Research on the link between turnout and corruption has produced inconclusive evidence: while some studies find corruption to be positively related to turnout, others report a negative relationship. This article argues that the relevant question is not whether corruption has a positive or negative effect on turnout, but for whom. We hypothesize that the effect of corruption on the likelihood to vote depends on individuals’ employment sector. Public employees have different incentives to vote in corrupt settings since their jobs often depend on the political success of the government of the day. Hence, while corruption dampens turnout among ordinary citizens, public employees are more likely to vote in highly corrupt countries. Analysis of World Values Survey data from 44 countries, shows that the differential in voting propensity between public employees and other citizens gets larger as corruption increases, partially confirming our expectations.
BednarczukMichael (2018) Identity and Vote Overreporting by Bureaucrats: Implications for public service motivation. The American Review of Public Administration48(2): 148–158.
2.
BennettJames TOrzechowskiWilliam P (1983) The Voting Behavior of Bureaucrats: Some empirical evidence. Public Choice41(2): 271–283.
3.
BirchSarah (2010) Perceptions of Electoral Fairness and Voter Turnout. Comparative Political Studies43(12): 1601–1622.
4.
BlaisAndré (2006) What Affects Voter Turnout?Annual Review of Political Science9(1): 111–125.
5.
BlaisAndréBlakeDonald EDionStéphane (1990) The Public/Private Sector Cleavage in North America: The political behavior and attitudes of public sector employees. Comparative Political Studies23(3): 381–403.
6.
BrewerGene A (2003) Building Social Capital: Civic attitudes and behavior of public servants. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory13(1): 5–26.
7.
ChandraKanchan (2004) Why Ethnic Parties Succeed: Patronage and Ethnic Headcounts in India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8.
CoreyElizabeth CGarandJames C (2002) Are Government Employees More Likely to Vote? An analysis of turnout in the 1996 U.S. National Election. Public Choice111(3–4): 259–283.
9.
DahlbergStefanSolevidMaria (2016) Does Corruption Suppress Voter Turnout?Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties26(4): 489–510.
10.
DavisCharles LRodericAi CampColemanKenneth M (2004) The Influence of Party Systems on Citizens’ Perceptions of Corruption and Electoral Response in Latin America. Comparative Political Studies37(6): 677–703.
11.
EscalerasMonicaCalcagnoPeter TShughartWilliam F (2012) Corruption and Voter Participation Evidence from the US States. Public Finance Review40(6): 789–815.
12.
GarandJames CParkhurstCatherine TSeoudRusanne Jourdan (1991) Bureaucrats, Policy Attitudes, and Political Behavior: Extension of the bureau voting model of government growth. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory1(2): 177–212.
13.
GerringJohnThackerStrom C (2004) Political Institutions and Corruption: The role of unitarism and parliamentarism. British Journal of Political Science34(2): 295–330.
14.
GeysBenny (2006) Explaining Voter Turnout: A review of aggregate-level research. Electoral Studies25(4): 637–663.
15.
HeidenheimerArnold JJohnstonMichael (2011) Political Corruption: Concepts and Contexts. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
16.
HeywoodPaul (1997) Political Corruption: Problems and perspectives. Political Studies45(3): 417–435.
17.
JainK Arvind (2001) Corruption: A review. Journal of Economic Surveys15(1): 71–121.
18.
JensenJason LSumPaul EFlynnDavid T (2009) Political Orientations and Behavior of Public Employees: A cross-national comparison. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory19(4): 709–730.
19.
JohnstonMichael (2005) Syndromes of Corruption: Wealth, Power, and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20.
KennyPaul D (2015) The Origins of Patronage Politics: State building, centrifugalism, and decolonization. British Journal of Political Science45(1): 141–171.
21.
KitscheltHerbert (2000) Linkages between Citizens and Politicians in Democratic Polities. Comparative Political Studies33(6–7): 845–879.
22.
KostadinovaTatiana (2009) Abstain or Rebel: Corruption Perceptions and Voting in East European Elections. Politics & Policy37(4): 691–714.
23.
KurerOskar (1993) Clientelism, Corruption, and the Allocation of Resources. Public Choice77: 259–273.
24.
LambsdorffJohann G (2006) Causes and Consequences of Corruption: What do we know from a cross-section of countries?. In Rose-AckermanSusan (ed.) International Handbook on the Economics of Corruption. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 3–52.
25.
ManzettiLuigiWilsonCarole J (2007) Why Do Corrupt Governments Maintain Public Support?Comparative Political Studies40(8): 949–970.
26.
McCannJames AJorgeDomínguez(1998) Mexicans React to Electoral Fraud and Political Corruption: An assessment of public opinion and voting behavior. Electoral Studies17(4): 483–503.
27.
NichterSimeon (2008) Vote Buying or Turnout Buying? Machine politics and the secret ballot. American Political Science Review102(1): 19–31.
28.
OliverosVirginia (2017) Working for the Machine: Patronage jobs and political services in Argentina. Working paper Tulane University.
29.
OliverosVirginiaSchusterChristian (2017) Merit, Tenure, and Bureaucratic Behavior: Evidence from a conjoint experiment in the Dominican Republic. Comparative Political Studies51(6): 759–792.
30.
OlkenBenjamin (2009) Corruption Perceptions vs. Corruption Reality. Journal of Public Economics93(7–8): 950–964.
31.
RattsøJørnSørensenRune J (2016) Public–Private Political Cleavage: What happens after retirement?Public Choice166(3–4): 315–333.
32.
SchusterChristian (2016) When the Victor Cannot Claim the Spoils: Institutional incentives for professionalizing patronage states. Working Paper Series No. 667. Inter-American Development Bank.
33.
SoraufFrank J (1960) The Silent Revolution in Patronage. Public Administration Review20(1): 28–34.
34.
StockemerDanielLaMontagneBernadetteScruggsLyle (2013) Bribes and Ballots: The impact of corruption on voter turnout in democracies. International Political Science Review34(1): 74–90.
35.
StokesSusan C (2005) Perverse Accountability: A formal model of machine politics with evidence from Argentina. American Political Science Review99(3): 315–325.
36.
StokesSusan CDunningThadNazarenoMarceloBruscoValeria (2013) Brokers, Voters, and Clientelism: The Puzzle of Distributive Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37.
SundellAnders (2012) What Is the Best Way to Recruit Public Servants? The Quality of Government Institute. Working Paper Series 2012:7.
38.
SundströmAkselStockemerDaniel (2015) Regional Variation in Voter Turnout in Europe: The impact of corruption perceptions. Electoral Studies40(December): 158–169.
39.
VerbaSidneyNieNorman HKimJae-on (1978) Participation and Political Equality. A Seven-Nation Comparison. Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.
40.
WeingrodAlex (1968) Patrons, Patronage, and Political Parties. Comparative Studies in Society and History10(4): 377–400.
41.
WolfingerRaymond ERosenstoneSteven J (1980) Who Votes?New Haven: Yale University Press.
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.
