Clientelism and Voter Mobilization: The Impact of Positive and Negative Inducements

Mogens Kamp Justesen, Isabela Mares

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperResearchpeer-review

Abstract

In elections around the world, candidates seek to mobilize voters using a combination of positive and negative clientelist inducements. The former includes offers of gifts, money, and privileged access to policy benefits; the latter includes threats to cut off access to long-term benefits, social grants, or to worsen ongoing terms of exchange between brokers and voters. In this paper, we examine variation in the ways voters evaluate different types of clientelist strategies. The study of this variation in punishment thresholds is important for understanding the leeway enjoyed by politicians using different forms of clientelism. Our study relies on a vignette experiment embedded in a nation-wide survey (n=1500) conducted in 2017 in South Africa. The results suggest that voters punish candidates using threats more harshly than candidates using positive inducements. Secondly, we document the existence of variation across subgroups of voters in their willingness to sanction different nonprogrammatic strategies and find that lower income voters are more forgiving towards clientelistic exchanges than higher income voters. By contrast, voters’ partisan attachments do not influence voters’ evaluations of clientelistic exchanges.

Original languageEnglish
Publication date2019
Number of pages41
Publication statusPublished - 2019
EventAmerican Political Science Association, APSA Annual Meeting 2019: Populism and Privilege - Washington, DC, United States
Duration: 29 Aug 20191 Sep 2019
Conference number: 115
https://connect.apsanet.org/apsa2019/

Conference

ConferenceAmerican Political Science Association, APSA Annual Meeting 2019
Number115
CountryUnited States
CityWashington, DC
Period29/08/201901/09/2019
Internet address

Bibliographical note

CBS Library does not have access to the material

Cite this

Justesen, M. K., & Mares, I. (2019). Clientelism and Voter Mobilization: The Impact of Positive and Negative Inducements. Paper presented at American Political Science Association, APSA Annual Meeting 2019, Washington, DC, United States.
Justesen, Mogens Kamp ; Mares, Isabela. / Clientelism and Voter Mobilization : The Impact of Positive and Negative Inducements. Paper presented at American Political Science Association, APSA Annual Meeting 2019, Washington, DC, United States.41 p.
@conference{5f150064c9c84968a9dbff9b36265f67,
title = "Clientelism and Voter Mobilization: The Impact of Positive and Negative Inducements",
abstract = "In elections around the world, candidates seek to mobilize voters using a combination of positive and negative clientelist inducements. The former includes offers of gifts, money, and privileged access to policy benefits; the latter includes threats to cut off access to long-term benefits, social grants, or to worsen ongoing terms of exchange between brokers and voters. In this paper, we examine variation in the ways voters evaluate different types of clientelist strategies. The study of this variation in punishment thresholds is important for understanding the leeway enjoyed by politicians using different forms of clientelism. Our study relies on a vignette experiment embedded in a nation-wide survey (n=1500) conducted in 2017 in South Africa. The results suggest that voters punish candidates using threats more harshly than candidates using positive inducements. Secondly, we document the existence of variation across subgroups of voters in their willingness to sanction different nonprogrammatic strategies and find that lower income voters are more forgiving towards clientelistic exchanges than higher income voters. By contrast, voters’ partisan attachments do not influence voters’ evaluations of clientelistic exchanges.",
author = "Justesen, {Mogens Kamp} and Isabela Mares",
note = "CBS Library does not have access to the material; null ; Conference date: 29-08-2019 Through 01-09-2019",
year = "2019",
language = "English",
url = "https://connect.apsanet.org/apsa2019/",

}

Justesen, MK & Mares, I 2019, 'Clientelism and Voter Mobilization: The Impact of Positive and Negative Inducements' Paper presented at, Washington, DC, United States, 29/08/2019 - 01/09/2019, .

Clientelism and Voter Mobilization : The Impact of Positive and Negative Inducements. / Justesen, Mogens Kamp; Mares, Isabela.

2019. Paper presented at American Political Science Association, APSA Annual Meeting 2019, Washington, DC, United States.

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperResearchpeer-review

TY - CONF

T1 - Clientelism and Voter Mobilization

T2 - The Impact of Positive and Negative Inducements

AU - Justesen, Mogens Kamp

AU - Mares, Isabela

N1 - CBS Library does not have access to the material

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - In elections around the world, candidates seek to mobilize voters using a combination of positive and negative clientelist inducements. The former includes offers of gifts, money, and privileged access to policy benefits; the latter includes threats to cut off access to long-term benefits, social grants, or to worsen ongoing terms of exchange between brokers and voters. In this paper, we examine variation in the ways voters evaluate different types of clientelist strategies. The study of this variation in punishment thresholds is important for understanding the leeway enjoyed by politicians using different forms of clientelism. Our study relies on a vignette experiment embedded in a nation-wide survey (n=1500) conducted in 2017 in South Africa. The results suggest that voters punish candidates using threats more harshly than candidates using positive inducements. Secondly, we document the existence of variation across subgroups of voters in their willingness to sanction different nonprogrammatic strategies and find that lower income voters are more forgiving towards clientelistic exchanges than higher income voters. By contrast, voters’ partisan attachments do not influence voters’ evaluations of clientelistic exchanges.

AB - In elections around the world, candidates seek to mobilize voters using a combination of positive and negative clientelist inducements. The former includes offers of gifts, money, and privileged access to policy benefits; the latter includes threats to cut off access to long-term benefits, social grants, or to worsen ongoing terms of exchange between brokers and voters. In this paper, we examine variation in the ways voters evaluate different types of clientelist strategies. The study of this variation in punishment thresholds is important for understanding the leeway enjoyed by politicians using different forms of clientelism. Our study relies on a vignette experiment embedded in a nation-wide survey (n=1500) conducted in 2017 in South Africa. The results suggest that voters punish candidates using threats more harshly than candidates using positive inducements. Secondly, we document the existence of variation across subgroups of voters in their willingness to sanction different nonprogrammatic strategies and find that lower income voters are more forgiving towards clientelistic exchanges than higher income voters. By contrast, voters’ partisan attachments do not influence voters’ evaluations of clientelistic exchanges.

M3 - Paper

ER -

Justesen MK, Mares I. Clientelism and Voter Mobilization: The Impact of Positive and Negative Inducements. 2019. Paper presented at American Political Science Association, APSA Annual Meeting 2019, Washington, DC, United States.