In a recent issue of Japanese Journal of Political Science, Nathan F. Batto and Benjamin L. Read, in an article called, “Some head starts are bigger than others: dynastic legacies and variation in candidate quality in Taiwan’s local elections,” pose a chicken or egg question of sorts: Are candidates from established political families more likely to win than their non-dynastic counterparts because of their family legacy, or because of the individual characteristics they bring to elections? And how and when do political resources transfer to a new generation?
Previous literature suggests that younger family members and candidates effectively inherit much of this dynastic quality in campaigns. The authors also note that these candidates have higher name recognition and a ready-made brand. But to better answer their questions, the authors looked at Taiwanese city and council elections from 2009 to 2014.
As they write in explaining this choice, “The 22 city and county councils constitute the vital middle level of Taiwan’s politics. In substantive terms, they play a significant role in democratic governance.” Also, “these councils can be thought of as both coveted destinations and vital way-stations in the career trajectories of many politicians.”
Younger and Less Experienced
Dynastic candidates tended to be younger and less electorally experienced than their non-dynastic counterparts. Yet, the authors argue, this isn’t what propels them to success, and they win despite these qualities, not because of them.
Dynastic candidates tended to be younger and less electorally experienced than their non-dynastic counterparts.
This is to say that dynastic candidates have advantages that are significant enough to either outweigh or cancel out individual qualities that might otherwise act as drawbacks. And being a dynastic candidate gives a politician more of a boost than does a well-padded resume. There are, of course, several factors that go into whether a candidate wins, but “the legacy advantage strongly holds its own in the regression analysis. As we have seen, dynastic candidates do not always win, but they enjoy much more favorable odds.”
As the authors conclude, “Even after controlling for candidate quality, dynastic status remains a powerful predictor, conveying roughly a 20 percentage point increase in the probability of winning. This suggests that while dynastic candidates accrue some of their advantage long before they run for office, a large part of the inheritance is transferred during the campaign.”
There are other questions that the authors feel are still ripe for exploring. For example, how much does the relationship with the dynastic predecessor matter? What about relations with others in the family? And though the name can help them win, the authors didn’t look into whether it actually helps them govern — or move onto higher office. Those are questions that they, like the dynastic families they studied, are passing onto future researchers.
