Rationality, Trust, and Collective Action: Argentina’s Mothers of Plaza de Mayo.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Carolina Curvale

Resumen

How did a group of mothers of youngsters who had been illegally detained and murdered by Argentina’s 1976-1983 dictatorship, manage to organize and protest during this period of severe state repression? Under what conditions would a rational individual choose to risk her life by engaging in collective activities subjected to the free rider problem? Combining the insights of a step public goods model and the encapsulated-interest theory of trust, I show that in spite of the high levels of uncertainty and risk involved in participation, collective action was possible given credible mutual commitments inherent in participation, and due to the provision of selective incentives to the members. These findings are con- firmed by later developments: once a democratic transition ocurred and the risk and uncertainty levels diminished, the group split into two different associations.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Citas

I. [AMPM] Asociación Madres de Plaza de Mayo. Historia de las Madres de Plaza de Mayo. Ediciones Asociación Madres de Plaza de Mayo, Buenos Aires. 1995.

II. Chamberlin J. “Provisionof collective goods as a function of group size,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 68, Issue 2 (Jun 1974), 707–716.

III. Marguerite Guzman Bouvard. Revolutionizing Motherhood: The Mothers of the Plaza De Mayo. Latin American Silhouettes. Wilmington, Del. Scholarly Resources, Inc., 1994.

IV. Comisión Nacional sobre la Desaparición de Personas (CONADEP). Informe de la Comisión Nacional sobre la Desaparición de Personas: nunca más. 3a ed., Buenos Aires, EUDEBA, 1997. Also available at www.nuncamas.org

V. Alejandro Diago. Hebe Memoria y Esperanza. Ediciones Dialéctica, Buenos Aires, 1988.

VI. J. Elster. The Cement of Society: A Study of Social Order, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

VII. Joan Esteban and Debraj Ray. “Collective Action and the Group Size Paradox,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 95, Issue 3, September 2001.

VIII. Marguerite Feitlowitz. A Lexicon of Terror: Argentina and the Legacies of Torture.Oxford University Press, New York, 1998.

IX. Jo Fisher. Mothers of the Disappeared, Zed Books Ltd., London, 1989.

X.Fuster Retali J. El Proceso de Reorganizacio ́n Nacional (Argentina 1976-1983) a traves del cine de la democracia. L’Ordinaire Latino-American 183, Janv./mars 2001.

XI. Riker WH and Ordeshook PC. 1968. A Theory of the Calculus of Voting. American Political Science Review 62: 25-42.

XII. Hardin, R. 1971. Collective Action As an Agreeable n-Prisoners’ Dilemma. Behavioral Science 16: 472-481.

XIII. Hardin R. 1995. One for All, Princeton University Press: Princeton.

XIV. Hardin R. 2004. Distrust: Manifestations and Management. In Distrust, Hardin R (ed.). Russell Sage Foundation: New York; 3-33.

XV. Hardin R. 1982. Collective Action. The John Hopkins University Press: Baltimore.

XVI. Hardin R. 2002. Trust and trustworthiness. Russell Sage Foundation: New York.

XVII. Hardin R. 2003. Gaming Trust. In Trust and Reciprocity: Interdisciplinary Lessons from Experimental Research, Ostrom E and Walker J (eds.). Russell Sage Foundation:New York; 80-101.

XVIII. Holt CA and Laury SK. 2008. Theoretical Explanations of Treatment Effects in Voluntary Contributions Experiments. In Handbook of Experimental Economics Results Vol 1, Plott CR and Smith VL (eds.). North-Holland: Amsterdam; 846-855.

XIX. Historia del pais, Buenos Aires, Argentina at http://www.historiadelpais.com.ar [5 December 2003]

XX. Knudson JW. 1997. Veil of Silence: The Argentine Press and the Dirty War, 19761983. Latin American Perspectives 24: 93-112.

XXI. Luhmann N. 1988. Familiarity, Confidence, and Trust: Problems and Alternatives. In Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, Gambetta D (ed.), Blackwell:Oxford; 94-107.

XXII. [MLF] Madres Línea Fundadora web site.http://madres-lineafundadora.org/noticias/Completo/6.html [1 November 2003]

XXIII. Mellibovsky, M. 1990. Cíırculo de Amor sobre la Muerte. Ediciones del Pensamiento Nacional: Buenos Aires.

XXIV. Muñoz S and Portillo L. 1986. Las Madres (videorecording): the mothers of the Plaza de Mayo. Direct Cinema, Limited: Santa Monica, California.

XXV. Oliver P. 1980. Rewards and Punishments as Selective Incentives to Collective Action: Theoretical Investigations. American Journal of Sociology 85: 1356-1375.

XXVI. Olson, M. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.

XXVII.Przeworksi A et al. 2000. Democracy and Development, Cambridge University Press: New York.

XXVIII. Sanchez-Cuenca I. 1998. Institutional commitments and democracy. European Journal of Sociology 39: 78–109.

XXIX. Warren M. 1999. Democratic theory and trust. In Democracy and Trust, Warren ME (ed.). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge; 310-345.

XXX. Williams B. 1988. Formal Structures and Social Reality. In Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, Gambetta D (ed.). Blackwell: Oxford; 3-13.

XXXI. Hawthorn G. 1988. Three Ironies in Trust. In Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, Gambetta D (ed.). Blackwell: Oxford; 111-126.