The literature on democratic accountability assumes that alternative institutions can make state practices more transparent and thus enhance accountability. In this paper, we problematize the celebration of alternative institutions by comparing the cases of Mexico and India. Why, we ask, given the popular support for a caste census and a rights-based approach to poverty alleviation in India and Mexico, respectively, did these initiatives lose steam soon after political elites conceded to civil society demands? In answer, we argue that alternative institutions may become conduits to undercut accountability under the guise of expertise through a mechanism that we call the “retreat to method,” in which political elites channel substantive public debate into abstruse disputes over methodology. As the task of measuring poverty and caste retreats into backrooms, vertical accountability between the state and civil society in our two cases has weakened. Horizontal accountability mechanisms—in which one arm of the state (e.g., the bureaucracy) provides checks and balances on another (e.g., the legislature)—may be exploited to undercut vertical accountability in cases where expertise is valued over democratic deliberation.

中文翻译：

---

回归方法：精英让步给印度和墨西哥公民社会的后果

关于民主问责的文献假设替代制度可以使国家实践更加透明，从而加强问责。在本文中，我们通过比较墨西哥和印度的案例来对替代制度的庆祝进行问题化。我们要问，鉴于印度和墨西哥分别对种姓人口普查和基于权利的扶贫方法的普遍支持，为什么在政治精英对公民社会的要求做出让步后，这些举措很快就失去了动力？作为回答，我们认为替代机构可能成为以专业知识为幌子削弱问责制的渠道，通过一种我们称之为“撤退到方法”的机制，在这种机制中，政治精英将实质性的公共辩论引导到关于方法论的深奥争议中。随着衡量贫困和种姓的任务退回到幕后，在我们的两个案例中，国家和公民社会之间的垂直问责已经减弱。横向问责机制——国家的一个部门（例如，官僚机构）对另一部门（例如，立法机构）进行制衡——在专业知识被重视而不是民主审议的情况下，可能会被用来削弱纵向问责制。