● VOTERS TURNOUT

Voter turnout as defined by MIT Election Lab is a measure of civic participation that
many people believe best gauges the health of the electoral process. However,
measuring it can be more difficult than it first appears, which means that understanding
how and why it fluctuates can also be difficult.

Understanding the factors that influence voter turnout is a fundamentally important

question in public policy and political science research. High voter turnout for example is
considered a mark of a thriving democracy, policymakers and citizens often support
electoral reform measures based on whether they will increase turnout, either overall or
for particular groups.

The importance of Voting Turnout in society is that it becomes the basis for some
candidates (whether pro-admin or opposition) about their fate to the pulse of the
majority for the future of our country. A field of domestic and foreign policy is also
known to determine here since all elected officials have many stands regarding their
political policy. It becomes an instrument for the next steps of each individual,
group, or party regarding their political career and management in the present
and the future.

● ELECTORAL BEHAVIOR

Voting behavior pertains to the form of political participation through actions or

inactions of citizens that take place for members of their local, regional, or
national governments. The behavior results either in support for political candidates or
parties or abstention from the voting process. The behavior of voters can be traced to
the benefits or disadvantages of their quality of life.

Several different (but not mutually exclusive) approaches or models to the explanation
of voting behavior can be distinguished in the literature.
1. Structural (or sociological) - approaches concentrate on the relationship between
individual and social structure. (determined by the membership of a particular social
community (professional, religion, social class, etc.)
2. Ecological (or aggregate statistical) - approaches relate voting patterns to the
characteristic features of a geographical area (ward, constituency, state, etc).
3. Social psychological - approaches relate voting decisions to the voter's psychological
predispositions or attitudes, for example, his or her party identification (loyalty to the
political entity), attitudes to candidates, and such.
4. Rational-choice - approaches attempt to explain voting behavior as the outcome of a
series of instrumental cost-benefit calculations by the individual, assessing the relative
desirability of specific electoral outcomes in terms of the issues addressed and policies
espoused by the different parties or candidates. (approach elections rationally and
make decisions based on a profit and loss account they draw uo)

Turska-Kawa, A. 2013. Political Trust and Electoral Behavior.

https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_3181

● POLITICAL POLARIZATION

DEFINITION: Political polarization refers to the vast and growing gap of political
attitudes and identities among the public that undermine the pursuit of a common
good. Its emergence is often compounded by the rise of ideologically divided masses
and radical political parties. Polarization usually refers to how people think,
especially when two views emerge that drive people apart, kind of like two opposing
magnets.

TODAY: Today, we witness political polarization in many parts of the world on issues of
discrimination, multiculturalism, religion, immigration, human rights, terrorism, civil war,
and nuclear armament.

Source:
https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/polarization#:~:text=Polarization%20is%20a%20concept%20that,o
f%20like%20two%20opposing%20magnets
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0702071104

● POLITICAL BEHAVIOR

Why do individuals decide to vote for her and not him? Why do People choose to
participate or not in the political arena? Why do we have different opinions? This is how
Political behavior is defined.

Political Behavior is defined as how someone influences others' opinions in a

political setting.

It is one of the alternatives for influencing decisions and getting the desired
results (Prasad, 1993).
The use of power to affect decision-making in the organization or on behaviors by
members that are self-serving or organizationally nonsanctioned is also defined as
political behavior (Vredenburgh & Maurer, 1984).

An obvious act of Political Behavior is voting, when voting, there is immediate political
behavior that can be seen, by choosing who you want or you don’t want in the position
is a behavior itself. Maybe because of your experienced economic status you voted for
them or maybe this is what the majority wants. We depend on our choice and behavior
on what we think is more worthy for ourselves and for the economy, and that itself is a
political behavior.

Why is it Important to study?

Political Behavior tells us how to understand people and why they act the way they
behave. It talks about Political socialization which it is the process through which
political beliefs are transferred from one generation to another generation and it is most
like to come to from family, school, peer pressure, or friends. For example, voting for
Ms. A and not Ms. B because your friends like Ms. A is an act of Political Behavior that
came from someone. Political Behavior also talks about Political Culture where your
decision to vote for Ms. A rather than Ms. B is a political Behavior came from the
dominant group. All knowledge is being transferred by the dominant group that is
acceptable in your society. Political Behavior also talks about the people's participation
in the political arena. How people react and relate to issues concerning
government is also a form of Political Behavior. For example, Ms. A is known for
being the most influential person in the world, by deciding to vote for Ms. A Because of
her achievement is a behavior we got from the political aspect.

political-behavior. (n.d.). http://www.kyoolee.net/political-behaviour.html

(Caribbean Elections | Politics and the Electoral Process, n.d.)

● PUBLIC POLICY

Public policy is a vital government function, helping to address challenges throughout

society. They define government actions, typically instigated as a response to
common problems that have been raised to their attention.

Public policies come in the form of regulations and laws, created by the
appropriate governing bodies within a specified area. The purpose of them is to
maintain order throughout the society in which they are implemented, attempting to
meet people’s basic needs and manage certain problems and challenges.
Individuals and groups often attempt to shape public policy through education,
advocacy, or mobilization of interest groups. Shaping public policy is obviously different
in Western-style democracies than in other forms of government. But it is reasonable to
assume that the process always involves efforts by competing interest groups to
influence policymakers in their favor.

EXAMPLES AND APPLICATION IN TODAY'S SOCIETY:

Some examples of public policy include informing the public about making healthy
choices, such as what they eat, physical activity, and the consequences of smoking.
Policies can also work to prevent the spread of diseases, like the mask mandates and
other public policies we've seen during the COVID-19 outbreak.

● POLICY IMPLEMENTATION

Represents the stage where the government executes an adopted policy as

specified by the legislation or policy action. At this stage, various government
agencies and departments, responsible for the respective area of policy, are formally
made responsible for implementation. Policy implementation is what happens after a
bill becomes law. (Theodoulou and Kofinis, 2004)

Petrus and Brynard (2005) see policy Implementation as an administrative task or

choice and the accomplishment of policy objectives through the planning and
programming of projects so that the desired impacts are achieved. It was given
little attention up until the 1970's that's why Petrus and Brynard view it as an
administrative choice.

It is a process of setting a law passed for some specific goal into action. Once a
Policy is made it is logically time for it to be implemented. Designing the content of the
policy to achieve the end result is what Policy Implementation is all about.
In implementing policy they must ensure that the policy is covered by legal power.
Organizing the materials, persons, or certain organizations that will help in implementing
the policy is needed for the success of policy implementation. According to Sabatier and
Mazmanian (1979) making sure that with the involvement of various stakeholders,
adequate projects, programs, resources, and finance, the successful end of the
implementation of the said policy will be ensured.

Some factors are considered for the implementation of the policy. The factors depend
on the policy implementer's capacity and the will or motivation to implement solely
depends on the implementer's response that can influence the policy (McLaughi, 1987)
He also added that pressure and support should be balanced where pressure is
required to ensure the attention of policymakers is preparing the targeted objectives and
support is needed for the successful implementation of policy.

https://youtu.be/eTSS4UhCnXc

● POLITICAL VIOLENCE

DEFINITION: Political violence is the deliberate use of power and force to achieve
political goals (World Health Organization (WHO), 2002). It is characterized by both
physical and psychological acts aimed at injuring or intimidating populations. [Examples
include shootings or aerial bombardments; detentions; arrests and torture; and home
demolitions.] Political violence also includes deprivation, the deliberate denial of
basic needs and human rights. [Examples include obstruction related to freedom of
speech, and denial of access to food, education, sanitation, and healthcare.]

EFFECTS: Political violence not only lessens individuals' abilities to act within their
communities, but it also undermines the social foundations of society
(Summerfield, 2000), rupturing the social fabric and often engendering collective senses
of fear (Bar-Tal, et al., 2007). Studies reveal political violence deteriorates community
functioning and social fabric by:
1. damaging community as a shared physical location of people, culture, and
identity through mass killings and displacement, destruction of meaningful
places, and control of space and movement and;
2. changing the overall climate and functioning of communities through the
instillation of collective fear and terror, destruction of networks, and diminishment
of community organizing activities.

TODAY: Political violence diminishes individuals’ trust in the moral organization of

society, government entities, and processes of democracy. Lykes, et al.’s study in
Guatemala found the complicity of people’s own governments in political violence
decreased individuals’ trust in community and organizational processes (2007).

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3801099/

● IDEOLOGY

Ideology has been defined as a "set of closely related beliefs, or ideas, or even
attitudes, characteristic of a group or community."

A distinction between theory, philosophy, and ideology has been made. The first
two involve contemplation, organization, and whenever possible a demonstration, while
ideology shapes beliefs that incite people into action. Furthermore, it serves to
recommend, justify or endorse collective action aimed at preserving or changing political
practices and institutions.

Application in today's society

Ideas and ideologies influence political life in several ways. In the first place, they
provide a perspective through which the world is understood and explained.
People do not see the world as it is, but only as they expect it to be; in other words, they
see it through a veil of ingrained beliefs, opinions, and assumptions. Whether
consciously or unconsciously, everyone subscribes to a set of political beliefs and
values that guide their behavior and influence their conduct. Political ideas and
ideologies thus set goals that inspire political activity. With this, ideologies will continue
to provide us with the resources to link theory with action and to make sense of the
confusing and conflict-ridden world that we live in.

● POLITICAL TRUST

Political trust refers to the level of confidence that people have in their
government, political leaders, and political institutions to do what is right and act
in the best interest of the public. It is a measure of the degree to which people
believe that their government is legitimate and effective. Political trust can be
influenced by a variety of factors, such as economic conditions, social inequality,
corruption, and other forms of misconduct in government. High levels of political
trust can lead to greater civic engagement, political participation, and compliance with
laws and regulations. On the other hand, low levels of political trust can lead to
skepticism, apathy, and even resistance to government policies and institutions.

In democratic societies, political trust is seen as crucial for maintaining the legitimacy of
the government and promoting social cohesion. However, political trust can be fragile
and easily eroded by political scandals, economic crises, or other events that undermine
the public's confidence in the government.

Political trust, generally defined as citizens’ confidence in political institutions, is

an important indicator of political legitimacy—the belief in the righteousness of
these political institutions and the regime of which they are part. A widespread belief in
legitimacy is commonly regarded as a necessary condition for the survival of political
regimes. Therefore, measuring the level and development of political trust may provide
us with important information about the stability of political systems (Easton 1965,
1975). Trust in the political regime of a country constitutes a reservoir of goodwill for
when the day-to-day performance of the regime fails to meet expectations. Given these
crucial implications, political trust is often considered an essential component of the
civic culture that is necessary for the stability of democratic systems (Almond and Verba
1963). Therefore, the seemingly decreasing levels of political trust in Western
democracies over the last couple of decades (Dalton 2004, 2005; Klingemann 1999)
have stimulated a growing body of research on the causes and consequences of
political trust. The presumed decline of political trust (and, by implication, the presumed
decline of the legitimacy of political systems) is often attributed to long-term processes
of modernization and globalization. At the level of the individual citizen, modernization
implies among other things a rise in the level of education (Klingemann and Fuchs
1995). Modernization theory states that the increased level of education, in combination
with increasing political interest and decreasing respect for traditional authorities and
institutions leads to a growing dissatisfaction of higher-educated citizens with the
working of the political system (Aarts et al. 2014; Dalton 2004; Thomassen 2005). This
growing dissatisfaction presumably translates into a decreased trust in political
institutions, as these institutions apparently fail to do what modern citizens expect from
them.

Political trust in the Philippines has been a complex issue in recent years. The
Philippines has a presidential system with a strong executive branch, and the country
has experienced political turmoil and corruption scandals in the past. These factors
have contributed to a lack of trust in the government and politicians among some
Filipinos. In addition, there have been concerns about the government's handling of
various issues, including human rights abuses, the COVID-19 pandemic response, and
economic inequality. These issues have further eroded public trust in the government
and its leaders. However, it is important to note that political trust is not a monolithic
concept and can vary across different groups and individuals. Some Filipinos may still
have confidence in the government, while others may be more skeptical or critical.

● POLITICAL DYNASTY

A political dynasty refers to a family or group of families who have established a

long-standing tradition of holding political power within a particular region or
country. This typically involves a pattern of family members holding elected or
appointed positions of power, with the transfer of power occurring through nepotism or
other means that favor the family members. The concept of political dynasties is often
associated with negative connotations, as it can suggest an unfair concentration of
power and a lack of equal opportunity for other individuals to participate in the political
process. Critics argue that political dynasties can lead to corruption, as family
members may use their power to enrich themselves and their relatives. Some
countries have attempted to address the issue of political dynasties through legislation
or constitutional amendments, while others continue to grapple with the challenges
posed by these entrenched political families.

The Philippines has a long history of political dynasties dating back to the Spanish
colonial period. However, the problem of political dynasties became more pronounced
after the country gained independence in 1946. The roots of political dynasties in the
Philippines can be traced to the country's traditional political and social
structures, which place a high value on family ties and relationships. Many
wealthy and influential families have maintained their hold on political power through
nepotism, patronage, and alliances with other powerful families.

During the Marcos regime from 1965 to 1986, the concentration of power among a few
families became even more pronounced as the dictator Ferdinand Marcos and his wife
Imelda Marcos consolidated their grip on power and accumulated wealth through
corruption. The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines included a provision that
prohibits political dynasties, but the lack of a clear definition of what constitutes
a political dynasty and the absence of an implementing law have rendered this
provision ineffective. As a result, political dynasties continue to dominate Philippine
politics, with many members of the same family holding positions of power at the local
and national levels. This has led to concerns about the concentration of power and the
lack of representation for marginalized groups, as well as allegations of corruption and
abuse of power by members of political dynasties

Political dynasties remain a significant issue in Philippine politics to this day. According
to a 2019 study by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ), around
70% of elected officials at the provincial, city, and municipal levels are members of
political dynasties. Many of these political families have maintained their hold on power
for decades, with members holding various positions such as governor, congressman,
mayor, and councilor. Some of the most prominent political dynasties in the Philippines
include the Aquino, Cojuangco, Binay, Estrada, and Marcos families, among others. The
persistence of political dynasties in the Philippines is partly due to the lack of effective
implementation of the constitutional provision prohibiting them. Attempts to pass
an anti-political dynasty law have been unsuccessful, with some lawmakers arguing that
such a law would violate the constitutional rights of individuals to run for public office.
Critics of political dynasties argue that they contribute to a concentration of power and
wealth, limit political competition, and perpetuate a system of oligarchy in the country.
Proponents, on the other hand, argue that political dynasties can bring stability and
continuity to local governments, as well as provide opportunities for family members to
serve their constituents.