Corruption & Women's Leadership
Mexico has elected its first female president, Claudia Sheinbaum. Massive media coverage tends to highlight Latin America’s gender quotas, alongside rising support for women leaders. But these analyses do not explain why women have been elected despite pervasive machismo. How can we resolve that paradox?
My answer: corruption.
I wrote this piece a year ago, but am reposting it today to highlight important research by political scientists that appears to have been overlooked..
When voters are concerned about corruption, they may favour female outsiders. But this effect is contingent: on democracy and stereotypes of women as virtuous outsiders. Together, this may help explain why Latin American’s rising share of female leaders. In this essay, I share evidence that:
Latin Americans think there is very high corruption
Perceived corruption can shape elections
Women are often stereotyped as less corrupt
Distrust in government is associated with support for women leaders
These effects are strongest in countries where women are political outsiders
Only in democracies does perceived corruption elevate female leadership
It follows that Latin Americans would favour women leaders.
Perceived corruption can shape elections
Latin Americans and Italians (for example) think corruption is very high (as shown in the map above). This has impacted their elections.
‘The Clean Hands investigation’ in early 1990s Italy uncovered widespread corruption. 23% of parliamentarians were charged with corruption. 75% of the members of the two incumbent parties were found to be corrupt. Corruption was a major public scandal - amply covered by newspapers, television and radio. Many voters lost trust in government and increasingly favoured populists.
‘Operation Car Wash’ in Brazil exposed massive bribery at Petrobas (the state-owned oil company): presidents, governors and businessmen were all in cahoots. Over a thousand warrants were issued, hundreds were arrested. Voters lost faith in the incumbent Workers’ Party. Seizing this opportunity, Bolsonaro positioned himself as an outsider, promising to combat corruption.
When voters are concerned about corruption, they want leaders who will clean up.
Women are often stereotyped as less corrupt
In the USA, female candidates reduce strong suspicions of election fraud. 70% of surveyed Brazilians believed that more women in politics to promote greater honesty. In Mexico City, over 50% of women said that women leaders are more honest. Respondents to an MTurk poll likewise predicted that police corruption would be reduced by hiring more female officers.
Gender stereotypes impact behaviour. Female procurement officers in Italy are 34% less likely to be investigated for corruption. They are presumed wholesome and pure!
Distrust in government is associated with support for women leaders
Nearly half of Latin Americans have very little trust in their national legislature. In Paraguay, it’s as high as 77%. Public sector corruption is also seen as pervasive. 94% of Argentinians believe corruption is common.
In Latin American countries with strong distrust in legislatures, political parties tend to nominate more women. Kendall Funk and colleagues show this holds even controlling for party ideology, quota laws, women’s existing representation, and proportional representation. In Mexico, audits and revelations of corruption increase the likelihood of women being elected.
Corruption also affects voters’ preferences. Latin Americans who distrust their government tend to favour female leaders. In places where there are weak checks and balances (and corruption is more down to individual integrity), then voters may want women.
Media companies may reinforce these perceptions. Slovakia’s newspapers have tended to portray female candidates as much more communal - that is, selfless, compassionate, and cooperative. In the wake of massive corruption scandals, Čaputová was portrayed as a decent outsider, who could bring about political transformation. She was subsequently elected president.
These effects are strongest in countries where women are political outsiders
Distrust in government is only associated with a preference for female leaders in Latin American countries where women are untested outsiders, occupying less than a third of cabinet seats. Above this threshold, distrust no longer breeds female favouritism.
So it may only be in more patriarchal countries, where female representation is low and women are stereotyped as perfectly innocent, that perceived corruption fosters votes for women. Once women come to power and fail to quell corruption (or even become personally complicit), then these stereotypes dissolve. Voters realise they are equally corrupt!
There’s probably a ‘Goldilocks level of patriarchy’. That sample was all from Latin America (which is one of the more gender equal regions in the world). Under male-dominated institutions (like Egypt, Russia and China), the obstacles may be insurmountable.
Once in office, women appear to be punished more harshly for corruption.
Male politicians are systematically more likely to survive corruption scandals - across Latin America, the Philippines and South Korea. Ryan Carlin et al find that men are typically exonerated. In Brazil, for example, Lula da Silva and Dilma Rouseff presided over massive corruption scandals, yet Lula was re-elected and Rouseff was unseated. In Malawi too, Joyce Banda paid a heavier price for corruption scandals than her male predecessors.
[Terror attacks have a similar effect, hurting female but not male presidents].
In sum, corruption combined with gender stereotypes seems to benefit women candidates, but only before they gain power!
Only in democracies does perceived corruption elevate female leadership
Women are more likely to serve as finance ministers when corruption increases, but this effect is strongest in countries with free and fair elections or presidential systems.
Under autocracies, voters’ stereotypes and preferences make no difference.
Cross-national research by Esarey and Schwindt-Bayer likewise finds that the link between corruption and women’s representation is strongest in countries where there is a high chance of corruption being detected and punished by voters. Where press freedom is low, the association between corruption and female leadership is zero.
What does this tell us about patriarchy?
Recent research on corruption and gender has actually rocked my priors; it indicates that the reasons for rising female leadership could actually vary around the world.
Female representation has soared in Latin America. It has not only converged with but actually outpaced Europe. This could reflect rising female labour force participation, as well as feminist activism for gender quotas.
But what about endogeneity, why was that activism successful? It’s not that Latin American voters are super woke. 40% of Mexicans think a man is justified in beating his wife if she is unfaithful. Europeans are actually more likely to endorse gender equality. Latin American female representation has risen despite strong machismo.
One possible explanation is that Latin America’s ongoing democratisation has enabled media to reveal corruption, cultivating support for female outsiders, who are seen as more virtuous and likely to clean up. There may be similar dynamics in Italy and Eastern Europe.
This may also explain why - notwithstanding Italians’ patriarchal nostalgia and attacks on female politicians - ‘Brothers of Italy’ are nevertheless led by a woman.
Italian politicians are widely distrusted, suspected of embezzling public funds and enriching their cronies. Women, however, are often stereotyped as less corrupt. Together, these perceptions may help explain why patriarchs cheer for Georgia Meloni - who presents herself as “Woman, Mother, Italian, Christian”. She presents right-wing politics with greater ‘purity’.
Alice,
You bring forward a lot of great stuff about international cross-cultural, cross-continental divergences on gender related matters. I suspect quite a lot of it makes you appreciate being an American.
However, do you have, or will you be sharing any research results or insights about divergences about gender related matters *within* the United States, at the aspirational level, or lived experience level, across geographic regional lines, socioeconomic class lines, racial lines, generational lines, educational lines, religious, political, or any other demographic factors?
> Latin Americans and Italians (for example) think corruption is very high (as shown in the map above).
Informative article, but minor correction: The CPI is a collation of (outside) expert assessments of corruption in a country, it's not a poll of Latins/Italians/etc. themselves on the level of corruption in Latam/Italy/etc. Though the point should still be true because there are good correlations between the CPI and country polls on perceived and experienced corruption.