Gender and corruption: what we know and ways forward

Cautious or marginalized? Perceptions of the riskiness of engaging in corruption and gender differences in corruptness

“…A belief in gender equality does not exclude perceptions of women as political outsiders; however, we find it likely that people who believe in traditional gender roles would also have a stronger tendency to believe in the social exclusion of women. Following the argument of Merkle (2020), among others, that the association between women and corruption might be a reflection of power asymmetries or inequalities between men and women, we hypothesize that there is a higher tendency to perceive women as less corrupt among individuals who hold gender equality in lesser regard. The view that women are less corrupt than men can be considered a form of what some scholars call “benevolent sexism,” that is, a view of women as the fairer (and weaker) sex who requires men to provide chivalrous protection and govern society (Benstead & Lust, 2018; Glick & Fiske, 2001; Merkle & Wong, 2020).…”

“…A prominent line of research in recent years has been the association between gender and corruption (see, e.g., Bauhr & Charron, 2020; Malmberg & Christensen, 2021; Merkle, 2020; Stensöta & Wängnerud, 2018). While a large share of these studies has been interested in exploring the link between gender (in)equality and overall levels of corruption, and the question if women actually have a lesser tendency to engage in corruption or tolerate corruption, some, such as Barnes and others (2018) and Goetz (2007), have concentrated on explaining public perceptions of women as “political cleaners.” The distinction between perceptions of being less corrupt and actually being less corrupt is important since perceptions—regardless of whether they are true or false—have also been shown to have real‐life consequences.…”

“…Previous research stresses that there are strong theoretical reasons for believing that men and women are actually affected by corruption in differential ways as a result of gender roles that (re)distribute power resources unequally in societies (Boehm & Sierra, 2015; Merkle, 2020). Women are often claimed to be more vulnerable to corruption while at the same time lacking the means to benefit from taking part in it due to gender‐based asymmetries in power.…”

“…The contemporary academic debate on the association between gender and corruption was kick started by two pioneering studies by Dollar and others (2001) and Swamy and others (2001) showing a relationship between a higher share of women in national parliament and lower levels of corruption. In the following two decades, these studies helped to inspire an extensive body of research that has attempted to untangle the seemingly robust association between gender inequality and corruption and explain the underlying mechanisms (for a recent overview, see Merkle, 2020).…”

Marginalization or risk aversion? Using big data to examine why women are found to be less corrupt in court judgments

“…Some studies have taken an indirect approach, arguing that women's prosocial behaviors and political participation help to create gender equality policies and reduce overall levels of corruption (see Rivas, 2013; Vijayalakshmi, 2008). The theories of marginalization (Alhassan‐Alolo, 2007; Bauhr & Charron, 2020, 2021; Bauhr et al., 2019; Sampson & Decker, 2010; Torgler & Valev, 2010) and risk aversion (Alexander, 2018; Echazu, 2010; Esarey & Chirillo, 2013; Esarey & Schwindt‐Bayer, 2018, 2019; Kubbe et al., 2019; Waylen & Southern, 2019) have received the most attention, and many scholars have based their investigations on them (Merkle, 2020). The core logic of these two theories directly inform the government's anti‐corruption measures.…”