Whether corruption leads to the election of women and whether increased women’s representation leads to lower levels of corruption are two questions with answers that remain uncertain and context-dependent. We explore the case of Mexico and theorize that three factors—gender stereotypes, demands for the inclusion of women, and expectations of accountability—condition the relationship between women’s representation and corruption. We hypothesize that given the features of the Mexican system, revelations of corruption should lead to the election of women and women should not be less corrupt than men in office. Leveraging an original dataset of close to 20 years of municipal audits to mayors, we find supporting evidence. The occurrence of audits and recent revelations of corruption increase the likelihood of women being elected and municipalities led by women report no fewer irregularities as compared to those led by men.
AfridiF.IversenV.SharanM. (2017). Women political leaders, corruption, and learning: Evidence from a large public program in India. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 66(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1086/693679
2.
AlatasV.CameronL.ChaudhuriA.ErkalN.GangadharanL. (2009). Gender and corruption: Insights from an experimental analysis. Southern Economic Journal, 75(3), 663–680. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2325-8012.2009.tb00925.x
3.
ArmstrongB.BarnesT.O’BrienD.Taylor-RobinsonM. (2022). Corruption, accountability, and women’s access to power. The Journal of Politics, 84(2), 1207–1213. https://doi.org/10.1086/715989
4.
BaldezL. (2004). Elected bodies: The gender quota law for legislative candidates in Mexico. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 29(2), 231–258. https://doi.org/10.3162/036298004x201168
5.
BarnesT.BeaulieuE. (2019). Women politicians, institutions, and perceptions of corruption. Comparative Political Studies, 52(1), 134–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414018774355
6.
Batista PereiraF. (2020). Do female politicians face stronger backlash for corruption allegations? Evidence from survey-experiments in Brazil and Mexico. Political Behavior, 43(4), 1561–1580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-020-09602-9
7.
BauhrM.CharronN. (2021). Will women executives reduce corruption? Marginalization and network inclusion. Comparative Political Studies, 54(7), 1292–1322. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414020970218
BjarnegardE. (2013). Gender, informal institutions and political recruitment: Explaining male dominance in parliamentary representation. Springer.
10.
BjarnegardE.ZetterbergP. (2017). Political parties, formal selection criteria, and gendered parliamentary representation. Party Politics, 25(3), 325–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068817715552
11.
BobonisG.Camara FuertesL.SchwabeR. (2016). Monitoring corruptible politicians. The American Economic Review, 106(8), 2371–2405. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20130874
12.
BrolloF.TroianoU. (2016). What happens when a woman wins an election? Evidence from close races in Brazil. Journal of Development Eerconomics, 122, 28–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2016.04.003
13.
BruckmullerS.BranscombeN. (2010). The glass cliff: When and why women are selected as leaders in crisis contexts. British Journal of Social Psychology, 49(Pt 3), 433–451. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466609X466594
14.
BruhnK. (2003). Whores and lesbians: Political activism, party strategies, and gender quotas in Mexico. Electoral Studies, 22(1), 101–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0261-3794(01)00039-7
15.
ByrnesJ. P.MillerD.SchaferW. (1999). Gender differences in risk-taking: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125(3), 367–383. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.3.367
16.
CampR. (2014). Politics in Mexico: Democratic consolidation or decline (6th ed.). Oxford University Press.
17.
ChaudhuriA. (2012). Chapter 2 gender and corruption: A survey of the experimental evidence. In SerraD.WantchekonL. (Eds.), New advances in experimental research on corruption (pp. 13–49). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
18.
ChongA.De La OA.KarlanD.WantchekonL. (2015). Does corruption information inspire the fight or Quash the hope? A field experiment in Mexico on voter turnout, choice and party identification. The Journal of Politics, 77(1), 55–71. https://doi.org/10.1086/678766
19.
CrosonR.GneezyU. (2009). Gender differences in preferences. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(2), 448–474. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.47.2.448
DollarD.FismanR.GattiR. (2001). Are women really the ‘fairer’ sex? Corruption and women in government. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 46(4), 423–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0167-2681(01)00169-x
23.
EckelC.GrossmanP. (2008). Men, women, and risk aversion: Experimental evidence. In CharlesP.VernonS. (Eds.), Handbook of experimental economic results (vol. 1, pp. 1061–1073). Elsevier.
24.
EggersA. C.VivyanN.WagnerM. (2017). Corruption, accountability, and gender: Do female politicians face higher standards in public life?The Journal of Politics, 80(1), 321–326. https://doi.org/10.1086/694649
25.
EsareyJ.ChirilloG. (2013). “Fairer sex” of purity myth? Corruption, gender, and institutional context. Politics and Gender, 9(04), 361–389. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1743923x13000378
26.
EsareyJ.MengerA. (2019). Practical and effective approaches to dealing with clustered data. Political Science Research and Methods, 7(3), 541–559. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2017.42
27.
EsareyJ.Schwindt-BayerL. (2018). Women’s representation, accountability and corruption in democracies. British Journal of Political Science, 48(3), 659–690. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123416000478
28.
EsareyJ.Schwindt-BayerL. (2019). Estimating causal relationships between women’s representation in government and corruption. Comparative Political Studies, 52(11), 1713–1741. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414019830744
29.
EsareyJ.ValdesN. (2021). The past, present and future of research on gender and corruption. Paper presented at the 79th Midwest Political Science Association Conference, Chicago, April 2022.
FazekasM.JanosI. (2016). An objective corruption risk index using public procurement data. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 22(3), 369–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-016-9308-z
32.
FazekasM.KocsisG. (2017). Uncovering high-level corruption: Cross-national objective corruption risk indicator using public procurement data. British Journal of Political Science, 50(1), 155–164. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123417000461
33.
FerrazC.FinanF. (2008). Exposing corrupt politicians: The effects of Brazil’s publicly released audits on electoral outcomes. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123(2), 703–745. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2008.123.2.703
34.
FerrazC.FinanF. (2011). Electoral accountability and corruption: Evidence from the audits of local governments. The American Economic Review, 101(4), 1274–1311. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.101.4.1274
35.
FríasS. (2008). Diferencias regionales en violencia doméstica en México: el rol de la estructura patriarcal. In Estudios sobre cultura, género y violencia contra las mujeres. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
36.
FriedenbergF. (2017). La representación política de las mujeres en México (Primera Edición). Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
37.
FunkK.HinojosaM.PiscopoJ. (2021). Women to the rescue: The gendered effects of public discontent on legislative nominations in Latin America. Party Politics, 27(3), 465–477. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068819856614
GrimesM.WängnerudL. (2018). Gender and corruption in Mexico: Building a theory of conditioned causality. In HelenaS.LenaW. (Eds.), Gender and corruption: Historical roots and new avenues for research (pp. 191–211). Palgrave Macmillan.
40.
GuajardoG.Schwindt-BayerL. (2023). Replication data for: Women’s representation and corruption: Evidence from local audits in Mexico. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/FW9SLZ. Harvard Dataverse, V1, UNF:6:9+uuSadDO2rKZoGoV+vEcg== [fileUNF].
HtunM. (2016). Inclusion without representation in Latin America: Gender quotas and ethnic reservations. Cambridge University Press.
43.
HughesM. (2011). Intersectionality, quotas, and minority women’s political representation worldwide. American Political Science Review, 105(3), 604–620. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055411000293
JhaC.SarangiS. (2018). Women and corruption: What positions must they hold to make a difference?Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 151, 219–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2018.03.021
46.
LarreguyH.MarshallJ.SnyderJ. (2020). Publicizing malfeasance: When the local media structure facilitates electoral accountability in Mexico. The Economic Journal, 30(631), 2291–2327. https://doi.org/10.1093/ej/ueaa046
MatlandR. (1993). Institutional variables affecting female representation in national legislatures: The case of Norway. The Journal of Politics, 55(3), 737–755. https://doi.org/10.2307/2131998
49.
MeloM.PereiraC.FiguereidoC. (2009). Political and institutional checks on corruption: Explaining the performance of Brazilian audit institutions. Comparative Political Studies, 42(9), 1217–1244. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414009331732
50.
NúñezL. (2017). ¿Y dónde quedó la bolita? Presupuesto de egresos ficticio: cómo el gobierno hace lo que quiere con nuestro dinero. Editorial Aguilar.
51.
PereiraC.MeloM. (2015). Reelecting corrupt incumbents in exchange for public goods: Rouba maz faz in Brazil. Latin American Research Review, 50(4), 88–115. https://doi.org/10.1353/lar.2015.0054
52.
PereiraM.Fernandez-VazquezP. (2022). Does electing women reduce corruption? A regression discontinuity approach. Legislative Studies Quarterly. Forthcoming. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsq.12409
53.
PiscopoJ. (2017). Leveraging informality, rewriting formal rules: The implementation of gender parity in Mexico. In WaylenG. (Ed.), Gender and informal institutions. Rowman & Littlefield.
54.
Reyes-HousholderC.ThomasG. (2018). Latin America’s presidentas: Overcoming challenges, forging new pathways. In Schwindt-BayerL. A. (Ed.), Gender and representation in Latin America. Oxford University Press.
RuleW. (1987). Electoral systems, contextual factors and women’s opportunity for election to parliament in twenty-three democracies. The Western Political Quarterly, 40(3), 477–498. https://doi.org/10.2307/448386
57.
Schwindt-BayerL.EsareyJ.SchumacherE. (2018). Gender and citizen responses to corruption among politicians: The U.S. and Brazil. In HelenaS.LenaW. (Eds.), Gender and corruption: Historical roots and new avenues for research (pp. 59–82). Palgrave Macmillan.
58.
StanigP. (2014). Regulation of speech and media coverage of corruption: An empirical analysis oft he Mexican press. American Journal of Political Science, 59(1), 175–193. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12110
59.
StockemerD.SundströmA. (2019). Corruption and women in cabinets: Informal barriers to recruitment in the executive. Governance, 32(1), 83–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12352
60.
SundströmA.WängnerudL. (2014). Corruption as an obstacle to women’s political representation: Evidence from local councils in 18 European countries. Party Politics, 22(3), 354–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068814549339
TreismanD. (2007). What have we learned about the causes of corruption from ten years of cross-national empirical research?Annual Review of Political Science, 10(1), 211–244. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.081205.095418
63.
ValdiniM. (2019). The inclusion calculation: Why men appropriate women’s representation. Oxford University Press.
64.
Vidal CorreaF. (2017). Women in Mexican politics: A study of representation in a renewed federal and democratic state. Lexington Books.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
