Mid Sweden University

Multiple-mandate holding (MMH), i.e. the simultaneous exercise ofat least two directly elected political functions, is a widespread butcontroversial political practice. Theoretically it can be argued toconstitute a valuable personal vote earning attribute (PVEA)among candidates due to its’ combination of the incumbencyand local background traits, but previous scholarship has alsoshown that citizens tend to be quite critical towards it. However,whether and how the practice of MMH affects voter preferenceshas not been previously empirically explored. The purpose of thisstudy is thus to contribute to this line of research by exploringthe potential causal impact of the practice of MMH, making avaluable empirical contribution to scholarships of voterpreferences and candidate traits. We examine this question byutilising a conjoint survey experiment carried out in 2023 inFinland, a country that recently (in 2022) established a newregional government tier, thereby enabling the possibility forpoliticians of being simultaneously elected at three differentinstitutional levels. The results of the study confirm that MMH asa candidate trait has the potential to be disadvantageous forindividual candidates during elections.

Demand-side studies of populism, adapting a citizen perspective, have grown exponentially during the last decade as a result of a growing political and academic concern over the potential effects of populism on the political system. Nevertheless, how populist attitudes at the citizen level are related to actual proposals for system-change is a surprisingly neglected research topic. One such proposal concerns the future of multiple-mandate-holding (MMH), i.e. the simultaneous exercise of at least two directly elected political functions, a controversial practice in many parts of Europe. By utilizing cross-sectional panel data gathered in Finland in 2022– 2023, a country characterized by extensive MMH among Members of Parliament, this study seeks to explore whether and how populist attitudes are related to the idea of representational pluralism in the political system, defined as the level of diversity among directly elected political representatives active within the political system. Using statistical analyses, we confirm our hypothesis that stronger populist attitudes are clearly associated with weaker support for MMH in general and stronger support for limiting the scope of MMH specifically. Our findings contribute to the theory-building of demand-side populism by showing that populist attitudes are also associated with the idea of representational pluralism.

Members of a minority population are expected to evaluate political authorities through a different spectrum than majority members. Still, only a few studies have explored the role of local conditions as determinants for political attitudes among a linguistic minority population. This study focuses on the role of linguistic homogeneity, local economic conditions and community size as determinants for corruption perceptions and political trust at the individual level among members of a linguistic minority population: the Swedish-speaking Finns. Moreover, this study differs empirically between evaluations of the local and national authorities. Combining data from a panel survey collected by Barometern (2019-21) with varying contextual-level factors in a multilevel model, we show that evaluations of local authorities are related to local contextual factors, in particular municipal unemployment rates and median incomes, while national evaluations are largely unrelated to local conditions. In contrast to theoretical expectations for an in-group bias among minority members, however, we find no effect for linguistic homogeneity on corruption perceptions and political trust after controlling for economic conditions. The results make an important contribution to our understanding about the role of local conditions for political attitudes among a well-assimilated minority population.

Previous studies suggest that women are often perceived as less corrupt and more risk averse, possibly due to longstanding asymmetries in power and marginalization that reproduce certain gender stereotypes. However, much remains unclear regarding the origins of these perceptions. Why are some individuals and societies more prone to perceive women as less corrupt than men? We present the first cross-country examination of these questions utilizing data from the latest wave of the World Values Survey, covering a total of 49 countries. Our results suggest that both perceived riskiness of corruption and attitude toward gender equality, in addition to the overall level of gender inequality in society, matter in explaining a stronger belief in gender differences in corruptness. However, the positive association between a higher perceived riskiness and the perception that women are less corrupt is mostly limited to societies with high levels of corruption and gender inequality.

Multiple-mandate holding, i.e., the holding of more than one directly elected mandate simultaneously on different government tiers, is a controversial practice with potential consequences on political trust. The research purpose of this study is thus to contribute to this line of research by exploring how the extent of this practice at the local level reflects on the opinions of ordinary citizens and their confidence in local government. The aim of this paper is therefore to examine this question utilising a vignette survey experiment carried out in Finland. The findings presented contribute to shining a light on the potential consequences of this practice for trust in the local government by exposing one way in which negative evaluations of politicians are formed.

idigare forskning har påvisat att medborgare tenderar att ha en kritisk hållning gentemot fenomenet mandatackumulering, en process varvid politiker förvärvar parallella direkt folkvalda politiska mandat på fler än en institutionell nivå. I Finland har politikernas omfattande mandatackumulering skapat debatt och Finland står även ut i Europa när det kommer till den faktiska omfattningen av mandatackumulering. Fördelarna kontra nackdelarna med mandatackumulering ur ett systemperspektiv har diskuterats i tidigare studier, men en stor kunskapslucka existerar fortfarande angående medborgarnas inställning till denna praxis och vilka faktorer på individnivå som kan förklara inställningen i frågan. Detta gäller speciellt inom en nationell kontext med omfattande mandatackumulering. Syftet med denna studie är därmed att bidra till att fylla denna empiriska lucka. För att undersöka dessa samband använder vi oss av paneldata insamlat under perioden 2022–2023 från en finländsk medborgarpanel som analyseras med hjälp av statistiska metoder. Resultaten visar på ett tydligt samband mellan hur medborgare förhåller sig till det politiska systemet och synen på mandatackumulering medan ett samband mellan politisk sofistikation och synen på mandatackumulering inte kan bekräftas.

Previous research has shown that citizens in general tends to express a negative disposition towards the phenomenon of multiple-mandate holding, i.e., a process where politicians collect overlapping political mandates on more than one institutional level. This phenomenon has in Finland also contributed to a public debate, as the extent of multiple-mandate holding in Finland stands out in a comparative European perspective. The potential costs and benefits from a political system perspective have been extensively discussed by previous research, although the literature is still missing more explanatory studies from a citizen perspective focusing on explaining individual-level variation in attitudes towards multiple-mandate holding. This especially within a national context characterized by extensive multiple-mandate holding among politicians. The purpose of this study is therefore to make an empirical contribution to fill that lacuna. In order to explore this phenomenon, we use survey data collected from a Finnish citizen panel during 2022–2023 which is analysed using suitable statistical analyses. The results show that there is a clear association between how citizens relate to the workings of the political system, and attitudes towards multiple-mandate holding, while we were unable to confirm an expected association between individual-level political sophistication and attitudes towards multiple-mandate holding.

The practice of multiple‐mandate holding is widespread across Europe. Critics argue that this practice contributes to a concentration of political power, a higher risk for conflicts of interest and damage to the public image of political actors. Advocates  meanwhile  claim  that  it  provides  clear  benefits,  such  as  local embeddedness of the national or regional political decision‐making and a greater degree of professionalisation in politics. However, little is known about how political actors themselves look upon this practice. This especially in a context like Finland, where this practice is said to be embedded in the political culture and where another institutional level has recently been implemented, making it possible for political actors to simultaneously hold political mandates at the local‐, regional‐and national levels. This paper examines attitudes towards multiple‐mandate holding among local political decision‐makers using unique survey data gathered through a new online panel. The results suggest that councillors from a populist radical right party and those who perceive corruption and partial treatment as more common were the most negatively disposed towards this practice, while councillors from the traditionally strongest rural party were the most in favour.

A corrupt personality? A study of the association between the Big Five personality traits and corruption tolerance

Previous research has shown a link between certain basic personality traits belonging to the well-established Big Five model and corruption tolerance, operationalized with relatively simple measures that mainly include bribe-taking. This study takes a closer look at these relationships using a more sophisticated measure of corruption tolerance that encompasses a much broader spectrum of more or less corrupt acts. The results from the empirical analyses, which include over 2,000 Swedish-speaking Finns, support the conclusions from previous studies that it is mainly Conscientiousness and Agreeableness that have significant negative associations with corruption tolerance. Of these two characteristics, it is mainly Conscientiousness that has a negative association with almost all individual corruption scenarios, while Agreeableness is mainly associated with those scenarios where the ethical guidelines are less clear.