Interest group dynamics in a weak and transitional state: the case of Bolivia

• Author: Kristina Klimovich,Sergio Biggemann,Clive S. Thomas
• Published date: 01 November 2014
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1546
• Date: 01 November 2014

■Special Issue Paper

Interest group dynamics in a weak and

transitional state: the case of Bolivia

Sergio Biggemann

1

*, Kristina Klimovich

2

and Clive S. Thomas

3

1

Department of Marketing, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

2

The New School, New York City, New York, USA

3

Thomas S. Foley Institute for Politics and Public Service, Washington State University, Pullman,

Washington, USA

Bolivia’s political development has been characterized by elitist control set in an environment of political instability

and a weak decentralized state. Since the 1980s and Bolivia’s transition to a limited form of democracy, this elitist

control has been successfully challenged from the left and, since the early 2000s, particularly by the indigenous

population. In fact, Bolivian contemporary politics and interest group activity have been shaped mainly by the rise

in political power of the left and indigenous interests. This rise, given a weak state transitioning to limited democracy,

has had several consequences for interest group activity that add increasing complexity to the group system. One

consequence of Bolivia’s course of political development is that, although it exhibits many common elements of

interest group activity explained by existing group theories, aspects of its group development are not adequately

accounted for by these theories. In addition, there are questions about whether the new configuration of interest

groups promotes or undermines democracy. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

INTRODUCTION

In a region known for the regularity and size of its

mass demonstrations, Bolivians have a particular

penchant for venting their political ire en masse in

the streets, marches, sit-ins, boycotts, and most

recently, ‘chew-ins’—mass chewing of coca leaves

to protest attempts to eradicate coca leaf produc-

tion. This mass form of political advocacy provides

important insights into Bolivia’s underdeveloped

but recently transformed interest group system.

Although its political advocacy system is less

developed than many in Latin America, such as

those in Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, and Uruguay,

developments since the mid-1980s, especially

the movement to a limited form of democracy,

have changed the nat ure of Bolivian polit ics and

with it its interest group system. In particular,

the rise of both Evo Morales, a coca farmer,

llama herder, and union leader, with his election

in 2005 as the nation’sfirst indigenous presi-

dent, and a new political party, Movement Towards

Socialism (MAS) , has reshaped Boliv ia’sinterest

group system.

The new interest group dynamics have brought

problems of their own, however. These include

divisionswithinindigenousinterests,asvarious

groups within that community are aff ected differ-

ently by political issues, and as social movements

transition into m ore focused interest groups.

Perhaps most important of all, what since the

election of Morales has amounted to the dominance

of one political party, the MAS, raises questions

about the extent to which the new political order

promotes a strong and inclusive civil society. This

raises a key question: does Bolivia’s new political

order produce a viable an d all-embracing in terest

group system and effective pluralist democracy

or a form of populist democracy that excludes

certain interests?

*Correspondence to: Sergio Biggemann, Department of Market-

ing, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.

E-mail: sergio.biggemann@otago.ac.nz

Journal of Public Affairs

Volume 14 Number 3 pp 254–282 (2014)

Published online 6 November 2014 in Wiley Online Library

(www.wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/pa.1546

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Like all interest group systems, Bolivia’sis

unique in its specific development, issues, particu-

lar range of interests, operating techniques, and

power dynamics between interests. Yet, analysis

shows that the Bolivian system has also exhibited

many common elements of interest group systems

as it developed, particularly as a result of the major

changes that have occurred since the mid-1980s.

Given this manifestation of both unique and com-

mon elements, this article takes the relationship of

these two elements as its theme. The major purpose

is to explain the relationship between the two and

what this tells us about the country’sinterestgroup

system in the past and particularly its present con-

figuration and likely future developments. The

methodological approach combines political devel-

opment with political economy and the application

of interest group theory. This eclectic approach is a

productofthechallengeswefacedbecauseofthe

lack of information sources that deal directly with

interest groups in Bolivia.

The sources that are available are several treat-

ments on Bolivia’s politics and political history

(e.g., Hylton and Thomson, 2007; Klein, 2003;

Morales, 2004; Sándor John, 2009) and of the country’s

contemporary turbulent history (e.g., Dangl, 2007;

Kohl and Farthing, 2006; Lehoucq, 2011, 2014;

Morales, 2012; Webber, 2011), all of which deal with

various power groups, interests, and interest

groups,evenifnotreferredtoassuch,aswellas

social movements. Added to these are various

statistical sources and contemporary accounts

found in newspapers and newsletters, such as

LatinNews, information from group websites,

and the extensive experience of the authors. Ex-

trapolating from and synthesizing these sources

provide the foundation of past and present inter-

est group activity in Bolivia for achieving the

twofold goal of the article.

This approach enables us to deal with several

specific questions. These include the following.

How do extreme economic, social, and geographic

differences shape interest group dynamics? What

are the ramifications of the weak state and decen-

tralization as Bolivia transitions to democracy?

What influences the current interest group system?

What do the tactics used reveal about the level of

democratization? What major elements of its group

system does Bolivia share with other Latin

American systems? In what ways does Bolivia’s

experience reflect general patterns of group system

development? Or is it an outlier in its political

advocacy system? And how do the nation’s present

political arrangements under the rule of MAS affect

political advocacy and democracy?

The article begins with an overview of Bolivia’s

contemporaryinterest group system, whichhas some

particular features that are much less prominent in

most Latin American group systems. To account for

these differences and provide a foundation for the

analysis in the rest of the article, the next section ex-

plains six major factors that have shaped Bolivia’s

group system. This is followed by an outline of the

development ofthe group system and recent changes

in group strategiesand tactics. To illustrate the evolv-

ing nature of the group system, the next section pre-

sents some case studies. How interest group

development is affecting Bolivia’s democracy is the

subject of the next section. Then the country’sgroup

activity is assessed against interest group theory.

The conclusion returns to the theme of the chapter

and also looks at the viabilityof Bolivia’s new interest

group system.

1

AN OVERVIEW OF BOLIVIA’SCONTEMPORARY

INTEREST GROUP SYSTEM

Drawing on our theme that the Bolivian group sys-

tem exhibits both elements common to all group sys-

tems and some variations and even some unique

elements, we make the following initial observations.

Common elements

First and foremost, like all nations, states, and

localities, past and present, at the fundamental

level, Bolivian politics is essentially group politics

with various interests competing to get their

political agenda translated into public policy. This

can be to promote certain issues or to block those

of their opponents.

Similar to all political systems that have

transitioned to some formof democracy, the Bolivian

system has seen a gradual expansion in the range of

groups since 1982 when it nominally became a de-

mocracy. These include traditional as well as new in-

terests of the individual membership, organizational

interest, and institutional interest categories ex-

plained in the introductory article. The new interests

include environmentalists and groups representing

previously unrepresented segments of society, such

as the poor and indigenous peoples. Insert 1 lists the

major groups operating today. The system has

become more institutionalized, and power groups

1

For definitions of the various terms relating to Latin American

politics and interest group activity used in this article, see the in-

troductory article to this volume, Tables 2 and 3.

Interest group dynamics in a weak state 255

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Public Affairs 14, 254–282 (2014)

DOI: 10.1002/pa