, 1980). First-order elections are marked mainly by an increase in conflict and salience (Schmitt, 2005), providing voters with an arena 71 José Santana Pereira, Susana Rogeiro Nina & Danielton Delgado Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 to make a critical decision about who should govern the country and what public policies should be adopted (Norris, 1997). Second-order elections, however, have no direct influence on who controls national executive power, and consequently are perceived as minor elections by both voters and political actors (Reif & Schmitt, 1980). Instead of factors directly having to do with the arena or function that the elected will cover, in a second-order election voting behaviour is determined by the voter’s assessment of the political parties based on their domestic policy, government popularity and economic performance (de Vries et al., 2011). This will have a two-fold impact: on the one hand, in terms of voter turnout and, on the other, voting choices (Hobolt & Wittrock, 2011; Norris, 1997; Reif & Schmitt, 1980; van der Eijk & Franklin, 1996). Voter turnout tends to be lower in second-order elections simply because individuals are less likely to go to the polls if they believe what is at stake is of lesser importance (e.g. Freire & Magalhães, 2002). However, when they do vote, they tend to base the vote on their concerns about the national government, often treating these elections as an opportunity to express dissatisfaction with the party of government (de Vries et al., 2011). In fact, second-order elections tend to offer minor parties more chances of success, often denied them in the first-order elections, which tend to be dominated by mainstream parties (Hix & Marsh, 2007; Hobolt & Wittrok, 2011; Reif & Schmitt, 1980; van der Eijk & Franklin, 1996). In this sense, political actors involved in first-order elections can be punished directly through second-order elections (Marsh, 1998), especially when second-order elections are held in a moment of the electoral cycle in which the incumbent’s popularity is low (Fortes & Magalhães, 2005; Reif & Schmitt, 1980; van der Eijk, Franklin & Marsh, 1996). Reif and Schmitt (1980) argue this behaviour has two causes: 1) the absence of strategic voting – second-order elections are a means by which voters can express their party preferences (Ferrara & Weishaupt, 2004); and 2) protest voting – voters use such elections to express their dissatisfaction with the performance of the government and as a way to punish the incumbent party (van der Eijk & Franklin, 1996). While its original formulation was aimed first and foremost at explaining differences in voting behaviour between national and European Parliament elections, the second-order election model was later extended to other types of competitions: local elections (Anderson & Ward, 1996; Freire, 2005; Norris, 1997; Schmitt, 2005; Sotillos, 1997), mid-term elections in the United States (Kernell, 1977; Stimson, 1976; van der Eijk, Franklin & Marsh, 1996), parliamentary by-elections in the United Kingdom (Norris, 1997) and presidential elections in semi-presidential regimes (Fortes & Magalhães, 2005). 72 Elections in Cape Verde, 1991-2016: Testing the second-order election model in a consolidated semi-presidential African democracy Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 In 1997, Reif, Schmitt and Norris conducted a theoretical review of second-order elections and highlighted some shortcomings in the original 1980 article, such as the fact it was restricted to consolidated European democracies. Looking at the changes that have taken place over the past 40 years, it is about time to ask if the second-order election model remains accurate and valid when applied to new situations – such as in countries that have only recently become democracies. From 2004 on, research in this field of electoral politics has encompassed the Central and Eastern European (CEE) new democracies, which has brought some of the flaws of the second-order election model to light. Some studies suggest Reif and Schmitt’s original theory is less useful in terms of explaining and forecasting differences between elections in new democracies due to the feeble patterns of party identification and more fluid party competition trends that characterize these contexts. For instance, Koepke and Ringe’s 2006 analysis of four CEE democracies concluded that voters do not use second-order elections to engage in protest voting against their national governments, and that electoral losses of larger parties decreased as the first-order electoral cycle proceeded. Hix and Marsh (2007) observed a cleavage between the new and old democracies in respect of the electoral success of small and mainstream parties in the 2004 European elections. Despite incumbent parties largely losing electoral support in both old and new European democracies when compared to smaller parties, in the post-communist states there were unique features related to party competition, with high levels of volatility, creating a more complex panorama. Schmitt (2005) reached a similar conclusion in his comparison of the 2004 PE election results with the previous first-order election in each EU country: in the new Eastern democracies, voting losses do not follow the cyclical arrangement of second-order elections, in the sense that the small parties do not perform consistently better in EP elections compared to mainstream parties. According to Schmitt (2005) and Mainwaring and Torcal (2005), this is explained by the fact that post-communist democracies did not enjoy a stable, consolidated party system and thus experienced high levels of electoral volatility. Indeed, the party organisational and programmatic instability makes it more challenging for voters to identify the actors involved in party competition, assign accountability and assess the government’s performance. To a certain extent, these are also traits of African new democracies (Bleck & van de Walle, 2019), but perhaps to a lower extent in Cape Verde, where party system institutionalization levels are comparatively high (Sanches, 2018). To our knowledge, the second-order election model was never implemented in an African consolidated new democracy such as Cape Verde. Considering that, in terms of postdemocratization electoral dynamics, Africa can be compared to 73 José Santana Pereira, Susana Rogeiro Nina & Danielton Delgado Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 the experience of former Soviet Union and Eastern European democracies (Bleck & van de Walle, 2019), an educated guess would state that the likelihood of fit between the second order model theoretical assumptions and the empirical patterns would be low. In the following two sections we lay out the grounds of the assumptions regarding to what extent may presidential and local elections in Cape Verde, despite its celebrated exceptionality vis-à-vis the African general panorama, be less viewed as second order. Presidential elections in Cape Verde – firstor secondorder? As mentioned above, presidential elections in semi-presidential systems may be characterised as second-order elections (e.g. Fortes & Magalhães, 2005), albeit the use of this framework in this type of elections is less common in the literature. Resorting to the definition of semi-presidentialism, in which presidential power is limited, and the president does not govern (Elgie, 1999), Marsh and Franklin (1996) argue such elections are strong candidates to be described as second-order. Yet, a comparative study of semi-presidential systems by Fortes and Magalhães (2005) shows that the applicability of the second-order model to presidential elections in semi-presidential regimes is not straightforward and depends mainly on the powers the president has. The argument is that the more power they have, the more important the election will be to voters, making them more likely to be first-order elections; however, if the president’s power is limited, then voters will treat the election as less important and, therefore, as second-order (Fortes & Magalhães, 2005; van der Brug, van der Eijk & Marsh, 2001). With this in mind, what can we say about Cape Verde? In fact, there is no consensus among researchers in respect of the nature of the system of government established by Cape Verde’s 1992 Constitution (Canas & Fonseca, 2007; Madeira, 2015): while some describe it as a form of rationalised or mitigated parliamentarism, others prefer to call it semi-presidential (Costa, 2009). In any case, the system in place distinguishes Cape Verde from several other African political systems, in which presidentialism is the most popular choice in terms of system of government (Bleck & van de Walle, 2019) – and in which presidential elections are clearly first-order. The powers granted the President of Cape Verde by the 1992 Constitution do not allow the holder of that office to make big decisions independently; rather, the most important decisions can only be achieved with the consent of the political forces represented in the National Assembly and, in some cases, take into 80 Elections in Cape Verde, 1991-2016: Testing the second-order election model in a consolidated semi-presidential African democracy Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 Table 4 Local elections in Cape Verde (1991-2016) Source: CNE. All values were rounded to one decimal place Election Year Incumbent Turnout (%) Blank and Spoiled Papers (%) Votes (%) 1991 MPD 55.3 8.0 MPD GIDP N CINSN P ROS FDI S PAIC V GINCP PROJ O MPRSV GALI S PFD MACI F NET A UD D PRO S GIDS P GAPD M 42.1 4.0 2.2 1.2 2.1 18.8 0.2 0.5 6.0 2.1 4.2 0.5 1.9 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.0 1996 MPD - 4.1 MPD PAICV GIDSP PCD MDPN MUPA D MPM MPRS V PAF MPCBV GDR 38.4 7.4 1.6 0.3 1.2 1.1 0.1 10.5 0 0.1 3.8 2000 MPD 60.3 6.1 MPD PAICV PCD UCID PRF ATS MAIS V GIDR APN GIDP JPSN JIDSC GSTDT GUDT MUPD 32.0 33.8 6.6 0.9 0.6 7.0 4.1 4.3 0.3 1.3 2.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 2004 PAICV 57.5 4.4 PAIC V MPD PCD/PP UCID PTS MMSV GDRG GIMDS GID-SD NUBAI MDM 40.5 40.8 2.0 2.7 1.7 0.8 4.0 2.0 0.9 0.1 0.02 2008 PAICV 80.6 2.7 ASV GIGA GIMS GIST MPD PAICV UCID 0.5 1.1 3.3 0.4 45.7 43.0 3.5 2012 PAICV 69.0 2.4 FV.BV GIASF GIMC S GIUD S GUD/SM MPD PAICV PTS RRSC UCID UNISC 0.2 1.6 2.5 1.3 0.1 46.4 40.6 0.4 0.2 4 0.1 2016 MPD 58.2 2.7 MPD PAICV UCID GIRB PSD BASTA OIAM PP PTS GPAIS AMI 53.4 34.8 5.1 0.7 0.02 1.4 0.8 0.2 0.1 1.0 0.03 81 José Santana Pereira, Susana Rogeiro Nina & Danielton Delgado Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 A total of 15 small parties and independent groups took part in the first local elections in 1991, with all but one obtaining less than 5% of the vote: the exception was the Movement for the Renaissance of St. Vincent (MPRSV – Movimento para o Renascimento de São Vicente) with 6%. Just nine small parties and independent groups took part in the 1996 local elections, with the MPRSV gaining 10.5% and beating the PAICV, which obtained 7.4%. The 2000 local elections were contested by 13 small parties and independent groups, with the PCD and the Action for Work and Solidarity (ATS – Acão para o Trabalho e para a Solidariedade) winning 6.6% and 7%, respectively. In 2004, none of the nine small parties and independent groups contesting the local elections obtained more than 5%, and in 2008 local elections, none of the smaller competitors took more than 4%. Again, while a total of nine small parties and independent groups stood in the 2012 local elections, their results were below the 5% threshold. Finally, of the nine smaller parties and groups that contested the 2016 local elections, only UCID won more than 5% of the vote (5.1%). It is worth noting that the time between these elections and the previous legislative elections varied between one month and three years, but that most local elections are not held close to the legislative election date (the January 1996 election, held one month after the legislative contest, is a clear outlier in this set of local elections). Turnout at local elections generally varies between 55% and 60%, but it was higher in 2008 and 2012. Hypotheses testing Our four hypotheses are tested in two phases. First, we look at the democratic period in Cape Verde as a whole, comparing average differences between the patterns observed in presidential and local elections and the preceding first-order elections; then we test them through an analysis of the electoral cycles, composed of legislative elections and the local and presidential elections that followed. The first electoral cycle is that of 1991, the year in which the country held its first multiparty elections. The second cycle includes the years 1995, 1996 and 2000, with legislative and presidential elections in the first two years and local elections in the second and the latter. The third electoral cycle ran from 2001 to 2004, with presidential and legislative elections in 2001 and local elections in 2004. The fourth electoral cycle corresponds to the years 2006 to 2008, with presidential and legislative elections in the former and local elections in the latter. The fifth cycle took place from 2011 to 2012, with presidential and legislative elections in the former and local elections in the second. Finally, the sixth electoral cycle 82 Elections in Cape Verde, 1991-2016: Testing the second-order election model in a consolidated semi-presidential African democracy Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 took place in 2016, a year in which all three types of election were held. While the overall analysis identifies general patterns, the election cycle analysis allows us to test our hypotheses with more precision and robustness, since second-orderness effects in terms of participation and vote choice are expected to be linked with the specificities of legislative election cycles (Reif & Schmitt, 1980). Overall analysis of the period 1991-2016 We begin by analysing the global average differences between turnout rates in local and presidential elections and the legislative election that preceded them (Table 5). Taken as a whole, presidential and local elections display negative figures, which suggest that more people voted in the previous first-order elections (the overall average difference is of almost 10 percent points). Despite the differences being much greater in the case of presidential elections (-14.4) than local elections (-3.6), these patterns confirm our first hypothesis. The next two columns of Table 5 present the data used to test the second hypothesis (small parties obtaining better results in elections other than the parliamentary competitions). We see an overall average difference of 5.5 percentage points, with both the presidential and local elections showing positive values of 2.4% and 7.6%, respectively. This confirms the second hypothesis. It is nevertheless interesting to see that, if we look at the overall average difference in the electoral result of large parties between the two election types, while we observed an overall difference that is congruent with our expectations (negative: -5.4), the average difference for presidential elections is actually positive (5.1%), while local elections are those in which a negative difference can be spotted (-17.5%). Looking at the local and presidential elections as a whole, it is not possible to spot more blank and spoiled papers than in the previous legislative election (our third hypothesis), since the overall average difference was of 0.3 percentage points. This is because the average difference for the presidential elections is negative (-1.1%), while for the local elections the figure is positive (1.9%). This means the hypothesis is only confirmed for local elections. Interestingly enough, in the case of the local elections, the difference is positive for every election, while in the case of presidential elections it is always negative. Finally, looking at the hypothesis stemming from the argument that presidential and local elections may be used to punish the party of government, the data points to an overall average of -3.1 percentage points difference in the incumbent’s results (Table 5). The average for presidential elections is positive (4.0%), while for local elections it is negative (-11.2). This partially confirms the fourth hypothesis, only for local elections. 83 José Santana Pereira, Susana Rogeiro Nina & Danielton Delgado Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 Table 5 Comparison between firstand second-order elections Type of election Year Difference between participation in this election and the previous legislative election Difference between the % of combined votes for the PAICV and MPD in this election and the previous legislative election Difference between the % vote for smaller parties in this election and the previous legislative election Difference between the % of blank and spoiled papers in this election and the previous legislative election Difference between the result for the party/ candidate supported by the party in government in this election and the previous legislative election Presidential 1991 -13.9 4.1 --1 -4.1 9.6 Local 1991 -20.0 -33.2 --2 2.1 -20.5 Presidential 1996 -33.0 28.83 -9.0 -1.2 28.8 Local 1996 No data4 -45.2 9.55 0.8 -22.9 Local 2000 -16.2 -21.2 18.7 4.3 -7.2 Presidential 2001 1st Round -2.9 4.0 -2.1 -0.3 -2.0 Presidential 2001 2nd Round 4.4 11.8 --6 -0.7 1.6 Local 2004 3.0 -5.8 4.7 2.6 -7.4 Presidential 2006 -1.1 3.7 -- -0.8 -1.3 Local 2008 26.4 -7.6 4.9 1.3 -9.3 Presidential 2011 1st Round -22.5 -23.3 24.6 -0.2 -19.3 Presidential 2011 2nd Round -16.1 6.3 -7 -0.6 -6.28 Local 2012 -7.0 -6.62 5.5 1.1 -11.3 Presidential 2016 -30.5 5.5 -3.8 -0.9 20.5 Local 2016 -7.8 -2.8 2 1.0 -0.2 Overall Average 1991-2016 -9.8 -5.4 5.5 0.3 -3.1 Presidential Average 1991-2016 -14.4 5.1 2.4 -1.1 4.0 Local Average 1991-2016 -3.6 -17.5 7.6 1.9 -11.2 Hypotheses confirmed? Hypothesis 1 confirmed Hypothesis 2 confirmed, especially for local elections Hypothesis 3 confirmed only for local elections Hypothesis 4 confirmed only for local elections Source: CNE 1 No small parties ran in the 1991 legislative election, so this difference could not be computed. 2 No small parties ran in the 1991 legislative election, so this difference could not be computed. 3 Only results for the MPD were calculated, since this party supported the only candidate in the 1996 presidential election. 4 The documents consulted do not provide figures on the voter participation rate in the 1996 local elections. 5 The sum of the difference between all of the small parties in these elections and the legislative elections; however, it must be noted that not all parties taking part in the local elections also took part in the legislative elections, and vice versa. 6 Candidates in the second round were not (exclusively) supported by small parties, so this difference could not be computed. 7 Candidates in the second round were not (exclusively) supported by small parties, so this difference could not be computed. 8 The PAICV was the party of government at the time of the 2011 presidential elections; however, its candidate for the presidency lost the election. 84 Elections in Cape Verde, 1991-2016: Testing the second-order election model in a consolidated semi-presidential African democracy Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 Analysis of electoral cycles Looking at the election results in each cycle (Tables 5 and 6), we see that the first hypothesis (lower voter turnout in presidential and local elections in Cape Verde compared to the turnout in first-order elections) is confirmed in most electoral cycles (1991; 1995/1996/2000; 2011/2012; and 2016). However, this was not the case in the 2001/2004 electoral cycle, when both local and presidential elections had a higher turnout than the first-order elections. This, however, may be due to the specific context of the 2001 legislative election, when alternation was expected after the MPD faced change in leadership, corruption accusations, internal turmoil and dissidence (Meyns, 2002; Sanches, 2018), which may cause their voters to demobilize. However, the hypothesis is confirmed for the first round of the presidential elections in this 2001/2004 cycle, which had a lower voter turnout than the first-order elections. Considering that the two candidates had virtually the same result in the first round, it is not surprising that voters felt more mobilized in the second round – due to a very intense campaign (Meyns, 2002). Also, the hypothesis is confirmed for the 2006/2008 electoral cycle only when comparing the legislative and presidential elections. Again, legislative elections were poorly participated, very much due to contextual reasons that would be overcome in the 2011 race (Sanches, 2018). Therefore, the fact that the hypothesis about turnout is not confirmed in the second round of the presidential elections and the local elections of the 2001/2004 electoral cycle, and its partial confirmation in the 2006/2008 electoral cycle, may be due to the climate of public opinion. While in some cases government popularity could be the cause of increased voter turnout in second-order elections, this pattern may also be explained by voter “discontent” with the positions adopted by the party of government, with the increased participation being accompanied by a decline in support for the incumbent party or its favoured candidate in second-order elections when compared to the results obtained in first-order elections. This argument gains weight especially when we realise that in all the non-parliamentary elections that took place during these two electoral cycles, with the exception of the 2001 presidential elections, and even when there was an increase in voter turnout rates, the incumbent party lost support (in terms of vote share) compared to the results it had received in the preceding first-order elections. As for the second hypothesis (greater probability of smaller parties in Cape Verde obtaining better results in local and presidential than in first-order elections), our analysis highlighted three different situations. First, the hypothesis is partially confirmed in the 1995/1996/2000, 2001/2004 and 2006/2008 electoral 85 José Santana Pereira, Susana Rogeiro Nina & Danielton Delgado Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 cycles, only when we compare the sum of the results achieved by small parties in local elections with their results in legislative elections. The hypothesis was confirmed, however, for all elections in the 2011/2012 and 2016 electoral cycles. Lastly, the hypothesis could not be tested at all in the 1991 election cycle (because there were not small parties in the 1991 legislative race) and for presidential elections in the 1995/1996/2000 (because there was only one candidate, supported by the MPD) and 2006/2008 electoral cycles (due to the absence of candidates who were either independent or supported by small parties). The third hypothesis (that there would be more blank and spoiled papers in presidential and local elections in Cape Verde than in first-order elections) is confirmed in all electoral cycles, but only for local elections. The hypothesis is indeed not confirmed when we compare the percentage of spoiled papers in legislative elections with those in presidential elections in each election cycle; in fact, there were actually fewer spoiled papers in every presidential election than in any of the legislative elections. One of the explanations for this hypothesis not be confirmed could be the fact that presidential elections are more personalized, so it is possible voters feel it is easier to express their views. Lastly, the fourth hypothesis (incumbent party punished in local and presidential elections) is partially confirmed for local elections in the electoral cycle of 1991, the year in which the first multi-party elections were held, as well as in the 1995/1996/2000, 2001/2004 and 2006/2008 electoral cycles, when the incumbent party suffered a substantial decline in vote share relative to the elections it had won. Yet, we should mention that it was not possible to carry out a valid test of the 1995/1996/2000 cycle in what regards the presidential election, because there was only one candidate, António Mascarenhas Monteiro, supported by the MPD, the incumbent party at the time4. The hypothesis is ultimately confirmed in the 2011/2012 electoral cycle, when the incumbent party received a lower vote share than it had secured in legislative elections in both the local and presidential elections. The government-supported candidate in the 2011 presidential elections lost, with a slight decline in their percentage share of the vote – however, this was much due to the fact that another PAICV personality decided to run as presidential candidate (Sanches, 2018). Moreover, not only there was a large fall in the share of votes won by the incumbent party in the 2012 local elections, but this meant that it lost those elections to the opposition parties. In turn, this hypothesis was rejected in the 2016 electoral 4 It is worth mention that Monteiro was the only candidate in the history of democratic Cape Verde to run alone in an election, but also the only to have won an election against a president in office (in 1991; Bleck and van de Walle, 2019). 86 Elections in Cape Verde, 1991-2016: Testing the second-order election model in a consolidated semi-presidential African democracy Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 cycle, the last year in which elections were held, and in which the party of government displayed a better electoral performance in both second-order contests. The non-confirmation of the fourth hypothesis in the 2016 electoral cycle may be due to the fact the MPD (the winner of the first of these three elections) had been the main opposition party for three mandates (15 years). In this sense, Cape Verde voters may have seen this election an opportunity to punish the PAICV, which had governed the country for more than a decade, more than the newly elected party with whom they were still honeymooning. Table 6 Testing the hypotheses in each electoral cycle Hypothesis 1 (turnout) Hypothesis 2 (small parties) Hypothesis 3 (spoiled/blank) Hypothesis 4 (incumbent) 1991 Confirmed Not tested 1 Partially Confirmed (Local) Partially Confirmed (Local) 1995/1996/2000 Confirmed Partially Confirmed (Local)2 Partially Confirmed (Local) Partially Confirmed (Local)3 2001/2004 Partially Confirmed (1st round presidential) Partially Confirmed (Local) Partially Confirmed (Local) Partially Confirmed (Local) 2006/2008 Partially Confirmed (Presidential) Partially Confirmed (Local)4 Partially Confirmed (Local) Partially Confirmed (Local) 2011/2012 Confirmed Confirmed Partially Confirmed (Local) Confirmed 2016 Confirmed Confirmed Partially Confirmed (Local) Rejected 1 Because of the absence of small parties in the first-order elections it was not possible to test the second hypothesis in this electoral cycle. 2 Because there was only one candidate for president in this electoral cycle, it was not possible to test the second hypothesis. 3 Because there was only one candidate for the presidency, supported by the incumbent party, it was not possible to test the fourth hypothesis in the presidential elections. 4 The second hypothesis was not tested in presidential elections because of the lack of independent candidates or candidates supported by smaller parties. 87 José Santana Pereira, Susana Rogeiro Nina & Danielton Delgado Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 Conclusions This article sought to apply Reif and Schmitt’s (1980) second-order election model to Cape Verde by assessing if there are any differences in voter turnout and electoral choice in legislative, presidential and local elections consistent with the model proposed. To accomplish this goal, we examined all the elections that took place between the first multi-party elections in 1991 and the most recent elections held in 2016. The empirical patterns observed allow us to highlight some points that help understand the dynamics of participation and voting behaviour in local and presidential elections in Cape Verde. First, the results suggest without doubt that Cape Verde voters view local elections as second-order: lower participation, more blank and spoiled papers, better results achieved by smaller parties and the party of government being punished. However, in the case of presidential elections, their second-order nature is less clear and not always verified: if, on the one hand, turnout is almost always lower than that of the previous legislative race, as expected, the other trends are either completely absent or present in but a few presidential races. There could be two reasons for this. The most likely explanation is the fact that legislative and presidential elections have almost always been held within a few months of each other. Presidential elections therefore happen in the honeymoon phase of the first-order electoral cycle. This may not lead to a case in which a considerable amount of voters are discontent and so seek to penalise the party of government in subsequent presidential elections, either by voting for the main opposition party, spoiling their ballots or voting for smaller parties (Reif & Schmitt, 1980). Indeed, both Costa (2009) and Sanches (2010) mention a sort of contagion effect between the legislatives and the presidential elections in Cape Verde due to the timing, with the candidates supported by the winner of the legislative race having good results in the presidential election. The fact that presidential elections are scheduled to occur soon after the legislative elections and do not produce any changes in terms of who governs would actually be a distinct sign of these elections’ second-orderness. Nevertheless, despite Cape Verde being a semi-presidential regime, the president does have a number of powers (Costa, 2009; Fortes & Magalhães, 2005; Madeira, 2015), which make it possible to argue that perhaps the Cape Verdean voters do not regard, or at least do not always regard, presidential elections as being actually second-order, and therefore do not vote in line with Reif and Schmitt’s (1980) theoretical expectations. This would actually put Cape Verde in line with a clear trend in terms of electoral politics in 88 Elections in Cape Verde, 1991-2016: Testing the second-order election model in a consolidated semi-presidential African democracy Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 African democracies: that of a considerable weight of presidents and presidential elections (e.g. van de Walle, 2003). Subsequent research, perhaps benefiting from more variation in the distance between the legislative and presidential election dates in Cape Verde, may shed light on this interesting puzzle. 89 José Santana Pereira, Susana Rogeiro Nina & Danielton Delgado Cadernos de Estudos Africanos • julho-dezembro de 2019 • 38, 67-91 References Anderson, C. J., & Ward, D. S. (1996). Barometer elections in comparative perspective. Electoral Studies, 15(4), 447-460. Baker, B. (2006). Cape Verde: The most democratic nation in Africa? The Journal of Modern African Studies, 44(4), 493-511. Berry, C., & Howell, W. (2007). Accountability and local elections: Rethinking retrospective voting. The Journal of Politics, 69(3), 844-858. Bleck, J., & Walle, N. van de. (2019). Electoral politics in Africa since 1990: Continuity in change. Cambridge University Press. Brug, W. van der, Eijk, C. V. D. van der, & Marsh, M. (2001). Exploring uncharted territory: The Irish presidential election, 1997. British Journal of Political Science, 30(4), 631-650. Canas, V., & Fonseca, J. C. (2007). Cabo Verde: Um sistema semi-presidencial de sucesso? Revista Negócios Estrangeiros, 11(4), 123-133. Costa, D. (2009). O papel do chefe de Estado no semipresidencialismo cabo-verdiano, 1991-2007. In M. C. Lobo, & O. A. Neto (Orgs.), O semipresidencialismo nos países de língua portuguesa (pp. 105-137). Imprensa de Ciências Sociais. Eijk, C. van der, & Franklin, M. N. (1996). Choosing Europe? The European electorate and national politics in the face of union. University of Michigan Press. Eijk, C. van der, Franklin, M., & Marsh, M. (1996). What voters teach us about Europewide elections: What Europe-wide elections teach us about voters. Electoral Studies, 15(2), 149-166. Elgie, R. (1999). The politics of semi-presidentialism. In R. Elgie (Ed.), Semi-presidentialism in Europe (pp. 1-21). Oxford University Press. Évora, R. (2001). A abertura política e o processo de transição democrática em Cabo Verde. Unpublished master’s thesis in political science, Department of Political Science, University of Brasília, Brazil. Évora, R. (2009). Poder legislativo no regime democrático em Cabo Verde. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis in political science, Department of Sociology, University of Brasília, Brazil. Ferrara, F., & Weishaupt, J. T. (2004). Get your act together: Party performance in European Parliament elections. European Union Politics, 5(3), 283-306. Fortes, B. G., & Magalhães, P. (2005). As eleições presidenciais em sistemas semipresidenciais: Participação eleitoral e punição dos governos. Análise Social, 40(177), 891-922. Freire, A. (2005). Eleições de segunda ordem e ciclos eleitorais no Portugal democrático, 1975-2004. Análise Social, 40(177), 815-846. Freire, A., & Magalhães, P. (2002). A abstenção eleitoral em Portugal. Imprensa de Ciências Sociais. Fuentes, G. M., & Villodres, C. O. (2010). The political leadership factor in the Spanish local elections. Lex Localis, 8(2), 147-160. Heath, A., McLean, I., Taylor, B., & Curtice, J. (1999). Between first and second order: A comparison of voting behaviour in European and local elections in Britain. European Journal of Political Research, 35(3), 389-414. Hix, S., & Marsh, M. (2007). Punishment or protest? Understanding European Parliament elections. The Journal of Politics, 69(2), 495-510.