From Democratic Renewal to Democratic Erosion: How Citizens Respond to Perceived Corruption

Perceptions of political corruption are central to how citizens evaluate governments, institutions, and democratic performance. They are commonly associated with lower institutional trust, cynicism, dissatisfaction with democracy and support for anti-establishment actors. Yet their consequences are neither automatic nor uniform. Citizens interpret information, attribute responsibility, assess institutional alternatives and evaluate their capacity to influence outcomes before deciding how to respond.
This panel distinguishes three pathways through which corruption-related dissatisfaction may be channeled: reformist, authoritarian, and disengagement. Conceptually, they represent different forms of Hirschman's voice and exit.
When the citizens opt for using their voice against corruption, we can talk about the reformist pathway. It emerges when corruption is understood as a serious but remediable failure of actors or institutions. Citizens respond by demanding transparency, electoral accountability, stronger oversight, whistleblower protection, and institutional renewal. Its viability does not only depend on the citizens, but on the interaction between the demand side of integrity—citizen agency, mobilization, and monitoring—and the supply side—independent, capable, and responsive institutions. Social empowerment is crucial: citizens must know how to report wrongdoing, expect protection from retaliation, and believe that complaints will be investigated. Effective reform may also require critical junctures, advocacy coalitions, administrative capacity, and leverage points capable of altering established incentives and expectations.
In contrast, when corruption is widespread or citizens perceive it as a problem with no clear solutions, they might opt for the exit mechanism. This one can have two different outcomes. On the one hand, an authoritarian pathway can arise when corruption is attributed to the establishment as a whole. Populist attitudes may reinforce this interpretation by framing politics as a moral conflict between a virtuous people and a corrupt elite. Targeted reform may then appear insufficient, increasing support for leaders willing to concentrate power or circumvent democratic constraints.
On the other hand, a disengagement pathway can emerge when citizens consider participation futile and withdraw through abstention, apathy, or declining involvement. In this case, citizens might not disengage from democracy as a preferred political system but might abstain from participating actively in politics.
This panel invites contributions examining this differente mechanisms, interactions and transitions among these pathways, connecting research on corruption, populism, democratic backsliding, political behaviour, public administration, and social accountability.