Assessing the conditions and ingridients of political clientelism within the South African context

Keywords: clientelism, politicians, citizens, government, voters and inequalities

Abstract

The study examines the conditions, associated with political clientelism, as well as the ingredients of clientelism within the South African context. The study brings the understanding about the relationship between politicians who go out on a periodic basis to canvass for votes and then not much happens in the lives of ordinary people. Despite this, a large number of the same politicians is re-elected to another five-year term. The broad argument in this study is that there seems to be an observable patronage type of relationship between elected parties (politicians) and citizens, and that no matter what service delivery challenges citizens confront (coupled with violent protest in some cases), voting patterns do not change much come election time. The study adopted a conceptual approach, relying on secondary data. Clientelism refers to the relationship that exists between citizens/voters (clients) and politicians (patrons) who make electoral promises in order to gain office. The first section describes what clientelism entails, followed by a discussion of clientelism’s relevance to the present study. Then, anecdotal evidence from the research site will be examined to demonstrate some elements of clientelism, as well as its significance and utility in examining service delivery challenges in local government. Following that, essential components of democratic states will be explored because they have an impact on available research evidence, showing clientelistic elements are prevalent in democracies around the world. The chapter's closing will shed some light on how leadership will be approached in this study, which stems from the fact that leadership is a key concept in this research and is implied in clientelism

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Mocheudi Martinus Selepe, University of Limpopo

Department of Public Administration

References

Pellicer, M., Wegner, E., Benstead, L. J., Lust, E. (2021). Poor people’s beliefs and the dynamics of clientelism. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 33 (3), 300–332. doi: http://doi.org/10.1177/09516298211003661

Anciano, F. (2017). Clientelism as civil society? Unpacking the relationship between clientelism and democracy at the local level in South Africa. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 53 (4), 593–611. doi: http://doi.org/10.1177/0021909617709487

Hicken, A. (2011). Clientelism. Annual Review of Political Science, 14, 289–310. doi: http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.031908.220508

Fox, J. (2012). State Power and Clientelism. Clientelism in Everyday Latin American Politics, 187–211. doi: http://doi.org/10.1057/9781137275998_10

Hopkin, J. (2006). Conceptualizing political clientelism: Political Exchange and Democratic Theory. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237386883 Last accessed: 21.05.2022

Van de Walle, N. (2009). The Democratization of Political Clientelism in Sub-Saharan Africa. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 9 (5).

Wantchekon, L., Vicente, P. C. (2009). Clientlism and vote buying: Lessons from field experiments in African Elections. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 25 (2), 292–305. doi: http://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grp018

Schedler, A. (2002). Clientelism without Clients. The incongruent institutionalisation of Electoral Mobilisation in Mexico. Paper presented at Conference on Informal Institutions and Politics in Developing World. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Kolev, K., Goist, M. (2014). Empowering the Marginalised Voter: Clientelism in Heterogeneous Electorates. The Mid South Political Science Review, 15 (2), 59–79.

Robinson, J. A., Verdier, T. (2013). The Political Economy of Clientelism. The Scandinavan Journal of Economics, 115 (2), 260–291. doi: http://doi.org/10.1111/sjoe.12010

Young, D. J. (2009). Is Clientelism at Work in African Elections? A Study of Voting Behavior in Kenya and Zambia. Afro barometer working papers, No. 106.

Roniger, L. (2004). Political Clientelism, Democracy, and Market Economy. Comparative Politics, 36 (3), 353–375. doi: http://doi.org/10.2307/4150135

Medina, L. F. Stokes, S. (2002). Clientelism as Political Monopoly. Chicago: University of Chicago.

Gallego, J. A., Raciborski, R. (2007). Clientelism, Income Inequality, and Social Preferences: An Evolutionary Approach to Poverty Traps. Available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/7077214.pdf

Poverty and Inequality in South Africa (2011). Mail and Guardian. Available at: https://mg.co.za/article/2011-09-16-poverty-and-inequality-in-south-africa/

Mantashe, G. (2017). ‘Corruption in The ANC Must End’. Preparation for January 8 ANC Statement. Sunday Times.

Roble-Egea, M., Aceituno-Montes, J. M. (2011). Conceptualization of Party Patronage.

McCourt, W. (2000). Public Appointments: From Patronage to Merit. Manchester: University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management, Human Resources in Development Working Paper No 9.

Statistics South Africa, Annual Report (2012/2013). Pretoria: Government Printers. Available at: https://www.gov.za/documents/statistics-south-africa-annual-report-20122013

Human Sciences Research Council. 2013/14. Towards 2030: Transforming the Quality of Life of All Through Research. Integrated Annual Report. Cape Town: HSRC Publishers.

Turner, T.,Young, C. (1985). The Rise and Decline of the Zairian State. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Bardhan, P., Mookerjee, D. (2012). Political Clientelism and Capture: Theory and Evidence from West Bengal.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviours, Institutions and Organisation across Nations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Schaffer, F. (2002). Disciplinary Reactions: Alienation and the Reform of Vote Buying in Philippines. Conference paper on Trading Political Rights: The Comparative Politics of Vote Buying. Cambridge.

Statistics South Africa. General Household Survey (2014). Pretoria: Government Printers.

Singer, M. M. (2008). Buying Voters with Dirty Money: The Relationship between Cientelism and Corruption. University of Connecticut.

Madonsela, T. (2014). Secure in Comfort: Report on an Investigation into Allegations of impropriety and Unethical Conduct. Report No 25 of 2013 /2014

Brinkerhoff, D. W., Goldsmith, A. A. (2002). Clientelism, Patrimonialism and Democratic Governance: An Overview and Framework for Assessment and Programming. Unpublished paper prepared for U.S Agency for International Development. Montgomery, 50.

Madonsela,T .(2016) . State Capture Report: Investigations into Alleged Impropriety and Unethical conduct by the President. Report no 6 of 2016/2017

Public Service Anti-Corruption Strategy. (2002). Department of Public Service and Administration. Pretoria: Government Printers.

Navarro, B. (2015). Why clientelism sparks corruption? https://blogs.iadb.org/ideas-matter/en/art-against-corruption/ Last accessed: 22.05.2022

Dasgupta, A. (2015). Corruption or Constituency Service? Local Democratic Institutions and Political Connections in Rural India

Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) (2016). Pretoria: Government Printers.

Reno, W. (1997). Sovereignty and Personal Rule in Zaire. African Studies Quarterly 1(3)

Habib, A. (2009). Reflections on the Development State of South Africa. Available at: https://www.polity.org.za/article/reflections-on-the-development-state-for-south-africa-2009-08-13

Boubacar, B., Boa, M. (2013). The Mali Presidential Elections: Outcomes and Challenges. Oslo.

Horowitz, D. L. (2014). Ethnic Power Sharing: Three Big Problems. Journal of Democracy, 25 (2), 5–20. doi: http://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2014.0020

Rothchild, D. (1997). Managing Ethnic Conflict in Africa Pressures and Incentives for Cooperation. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/book/managing-ethnic-conflict-in-africa/ Last accessed: 22.05.2022


👁 23
⬇ 21
Published
2022-07-29
How to Cite
Masemola, N. D., & Selepe, M. M. (2022). Assessing the conditions and ingridients of political clientelism within the South African context. EUREKA: Social and Humanities, (4), 91-102. https://doi.org/10.21303/2504-5571.2022.002515
Section
Social Sciences