Skip to main content

Political Corruption and Valence Issues

  • 657 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter is devoted to linking the literature on political corruption with that on valence issues. It discusses how the former literature has generally focused on understanding the consequences of political corruption, as well as the reasons for its diffusion in different countries, while discarding (with few exceptions) the reasons that could explain why political actors may have an incentive to campaign (in a stronger or weaker way) on political corruption issues, thereby precluding the possibility of investigating the consequences of that choice. It is argued that looking at political corruption using the framework provided by the valence issues literature helps to fill this gap.

Keywords

  • Corruption
  • Ideology
  • Valence issues
  • Policy issues
  • Party manifestoes
  • Corruption Perceptions Index

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-56735-8_1
  • Chapter length: 28 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-319-56735-8
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 1.1
Fig. 1.2
Fig. 1.3
Fig. 1.4

References

  • Abney, R., Adams, J., Clark, M., Easton, M., Ezrow, L., Kosmidis, S., et al. (2013). When Does Valence Matter? Heightened Valence Effects for Governing Parties During Election Campaigns. Party Politics, 19(1), 61–82.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J. (1998). Partisan Voting and Multiparty Spatial Competition: The Pressure for Responsible Parties. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 10(1), 5–31.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J., & Merrill, S. (2013). Policy-Seeking Candidates Who Value the Valence Attributes of the Winner. Public Choice, 155, 139–161.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J., Merrill, S., & Grofman, B. (2005). A Unified Theory of Party Competition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J., Merrill, S., Simas, E., & Stone, W. (2011). When Candidates Value Good Character: A Spatial Model with Applications to Congressional Elections. Journal of Politics, 73(1), 17–30.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Alt, J., & Lassen, D. (2003). The Political Economy of Institutions and Corruption in American States. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 15, 341–365.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C. J., & Tverdova, Y. V. (2003). Corruption, Political Allegiances, and Attitudes Toward Government in Contemporary Democracies. American Journal of Political Science, 47(1), 91–109.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, J., & Montinola, G. (2004). Veto Players and the Rule of Law in Emerging Democracies. Comparative Political Studies, 37(1), 55–87.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ansolabehere, S., & Snyder, J. M. (2000). Valence Politics and Equilibrium in Spatial Election Models. Public Choice, 103, 327–336.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Aragones, E., & Palfrey, T. (2002). Mixed Equilibrium in a Downsian Model with a Favored Candidate. Journal of Economic Theory, 103, 131–161.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bågenholm, A. (2013). Throwing the Rascals Out? The Electoral Effects of Corruption Allegations and Corruption Scandals in Europe 1981–2011. Crime Law and Social Change, 60(5), 595–609.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bågenholm, A., & Charron, N. (2014). Do Politics in Europe Benefit from Politicising Corruption? West European Politics, 37(5), 903–931.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Benoit, W. L. (1999). Seeing Spots: A Functional Analysis of Presidential Television Advertisements from 1952–1996. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benoit, W. L. (2007). Communication in Political Campaigns. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohara, A., Mitchell, N., & Mittendorff, C. (2004). Compound Democracy and the Control of Corruption: A Cross-Country Investigation. Policy Studies Journal, 32, 481–499.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, D. J., & Geer, J. C. (2007). Beyond Negativity: The Effects of Incivility on the Electorate. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 1–16.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, D., Touchton, M., & Whitford, A. (2011). Political Polarization as a Constraint on Corruption: A Cross-National Comparison. World Development, 39(9), 1516–1529.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Budge, I., Crewe, I., & Farlie, D. (Eds.). (1976). Party Identification and Beyond. London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Budge, I., & Farlie, D. J. (1983). Explaining and Predicting Elections: Issue Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-Three Democracies. London: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Budge, I., Klingemann, H. D., Volkens, A., Bara, J., & Tanenbaum, E. (Eds.). (2001). Mapping Policy Preferences. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burden, B. (2004). Candidate Positioning in US Congressional Elections. British Journal of Political Science, 34(2), 211–227.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A., Converse, P., Miller, W., & Stokes, D. (1960). The American Voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, E., & Golden, M. (2006). Electoral Systems, District Magnitude and Corruption. British Journal of Political Science, 37(1), 115–137.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, E., Golden, M., & Hill, S. J. (2010). Legislative Malfeasance and Political Accountability. World Politics, 62(2), 177–220.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, E. C. (2005). Electoral Incentives for Political Corruption Under Open-List Proportional Representation. Journal of Politics, 67(3), 716–730.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Charron, N. (2016). Do Corruption Measures have a Perception Problem? Assessing the Relationship Between Experiences and Perceptions of Corruption Among Citizens and Experts. European Political Science Review, 8(1), 147–171.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Charron, N., & Bågenholm, A. (2016). Ideology, Party Systems and Corruption Voting in European Democracies. Electoral Studies, 41, 35–49.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Charron, N., Dijkstra, L., & Lapuente, V. (2014). Regional Governance Matters: Quality of Government Within European Union Member States. Regional Studies, 48(1), 68–90.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Charron, N., & Lapuente, V. (2010). Does Democracy Produce Quality of Government? European Journal of Political Research, 49, 443–470.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, E., & Woo, J. (2010). Political Corruption, Economic Performance, and Electoral Outcomes: A Cross-National Analysis. Contemporary Politics, 16(3), 249–262.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, M. (2009). Valence and Electoral Outcomes in Western Europe, 1976–1998. Electoral Studies, 28, 111–122.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, M. (2014). Does Public Opinion Respond to Shifts in Party Valence? A Cross-National Analysis of Western Europe, 1976–2002. West European Politics, 37(1), 91–112.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, H. D., Sanders, D., Steward, M. C., & Whiteley, P. (2004). Political Choice in Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, H. D., Sanders, D., Steward, M. C., & Whiteley, P. (2010). Performance Politics and the British Voter. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, H. D., Sanders, M. S., Stewart, M. C., & Whiteley, P. (2009). The American Voter’s British Cousin. Electoral Studies, 28, 632–641.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Cordero, G., & Blais, A. (2017). Is a Corrupt Government Totally Unacceptable? West European Politics. doi:10.1080/01402382.2017.1280746.

  • Cutler, F. (2002). The Simplest Shortcut of All: Sociodemographic Characteristics and Electoral Choice. Journal of Politics, 64(2), 466–490.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • De Sio, L., & Weber, T. (2014). Issue Yield: A Model of Party Strategy in Multidimensional Space. American Political Science Review, 108(4), 870–885.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • de Sousa, L., & Moriconi, M. (2013). Why Voters Do Not Throw the Rascals Out? A Conceptual Framework for Analyzing Electoral Punishment of Corruption. Crime Law and Social Change, 60, 471–502.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Della Porta, D., & Vannucci, A. (1997). The Resources of Corruption: Some Reflections from the Italian Case. Crime, Law and Social Change, 27, 231–254.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Downs, A. (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ecker, A., Glinitzer, K., & Meyer, T. M. (2016). Corruption Performance Voting and the Electoral Context. European Political Science Review, 8(3), 333–354.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Enelow, J., & Hinich, M. (1982). Non Spatial Candidate Characteristics and Electoral Competition. Journal of Politics, 44, 115–130.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Enelow, J., & Hinich, M. (1984). The Spatial Theory of Voting: An Introduction. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engler, S. (2016). Corruption and Electoral Support for New Political Parties in Central and Eastern Europe. West European Politics, 39(2), 278–304.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Escresa, L., & Picci, L. (2016). Trends in Corruptions Around the World. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research. doi:10.1007/s10610-016-9317-y.

  • Evans, G., & Chzhen, K. (2016). Re-evaluating the Valence Model of Political Choice. Political Science Research and Methods, 4(1), 199–220.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Feld, S. L., & Grofman, B. (1991). Incumbency Advantage, Voter Loyalty and the Benefit of the Doubt. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 3(2), 115–137.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fernández-Vázquez, P., Barberá, P., & Rivero, G. (2016). Rooting Out Corruption or Rooting for Corruption? The Heterogeneous Electoral Consequences of Scandals. Political Science Research and Methods, 4(2), 379–397.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ferraz, C., & Finan, F. S. (2008). Exposing Corrupt Politicians: The Effects of Brazil’s Publicly Released Audits on Electoral Outcomes. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123(2), 703–745.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fiorina, M. (1981). Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerring, J., & Thacker, S. C. (2004). Political Institutions and Corruption: The Role of Unitarism and Parliamentarism. British Journal of Political Science, 34(2), 295–330.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Green, J. (2007). When Voters and Parties Agree: Valence Issues and Party Competition. Political Studies, 55(3), 629–655.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Green, J., & Hobolt, S. B. (2008). Owning the Issue Agenda: Party Strategies and Vote Choices in British Elections. Electoral Studies, 27(3), 460–476.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Green, J., & Jennings, W. (2012). Valence as Macro-Competence: An Analysis of Mood in Party Competence Evaluations in Great Britain. British Journal of Political Science, 42(2), 311–343.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Green, J., & Jennings, W. (2017). Valence. In K. Arzheimer, J. Evans, & M. Lewis-Beck (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Electoral Behaviour (pp. 538–560). Los Angeles: Sage.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Groseclose, T. (2001). A Model of Candidate Location When One Candidate Has a Valence Advantage. American Journal of Political Science, 45(4), 862–886.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, S., Davoodi, H., & Alonso-Terme, R. (2002). Does Corruption Affect Income Inequality and Poverty? Economics of Governance, 3(1), 23–45.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hanley, S., & Sikk, A. (2014). Economy, Corruption or Floating Voters? Explaining the Breakthroughs of Anti-Establishment Reform Parties in Eastern Europe. Party Politics. doi:10.1177/1354068814550438.

  • Heller, W. B., Kyriacou, A. P., & Roca-Sagalés, O. (2016). Institutional Checks and Corruption: The Effect of Formal Agenda Access on Governance. European Journal of Political Research, 55, 681–701.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Holmberg, S., & Rothstein, B. (Eds.). (2012). Good Government: The Relevance of Political Science. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • John, P., Bertelli, A., Jennings, W., & Bevan, S. (2013). Policy Agendas in British Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kaase, M. (1994). Is There Personalisation in Politics? Candidates and Voting Behavior in Germany. International Political Science Review, 15, 211–230.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Klašnja, M., Tucker, J. A., & Deegan-Krause, K. (2016). Pocketbook vs. Sociotropic Corruption Voting. British Journal of Political Science, 46(1), 67–94.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ko, K., & Samajdar, A. (2010). Evaluation of International Corruption Indexes: Should We Believe Them or Not? The Social Science Journal, 47(3), 508–540.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kostadinova, T. (2009). Abstain or Rebel: Corruption Perceptions and Voting in East European Elections. Politics and Policy, 37(4), 691–714.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kostadinova, T. (2012). Political Corruption in Eastern Europe. Politics after Communism. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krause, S., & Méndez, F. (2009). Corruption and Elections: An Empirical Study for a Cross-Section of Countries. Economics and Politics, 21(2), 179–200.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kumlin, S., & Esaiasson, P. (2012). Scandal Fatigue? Scandal Elections and Satisfaction with Democracy in Western Europe, 1977–2007. British Journal of Political Science, 42, 263–282.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kunicova, J., & Rose-Ackerman, S. (2005). Electoral Rules and Constitutional Structures as Constraints on Corruption. British Journal of Political Science, 35, 573–606.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lipset, S., & Lenz, G. (2000). Corruption, Culture, and Market. In L. Harrison & S. Huntington (Eds.), Culture Matters. How Values Shape Human Progress (pp. 112–124). New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manzetti, L., & Wilson, C. J. (2007). Why Do Corrupt Governments Maintain Public Support? Comparative Political Studies, 40(8), 949–970.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mattes, K., Spezio, M., Kim, H., Todorov, A., Adolphs, R., & Alvarez, R. M. (2010). Predicting Election Outcomes from Positive and Negative Trait Assessments of Candidate Images. Political Psychology, 31(1), 41–58.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mauro, P. (1995). Corruption and Growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(3), 681–712.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, J. A., & Dominguez, J. (1998). Mexicans React to Electoral Fraud and Political Corruption: An Assessment of Public Opinion and Voting Behavior. Electoral Studies, 17, 483–503.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mishler, W., & Rose, R. (2001). What are the Origins of Political Trust? Testing Institutional and Cultural Theories in Post-Communist Societies. Comparative Political Studies, 34(1), 30–62.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mondak, J. J. (1995). Competence, Integrity, and the Electoral Success of Congressional Incumbents. Journal of Politics, 57(4), 1043–1069.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Montinola, G. R., & Jackman, R. W. (2002). Sources of Corruption: A Cross-Country Study. British Journal of Political Science, 32(1), 147–170.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mughan, A. (2000). Media and the Presidentialization of Parliamentary Elections. Basingstoke, Hants: Palgrave.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Nyhuis, D. (2016). Electoral Effects of Candidate Valence. Electoral Studies, 42, 33–41.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Pardos-Prado, S. (2011). Valence Beyond Consensus: Party Competence and Policy Dispersion from a Comparative Perspective. Electoral Studies, 31(2), 342–352.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, J. G., & Welch, S. (1980). The Effects of Charges of Corruption on Voting Behavior in Congressional Elections. American Political Science Review, 74(3), 697–708.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Petrocik, J. R. (1996). Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study. American Journal of Political Science, 40(3), 825–850.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Razafindrakoto, M., & Roubaud, F. (2010). Are International Databases on Corruption Reliable? A Comparison of Expert Opinion Surveys and Household Surveys in Sub-Saharan Africa. World Development, 38(8), 1057–1069.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, S. R. (1999). Strategic Voting in the 1996 Japanese General Election. Comparative Political Studies, 32(2), 257–270.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, D. B. (1976). A Theory of Party Competition. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, B., & Uslaner, E. M. (2005). All for All: Equality, Corruption, and Social Trust. World Politics, 58(1), 41–72.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Sanbonmatsu, K. (2002). Gender Stereotypes and Vote Choice. American Journal of Political Science, 46(1), 20–34.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Schofield, N., & Sened, I. (2006). Multiparty Democracy: Parties, Elections and Legislative Politics in Multiparty Systems. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Seligson, M. A. (2002). The Impact of Corruption on Regime Legitimacy: A Comparative Study of Four Latin American Countries. Journal of Politics, 84(2), 408–433.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1993). Corruption. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3), 599–617.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Stokes, D. E. (1963). Spatial Models of Party Competition. American Political Science Review, 57, 368–377.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Stokes, D. E. (1992). Valence Politics. In D. Kavanagh (Ed.), Electoral Politics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, W. J., & Simas, E. N. (2010). Candidate Valence and Ideological Positions in U.S. House Elections. American Journal of Political Science, 54, 371–388.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Tavits, M. (2007). Clarity of Responsibility and Corruption. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 218–229.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Todorov, A., Mandisodza, A. N., Goren, A., & Hall, C. C. (2005). Inferences of Competence from Faces Predict Election Outcomes. Science, 308, 1623–1626.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Treisman, D. (2000). The Causes of Corruption: A Cross-National Study. Journal of Public Economics, 76(3), 399–457.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Volkens, A., Lehmann, P., Matthieß, T., Merz, N., Regel, S., & Werner, A. (2016). The Manifesto Data Collection. Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR). Version 2016a. Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB).

    Google Scholar 

  • Welsch, H. (2004). Corruption, Growth, and the Environment: A Cross–Country Analysis. Environment and Development Economics, 9(5), 663–693.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Whiteley, P., Clarke, H., Sanders, D., & Stuart, M. (2016). Hunting the Snark: A Reply to “Re-Evaluating Valence Models of Political Choice”. Political Science Research and Methods, 4(1), 221–240.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luigi Curini .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Curini, L. (2018). Political Corruption and Valence Issues. In: Corruption, Ideology, and Populism. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56735-8_1

Download citation