How do nations control political finance and why do reforms occur? A nested mixed-method analysis of political finance reform in Canada, New Zealand, and Commonwealth Caribbean small states
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This thesis aims to provide a greater understanding of how nations regulate political finance and why reforms occur. To compare models of regulation, the first stage of the thesis develops the ‘Regulation of Political Finance Indicator’ (RoPFI). Starting with the 2020 iteration of International IDEA’s ‘Political Finance Database’, Multiple Correspondence Analysis is used to construct a variable on which to measure levels of regulation across 180 nations. Subsequently, Model Based Clustering identifies the ‘Unregulated’, ‘Partially Regulated’ and ‘Strongly Regulated’ types of political finance system, and provides a statistical measure of the certainty of each nation’s classification. Using the RoPFI to assess global trends, findings indicate that small states of the Caribbean and Pacific have the fewest regulations on political finance, while nations of Central and Eastern Europe, the Middle East and North African (MENA) region, and the Americas employ the strictest controls in this area. The remainder of this thesis examines political finance reform in a group of Westminster democracies, namely Canada, New Zealand, and a sample of seven small states from the Commonwealth Caribbean (The Bahamas, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent & The Grenadines). Studies use Zim Nwokora’s ‘General Theory of Campaign Finance Reform’ as a foundation upon which to examine why reforms occur. Distinguishing between loosening and tightening reforms, the model suggests that the reform process is guided by shifts in party competition, party organization strength, and ideological factors. Scandals and changes in incumbency are also suggested as junctures that may prompt reform. To test the projections of this model, Hansard is used to document Parliamentary interactions on political finance, and operationalized indicators of party competition, organization, and ideology are used to trace the context within which discussions took place. Findings indicate that variations in levels of party competition and party organization strength are influential in shaping political finance reform, while ideological factors are much less so. Scandals are found to be influential in the passage of tightening reforms, while changes in incumbency are identified as a poor predictor in this area. Building on these observations, the final case study – focused on small states of the Commonwealth Caribbean – finds that the endurance of clientelism in the region continue to act as a barrier to political finance reform. This relationship is exemplified in a detailed case study of failed reform attempts in Saint Lucia and, subsequently, a link between practice in small and large states is identified. The differentiation between governance approaches – where small states are more likely to trend toward clientelism, relative to larger states – is identified as the causal mechanism that underpins this observation. Taking this into consideration, the thesis concludes with an updated theoretical model of political finance reform. To summarize, scandals are presented as critical junctures in the passage of tighter regulations. Beyond this, variations in governance model type, levels of competition, and the strength of party organizations are the main factors that influence the direction of the reform process. This thesis makes contributions in methodological, empirical, and theoretical terms. Methodologically, the development of the RoPFI provides a key resource for scholars of political finance. In empirical terms, the RoPFI represents one of the first global measures of political finance to consider all areas of regulation – both from the party and candidate perspectives – and also incorporates some of the least studied regions in this area, namely the Caribbean and the Pacific. Theoretical contributions span numerous areas of research. Primarily, the theoretical model developed in this thesis broadens understanding of the origins of political finance regulation, by addressing inconsistencies in prior literature. The identification of clientelism as a barrier to reform, particularly within the small state context, contributes to knowledge on the implications of clientelist governance models, as well as institutional development in small states.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».