Why do voters sometimes support corrupt politicians? And can putting forward women candidates help parties recover from corruption scandals? In this episode, regular host Liz David-Barrett speaks with Emily Elia about her experimental research on voter behaviour and corruption in Latin American democracies. The conversation delves into the "feminization strategy", examining the level to which deploying women candidates after corruption scandals actually works to restore party credibility. The conversation also explores emerging questions about who becomes an anti-corruption fighter in politics and whether voters can tell genuine reformers from those just paying lip service to clean government.
Read more about Emily's research into gender stereotypes and electoral accountability here: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-024-09943-9
And on the role of ideological proximity to the opposition in "corruption voting" here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0261379422001019?via%3Dihub
All content for KickBack - The Global Anticorruption Podcast is the property of KickBack and is served directly from their servers
with no modification, redirects, or rehosting. The podcast is not affiliated with or endorsed by Podjoint in any way.
Why do voters sometimes support corrupt politicians? And can putting forward women candidates help parties recover from corruption scandals? In this episode, regular host Liz David-Barrett speaks with Emily Elia about her experimental research on voter behaviour and corruption in Latin American democracies. The conversation delves into the "feminization strategy", examining the level to which deploying women candidates after corruption scandals actually works to restore party credibility. The conversation also explores emerging questions about who becomes an anti-corruption fighter in politics and whether voters can tell genuine reformers from those just paying lip service to clean government.
Read more about Emily's research into gender stereotypes and electoral accountability here: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-024-09943-9
And on the role of ideological proximity to the opposition in "corruption voting" here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0261379422001019?via%3Dihub
126. Dan Haberly on illicit global financial networks
KickBack - The Global Anticorruption Podcast
27 minutes 4 seconds
9 months ago
126. Dan Haberly on illicit global financial networks
This episode dives into the shadowy world of illicit financial networks with Dr Dan Haberly, whose research with the GI ACE program addresses significant knowledge gaps around the opaque structures of the global economy. Dan introduces the Regulation of Illicit Financial Flows (RIFF) dataset, which aims to track regulatory progress in financial transparency. The discussion examines the geographical reorganisation and persistence of illicit networks and the role of various jurisdictions in facilitating illicit finance.
Learn more about Dan and GI ACE's ground-breaking research here:
https://giace.org/resources/from-secrecy-to-scrutiny-a-new-map-of-illicit-global-financial-networks-and-regulation/
https://giace.org/resources/the-regulation-of-illicit-financial-flows-riff-dataset/
KickBack - The Global Anticorruption Podcast
Why do voters sometimes support corrupt politicians? And can putting forward women candidates help parties recover from corruption scandals? In this episode, regular host Liz David-Barrett speaks with Emily Elia about her experimental research on voter behaviour and corruption in Latin American democracies. The conversation delves into the "feminization strategy", examining the level to which deploying women candidates after corruption scandals actually works to restore party credibility. The conversation also explores emerging questions about who becomes an anti-corruption fighter in politics and whether voters can tell genuine reformers from those just paying lip service to clean government.
Read more about Emily's research into gender stereotypes and electoral accountability here: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-024-09943-9
And on the role of ideological proximity to the opposition in "corruption voting" here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0261379422001019?via%3Dihub
