1 | P a g e
THE ROLE OF ETHNIC VOTING AND VOTE BUYING IN SHAPING THE PROVISION OF
PUBLIC GOODS IN DEVELOPING DEMOCRACIES
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Ethnic voting and vote deals definition.
A situation where ethnic voting and deal-making occur simultaneously so often present a
problem for the political stability and democratic institution especially in developing nations.
Ethnic voting with identity politics determines on consolidated power group risks, while others
exclude. As Auerbach et al. (2022) highlight, when the voters are guided by choosing ethnic
identity instead of other determinants, including ones about policy preferences and candidate
capabilities, the social divisions and ethic disparities increase. On top of that, political parties
incompetently leverage ethnic voting blocs which in turn leads to politicians prioritizing the
needs of their own ethnic base as well as ignoring the concerns of the others which might get
aggravated, in turn, accentuating ethnic divides. At the mean time, addition of influence of vote
deal to budget complicate the electoral situation with another transactional element intervening
into political process. However, Oladapo et al. (2020) highlight approval deals as those in which
the exchange of vote support is likely to take the form of favors, resources, or any other form of
exchange which will clearly undermine the integrity of democratic elections and erode public
trust in the political system. Although vote deals may offer a politicians an immediate benefit to
gains advantage over others in an election, they tend to fail to keep up with long-term principles
and values of a democracy and governance. Furthermore, the vote deals tend to serve as means
for the creation of corruption circle and dynamics where politicians pursue the narrow interests
of few selected categories instead of the common good. As ethnic voting and vote deals pose
more challenges for democracy, the solutions must be multidimensional and inclusive as well,
2 | P a g e
and they should focus on strengthening democratic institutions, on mandatory civic education
and on stimulate inclusive political involvement. Auerbach et al. (2022) emphasize that
developing cross-ethnic conclaves, increasing political accountability, and promoting inclusive
governing systems, are the right areas to begin in order to tackle the issue of ethnic voting.
Likewise, combating the real cause of vote deals advocates for changes such as an increase in
transparency in electoral financing, effective anti-corruption measures and an empowerment of
the civil society which will keep the electorate in check.
1.2 Public goods provision as a crucial aspect of establishment of democracies in developing
countries
In countries in the process of democratization, the public programs not only problem of
the governance but also one of the facets of the deformation and nation-building. Auerbach et al.
assert that public goods increase people's welfare and as such help to ensure fairness for
everyone, regardless of their position in society (2022). Education, like a case in point, does not
only provide individuals the skillful resources that head for economic participation that is
essential, but it also enhances a person’s critical thinking, and this is needed for civic
engagement. This way, health care access to public health is also crucial for improving the
outcomes of patients and reducing their burden of disease in society, which results in social
stability and economic productivity. Nonetheless, the issue of proper the delivery of public goods
in developing democracies is often hampered by various systematic problems. For instance,
corruption only serves to take away limited resources from providing essential services hence
undermining the trust of the public in the government agencies and institutions (Oladapo, et al.,
2020). However, this capability is not always given, as resource constraints and other priorities
may hamper governments' failure to invest sufficiently in the public, especially in the cases of
3 | P a g e
development of countries where factors, for example, conflict or economic instability hinder
economic growth. The institutional weaknesses such as depending on bureaucratic inefficiencies
and lack of transparency can also hamper delivering public services properly which in turn
increase the social inequalities and the legitimacy of the government is affected by it. Those
public services in democratic developing nations could be dealt with through sometimes
complicated measures of good governance, accountability and management of resources for
investing public funds. Auerbach et al. (2022) consider that transforming the institutional culture
is imperative in the fight against corruption and to ensure that resources are fairly allocated and
used. This can be achieved through transparency initiatives and independent oversight bodies.
Furthermore, robust institutions implement and administration capabilities are set up to enhance
service delivery efficiency so that public goods reach the most people in need.
2.0 Ethnic Voting and Its Extent
2.1 The ethnic loyalties and voting patterns
Ethnic voting is a multi-faceted concept dependant on numerous background factors,
such as historical, cultural, socio-economic, and political, that mix up in the social diversity.
Lundstedt and Edgell (2022) reinforce the fact that ethnic groups usually end up politicized in
the democracies that are still in the development process because of the historical dualities,
social inequalities, and power relationships affecting the interactions between the communities.
In this space, people could regard elections not only as a battle in between political parties but
also a kind of representation of ethnic nationalism and identity. Manifestation of this
phenomenon can result in ethnic voting blocs when some members of the community vote for
candidates or political parties whose views are believed to be similar to individuals and their
group's interests or grievances. The existence of the ethnic voting bloc is accompanied with dire
4 | P a g e
consequences in the formation of democratic governance and the achievement of the inclusive
political representation. Ethnic identities, rather than ideological or policy considerations, may be
given more importance by voters which in turn can condon the continuing of the politics of
conflict and disenfranchise minority groups within electoral processes (Lundstedt & Edgell
2022). Besides, the political elites' ethnic instrumentalization can be used as a fuel to intergroup
tensions and it will be difficult to create inclusive and stable societies. Similarly, along ethnically
defined ballot boxes electoral power struggles could accordingly concentrate on ethnic minorities
drawing rather than articulating policies being inclusive to solve all citizen’s needs. Considering
the complexity of the ethnic voting, the resolution of the issue requires the employment of
several directions that focus on the development of sectarian politics, inter-group discussion, and
inclusive governance. Ethnic identities impact the electoral behavior, according to the article by
Lundstedt and Edgell (2022) and the efforts to reduce this involvement should be in two main
ways: through facilitation of cross-cutting cleavages and promotion of issue-based politics. Also
acts that target to strengthening the democratic institutions, offering the proper educations, and
reconciliation of the groups are other ways to build the trust among diverse populations so that
they can't be easily manipulated by the ethnicity in their decision making process.
2.2 Clientelism and customer politics and relationships
Clientelism and customer politics are two distinguishable areas of corruption that
characterize many developing democracies where political elites often build patronage networks
to assure and to maintain their voters (Carlson, 2021). As a key element of clientelist politics,
there stand brokerage parties, which are the people or groups of people who play the role of
intermediaries between the politicians and the voters, who facilitate the conditions for the
exchange of benefits for a political loyalty. These brokers do this as a business at the local level,
5 | P a g e
relying on their personal contacts and influence to spread the products, services, and even favors
to the constituents and quid pro quo in exchange for their electoral endorsements. These
functional rather than democratic aspects of politics thwart the values of responsible and
representative governance, since elected officials often overlook the public’s interests to
prioritize their partisans instead. Budgetary allocations in clientelistic democracies are not
necessarily directed to the required investment areas of a country and this is a very important
factor in hampering the development process in many developing democracies. Instead of being
given out regardless of achievements, subsistence, or public welfare, resources are allocated to
workers with ties to politicians or electoral purposes (Carlson, 2021). Opening up certain
benefits to certain people spreads inequality and aggravates inequalities in education, health care,
infrastructure, and other essential services. In addition, it has a tendency of generating a culture
of dependency between citizens and the politicians, who may no longer be dealing with the
issues of the society as a whole, but instead they get the favors from the politicians as well as the
assistance they seek from them in exchange for their vote in the coming elections. The increased
clientelism that is present in the governments of many developing democracies is a big problem
they have to face. This problem is concerned with the establishment of stable governance and the
promotion of equitable development. Similarly, clientelism can cause public disappointment with
democracy and undermine trust in political institutions by consisting of patronage networks and
preventing the distribution of public goods. Allowing for clientelism presumes given a complete
spectrum of planned reforms which can include institution-building, promotion of accountability
and transparency and building a culture of civic engagement and participation.
6 | P a g e
2.3 Distribution of public goods on the ethos principle
In some democracies that are new and poor, clientalist brokers are the ones, whom
politicians hire to act as their messengers to the citizens (Carlson, 2021). They are the brokers
who mediate in the processes of goods, services, and favors in exchange for political support,
hence the continued reliance on clientistic networks whose actors rely on personal connections
rather than broader public concerns. This transactional manner of politics endangers the
accountability of the elected officials as they use political means rather than merit or need to
allocate the resources (Lassou, Kaplan, Robinson & Medina, 2024). Ethos principle is amended
to refer to the business of politics and public procurement. Political elites abuse control of the
public resources to their benefit by boosting their power and selfish interests. Harding (2020)
observes that the ideology which is based on the ethos in African rural democracy forms the
foundation of the resource allocation and further deepens these inequalities Therefore, which
implies means that electoral processes are at risk of manipulation and public goods are
commonly cultivated to preserve the bases of political cooperation. Similarly, marginalized
communities become voiceless because the funds intended to help them benefit only those
having political connections or with voting attractiveness, not responding to the issues which are
real and the desired agenda. Clientelism and ethos principle come to the fore all through making
the delivery of good and efficient public service being not efficient as well and also perpetuating
poverty and exclusion in the poor population. Also, the process of distributing the equitable
services for the public which are plagued by the clientelist brokers results in the democratic
regulation of governance and inclusive development (Carlson, 2021). Thus, the services’ social
cohesion, and the greater social justice is hardly achieved by clientelism, which multiplies the
divisions in the society and leaves the financial resources in the accounts of the elites and their
7 | P a g e
peers. Consequently marginalized groups at among these more and more as a result reinforcing
social prejudice and diminishing credibility of democratic institutions.
3.0 Voter-Buying and its Implications
3.1 Definitions and types of the cases and forms of vote buying
Voter-buying is usually associated with fraud in many electoral process where aspiring
politicians employ various techniques to influence voters through cash, goods, or services trade
(Kao et al., 2022). These methods can be presented in various ways—like direct payment to
votes or distributing goods and favor, even claims on future benefits for supporting the
candidates. Reported incidences of vote-buying range in different election systems, some using
coercive methods, and others using enticing techniques (Cheeseman et al., 2021). In some cases
of election moneys voters are forced or threatened this way or in other cases this is done directly
without being hidden or removed from the society. Therefore the difference come from the
strategies and resources available to various actors at a particular election campaign. While, the
assessment of impact vote-buying cases on electoral integrity and democratic procedures could
be feasible only if vote-buying complexities and wide spread of this are properly understood. In
many voting systems around the world, vote-buying increasingly affects fairness and trust in the
electoral processes where the citizens begin questioning the democratic governance, integrity,
and accountability of office-seekers (Kao et al., 2022). While voters should not be bribed by
politicians for their votes as a result of which the reason voting is undermined would be the favor
of immediate benefits or favors, the whole process of elections gets distorted, and the interests of
the public may not be represented properly. Additionally, vote-buying practices can form
inequality and keep on the clientele networks as the political actors concentrate on the
transactional representative of the election rather than the policy issues support (Cheeseman et
8 | P a g e
al., 2021). Consequently, powerless people are left behind, which has the effect of extending
their socio-economic marginalization inside the politics. Last but not least, to cope with the vote
buying therefore it is imperative to adopt a holistic strategy that addresses both the demand and
supply sides of the electoral corruption (Cheeseman et al., 2021). It encompasses, for example,
the empowering existing electoral institutions, the improvement of transparency and
accountability in campaign financing, and the enhancement of civil culture and awareness about
election rights.
3.2 Electoral process' distortion and accountability plunge
The rise of vote-buying compromises the effectiveness of electoral procedures as it
bolsters the anti-democratic values and tarnishes the credibility of electoral results (Agyepong et
al., 2021). This vote-buying commoditizes the electoral franchise. Reduced to an exchange of
votes for immediate returns or favors, the voters' preferences and policy considerations are not
taken well. It happens that the process of electoral race becomes biased and the fairness and the
transparency of the entire process is endangered (Vande, 2020). Moreover, the accountability of
elected officials to the electorate is also undermined. When candidates steal elections through
illicit means like vote buying, they may see themselves as serving only the interest of their
patrons instead of the general public, thus they do not being to respond to the needs of citizens.
The result is administrative challenges since the entire governance process is mismanaged. In
addition to that, the vote buying and bribery keeps the system on a vicious cycle of corruption
and clients’ presence. Politicians who practice vote-buying do not care about being elected
through fair means, rather they are more concerned about winning elections and they lose
interest in educating their voters as well as providing public service. It keeps the culture of
corruption alive and is one of the factors that hinders the advance of more transparency,
9 | P a g e
accountability and democratic consolidation. Conversely, vote-buying creates the incentive of
politicians for means that would help them in getting short-term electoral gains over the long-
term developmental objectives, hence there is a misallocation of resources and a neglect of
substantive policy issues (Agyepong et al., 2021). Hence, the manipulation of the election is a
matter that interferes with the way the administration is done, lowers the quality of democracy,
and discourages efforts to improve democratic representation, promote good governance, and
inclusive development.
3.3 Non-equitable distribution of public goods and utilities
The vulnerability brought on by vote-buying is not only restricted to the electoral arena
but also goes beyond the distribution of public goods and utilities where it worsens the existing
social economic inequalities (Agyepong et al., 2021). Politicians who are involved in vote selling
tend to allocate public resources equitably to the areas where they received votes and henceforth,
they overlook the whole public interest and maintain the proof of differences in access to
important services ( Kao et al., 2022). It does so through preferential treatment of some tied
groups and not others which in turn reinforces the clientelistic network s and undermines the
principles of fairness and service delivery. For these reasons, the marginalized communities that
either lack political power or electoral significance usually get the disadvantage of such situation,
which leads to the increasing of income and wealth inequalities in the democratic world. This, in
turn, undermines the progress of society towards creation of more inclusive development and
social justice. Likewise, buying votes leads to a network of corruption and patronage that
disintegrates democratically acquired governance system, promulgates distrust of public to
government institutions (Vande, 2020). Through the use of presidentially funded organizations
and campaigns, politicians give priority to immediate successes over future policy objectives and
10 | P a g e
accountability for the demands of the voters. Thus, politics becomes transactional, vulnerable to
impunity and does not uphold the rule of law. Politicians become accountable to their
benefactors instead of the citizens which elected them. A situation where elections outcomes are
influenced by the will of money instead of informed voting choices may lead to the erosion of
democratic values and cause people to drop their political participation. The process of election
integrity sabotage by malicious actors undermines the bedrocks upon which democracy is based
and becomes the fundamental threat to political stability and social cohesion. Thus, preventing
the roots of vote-buying and building strong mechanism of electoral integrity are key factors to
realize the democratic societies with all citizens equal and citizens' voices audible.
4.0 Ethnic Voting–Vote Buying Interplay
4.1 Underpinning dynamics and cycles of the vicious
The nexus of ethnic voting with vote buying suggests the long interplay between identity
politics and electoral malpractices within the systems of democracy (Selway, 2021). Ethnic
voting is based on historically anchored loyalties or identities and therefore paves the way for
politicians to use those lines for electoral gain. In these situations, politicians tend to buy votes so
as to secure the vote bank in their area, by providing material incentives or favors instead of
gaining voter support. The occurrence of this powerless attitude in no way interrupts the circle of
dependency and control of the leaders, the weak communities, therefore, become susceptible to
both coercion and bribery in the electoral processes. Also, the society of vote buying normalizes
the election process, which becomes unfair, and the public will lose confidence in democratic
institutions and service delivery, therefore destroying the legitimacy of the electoral outcomes
(Selway, 2021). When the integrity of elections is violated by case of vote buying, there is the
undermining of the free and fair electoral process as well as bribing the electorate to have them
11 | P a g e
support those who bribe them. Thus, the democratic ideals of political equality and
representation face a dilemma as the election outcomes begin to swing in favor of those with
money rather of the informed voter. Also, the connection between ethnic voting and vote buying
increases clientelistic links and hinder the improvement of systems in the field of elections
(Selway, 2021). Politicians who use vote buying to secure ethic votes extend these pre-existing
power relationships and subdue opposing factions, deepening the inequalities and thwarting
democratic administration. Consequently, the intricacy of the issue of ethnic voting and vote
buying calls for a system-wide change that leads towards electoral integrity enhancement,
political accountability and democratic governance development.
4.2 Nepotism and vote buying tactics are undemocratic stratagems
The major threats to the integrity of democratic governance and the principle of electoral
accountability, that is, the cases of nepotism and the vote buying tactics, are employed by the
political elites (Lo Bue et al., 2021). Nepotism, the unethical practice which favors an ethnic or
family agenda while disregarding qualifications or competence, erodes the meritocratic
foundations of governance, thus making it difficult for competent and qualified individuals to
rise to governance positions. The application of this practice reduces the level of public trust in
democratic institutions and encourages the formation of injustice and exclusion from society.
Thus, like vote selling, vote buying techniques affect the legitimacy of electoral processes as
people are induced or forced to vote in a certain way, which is in conflict with the fundamental
right of the voters to fair and free elections. Also, corruption related with nepotism and vote
buying encourages the erosion of the interests of the citizens and damage the trust of the citizens
to the elected officials. (Lo Bue et al., 2021). When the elected officials race to dodge the
democratic mandate, whether it is to secure their power or to follow their personal agendas, they
12 | P a g e
turn their back on the interests of the population in order to win. This leads to a weakening of the
democratic authority and to the loss of the electoral accountability. Therefore, the voices of the
marginalized groups such as the opposition groups are many a time muffled and, consequently,
the political exploitation and exclusion of the society are continued. Combating nepotism and
pivotal votes relies on a collaborative effort to reinforce democracy institutions and strengthen
transparency and accountability, as well, it depends on increasing citizen education and
participation (Lo Bue et al., 2021). With the mission of cultivating political integrity and ethical
leadership, the societies can attempt to lessen the compromising influence that nepotism and
vote-buying have on electoral processes and ensure that the democratic agenda of justice,
equality and representation is upheld.
4.3 Extensive case studies and evidence from research.
The extensive studies of cases and solid evidence from research demonstrate a clear and
alarming association between ethnic voting and vote buying and underdevelopment as per
democratic governance and provision of public goods (Zimbalist, 2022). Many scholars have
carefully scrutinized the way in which electoral dynamics in countries such as South Africa is
used by political leaders for their own gain by electorally through stirring ethnic identities and
clientelistic networks. From empirical evidence, scholars tag the association between electoral
competitiveness, social structures, and public goods provision outcomes through the use of
detailed case studies and comparative analyses in different contexts. For example, research
related to the instances where ethnic candidates buy votes fingers the systems of governance and
the democratic institutions (Zimbalist, 2022). Such problemas are the weakening of public
confidence in electoral systems, the deepening of social inequalities, and the undermining of
democratic ethos and values. Offering an analysis of the reasons why ethnic voting and vote
13 | P a g e
buying cause the imbalance, or lack of prosperity in public services, scholars provide solutions to
the situation of governance failure and political issues in many of the developing democracies.
Hence, empirical results bring a clear picture to those in the policy and practice level about how
best to strengthen elections and account for results. The actions of policymakers will be in large
part determined by their knowledge of the factors driving ethnic voting and vote buying. With
this understanding it is be possible to formulate tips that will help to stem the negative effects
associated with public goods provision and democratic governance. It can be manifested in a
variety of ways such as institution reforms, anti-corruption policies, etc.
5.0 Suggested Solutions and Reforms
5.1 Increasing accountability of democratic institutions and law enforcement.
The main remedy to the challenge of ethnic voting and vote buying is increasing the
responsibility of democratic institutions and the establishment of law enforcement mechanisms
(Selway, 2021). Through the implementation of mechanisms that compel elected officials to be
accountable for their actions and fair election management, governments can discourage
mischievous acts like ballot sale and nepotism. That would rather necessitate robust supervision
apparatus, objective electoral committees, and competent agencies able to explore and prosecute
electoral misbehaviors. Furthermore, emphasis on transparency and civic engagement can give
rise to the empowerment of citizens to oversee their representatives and urge them for the
accountability in the elections processes. An important measure to improve democratic
accountability is transparency in the financing of campaigns, strict monitoring of spending on
elections and making whistleblowing culture prevail which will encourage reporting of electoral
misconducts. Along with this, civic education programs and media literacy initiatives can be
fostered to allow citizens to better learn how to critically analyze political messaging and to
14 | P a g e
avoid being easily swayed to any undue influence. Through promoting the values of
transparency, accountability, and public involvement, societies can secure the sanctity of election
process and apply democratic standards. This also include international cooperation and peer
learning which enable to strengthen programs that combat electoral fraud and malpractice
(Zimbalist, 2022). Through regional meetings, intergovernmental bodies, and collaboration with
civil society organizations, countries are able to make use of each other's good practices,
communicate and cooperate in order to enhance the integrity of elections. Through the shared
knowledge and resources of the international community, countries are assisted in enacting the
reforms that directly target the causes of ethnic voting and vote buying so that electoral processes
are peaceful and believable around the globe
5.2 Elevating transparency and accountability in the mechanisms
Transparency and accountability are the main bricks of democratic governance and are
valid elements to fight the sinister influence of ethnic voting and vote buying (Lo Bue et al.,
2021). Governments can deal with this issue by bringing in reforms that make political activities
transparent, support transparency in campaign financing, and enhance political party funding and
electoral administration. Declaration of campaign contributions and expenditures is the way to
reduce the influence of money on politics and to limit the voters’ buying incentive. One more
step forward, establishing strong oversight mechanisms and a whistleblower protection system
ought to motivate people to report election malpractices as far as possible. Through the
promotion of more open and accountable electoral systems, governments are able to ensure the
conformity of democratic mechanisms with their high integrity and rebuild public credibility in
electoral results. Above all, the transparency activities should be supported by dedicating time,
energy and resources to civic education and political awareness campaigns, because only in this
15 | P a g e
manner citizens will be able to make truly free and informed choice and will become immune to
manipulations (Selway, 2021). Civics education programs can teach voters about their rights and
responsibilities, the need for the polls integrity, and the consequences of the ethnic-based or
undue rewards voting which may turn to be corrupted. In addition, measures that aim to increase
media literacy can empower people to decipher all political messages and, therefore, to discern
factual information from propaganda or misinformation. Government can empower its citizens
with the knowledge and skills needed for effective participation in the processes of electoral
through educating them and equipping them with such. The electorate thus becomes more
knowledgeable and can not easily be deceived or manipulated. In addition, international
cooperation and shared learning can prove to be priceless in this regard. Scholars argue that
transparency and accountability in an electoral process can be substantially enhanced by
cooperation (Zimbalist, 2022). Collaborations with international institutions e.g. the United
Nations and regional organizations provide a chance for learning through technical assistance,
capacity building and peer- to- peer learning programs which supplements the electoral
governance of countries. States can achieve this by observing successful practices, and
implementing international recognized standards and best practices. This can add effectiveness to
their electoral systems.
5.3 Discovering ways to combat socioeconomic inequalities and promote even development
Confronting the systemic factors of economic disparities is necessary for creating an
inclusive development and counter the origins of ethnic voting and vote buying (Zimbalist in
2022). Governments should first of all concentrate on the policies envisaged to deplete poverty,
widen provision of education and healthcare and create economic opportunities especially for the
poor and deprived communities. The governments can overcome the temptations of clientelism
16 | P a g e
and build an egalitarian and fraternal country with more wealth and opportunities if they can
straighten the disparities in wealth and opportunity. Other than that, as well as civic education
and political awareness trainings, it would be vital to appreciate that citizens will be able to make
informed choices and resist manipulation from the majority by the political elites. In the last
instance, combating socioeconomic inequalities is absolutely important to the establishment of
robust democratic institutions and that electoral processes serve the interests of the average
citizens, rather than those of the elite only. Moreover, encasing ethical dialogue and promoting
social cohesion can help lessen ethnic barriers and reduce the extent of ethnic identities in
electoral thinking (Lo Bue et al., 2021). The authorities must be able to provide avenues whereby
different ethnic groups are able to interact and reconcile thereby promoting understanding,
tolerance and working together between the community. Furthermore, communities emphasizing
efforts on interethnic cooperation in community development, public service delivery, and
governance can help build trust and solidarity among citizens of different ethnic groups. As a
result, authorities will strengthen the concept of common identity and common goal and thus,
ethnic politics will lose its strength and society will be more united and cohesive. Not only that,
but fortifying democratic structures and ensuring the there is rule of law, will help safeguard
against vote buying and nepotism (Selway, 2021). The government should devote more money
to the independence and autonomy of electoral commissions, judiciaries and anti corruption
authorities to guarantee fair implementation of electoral rules, and make sure that perpetrators of
electoral crime are prosecuted.
17 | P a g e
6.0 References
Agyepong, R. A., Eshun, I., & Baidoo, F. L. (2021). Incentives and decisions: Voters’
knowledge of the laws on vote buying and its implications for Ghana’s
democracy. Global Journal of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences, 9(7), 10-35.
Auerbach, A. M., Bussell, J., Chauchard, S., Jensenius, F. R., Nellis, G., Schneider, M., ... &
Ziegfeld, A. (2022). Rethinking the study of electoral politics in the developing world:
Reflections on the Indian case. Perspectives on Politics, 20(1), 250-264.
Carlson, E. (2021). Distribution or diversion? Distribution of local public goods in the presence
of clientelist brokers. Political Research Quarterly, 74(2), 274-287.
Cheeseman, N., Lynch, G., & Willis, J. (2021). Why Do Elections Matter in Africa?:
Democracy, Voting and Virtue. Cambridge University Press.
Harding, R. (2020). Rural democracy: elections and development in Africa. Oxford University
Press.
Kao, K., Lust, E., & Rakner, L. (2022). Vote-buying, anti-corruption campaigns, and identity in
African elections. World Development, 160, 106064.
Lassou, P. J. C., Sorola, M., Senkl, D., Lauwo, S. G., & Masse, C. (2024). Monetization of
politics and public procurement in Ghana. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability
Journal, 37(1), 85-118.
Lo Bue, M. C., Sen, K., & Lindberg, S. I. (2021). Clientelism, public goods provision, and
governance. V-Dem Working Paper, 125.
18 | P a g e
Lundstedt, M., & Edgell, A. B. (2022). Electoral management and vote-buying. Electoral
Studies, 79, 102521.
Oladapo, S. O., Oyewale, A. O., & Abayomi, H. O. (2020). Influence of vote buying among
electorates; its implications to Nigeria future democracy. Higher Education of Social
Science, 18(1), 73-78.
Selway, J. S. (2021). Electoral Rules, Social Structure, and Public Goods Provision: Outcomes,
Spending, and Policies. Studies in Comparative International Development, 56(3), 384-
411.
Vande, P. T. (2020). Vote Buying and Credible Elections in Nigeria: An Opinion Survey of
Voters on the 2019 General Election in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja.
Yoon, M. Y. (2020). Voters’ perceptions of gender differences in vote buying: The case of
Tanzania. Africa Spectrum, 55(2), 125-147.
Zimbalist, Z. (2022). How electoral competition shapes local public goods provision in South
Africa. Democratization, 29(2), 253-275.
