This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1532673X09335487v1 37/6/1024    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Lawrence, E. D. Articles by Bowler, S. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Adopting Direct Democracy

Tests of Competing Explanations of Institutional Change

The George Washington University, Washington, DC

Todd Donovan

Western Washington University, Bellingham

Shaun Bowler

University of California, Riverside

Why was direct democracy adopted in some U.S. states and not others? In this article, we sort through the various arguments advanced in the predominantly historical literature by using event history analysis. Among other factors we identify the importance of popular support for Populists and Socialists as well as the constraints imposed by state constitutions. We also find that the demographic composition of states was strongly associated with success or failure to adopt the initiative. Furthermore, we identify a number of key cases—highlighted by this approach—that present intriguing anomalies to the general patterns identified in the historical and political science literatures to date.

Key Words: direct democracy • U.S. state politics • innovation adoption • institutional reform • initiative • referendum

This version was published on November 1, 2009

American Politics Research, Vol. 37, No. 6, 1024-1047 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/1532673X09335487


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?