Suchergebnisse

Abstract
What candidates do voters perceive as best to combat corruption? While recent studies suggest that parties recruit women in order to restore legitimacy, we know less about whether voters believe that women candidates are better equipped than male candidates to fight corruption. This study suggests that women mayors are seen as more likely to fight corruption, yet that the credibility of both male and female politicians increases if they are ascribed traits traditionally seen as 'female,' including being risk averse or specializing in the provision of welfare services. Leveraging the diverse levels of socio-economic development, corruption, and gender equality across 25 EU member countries, our unique conjoint experiment shows support for these claims. Both women and male candidates benefit from being described as risk averse and prioritizing social welfare issues, while outsider status has no effect. Male candidates, however, have a consistent disadvantage, particularly among women voters. Moreover, the effects of candidate gender are strongest in areas of Europe with the highest levels of political gender equality.

AbstractWhile a growing body of work suggests that women representatives are less likely to be involved in corruption scandals, we know less about if changes in representation patterns also have implications for citizens' first-hand experiences with corruption in public service delivery. This study suggests that women elected representatives reduce street level bribery, in particular when the share of women increases in contexts where relatively few women are elected or when the absolute increase in women's representation is relatively large. Using newly collected data on the share of women in 128 regional level parliaments in 10 European countries and four rounds of the European Quality of Government Index (EQI) survey (2010–2021), our two-way fixed effects models show that on average, the proportion of women in regional parliaments is strongly associated with citizens' self-reported experiences of bribery across all countries and years. Furthermore, our difference-in-difference design shows that the level of bribery in public service provision dropped more sharply in regions that experienced a greater absolute or greater marginal increase in women's representation. Our results may be understood in light of women candidates placing priority on well-functioning and low corrupt public service provision and the important signals of inclusiveness, non-discrimination and decreased tolerance towards corruption that women's representation conveys to civil servants.

AbstractDisappointed by the numerous failures of anticorruption reforms, international organisations, scholars and policy makers increasingly place their hopes on measures aimed at enhancing gender equality and in particular increasing the inclusion of female representatives in elected assemblies. Yet most studies to date focus on aggregate measures of corruption and fail to explain why the correlation between women's representation and levels of corruption occurs. Using newly collected regional‐level, non‐perception‐based measures of corruption, this study distinguishes between different forms of corruption and shows that the inclusion of women in local councils is strongly negatively associated with the prevalence of both petty and grand forms of corruption. However, the reduction in corruption is primarily experienced among women. This suggests that female representatives seek to further two separate political agendas once they attain public office: the improvement of public service delivery in sectors that tend to primarily benefit women; and the breakup of male‐dominated collusive networks.

Scholars have argued that recruiting more women to office is an effective way to curb corruption; however, the more precise mechanisms underlying why this may be the case have remained unclear. We use meso‐level theories to elaborate on the relationship and suggest that institutional logics mediate the effect of gendered experiences on corruption. We make two propositions: First, we suggest that the relationship between more women and lower levels of corruption is weaker in the state administration than in the legislative arena, because the bureaucratic administrative logic absorbs actors' personal characteristics. Second, we refine our institutional argument by claiming that the stronger the bureaucratic principles are in the administration, the less gender matters. We validate our theory using data provided by the European Commission (EC) covering the EC countries and original data from the Quality of Government Institute Expert Surveys, covering a larger set of countries on a worldwide scale.

Concepts such as risk aversion and anxiety have received renewed attention in various strands of gender and politics research. Most contemporary scholars suggest that gender gaps in this area are related to social norms and stem from social learning rather than from inherent gender traits. Very few, however, elaborate on the gender variable to reach a fuller understanding of the dynamics at work. In this study, we examined gender gaps in levels of anxiety, an area closely related to risk aversion, and we applied a combination of categorical measures of gender distinguishing between "woman, "man," and "other" and scales capturing grades of femininity and masculinity in individuals. We label this approach fuzzy gender, and we suggest that it can be used to advance research in our field. The key finding is an interaction effect between categorical measures of gender and fuzzy gender: The more female characteristics in women, the higher the levels of anxiety. Moreover, there is no difference in levels of anxiety between men and women with few female characteristics. The data used draw from a large-scale survey among Swedish citizens in 2013.

Across surveys and regardless of controls, women in many Western countries are consistently more politically left-leaning than men. More recently, however, innovative measures of non-binary gender identity suggest important heterogeneity in political attitudes within the categories of 'women' and 'men'. Building from this, we study the direct and conditional associations between sex and non-binary gender on two political attitude dimensions: (1) left–right ideology; and (2) green/alternative/liberal versus traditionalist/authoritarian/nationalist opinions. Using a Swedish population-based survey from 2013, we find no evidence that political attitudes vary by non-binary gender identity alone, and only weak evidence that political attitudes vary by sex. However, supporting our conditional hypotheses, we find that gender (non)conformity matters significantly. Specifically, men with many masculine traits and women with many feminine traits stand more to the right and show more traditionalist/authoritarian/nationalist opinions than men and women who are less gender conforming.

The rationale for this study is that self-categorising rating scales are becoming increasingly popular in large-scale survey research moving beyond binary ways of measuring gender. We are referring here to the use of rating scales that are similar to graded scales capturing left–right or liberal–conservative political ideology, that is, scales that do not include predefinitions of the core concepts (femininity/masculinity, as compared to left/right or liberal/conservative). Yet, previous studies including such non-binary gender measures have paid little attention to potential effects of survey designs. Using an experimental set-up, we are able to show that sequencing of gender measurements influences the answers received. Men were especially affected by our treatments and rated themselves as significantly 'less masculine' when prompted to reason about the meaning of gender prior to self-categorisation on scales measuring degrees of femininity and masculinity. Moreover, self-categorising seems to trigger more biological understandings of gender than anticipated in theory.