Article Abstract: What determines the legitimacy of aspiring rulers? Questions about support of the governed are central to theories of state-building and political order. Millions worldwide live under the influence of competing armed groups, yet we know little about how people in these contexts make comparative assessments of would-be rulers. We theorize how local norms, social networks, and the provision of goods and services influence these comparative judgments. We report results from a conjoint survey experiment in Colombia among nearly 2,400 respondents across 54 municipalities contested by multiple armed groups. Armed groups that take community norms into account and those that involve local leaders in decision-making are judged less negatively. Additionally, providing services and limiting violence both reduce negative evaluations of armed groups. These findings help us understand dimensions of political legitimacy under limited statehood and the effects of governance on civilian attitudes in areas of competition.
Out-Competing Rivals: Armed Group Governance and Civilian Attitudes in Colombia was authored by Erica De Bruin, Gabriella Levy, Livia I. Schubiger and Michael Weintraub. It was published by Cambridge in APSR in 2025.
