High-Profile Corruption Convictions, Government Reactions, and Public Approval: A Comparative Analysis Across Levels of Democracy

IF 2.6 3区管理学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Governance-An International Journal of Policy Administration and Institutions Pub Date : 2025-04-30 DOI:10.1111/gove.70019

Manoel Gehrke, Feng Yang

{"title":"High-Profile Corruption Convictions, Government Reactions, and Public Approval: A Comparative Analysis Across Levels of Democracy","authors":"Manoel Gehrke, Feng Yang","doi":"10.1111/gove.70019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>This study investigates the political effects of corruption convictions involving former heads of government. Drawing on an original dataset of convictions and annual, nationally representative surveys covering over 130 countries from 2006 to 2019, we employ a difference-in-differences approach to analyze how these events shape government approval. Our findings indicate a notable contrast: in less democratic countries, convictions boost support for the government, whereas their effect is negligible in more democratic contexts. We reveal a key mechanism behind this divergence by showing how incumbent governments respond differently to the convictions. In less democratic settings, governments exploit corruption convictions by emphasizing the personal virtues of their leaders. Beyond identifying this critical condition that prompts political elites to adopt personalistic appeals, we also demonstrate how these appeals resonate with the public. These findings have implications for debates on the consequences of anti-corruption efforts and their relationship with populism.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48056,"journal":{"name":"Governance-An International Journal of Policy Administration and Institutions","volume":"38 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Governance-An International Journal of Policy Administration and Institutions","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gove.70019","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study investigates the political effects of corruption convictions involving former heads of government. Drawing on an original dataset of convictions and annual, nationally representative surveys covering over 130 countries from 2006 to 2019, we employ a difference-in-differences approach to analyze how these events shape government approval. Our findings indicate a notable contrast: in less democratic countries, convictions boost support for the government, whereas their effect is negligible in more democratic contexts. We reveal a key mechanism behind this divergence by showing how incumbent governments respond differently to the convictions. In less democratic settings, governments exploit corruption convictions by emphasizing the personal virtues of their leaders. Beyond identifying this critical condition that prompts political elites to adopt personalistic appeals, we also demonstrate how these appeals resonate with the public. These findings have implications for debates on the consequences of anti-corruption efforts and their relationship with populism.

查看原文本刊更多论文

高调的腐败定罪、政府反应和公众认可：跨民主水平的比较分析

本研究调查了涉及前政府首脑的腐败定罪的政治影响。根据2006年至2019年覆盖130多个国家的定罪和年度全国代表性调查的原始数据集，我们采用差异中的差异方法来分析这些事件如何影响政府批准。我们的研究结果表明了一个显著的对比：在不太民主的国家，信念会提高对政府的支持，而在更民主的环境中，信念的影响可以忽略不计。我们通过展示现任政府如何对这些信念做出不同的反应，揭示了这种分歧背后的关键机制。在不那么民主的环境中，政府通过强调其领导人的个人美德来利用腐败定罪。除了确定促使政治精英采取个人主义诉求的关键条件之外，我们还展示了这些诉求如何与公众产生共鸣。这些发现对关于反腐败努力的后果及其与民粹主义的关系的辩论具有启示意义。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Governance-An International Journal of Policy Administration and Institutions Multiple-

CiteScore

5.70

自引率

10.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： Governance provides a forum for the theoretical and practical discussion of executive politics, public policy, administration, and the organization of the state. Published in association with International Political Science Association''s Research Committee on the Structure & Organization of Government (SOG), it emphasizes peer-reviewed articles that take an international or comparative approach to public policy and administration. All papers, regardless of empirical focus, should have wider theoretical, comparative, or practical significance.