Does Aid Promote Electoral Integrity?

References

• Alesina, A., & Weder, B. (2002). Do corrupt governments receive less foreign aid? American Economic Review, 92, 1126–1137.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, T. W., & Hsiao, C. (1982). Formulation and estimation of dynamic models using panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 18, 47–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baetschmann, G., Staub, K. E., & Winkelmann, R. (2015). Consistent estimation of the fixed effects ordered logit model. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 178, 685–703.
   Google Scholar
• Bernhard, M., Reenock, C., & Nordstrom, T. (2004). The legacy of western overseas colonialism on democratic survival. International Studies Quarterly, 48, 225–250.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birch, S. (2011). Electoral malpractice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bishop, S., & Hoeffler, A. (2016). Free and fair elections: A new database. Journal of Peace Research, 53, 608–616.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bizzarro, F., Coppedge, M., & Pemstein, D. (2016). Incorporating V-Dem’s uncertainty estimates in regressions analysis (unpublished manuscript).
   Google Scholar
• Boix, C., & Stokes, S. (2003). Endogenous democratization. World Politics, 55, 517–549.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callen, M., & Long, J. (2015). Institutional corruption and election fraud: Evidence from a field experiment in Afghanistan. American Economic Review, 105, 354–381.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carothers, T. (2015). Democracy aid at 25: Time to choose. Journal of Democracy, 26(1), 59–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charron, N. (2011). Exploring the impact of foreign aid on corruption: Has the ‘anti-corruption movement’ been effective? The Developing Economies, 49, 66–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chauvet, L., & Collier, P. (2009). Elections and economic policy in developing countries. Economic Policy, 24, 509–550.
   Google Scholar
• Clemens, M. A., Radalet, S., Bhavnani, R., & Bazzi, S. (2011). Counting chickens when they hatch: Timing and the effects of aid on growth. Economic Journal, 122, 590–617.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collier, P., & Vicente, P. C. (2013). Votes and violence: Evidence from a field experiment in Nigeria. Economic Journal, 124, 327–355.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coppedge, M., Lindberg, S., Skaaning, S.-E., & Teorell, J. (2016). Measuring high-level democratic principles using the V-Dem data. International Political Science Review, 37, 580–593.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DFID. (2013). Business case: 18 month cost extension of the Somaliland Election Programme (SEP). London: Department for International Development U.K. (Retrieved from Somaliland Election Programme: iati.dfid.gov.uk/iati_documents/3787611.odt).
   Google Scholar
• Dickerson, A., Hole, A. R., & Munford, L. (2014). The relationship between well-being and commuting revisited: Does the choice of methodology matter? Regional Science and Urban Economics, 49, 321–329.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Djankov, S., Montalvo, J., & Reynal-Querol, M. (2008). The curse of aid. Journal of Economic Growth, 13, 169–194.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doucouliagos, H., & Paldam, M. (2009). The aid effectiveness literature: The sad results of 40 years of research. Journal of Economic Surveys, 23, 433–461.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dreher, A. (2006). Does globalization affect growth? Evidence from a new index of globalization. Applied Economics, 38, 1091–1110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dreher, A., Nunnenkamp, P., & Thiele, R. (2008). Does aid for education educate children? Evidence from panel data. World Bank Economic Review, 22, 291–314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EU Commission. (2014). EU support to Nigeria’s electoral cycle 2011–2015. Brussels: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Finkel, S., Perez-Linan, A., & Seligson, M. (2007). The effects of US foreign assistance on democracy building, 1990–2003. World Politics, 59, 404–439.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fujiwara, T., & Wantchekon, L. (2013). Can informed public deliberation overcome clientelism? Experimental evidence from benin. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5, 241–255.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gleditsch, K. S., & Ward, M. D. (2006). Diffusion and the international context of democratization. International Organization, 60, 911–933.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hadenius, A., & Teorell, J. (2007). Pathways from authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy, 18, 143–157.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamilton, L. C. (2013). Statistics with stata: Updated for version 12 (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Brooks/Cole.
   Google Scholar
• Hoeffler, A., & Outram, V. (2011). Need, merit or self-interest – what determines the allocation of aid? Review of Development Economics, 15, 237–250.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyde, S., & Marinov, N. (2012). Which elections can be lost? Political Analysis, 20, 191–210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ichino, N., & Schuendeln, M. (2012). Deterring or displacing electoral irregularities? Spillover effects of observers in a randomized field experiment in Ghana. The Journal of Politics, 74, 292–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keefer, P., & Vlaicu, R. (2008). Democracy, credibility, and clientelism. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 24, 371–406.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan, M. (2013). Bangladesh: Economic growth in a vulnerable LAO. In D. C. North, J. J. Wallis, S. B. Webb, & B. Weingast (Eds.), In the shadow of violence: Politics, economics and the problems of development (pp. 24–69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Knack, S. (2004). Does foreign aid promote democracy? International Studies Quarterly, 48, 251–266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knack, S., & Rahman, A. (2007). Donor fragmentation and bureaucratic quality in aid recipients. Journal of Development Economics, 83, 176–197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mares, I., Muntean, A., & Petrova, T. (2016). Economic intimidation in contemporary elections: Evidence from Romania and Bulgaria. Government and Opposition, 53, 486–517.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nickell, S. (1981). Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects. Econometrica, 49(6), 1417–1426.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris, P. (2013). The new research agenda studying electoral integrity. Electoral Studies, 32, 563–575.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris, P. (2015). Why elections fail. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Norris, P. (2017). Strengthening electoral integrity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• North, D., Wallis, J. J., Webb, S., & Weingast, B. (2007). Limited access orders in the developing world: A new approach to the problems of development (Policy Research Working Paper 4359). Washington, DC: The World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• North, D., Wallis, J. J., & Weingast, B. (2012). Violence and social orders. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2018). International development statistics. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
   Google Scholar
• Pemstein, D., Marquardt, K., Tzelgov, E., Wang, Y., & Miri, F. (2015). The varieties of democracy measurement model: Latent variable analysis for cross-national and cross-temporal expert-coded data (V-Dem Working Paper, 21). Gothenburg: The Varieties of Democracy Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Schedler, A. (2002). The menu of manipulation. Journal of Democracy, 13, 36–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, J. M., & Steele, C. (2011). Sponsoring democracy: The United States and democracy aid to the developing world, 1988–2001. International Studies Quarterly, 55, 47–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stock, J. H., & Watson, M. W. (2015). Introduction to econometrics. Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Treisman, D. (2000). The causes of corruption: A cross-national study. Journal of Public Economics, 76, 399–457.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuccinardi, D. (Ed.). (2014). International obligations for elections: Guidelines for legal frameworks. Stockholm: International IDEA.
   Google Scholar
• Uberti, L. J. (2017). Stata tip 128: Marginal effects in log-transformed models. Stata Journal, 17, 774–778.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UNDP (2002). Human Development Report 2002: Deepening Democracy in a Fragmented World, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• UNDP. (2012). Evaluation of UNDP contribution to strengthening electoral systems and processes. New York, NY: United Nations Development Programme.
   Google Scholar
• USAID. (2015). Bangladesh election support activities final performance evaluation. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development.
   Google Scholar
• V-Dem. (2017). V-Dem codebook v7. Gothenburg: Varieties of Democracy Project.
   Google Scholar
• Wantchekon, L. (2003). Clientelism and voting behaviour: Evidence from a field experiment in Benin. World Politics, 55, 399–422.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Bank. (1997). World development report 1997: The state in a changing world. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• World Bank. (2017). World development report 2017: Governance and the law. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar