This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Wang, C.-S. Articles by Kurzman, C. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Dilemmas of Electoral Clientelism: Taiwan, 1993

Department of Political Science and the Graduate Institute of Political Economy at the National Cheng Kung University in Taiwan, wangc{at}mail.ncku.edu.tw

Charles Kurzman

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, kurzman{at}unc.edu

For many years, studies of electoral clientelism regarded clients as the captive votes of patrons. In recent years, this conventional wisdom has come under challenge, as scholars have come to recognize the widespread noncompliance of clients. This article uses the case of the 1993 Taiwan election to offer the first ever systematic data on noncompliance. Documents from the ruling Kuomintang (Nationalist Party) campaign office in one Taiwanese district, combined with district electoral results, demonstrate considerable leakage in this instance of clientelistic mobilization: at least 45 percent of voters who sold their votes to the Kuomintang did not, in fact, vote for the Kuomintang's candidate. This article argues that clientelistic mobilization faced at least four serious obstacles, including (1) broker scarcity, (2) factionalism, (3) embezzlement, and (4) financial limitations. These obstacles prevented the Kuomintang from making full use of its broker organizations, even as it devoted extensive economic and political resources and personnel to the election.

Key Words: Clientelism • Electoral corruption • Kuomintang • Taiwan • Vote buying

International Political Science Review, Vol. 28, No. 2, 225-245 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0192512107075408


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?