Coca Politics: Exposure to Tough-on-Crime Policies, Electoral Accountability, and Public Opinion

Governments across the Global South widely rely on tough-on-crime policies to control illicit drug production. Yet, these measures often come with significant social, environmental, and economic costs, raising concerns about their broader political consequences. How does exposure to tough-on-crime policies influence electoral preferences and reshape public opinion? This paper answers that question by broadening the definition of tough-on-crime and analyzing Colombia’s aerial coca eradication program—a central strategy aimed at reducing cocaine production. Using sub-national data from three presidential elections and recent difference-in-differences methods, I find that exposure to these interventions reduces vote shares for pro-policy incumbents. Over time, areas subject to sustained intervention show stronger opposition to these incumbents, indicating that long-term exposure to punitive crime policies triggers electoral backlash. I further support this argument with data from a nationally representative survey, showing that while support for tough-on-crime policies is highly ideological, greater exposure to their negative consequences reduces approval across partisan lines. These findings highlight a key mechanism through which punitive policies influence democratic accountability, showing how direct exposure to coercive interventions shapes both voter behavior and public opinion. This study contributes to debates on security policy, electoral accountability, and the politics of crime in the Global South.