Presidential Breakdowns or Neo-Coups? Presenting a Typology of Social Legitimacy

Despite the conceptual and analytical differences between presidential breakdowns (PBs) and coups, the empirical decline in coups has shifted attention to disputes over the legitimacy of PBs. This study introduces a novel framework for analysing PBs’ elements that are theorised to influence their social legitimacy. The framework assesses three dimensions: First, quasi-vertical accountability considers the anticipation of elections and public mobilisation. Legitimacy is enhanced when elections are called and protests occur. Second, horizontal accountability concerns the ousting mechanism. Resignations tend to contribute to legitimacy, whereas extralegal removals face greater scrutiny. The third dimension addresses ideological switching, highlighting how legitimacy is questioned when caretaker governments differ from their predecessors ideologically. Using this framework, I classified 19 PBs in Latin America (1985–2020). The typology offers a tool for analysing future cases, selecting case studies, and identifying the risk of legitimacy crises.