IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/ecdecc/doi10.1086-722486.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Educated Candidates Less Corrupt Bureaucrats? Evidence from Randomized Audits in Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Caíque Melo
  • Robson Tigre

Abstract

In this paper, we test whether more educated candidates make less corrupt public managers. Leveraging electoral regression discontinuity design and a randomized inspection program, we show that more educated candidates commit 32% fewer moderate infringements (associated with public management), but we do not find a differential in severe irregularities (corruption related). Exploiting data on judicial records, we find this effect does not stem from differences in corrupt behavior and might be explained by differences in managerial skills. In addition, more educated mayors have the same chance of running again and being reelected as their less educated peers. Taking advantage of administrative labor records, our examination of possible mechanisms shows that educated candidates have more previous experience in the public sector and high-skill positions. Finally, we find no difference in the provision of public goods between these two groups. In summary, we find that more educated candidates are more effective bureaucrats rather than better politicians.

Suggested Citation

  • Caíque Melo & Robson Tigre, 2024. "Are Educated Candidates Less Corrupt Bureaucrats? Evidence from Randomized Audits in Brazil," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 72(3), pages 1493-1526.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucp:ecdecc:doi:10.1086/722486
    DOI: 10.1086/722486
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/722486
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/722486
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/722486?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:ecdecc:doi:10.1086/722486. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/EDCC .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.