Author: Mithil Agarwal.

Electoral violence refers to any form of violence, such as intimidation, coercion, or physical attacks, that occurs during the electoral processes. Literature hold that per capita GNP or the income of each state affects electoral violence. Analysing violence data from ACLED on 28 states and 7 UTs for a period of 4 years (2018-2021), we found that rich states of India, like Maharashtra and Karnataka are equally or more prone to electoral violence, like the poorer states of Bihar. Another finding showed that during election months in these states, income went drastically up and so did crime cases.

Determinants of political or electoral violence

According to a study conducted by Höglund (2009) and Birch et al. (2020), electoral violence refers to the use of violent means by dissatisfied actors to alter the course of elections. Höglund (2009) explains that such violence can occur before, during, and after an election, taking various forms such as riots, demonstrations (violent and non-violent), murders, and kidnappings. While it is challenging to determine the exact reasons behind the actors resorting to electoral violence, existing literature has identified certain prominent factors that contribute to its occurrence.

Hafner-Burton et al. (2014) distinguish between different types of actors and their motivations for employing violence as an instrumental tool during elections. Incumbent party members may use electoral violence to secure their position in power if they perceive a threat to their share of power post-election. Condra et al. (2018) find that opposition groups may resort to electoral violence to highlight the incompetence of the current government in conducting democratic elections.

Furthermore, electoral violence can be employed after elections when dissatisfied actors wish to contest the election results. Supporters affiliated with a party may also engage in violence to intimidate voters and ensure the success of their preferred candidates.

Fjelde and Höglund (2016) discovered in their study that when larger parties receive a disproportionate number of seats, the likelihood of violent elections increases. Violent tactics are used as a means to prevent the loss of power. Another influencing factor is the nature of the previous regime. If the former regime was exclusionary, dividing the state along ethnic lines, it heightens the chances of violence during elections (Broschè, Fjelde, and Höglund 2020).

In summary, electoral violence is characterized as a tool employed by dissatisfied actors to manipulate election outcomes. The motivation behind its use can vary, with incumbents seeking to maintain power, opposition groups challenging the legitimacy of the current government, and supporters resorting to violence to secure their electoral mandates. Factors such as disproportional seat distribution among parties and the ethnic divisions left by previous exclusionary regimes can further contribute to the occurrence of violent elections.

There has been growing evidence in the literature on how poverty affects the prevalence of electoral violence in a state (Sambanis, N., 2004). These theories are further validated by deprivation theories that state that people rebel or cause violence when they feel a discrepancy between what they must be getting in return for the work that they put in and what they actually get as a reward (Gurney, J.N. et al., 1982). Nicholas Sambanis quantitatively proved in his paper that there is a negative relationship between income per capita and forms of political violence. Apart from income per capita, Sambanis found a negative relationship between variables like GDP growth, education, income inequality, and forms of political violence (Sambanis, N., 2004).

Another interesting literature talks about injustices against women rise at an alarming speed during periods of political violence. Katherine Ronderos in her paper on “Poverty reduction, political violence and women’s rights in Honduras” uses data-based research to prove that countries (Honduras here) and their subparts where the income of the country on a daily basis is very low suffer a lot of inequality and injustice both as a violent state and on the gender basis. Her highlighting point was with the ongoing violence and suppression, women suffer even more than men with lower wages, fewer opportunities, no voting rights, and much more. There continues to exist a state of unfairness and benevolence for the gender basis and remains a serious issue. Our country too faces such an issue with men try oppressing positions created for women by means of violence and creating a moral indifference.

The study period 2018-2021

Analysing our data we infer that electoral violence does occur, and income has a major impact in determining its intensity. In our analysis, we found that states with per capita income of less than 2.1 lakh were likely to suffer from more violence than other, keeping all the factors like population, land size, etc. constant. India as a nation has been suffering from elections related crimes from a long time, but its comparison to income is a measure that came into trial from the recent times only. While on paper income doesn’t seem to be an exact measure to test violence, when working with data and exact numbers it provides a clearer picture.

People with higher income often represent how well managed and developed their stately affairs are, this also is a highlighting point on the representing body of that certain place. With more spendable income at hand, people have often trust in their elected rulers. People prosper in such a way and development maximises, and the state develops at a much faster rate. This can be seen in states like Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Chhattisgarh who have shown promising results on the development without electoral violence.

The case remains mute when it comes to States like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra, Rajasthan etc, who has low level per capita income thus a very high electoral violence case meter, as high as certain months experiencing more than 200+ cases. When conditions are so livid and unsure, people live with a doubt in their minds. This doubt causes the switching of the government every five years causing further increase in the violent cases and in certain cases even leads to the formation of violent protest groups. This hampers the growth and development of states as can be seen, the per capita GNP declining in certain cases each passing quarter.

States in the southern part of India namely Karnataka, Kerala, Telangana have high GDP per capita compared to other states. So does Goa, Sikkim, Delhi, and Chandigarh. From the data collected through the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED) for the years 2018-2022, we see alarmingly high reporting of events in the states of Kerala, Karnataka, Telangana, and Delhi. These results to some extent belie our assumption that poverty or low income leads to violence.

Another pattern that can be observed is the rise in the number of events post 2019, as compared to the previous years. Major political events such as the abrogation of Article 370, amendment in the Farm Bills, and bringing in the Citizenship Amendment Act took place in the year 2019, which might explain the spike in number of events being reported. Even without considering the GDP per capita, states like Kerala, Telangana, and Delhi have been reporting high rates of electoral violence as compared to other states. Maharashtra and West Bengal are two other states that report one of the highest number of events in terms of electoral violence.

Maharashtra is considered to be one of the richest states of the country reporting high rates of GDP. However other factors hold more power over the influence of electoral violence in the state. Kerala and West Bengal has had a rich communist background with longstanding histories of violent political rivalries between political parties, which could be one of the factors that determine the rate of electoral violence in the state. Apart from that, there could be a possible influence of lack of productive employment and the rise in share of educated unemployed in these states (Francis, A.M., 2022)

As we have seen in the literature before, economic growth can definitely have an impact on electoral violence in a state, especially in India with a diverse and complex background. However, owing to the diverse and complex background, economic growth is not the only main variable that affects the prevalence of electoral violence in a state. Factors such as ideology, ethnicity, coercion, and religion can also act as motivating elements in determining political violence around elections. Some of the factors that might be a significant motivating element in determining the prevalence of electoral violence in India could be as follows:

1. Social Cohesion – This refers to the extent of solidarity that is present within the society. Income inequality and cultural, religious differences have a high chance of disturbing the peace that might otherwise exist in the society. Income and wealth inequality creates a sense of marginalization, exclusion, and deprivation within the person or community at the disadvantaged end, which in turn might result in increased prevalence of electoral violence as per the relative deprivation theory.
2. Political Competition and Resource Allocation: Tensions may arise within political parties when economic resources are perceived as being unfairly distributed among various groups or regions. This inculcates a sense of unhealthy competition that might motivate them to resort to violent activities in order to secure electoral advantages or maintain power.
3. Institutional Strength and Governance: Strong, effective, and inclusive institutions ensure transparency, accountability, and make sure that the rule of law is being followed in due process which in turn helps mitigate conflicts that are rising.
4. Election Irregularities: Malpractices in election processes such as voter intimidation, booth capturing, rigging, etc., can contribute to violence during elections.

As identified in the literature review, motivation for causing violence around elections may arise from the intention to change electoral outcome which results in clashes between political parties.

We can conclude that income per capita cannot be a strong determinant for prevalence of electoral violence in a state. Factors like election irregularities, institutional strength and governance, political competition, rivalries, and social cohesion amongst various other factors that are not discussed in this paper combined could be better variables to explain the prevalence of electoral violence in the country and within states.

~ Mithil Agarwal

References

1. Sambanis, Nicholas. “Poverty and the Organization of Political Violence.” , 2004, pp. 165–211. , http://www.jstor.org/stable/25063193.
2. Ronderos, Katherine. “Poverty Reduction, Political Violence and Women’s Rights in Honduras.” Community Development Journal, vol. 46, no. 3, 2011, pp. 315–26. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/44258288. Accessed 31 May 2023.
3. Dorf, Michael C. Disaggregating Political Violence. Brennan Center for Justice, 2021. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep39534. Accessed 31 May 2023.
4. Bodea, Cristina, and Ibrahim Elbadawi. “Political Violence and Economic Growth.” The World Bank eBooks, 2008, doi:10.1596/1813-9450-4692.
5. Bohlken, Anjali Thomas, and Ernest Sergenti. “Economic Growth and Ethnic Violence: An Empirical Investigation of Hindu–Muslim Riots in India.” Journal of Peace Research, vol. 47, no. 5, SAGE Publishing, Aug. 2010, pp. 535–46, doi:10.1177/0022343310373032.
6. Fox, Sean, and Kristian Hoelscher. “Political Order, Development and Social Violence.” , vol. 49, no. 3, 2012, pp. 431–44. , http://www.jstor.org/stable/41721583. Accessed 31 May 2023.
7. Gurney, J. N., & Tierney, K. J. (1982). Relative deprivation and social movements: A critical look at twenty years of theory and research. , (1), 33-47.
8. Francis, A. M., & Media&PR, C. (2022, August 9). . Centre for Public Policy Research (CPPR). https://www.cppr.in/archives/the-problem-of-educated-unemployment-in-kerala#:~:text=For%20educated%20(secondary%20and%20above
9. Höglund, Kristine. 2009. “Electoral Violence in Conflict-Ridden Societies: Concepts, Causes, and Consequences.” Terrorism and Political Violence 21, no. 3: 412-427.
10. Brosché, Johan, Hanne Fjelde, and Kristine Höglund. 2020. ‘Electoral Violence and the Legacy of Authoritarian Rule in Kenya and Zambia’. 57 (1): 111–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343319884983.
11. Fjelde, Hanne, and Kristine Höglund. 2016. ‘Electoral Institutions and Electoral Violence in Sub- Saharan Africa’. 46 (2): 297–320. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123414000179.