Clientelism and dominant incumbent parties: party competition in an urban Turkish neighbourhood

Bibliography

• Arat, Yeşim. Rethinking Islam and Liberal Democracy: Islamist Women in Turkish Politics. Albany: SUNY Press, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Arıkan Akdağ, Gül. Ethnicity and Elections in Turkey: Party Politics and the Mobilization of Swing Voters. Abingdons: Routledge, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Ark-Yıldırım, Ceren. “Political Parties and Grassroots Clientelist Strategies in Urban Turkey: One Neighbourhood at a Time.” South European Society and Politics 22, no. 4 (2017): 473–490. doi: 10.1080/13608746.2017.1406431
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aspinall, Edward. “When Brokers Betray: Clientelism, Social Networks, and Electoral Politics in Indonesia.” Critical Asian Studies 46, no. 4 (2014): 545–570. doi: 10.1080/14672715.2014.960706
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Auyero, Javier. Poor People’s Politics: Peronist Survival Networks and the Legacy of Evita. Durham: Duke University Press, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Ayan Musil, Pelin. “Emergence of a Dominant Party System After Multipartyism: Theoretical Implications from the Case of the AKP in Turkey.” South European Society and Politics 20, no. 1 (2015): 71–92. doi: 10.1080/13608746.2014.968981
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ayata, Ayşe Güneş. CHP: Örgüt ve İdeoloji [CHP: Organization and Ideology]. Ankara: Gündoğan Yayınları, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Aytaç, S Erdem. “Distributive Politics in a Multiparty System The Conditional Cash Transfer Program in Turkey.” Comparative Political Studies 47, no. 9 (2014): 1211–1237. doi: 10.1177/0010414013495357
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Başlevent, Cem, and Meltem Dayıoğlu. “The Effect of Squatter Housing on Income Distribution in Urban Turkey.” Urban Studies 42, no. 1 (2005): 31–45. doi: 10.1080/0042098042000309685
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berenschot, Ward, and Edward Aspinall. “How Clientelism Varies: Comparing Patronage Democracies.” Democratization, Published Before Print, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Bobonis, Gustavo J, Paul Gertler, Marco Gonzalez-Navarro, and Simeon Nichter. “Vulnerability and Clientelism.” National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No.23589, 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Buğra, Ayşe. State and Business in Modern Turkey: A Comparative Study. Albany: SUNY Press, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Buğra, Ayşe, and Çağlar Keyder. “The Turkish Welfare Regime in Transformation.” Journal of European Social Policy 16, no. 3 (2006): 211–228. doi: 10.1177/0958928706065593
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çarkoğlu, Ali, and Deniz Aksen. “Partisan and Apportionment Bias in Creating a Predominant Party System.” Political Geography 69 (2019): 43–53. doi: 10.1016/j.polgeo.2018.11.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çarkoğlu, Ali, and S. Erdem Aytaç. “Who Gets Targeted for Vote-Buying? Evidence from an Augmented List Experiment in Turkey.” European Political Science Review 7, no. 04 (2015): 547–566. doi: 10.1017/S1755773914000320
   Google Scholar
• Çarkoğlu, Ali, Lemi Baruh, and Kerem Yıldırım. “Press-Party Parallelism and Polarization of News Media during an Election Campaign The Case of the 2011 Turkish Elections.” The International Journal of Press/Politics 19, no. 3 (2014): 295–317. doi: 10.1177/1940161214528994
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chandra, Kanchan. “Counting Heads: A Theory of Voter and Elite Behavior in Patronage Democracies.” In Patrons, Clients and Policies: Patterns of Democratic Accountability and Political Competition, edited by Herbert P Kitschelt, and Steven I Wilkinson, 84–109. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Chattharakul, Anyarat. “Thai Electoral Campaigning: Vote-Canvassing Networks and Hybrid Voting.” Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs 29, no. 4 (2010): 67–95. doi: 10.1177/186810341002900404
   Google Scholar
• Çınar, Kürşat. “Local Determinants of an Emerging Electoral Hegemony: The Case of Justice and Development Party (AKP) in Turkey.” Democratization 23, no. 7 (2016): 1216–1235. doi: 10.1080/13510347.2015.1077228
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esen, Berk, and Şebnem Gümüşçü. “Building a Competitive Authoritarian Regime: State–Business Relations in the AKP’s Turkey.” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 20, no. 4 (2018): 349–372. doi: 10.1080/19448953.2018.1385924
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esen, Berk, and Şebnem Gümüşçü. “Rising Competitive Authoritarianism in Turkey.” Third World Quarterly 37, no. 9 (2016): 1581–1606. doi: 10.1080/01436597.2015.1135732
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Filiztekin, Alpay. “Income Inequality Trends in Turkey.” Iktisat Isletme ve Finans 30, no. 350 (2015): 63–92.
   Google Scholar
• Folke, Olle, Shigeo Hirano, and James M. Snyder. “Patronage and Elections in U.S. States.” American Political Science Review 105, no. 03 (2011): 567–585. doi: 10.1017/S0003055411000256
   Google Scholar
• Geddes, Barbara. “What Do We Know about Democratization after Twenty Years?” Annual Review of Political Science 2, no. 1 (1999): 115–144. doi: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.115
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greene, Kenneth F. “The Political Economy of Authoritarian Single-Party Dominance.” Comparative Political Studies 43, no. 7 (2010): 807–834. doi: 10.1177/0010414009332462
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greene, Kenneth F. Why Dominant Parties Lose: Mexico’s Democratization in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Heper, Metin, and E. Fuat Keyman. “Double-Faced State: Political Patronage and the Consolidation of Democracy in Turkey.” Middle Eastern Studies 34, no. 4 (1998): 259–277. doi: 10.1080/00263209808701251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hidalgo, Manuel. “Hugo Chávez’s ‘Petro-Socialism’.” Journal of Democracy 20, no. 2 (2009): 78–92. doi: 10.1353/jod.0.0073
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holland, Alisha C. “Forbearance.” American Political Science Review 110, no. 2 (2016): 232–246. doi: 10.1017/S0003055416000083
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• İnan, Atilla. “Belediyeler ile Merkezi İdarenin Sosyal Yardım Görevleri ve Bu Görevin Kötüye Kullanılmasına Karşı Uygulanacak Önlemler [Social Assistance Duties of Municipalities and the Central Administration and Precautions Against Abuse of These Duties].” Mevzuat Dergisi 2, no. 19 (1999). https://www.mevzuatdergisi.com/1999/07a/03.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Kalaycıoğlu, Ersin. “Local Elections and the Turkish Voter: Looking for the Determinants of Party Choice.” South European Society and Politics 19, no. 4 (2014): 583–600. doi: 10.1080/13608746.2014.993511
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalaycıoğlu, Ersin. “Two Elections and a Political Regime in Crisis: Turkish Politics at the Crossroads.” Journal of Southeast European and Black Sea 18, no. 1 (2018): 21–51. doi: 10.1080/14683857.2017.1379148
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kitschelt, Herbert P. “Clientelistic Linkage Strategies. A Descriptive Exploration.” Paper presented at the workshop on Democratic Accountability Strategies, May 18–19, Duke University, 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Kuyucu, Tuna, and Özlem Ünsal. “'Urban Transformation’ as State-Led Property Transfer: An Analysis of Two Cases of Urban Renewal in Istanbul.” Urban Studies 47, no. 7 (2010): 1479–1499. doi: 10.1177/0042098009353629
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lust, Ellen. “Competitive Clientelism in the Middle East.” Journal of Democracy 20, no. 3 (2009): 122–135. doi: 10.1353/jod.0.0099
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mares, Isabela, and Lauren Young. “The Core Voter’s Curse: Clientelistic Threats and Promises in Hungarian Elections.” Comparative Political Studies 51, no. 11 (2018): 1441–1471. doi: 10.1177/0010414018758754
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markowski, Radoslaw. “Creating Authoritarian Clientelism: Poland After 2015.” Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 11, no. 1 (2019): 111–132. doi: 10.1007/s40803-018-0082-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marschall, Melissa, Abdullah Aydoğan, and Alper Bulut. “Does Housing Create Votes? Explaining the Electoral Success of the AKP in Turkey.” Electoral Studies 42 (2016): 201–212. doi: 10.1016/j.electstud.2016.02.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Öniş, Ziya. “Turkey’s Two Elections: The AKP Comes Back.” Journal of Democracy 27, no. 2 (2016): 141–154. doi: 10.1353/jod.2016.0021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Özbudun, Ergun. “From Political Islam to Conservative Democracy: The Case of the Justice and Development Party in Turkey.” South European Society and Politics 11, no. 3–4 (2006): 543–557. doi: 10.1080/13608740600856561
   Google Scholar
• Özbudun, Ergun. “Turkey’s Judiciary and the Drift Toward Competitive Authoritarianism.” International Spectator 50, no. 2 (2015): 42–55. doi: 10.1080/03932729.2015.1020651
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Özel, Işık D, and Kerem Yıldırım. “Political Consequences of Welfare Regimes: Social Assistance and Support for Presidentialism in Turkey.” South European Society and Politics, Published online before print (2019): 1–27. doi:10.1080/13608746.2019.1589155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reuter, Ora John. “Regional Patrons and Hegemonic Party Electoral Performance in Russia.” Post-Soviet Affairs 29, no. 2 (2013): 101–135. doi: 10.1080/1060586X.2013.780410
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, James A, and Thierry Verdier. “The Political Economy of Clientelism.” The Scandinavian Journal of Economics 115, no. 2 (2013): 260–291. doi: 10.1111/sjoe.12010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Şahin, Savaş Zafer. “The Urbanization Policy of Turkey: An Uneasy Symbiosis of Unimplemented Policy with Centralized Pragmatic Interventions.” Turkish Studies 20, no. 4 (2019): 599–618. doi: 10.1080/14683849.2019.1602826
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sayarı, Sabri. “Interdisciplinary Approaches to Political Clientelism and Patronage in Turkey.” Turkish Studies 15, no. 4 (2014): 655–670. doi: 10.1080/14683849.2014.985809
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sayarı, Sabri. “Political Patronage in Turkey.” In Patrons and Clients in Mediterranean Societies, edited by Ernest Gellner, and John Waterbury, 103–113. London: Duckworth, 1977.
   Google Scholar
• Slater, Dan. Ordering Power: Contentious Politics and Authoritarian Leviathans in Southeast Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Somer, Murat. “Understanding Turkey’s Democratic Breakdown: Old vs. New and Indigenous vs. Global Authoritarianism.” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 16, no. 4 (2016): 481–503. doi: 10.1080/14683857.2016.1246548
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stokes, Susan C. “Perverse Accountability: A Formal Model of Machine Politics with Evidence From Argentina.” American Political Science Review 99, no. 3 (2005): 315–325. doi: 10.1017/S0003055405051683
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szwarcberg, Mariela. Mobilizing Poor Voters: Machine Politics, Clientelism, and Social Networks in Argentina. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Szwarcberg, Mariela. “Revisiting Clientelism: A Network Analysis of Problem-Solving Networks in Argentina.” Social Networks 34, no. 2 (May 2012): 230–240. doi: 10.1016/j.socnet.2011.12.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trantidis, Aris. “Clientelism and the Classification of Dominant Party Systems.” Democratization 22, no. 1 (2015): 113–133. doi: 10.1080/13510347.2013.825608
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wantchekon, L. “Clientelism and Voting Behavior - Evidence from a Field Experiment in Benin.” World Politics 55, no. 3 (2003): 399–422. doi: 10.1353/wp.2003.0018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, Jenny B. Islamist Mobilization in Turkey: A Study in Vernacular Politics. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Yeşilada, Birol A. “The Virtue Party.” Turkish Studies 3, no. 1 (2002): 62–81. doi: 10.1080/714005697
   Google Scholar
• Yılmaz, İhsan, and Galib Bashirov. “The AKP after 15 Years: Emergence of Erdoganism in Turkey.” Third World Quarterly 39, no. 9 (2018): 1812–1830. doi: 10.1080/01436597.2018.1447371
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeng, Qingjie. “Engineering Popular Support for Long-Ruling Parties: The Role of Clientelism.” Japanese Journal of Political Science 20, no. 2 (2019): 75–92. doi: 10.1017/S146810991900001X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar