Anticorruption frames: Bridging accountability

References

• Bauhr, M., & Grimes, M. (2014). Indignation or resignation: The implications of transparency for societal accountability. Governance, 27(2), 291–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bazurli, R., & Portos, M. (2021). Crook!: The impact of perceived corruption on non-electoral forms of political behaviour. International Political Science Review, 42(2), 245–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512119881710
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benford, R. D. (1993). Frame disputes within the nuclear disarmament movement. Social Forces, 71(3), 677–701. https://doi.org/10.2307/2579890
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benford, R. D. (1997). An insider’s critique of the social movement framing perspective. Sociological Inquiry, 67(4), 409–430. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1997.tb00445.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benford, R. D. (2022). Frame disputes. In D. A. Snow, D. Della Porta, B. Klandermans, & D. McAdam (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of social and political movements (pp. 1–3). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470674871.wbespm092.pub2
   Google Scholar
• Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611–639. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berti, C. (2019). Rotten apples or rotten system? Media framing of political corruption in New Zealand and Italy. Journalism Studies, 20(11), 1580–1597. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1530068
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berti, C., Bratu, R., & Wickberg, S. (2020). Corruption and the media. In A. Mungiu-Pippidi & P. M. Heywood (Eds.), A research agenda for studies of corruption (pp. 107–117). Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Björnehed, E., & Erikson, J. (2018). Making the most of the frame: Developing the analytical potential of frame analysis. Policy Studies, 39(2), 109–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2018.1434874
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bocchiola, M., Ceva, E., & Vinciguerra, M. C. (2020). Heroes or villains? A legislative, ethical and policy assessment of whistleblowing. In A. Mungiu-Pippidi & P. M. Heywood (Eds.), A research agenda for studies of corruption (pp. 158–171). Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, K. (2015). Between representation and narration: Analysing policy frames. In F. Fischer, D. Torgerson, A. Durnová, & M. Orsini (Eds.), Handbook of critical policy studies (pp. 441–461). Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Breit, E. (2010). On the (re) construction of corruption in the media: A critical discursive approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 92(4), 619–635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0177-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, A. J., Vandekerckhove, W., & Dreyfus, S. (2014). The relationship between transparency, whistleblowing, and public trust. In P. Ala’i & R. G. Vaughn (Eds.), Research handbook on transparency (pp. 30–58). Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Bukovansky, M. (2006). The hollowness of anticorruption discourse. Review of International Political Economy, 13(2), 181–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290600625413
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne, E., Arnold, A.-K., & Nagano, F. (2010). Building public support for anticorruption efforts. Why anti corruption agencies need to communicate and how. World Bank Group.
   Google Scholar
• Caiani, M., & della Porta, D. (2011). The elitist populism of the extreme right: A frame analysis of extreme right-wing discourses in Italy and Germany. Acta Politica, 46(2), 180–202. https://doi.org/10.1057/ap.2010.28
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caruso, L. (2018). Back to the origin? Popular sovereignty from French revolution to current anticorruption movements: The Spanish case in historical perspective. Partecipazione e Conflitto, 10, 693–722. https://doi.org/10.1285/i20356609v10i3p693
   Google Scholar
• Ceva, E., & Bocchiola, M. (2019). Is whistleblowing a duty? Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, P. D. (2012). Introduction to the special issue: The global anti-corruption discourse - Towards integrity management?. Public Administration and Development, 32(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.618
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cress, D. M., & Snow, D. A. (2000). The outcomes of homeless mobilisation: The influence of organisation, disruption, political mediation, and framing. American Journal of Sociology, 105(4), 1063–1104. https://doi.org/10.1086/210399
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Croteau, D., & Hicks, L. (2003). Coalition framing and the challenge of a consonant frame pyramid: The case of a collaborative response to homelessness. Social Problems, 50(2), 251–272. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2003.50.2.251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dan, V., & Ihlen, Ø. (2011). Framing expertise: A cross-cultural analysis of success in framing contests. Journal of Communication Management, 15(4), 368–388. https://doi.org/10.1108/13632541111183352
   Google Scholar
• della Porta, D. (2018). Anticorruption from below. Social movements against corruption in late neoliberalism. Partecipazione e Conflitto, 10, 661–692. https://doi.org/10.1285/i20356609v10i3p661
   Google Scholar
• della Porta, D., & Mattoni, A. (2021). Civil society against corruption. In A. Bågenholm, M. Bauhr, M. Grimes, & B. Rothstein (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the quality of government (pp. 290). Oxford Handbooks. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198858218.013.15
   Google Scholar
• della Porta, D., Mattoni, A., Pirro, A. L., & Caruso, L. (2017). Anticorruption activism in Hungary, Italy, and Spain (ANTICORRP Final Report, Work Package: WP11 Building accountability: transparency, civil society and administrative response, pp. 240–276.
   Google Scholar
• Dewulf, A. (2013). Contrasting frames in policy debates on climate change adaptation. WIRES Climate Change, 4(4), 321–330. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.227
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Puppo, L. (2014). The construction of success in anticorruption activity in Georgia. East European Politics, 30(1), 105–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/21599165.2013.846260
   Google Scholar
• Fernández-Vázquez, P., Barberá, P., & Rivero, G. (2015). Rooting out corruption or rooting for corruption? The heterogeneous electoral consequences of scandals. Political Science Research and Methods, 4(2), 379–397. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2015.8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, J. (2015). Social accountability: What does the evidence really say? World Development, 72, 346–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.03.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gephart, M. (2009). Contextualising conceptions of corruption: Challenges for the international anticorruption campaign.
   Google Scholar
• Gephart, M. (2016). Local embedding of international discourse: Chile and the international and transnational anti-corruption campaign. International Relations, 30(1), 49–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerbaudo, P. (2017). The indignant citizen: Anti-austerity movements in Southern Europe and the anti-oligarchic reclaiming of citizenship. Social Movement Studies, 16(1), 36–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2016.1194749
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grimes, M. (2013). The contingencies of societal accountability: Examining the link between civil society and good government. Studies in Comparative International Development, 48(4), 380–402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-012-9126-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanley, S. L., & Sikk, A. (2013). Economy, corruption or promiscuous voters? Explaining the success of anti-establishment reform parties in Eastern Europe.
   Google Scholar
• Heywood, P. (2015a). Introduction: Scale and focus in the study of corruption. In P. Heywood (Ed.), Routledge handbook of political corruption (pp. 15–28). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Heywood, P. (2015b). Routledge handbook of political corruption. Routledge Abingdon.
   Google Scholar
• Huss, O. (2018). Corruption, crisis, and change: Use and misuse of an empty signifier. In E. Resende, D. Budrytė, & D. Buhari-Gulmez (Eds.), Crisis and change in post-cold war global politics: Ukraine in a comparative perspective (pp. 97–128). Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, H. (2002). Verification and proof in frame and discourse analysis. In B. Klandermans & S. Staggenborg (Eds.), Methods of social movement research (pp. 62–91). University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, M. (2005). Syndromes of corruption: Wealth, power, and democracy. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, M. (2013). More than necessary, less than sufficient: Democratisation and the control of corruption. Social Research: An International Quarterly, 80(4), 1237–1258. https://doi.org/10.1353/sor.2013.0054
   Google Scholar
• Khambekova, K., Los, A., & Huss, O. (2021). Corruption framing and formation of action strategies: Case of regional civil society organisations in Ukraine. Crime, Law and Social Change, 76(3), 277–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-021-09966-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lang, B. (2021). Framing and localizing anti-corruption norms in transnational civil society organizations: Transparency international in Portugal. Journal of Civil Society, 17, 155–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/17448689.2021.1925405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsson, F., & Grimes, M. (2022). Societal accountability and grand corruption: How institutions shape citizens’ efforts to shape institutions. Political Studies, 00323217211067134. https://doi.org/10.1177/00323217211067134
   Google Scholar
• Lindekilde, L. (2014). Discourse and frame analysis. In-depth analysis of qualitative data in social movement research. In D. della Porta (Ed.), Methodological practices in social movement research (pp. 195–223). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Loli, M. (2018). Self-legitimation patterns in the inequality-corruption nexus. Crime, Law and Social Change, 70(2), 241–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-017-9729-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makarova, M. (2019). Between the state and civil society: Anti-corruption discourse of movements and non-governmental organisations in Russia. Research in Social Change, 11(3), 39–67. https://doi.org/10.2478/rsc-2019-0014
   Google Scholar
• Marquette, H., & Peiffer, C. (2015). Corruption and collective action. DLP Research Paper.
   Google Scholar
• Marquette, H., & Peiffer, C. (2018). Grappling with the “real politics” of systemic corruption: Theoretical debates versus “real-world” functions. Governance, 31(3), 499–514. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12311
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McAdam, D., McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1996). Comparative perspectives on social movements: Political opportunities, mobilising structures, and cultural framings. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McVittie, C., & Sambaraju, R. (2019). Discourse of corruption and anticorruption. In J. Ellis (Ed.), Corruption, social sciences and the Law: Exploration across the disciplines (p. 149–165). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Milan, C. (2018). Rising against the thieves. Anticorruption campaigns in south-Eastern Europe. Partecipazione e Conflitto, 10, 826–849. https://doi.org/10.1285/i20356609v10i3p826
   Google Scholar
• Mische, A. (2003). Cross-talk in movements: Reconceiving the culture-network link. In M. Diani, & D. McAdam (Eds.), Social movements and networks: Relational approaches to collective action (pp. 258–280). Ofxord University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mungiu-Pippidi, A. (2013). Controlling corruption through collective action. Journal of Democracy, 24(1), 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2013.0020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mungiu-Pippidi, A. (2014). Why control of corruption works. When it does. The Anticorruption Frontline. The Anticorruption Report, 2, 90–123. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvddzrb6.9
   Google Scholar
• Mungiu-Pippidi, A., & Heywood, P. (2020). A research agenda for studies of corruption. https://doi.org/10.1285/i20356609v10i3p826
   Google Scholar
• Mungiu-Pippidi, A., & Johnston, M. (2017). Transitions to good governance: Creating virtuous circles of anticorruption. Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, P. E., & Johnston, H. (2000). What a good idea! ideologies and frames in social movement research. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 5(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.17813/maiq.5.1.g54k222086346251
   Google Scholar
• Persson, A., Rothstein, B., & Teorell, J. (2013). Why anticorruption reforms fail-systemic corruption as a collective action problem. Governance, 26(3), 449–471. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2012.01604.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Persson, A., Rothstein, B., & Teorell, J. (2019). Getting the basic nature of systemic corruption right: A reply to marquette and peiffer. Governance, 32(4), 799–810. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12403
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peruzzotti, E. (2011). The workings of accountability: Contexts and conditions. In Accountability through public opinion (Vol. 1–0, pp. 53–64). The World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/9780821385050_CH05
   Google Scholar
• Peruzzotti, E. (2019). Scandals and social accountability. In H. Tumber & S. R. Waisbord (Eds.), The routledge companion to media and scandal. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Piazza, G., & Sorci, G. (2018). Do Lulu Movements in Italy fight mafia and corruption? Framing processes and’anti-system’struggles in the No Tav, No Bridge and No Muos case studies. Partecipazione e Conflitto, 10, 747–772. https://doi.org/10.1285/i20356609v10i3p747
   Google Scholar
• Pirro, A. L. (2018). Screaming at a wall. Societal accountability from below in Bulgaria and Hungary. Partecipazione e Conflitto, 10, 773–796. https://doi.org/10.1285/i20356609v10i3p773
   Google Scholar
• Polk, J., Rovny, J., Bakker, R., Edwards, E., Hooghe, L., Jolly, S., Koedam, J., Kostelka, F., Marks, G., Schumacher, G., Steenbergen, M., Vachudova, M., & Zilovic, M. (2017). Explaining the salience of anti-elitism and reducing political corruption for political parties in Europe with the 2014 Chapel Hill Expert Survey data. Research & Politics, 4(1), 2053168016686915. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168016686915
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polzer, T. (2001). Corruption: Deconstructing the World Bank discourse (Development Studies Institute (DESTIN) working paper, 1(18)).
   Google Scholar
• Rein, M., & Schön, D. (1991). Frame-reflective policy discourse. In P. Wagner, C. H. Weiss, & B. Wittrock (Eds.), Social sciences and modern states: National experiences and theoretical crossroads (Vol. 9, pp. 262–288). Cambridge University Press Cambridge.
   Google Scholar
• Rein, M., & Schön, D. (1996). Frame-critical policy analysis and frame-reflective policy practice. Knowledge and Policy, 9(1), 85–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02832235
   Google Scholar
• Rispoli, F., & Vannucci, A. (2022). The corruption of democracy between neoliberalism and populism. In E. Calossi editor, & P. Imperatore editor (Eds.), Populism in contemporary Italian politics: Actors and processes in time of crisis (pp. 105–132). Pisa University Press. http://digital.casalini.it/9788833397009
   Google Scholar
• Rosanvallon, P. (2008). Counter-democracy: Politics in an age of distrust (Vol. 7). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan, C. (1991). Prime time activism: Media strategies for grassroots organizing. South End Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sampson, S. (2015). The anticorruption package. Ephemera: Theory and Politics in Organization, 15, 435–433.
   Google Scholar
• Schön, D. A. (1979). Generative metaphor: A perspective on problem-setting in social policy. Metaphor and Thought, 2, 137–163.
   Google Scholar
• Smilov, D., & Dorosiev, R. (2012). Corruption: Contested perceptions, shared disappointment. In D. Tanzler, K. Maras, & A. Giannakopoulos (Eds.), The social construction of corruption in Europe. Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1992). Master frames and cycles of protest. Frontiers in Social Movement Theory, 133, 155.
   Google Scholar
• Snow, D. A., Rochford, E. B., Jr, Worden, S. K., & Benford, R. D. (1986). Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation. American Sociological Review, 51, 464–481. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095581
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snow, D. A., Vliegenthart, R., & Ketelaars, P. (2018). The framing perspective on social movements: Its conceptual roots and architecture. In N. Van Dyke, V. Taylor, D. Snow, S. Soule, H. Kriesi, & H. McCammon (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to social movements (pp. 392–410). Wiley Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Snow, D., Benford, R., McCammon, H., Hewitt, L., & Fitzgerald, S. (2014). The emergence, development, and future of the framing perspective: 25+ years since "frame alignment". Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 19(1), 23–46. https://doi.org/10.17813/maiq.19.1.x74278226830m69l
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Hulst, M., & Yanow, D. (2016). From policy “frames” to “framing” theorising a more dynamic, political approach. The American Review of Public Administration, 46(1), 92–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074014533142
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vannucci, A. (2015). Three paradigms for the analysis of corruption. Labour & Law Issues, 1, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.2421-2695/5468
   Google Scholar
• Wickberg, S. (2016). Scandales et corruption dans le discours médiatique français: La partie émergée de l’iceberg? Éthique publique. Revue internationale d’éthique sociétale et gouvernementale, 18. https://doi.org/10.4000/ethiquepublique.2745
   Google Scholar
• Wickberg, S. (2018). The role of mediated scandals in the definition of anticorruption norms. In I. Kubbe & A. Engelbert (Eds.), Corruption and norms (pp. 91–112). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Wickberg, S. (2021). Understanding corruption in the twenty-first century: Towards a new constructivist research agenda. French Politics, 19(1), 82–102. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41253-020-00144-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yanow, D., van Hulst, M., Tkacheva, K., & Vakhshtayn, V. (2011). The political/process promise of policy framing. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschun.
   Google Scholar
• Zmolnig, R. (2018). Framing corruption: How language affects norms. Crime, Law and Social Change, 70(2), 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-017-9726-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar