Why oppose a peace agreement? The relationship between belief systems, informational shortcuts, and attitudes towards the 2016 referendum in Colombia
On 2 October 2016, the proposed peace agreement between the Colombian government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, or FARC) was narrowly defeated in a plebiscite that sought public approval for the deal. The "no" option received 50...
- Autores:
-
Muñoz Fuerte, Manuela
- Tipo de recurso:
- Work document
- Fecha de publicación:
- 2018
- Institución:
- Universidad de los Andes
- Repositorio:
- Séneca: repositorio Uniandes
- Idioma:
- eng
- OAI Identifier:
- oai:repositorio.uniandes.edu.co:1992/40729
- Acceso en línea:
- http://hdl.handle.net/1992/40729
- Palabra clave:
- Plebiscito - Investigaciones - Colombia - 2016
Construcción de la paz - Investigaciones - Colombia
Proceso de paz - Investigaciones - Colombia
Colombia - Política y gobierno - 2016
- Rights
- openAccess
- License
- https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/static/pdf/aceptacion_uso_es.pdf
id |
UNIANDES2_f051d95548668707b581eda66c3d280c |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.uniandes.edu.co:1992/40729 |
network_acronym_str |
UNIANDES2 |
network_name_str |
Séneca: repositorio Uniandes |
repository_id_str |
|
dc.title.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
Why oppose a peace agreement? The relationship between belief systems, informational shortcuts, and attitudes towards the 2016 referendum in Colombia |
title |
Why oppose a peace agreement? The relationship between belief systems, informational shortcuts, and attitudes towards the 2016 referendum in Colombia |
spellingShingle |
Why oppose a peace agreement? The relationship between belief systems, informational shortcuts, and attitudes towards the 2016 referendum in Colombia Plebiscito - Investigaciones - Colombia - 2016 Construcción de la paz - Investigaciones - Colombia Proceso de paz - Investigaciones - Colombia Colombia - Política y gobierno - 2016 |
title_short |
Why oppose a peace agreement? The relationship between belief systems, informational shortcuts, and attitudes towards the 2016 referendum in Colombia |
title_full |
Why oppose a peace agreement? The relationship between belief systems, informational shortcuts, and attitudes towards the 2016 referendum in Colombia |
title_fullStr |
Why oppose a peace agreement? The relationship between belief systems, informational shortcuts, and attitudes towards the 2016 referendum in Colombia |
title_full_unstemmed |
Why oppose a peace agreement? The relationship between belief systems, informational shortcuts, and attitudes towards the 2016 referendum in Colombia |
title_sort |
Why oppose a peace agreement? The relationship between belief systems, informational shortcuts, and attitudes towards the 2016 referendum in Colombia |
dc.creator.fl_str_mv |
Muñoz Fuerte, Manuela |
dc.contributor.author.none.fl_str_mv |
Muñoz Fuerte, Manuela |
dc.subject.keyword.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
Plebiscito - Investigaciones - Colombia - 2016 Construcción de la paz - Investigaciones - Colombia Proceso de paz - Investigaciones - Colombia Colombia - Política y gobierno - 2016 |
topic |
Plebiscito - Investigaciones - Colombia - 2016 Construcción de la paz - Investigaciones - Colombia Proceso de paz - Investigaciones - Colombia Colombia - Política y gobierno - 2016 |
description |
On 2 October 2016, the proposed peace agreement between the Colombian government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, or FARC) was narrowly defeated in a plebiscite that sought public approval for the deal. The "no" option received 50.2 percent of votes cast, and less than 38 percent of the electorate cast a vote. Why did the majority of voters oppose the peace agreement? In a combined survey -a face-to-face sample in Bogotá and an online sample- conducted prior to the referendum, we identify voter cleavages using the principal component analysis (PCA) method. We find three consistent dimensions with profiles reflecting whether an individual is a 1) pro-status quo citizen; 2) a conservative-right voter; and 3) a citizen with a pronounced religious identity. In addition, we not only assess voters choices in the plebiscite based on these profiles, but also examine how these profiles may predict voters opinions on specific aspects of, and beliefs about, the agreement. Similar results are found when we replicate the PCA exercise using data from the 2016 Latin American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP) survey. Our findings suggest that voters are heterogeneous, but that different beliefs and attitudes about the referendum clustered in specific type of voters, which in turn shaped these voters willingness to endorse the proposed agreement. |
publishDate |
2018 |
dc.date.issued.none.fl_str_mv |
2018-11 |
dc.date.accessioned.none.fl_str_mv |
2020-07-01T20:42:32Z |
dc.date.available.none.fl_str_mv |
2020-07-01T20:42:32Z |
dc.type.spa.fl_str_mv |
Documento de trabajo |
dc.type.coarversion.fl_str_mv |
http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 |
dc.type.driver.spa.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper |
dc.type.coar.spa.fl_str_mv |
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_8042 |
dc.type.content.spa.fl_str_mv |
Text |
dc.type.redcol.spa.fl_str_mv |
https://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/WP |
format |
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_8042 |
dc.identifier.uri.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/1992/40729 |
dc.identifier.instname.spa.fl_str_mv |
instname:Universidad de los Andes |
dc.identifier.reponame.spa.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositorio Institucional Séneca |
dc.identifier.repourl.spa.fl_str_mv |
repourl:https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/ |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/1992/40729 |
identifier_str_mv |
instname:Universidad de los Andes reponame:Repositorio Institucional Séneca repourl:https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/ |
dc.language.iso.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.ispartofseries.none.fl_str_mv |
Documentos de Trabajo EGOB número 59/Noviembre 2018 |
dc.rights.uri.none.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/static/pdf/aceptacion_uso_es.pdf |
dc.rights.accessrights.spa.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
dc.rights.coar.spa.fl_str_mv |
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/static/pdf/aceptacion_uso_es.pdf http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.extent.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
56 páginas |
dc.format.mimetype.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.coverage.spatial.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
Bogotá, Colombia |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidad de los Andes, Escuela de Gobierno Alberto Lleras Camargo |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidad de los Andes, Escuela de Gobierno Alberto Lleras Camargo |
dc.source.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
instname:Universidad de los Andes reponame:Repositorio Institucional Séneca |
instname_str |
Universidad de los Andes |
institution |
Universidad de los Andes |
reponame_str |
Repositorio Institucional Séneca |
collection |
Repositorio Institucional Séneca |
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/3a52a507-d252-4a12-9294-342fa389ed27/download https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/1e9bcdf7-dbdb-4db7-97f1-dabe6be9aff4/download https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/b82c72b3-94b5-46ef-b37f-0c41e35c726b/download https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/eedf5dfe-dde7-4c42-bb78-b0c4ce2e7e85/download |
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
877a25d5c4fa26cbca9e5cc43a5acd9d 3712501b71477eef138f931c5a7aac67 32cbb9ff981fc6b0bcab7ffc32300cba f32f5c6c411b4780925dac5edaa6f964 |
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5 |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositorio institucional Séneca |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
adminrepositorio@uniandes.edu.co |
_version_ |
1812133943467573248 |
spelling |
Al consultar y hacer uso de este recurso, está aceptando las condiciones de uso establecidas por los autores.https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/static/pdf/aceptacion_uso_es.pdfinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2Muñoz Fuerte, Manuelacb08a5ad-79ce-481a-85b6-998de499dde9600Bogotá, Colombia2020-07-01T20:42:32Z2020-07-01T20:42:32Z2018-11http://hdl.handle.net/1992/40729instname:Universidad de los Andesreponame:Repositorio Institucional Sénecarepourl:https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/On 2 October 2016, the proposed peace agreement between the Colombian government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, or FARC) was narrowly defeated in a plebiscite that sought public approval for the deal. The "no" option received 50.2 percent of votes cast, and less than 38 percent of the electorate cast a vote. Why did the majority of voters oppose the peace agreement? In a combined survey -a face-to-face sample in Bogotá and an online sample- conducted prior to the referendum, we identify voter cleavages using the principal component analysis (PCA) method. We find three consistent dimensions with profiles reflecting whether an individual is a 1) pro-status quo citizen; 2) a conservative-right voter; and 3) a citizen with a pronounced religious identity. In addition, we not only assess voters choices in the plebiscite based on these profiles, but also examine how these profiles may predict voters opinions on specific aspects of, and beliefs about, the agreement. Similar results are found when we replicate the PCA exercise using data from the 2016 Latin American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP) survey. Our findings suggest that voters are heterogeneous, but that different beliefs and attitudes about the referendum clustered in specific type of voters, which in turn shaped these voters willingness to endorse the proposed agreement.El 2 de octubre de 2016, el acuerdo de paz propuesto entre el Gobierno colombiano y las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC) fue derrotado en un plebiscito que buscaba la aprobación pública del acuerdo. La opción del "no" recibió 50,2 % de los votos a favor, menos de 38 % del electorado participó en la elección. ¿Por qué la mayoría de los votantes se opuso al acuerdo de paz? En una encuesta conjunta -una muestra cara a cara en Bogotá y una muestra en internet- realizada antes del plebiscito se identificaron diferentes perfiles de votantes utilizando el método de análisis de componentes principales (PCA). Se encontraron tres dimensiones coherentes con los perfiles que reflejan si un individuo es un 1) ciudadano pro-status quo; 2) un votante de derecha conservador; o 3) un ciudadano con una identidad religiosa pronunciada. Además, no solo se evaluaron las decisiones de los votantes en el plebiscito en función de estos perfiles, sino que también se examinó cómo estos pueden predecir las opiniones de los votantes sobre aspectos específicos y creencias acerca del acuerdo. Se encontraron resultados similares cuando se replicó el ejercicio de PCA utilizando datos de la encuesta del Proyecto de Opinión Pública Latinoamericana (LAPOP) de 2016. Los resultados sugieren que los votantes son heterogéneos, pero que diferentes creencias y actitudes sobre el referéndum se agrupan en tipos específicos de votantes, que a su vez influyen sobre la voluntad de éstos para respaldar el acuerdo de paz.56 páginasapplication/pdfengUniversidad de los Andes, Escuela de Gobierno Alberto Lleras CamargoDocumentos de Trabajo EGOBnúmero 59/Noviembre 2018instname:Universidad de los Andesreponame:Repositorio Institucional SénecaWhy oppose a peace agreement? The relationship between belief systems, informational shortcuts, and attitudes towards the 2016 referendum in ColombiaDocumento de trabajoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaperhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_8042http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85Texthttps://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/WPPlebiscito - Investigaciones - Colombia - 2016Construcción de la paz - Investigaciones - ColombiaProceso de paz - Investigaciones - ColombiaColombia - Política y gobierno - 2016PublicationTHUMBNAILWhy-oppose.pdf.jpgWhy-oppose.pdf.jpgIM Thumbnailimage/jpeg13628https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/3a52a507-d252-4a12-9294-342fa389ed27/download877a25d5c4fa26cbca9e5cc43a5acd9dMD56LICENSElicense.txtlicense.txttext/plain; charset=utf-81865https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/1e9bcdf7-dbdb-4db7-97f1-dabe6be9aff4/download3712501b71477eef138f931c5a7aac67MD52ORIGINALWhy-oppose.pdfWhy-oppose.pdfapplication/pdf8130916https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/b82c72b3-94b5-46ef-b37f-0c41e35c726b/download32cbb9ff981fc6b0bcab7ffc32300cbaMD51TEXTWhy-oppose.pdf.txtWhy-oppose.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain115036https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/eedf5dfe-dde7-4c42-bb78-b0c4ce2e7e85/downloadf32f5c6c411b4780925dac5edaa6f964MD551992/40729oai:repositorio.uniandes.edu.co:1992/407292023-10-10 17:33:16.456https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/static/pdf/aceptacion_uso_es.pdfopen.accesshttps://repositorio.uniandes.edu.coRepositorio institucional Sénecaadminrepositorio@uniandes.edu.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 |