Are women more likely to throw the rascals out? The mobilizing effect of social service spending on female voters

Abstract

This study focuses on gender differences in voter reactions to a corruption scandal in one's preferred party. We analyze, in a framework of 'exit, voice and loyalty', whether women differ from men in terms of turnout (exit), and given that they vote, whether they prefer a clean alternative party (voice) or whether they continue to vote for their preferred party (loyalty) involved in a corruption scandal. We employ sequential logit models using data from the European Quality of Government Index (EQI) survey from 2017, which contains roughly 77,000 respondents from 21 EU countries and 185 regions. We find that women generally are less tolerant of corruption, but that the effect is highly conditional. In areas where social service spending is more widespread, we find that female respondents are more likely to vote for an alternative party. Yet the odds of exit increase among women when social service spending is lower.

Do Men and Women Perceive Corruption Differently? Gender Differences in Perception of Need and Greed Corruption

“…Relatedly, evidence also suggests that women are more likely to mobilize against corruption. Recent studies investigate gender differences in voter responses to corruption and find that women are more likely to refrain from voting for a party and candidate involved in corruption (Alexander et al, 2019).…”

“…To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first that systematically investigates gender differences in the perceived prevalence of different forms of corruption, and in particular differences between need and greed corruption. Several studies suggest that women, on average, are less tolerant towards corruption (Alexander, Bågenholm, & Charron, 2019;Swamy et al, 2001). Most studies to date, however, investigate either the macro-level association between women representation and lower levels of corruption (Dollar et al, 2001), or micro-level differences between men and women's levels of tolerance towards corruption, whether expressed through vote choice (Alexander et al, 2019), perceptions of the extent to which corruption is justifiable (Swamy et al, 2001) or the varying propensity of men and women to engage in corruption (Bauhr et al, 2019).…”

“…Several studies suggest that women, on average, are less tolerant towards corruption (Alexander, Bågenholm, & Charron, 2019;Swamy et al, 2001). Most studies to date, however, investigate either the macro-level association between women representation and lower levels of corruption (Dollar et al, 2001), or micro-level differences between men and women's levels of tolerance towards corruption, whether expressed through vote choice (Alexander et al, 2019), perceptions of the extent to which corruption is justifiable (Swamy et al, 2001) or the varying propensity of men and women to engage in corruption (Bauhr et al, 2019). This study builds on new data specifically designed to measure the distinction between need and greed corruption and a large sample of respondents to investigate how the perceived nature of the corruption problem differs among men and women.…”

Is corruption distasteful or just another cost of doing business?

“…The explanations for preferences for honesty have been categorised as an inherent distaste for corruption (Tirole, 1996) or "predispositions" towards corporate illegality (Baucus, 1994), reputational concerns (David & Feichtinger, 1996) and psychological barriers that often are shaped by socialization and upbringing (Nabin & Bose, 2008). Women, at least in some contexts, have been found to be less tolerant of corruption and less willing to engage in corrupt acts (Alexander et al, 2019;Rivas, 2013). Such moral costs and preferences can tip the scales of decision making away from activities and opportunities that would otherwise be undertaken.…”

The Effects of Oil Windfalls on Political Corruption: Evidence from Brazil

“…Although there results are suggestive, it is unclear whether these observable variables correlate well with a candidates honesty. There is some evidence that women are less corrupt than men (Alexander et al 2019;Dollar et al 2001;Esarey and Chirillo 2013;Esarey and Schwindt-Bayer 2019), but in Brazil it is unclear whether more educated candidates are less corrupt than their less educated counterparts Carnes and Lupu (2016).…”