IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/cbscwp/330.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Kin in the game: How family ties help firms overcome campaign finance regulation

Author

Listed:
  • Balán, Pablo
  • Dodyk, Juan
  • Puente, Ignacio

Abstract

Can campaign finance regulation curb the political influence of economic actors? In this article, we identify a new factor that may hinder its effectiveness-the social structure of organizations. We argue that such regulation creates cooperation dilemmas in firms' leadership and propose that a specific feature of organizations-family ties-help solve such problems. We evaluate this argument by studying a Supreme Court ban on corporate contributions in Brazil. Using a difference-in-differences design and data on family ties in Brazilian public companies, we show that, following the ban, members of firms' controlling families substitute individual for corporate contributions. Furthermore, we document the presence of peer effects in the contribution behavior of family members, suggesting that family ties transmit influence. These bifurcated effects illustrate how organizational structure can be a source of de facto power by limiting the effectiveness of programmatic reforms, and thus contain a cautionary tale for policymakers.

Suggested Citation

  • Balán, Pablo & Dodyk, Juan & Puente, Ignacio, 2023. "Kin in the game: How family ties help firms overcome campaign finance regulation," Working Papers 330, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:cbscwp:330
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/273090/1/1850995524.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Claessens, Stijn & Feijen, Erik & Laeven, Luc, 2008. "Political connections and preferential access to finance: The role of campaign contributions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(3), pages 554-580, June.
    2. Li, Zhao, 2018. "How Internal Constraints Shape Interest Group Activities: Evidence from Access-Seeking PACs," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 112(4), pages 792-808, November.
    3. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, December.
    4. Natalie Bau, 2021. "Can Policy Change Culture? Government Pension Plans and Traditional Kinship Practices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(6), pages 1880-1917, June.
    5. Benjamin Enke, 2019. "Kinship, Cooperation, and the Evolution of Moral Systems," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(2), pages 953-1019.
    6. Avner Greif & Guido Tabellini, 2010. "Cultural and Institutional Bifurcation: China and Europe Compared," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(2), pages 135-140, May.
    7. Nicholas Carnes & Noam Lupu, 2015. "Rethinking the Comparative Perspective on Class and Representation: Evidence from Latin America," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 59(1), pages 1-18, January.
    8. Audinga Baltrunaite, 2020. "Political Contributions and Public Procurement: Evidence from Lithuania," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 541-582.
    9. Stuckatz, Jan, 2022. "How the Workplace Affects Employee Political Contributions," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 116(1), pages 54-69, February.
    10. Charles F. Manski, 1993. "Identification of Endogenous Social Effects: The Reflection Problem," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 60(3), pages 531-542.
    11. Alberto F. Alesina & Marlon Seror & David Y. Yang & Yang You & Weihong Zeng, 2020. "Persistence Despite Revolutions," NBER Working Papers 27053, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Jacob Moscona & Nathan Nunn & James A. Robinson, 2017. "Keeping It in the Family: Lineage Organization and the Scope of Trust in Sub-Saharan Africa," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 565-571, May.
    13. Steinert-Threlkeld, Zachary C., 2017. "Spontaneous Collective Action: Peripheral Mobilization During the Arab Spring," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 111(2), pages 379-403, May.
    14. Marianne Bertrand & Antoinette Schoar, 2006. "The Role of Family in Family Firms," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 73-96, Spring.
    15. Naidu, Suresh & Robinson, James A. & Young, Lauren E., 2021. "Social Origins of Dictatorships: Elite Networks and Political Transitions in Haiti," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 115(3), pages 900-916, August.
    16. Balán, Pablo & Dodyk, Juan & Puente, Ignacio, 2022. "The political behavior of family firms: Evidence from Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    17. Wang, Yuhua, 2022. "Blood is Thicker Than Water: Elite Kinship Networks and State Building in Imperial China," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 116(3), pages 896-910, August.
    18. David A. Siegel, 2009. "Social Networks and Collective Action," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 122-138, January.
    19. Mahsa Akbari & Duman Bahrami‐Rad & Erik O. Kimbrough & Pedro P. Romero & Sadegh Alhosseini, 2020. "An Experimental Study Of Kin And Ethnic Favoritism," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 58(4), pages 1795-1812, October.
    20. Robert M. Bond & Christopher J. Fariss & Jason J. Jones & Adam D. I. Kramer & Cameron Marlow & Jaime E. Settle & James H. Fowler, 2012. "A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization," Nature, Nature, vol. 489(7415), pages 295-298, September.
    21. Cruz, Cesi & Labonne, Julien & Querubín, Pablo, 2020. "Social Network Structures and the Politics of Public Goods Provision: Evidence from the Philippines," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 114(2), pages 486-501, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. James E. Alt & Amalie Jensen & Horacio Larreguy & David D. Lassen & John Marshall, 2022. "Diffusing Political Concerns: How Unemployment Information Passed between Social Ties Influences Danish Voters," Post-Print hal-03566206, HAL.
    2. Siwan Anderson & Chris Bidner, 2021. "An Institutional Perspective on the Economics of the Family," Discussion Papers dp21-14, Department of Economics, Simon Fraser University.
    3. Collins, Matthew, 2022. "Sibling Gender, Inheritance Customs and Educational Attainment: Evidence from Matrilineal and Patrilineal Societies," Working Papers 2022:5, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    4. Balán, Pablo & Dodyk, Juan & Puente, Ignacio, 2022. "The political behavior of family firms: Evidence from Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    5. Jacob Moscona & Nathan Nunn & James A. Robinson, 2020. "Segmentary Lineage Organization and Conflict in Sub‐Saharan Africa," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(5), pages 1999-2036, September.
    6. Hirofumi Takesue, 2020. "From defection to ingroup favoritism to cooperation: simulation analysis of the social dilemma in dynamic networks," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 189-207, April.
    7. Cheng, Jiameng & Dai, Yanke & Lin, Shu & Ye, Haichun, 2021. "Clan culture and family ownership concentration: Evidence from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    8. Ruomeng Cui & Dennis J. Zhang & Achal Bassamboo, 2019. "Learning from Inventory Availability Information: Evidence from Field Experiments on Amazon," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 1216-1235, March.
    9. Kiichi Tokuoka, 2017. "Is stock investment contagious among siblings?," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1505-1528, June.
    10. Giovanni Cerulli, 2014. "ntreatreg: a Stata module for estimation of treatment effects in the presence of neighborhood interactions," United Kingdom Stata Users' Group Meetings 2014 15, Stata Users Group.
    11. Marco Manacorda & Andrea Tesei, 2020. "Liberation Technology: Mobile Phones and Political Mobilization in Africa," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 533-567, March.
    12. Sara Lowes & Etienne Le Rossignol, 2022. "Ancestral Livelihoods and Moral Universalism: Evidence from Transhumant Pastoralist Societies," Working Papers hal-04083412, HAL.
    13. Florence Goffette-Nagot & Claire Dujardin, 2005. "Neighborhood effects, public housing and unemployment in France," Working Papers 0505, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    14. Maness, Michael & Cirillo, Cinzia, 2016. "An indirect latent informational conformity social influence choice model: Formulation and case study," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 93(PA), pages 75-101.
    15. Khushbu Mishra & Abdoul G. Sam & Gracious M. Diiro & Mario J. Miranda, 2020. "Gender and the dynamics of technology adoption: Empirical evidence from a household‐level panel data," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(6), pages 857-870, November.
    16. Debopam Bhattacharya & Pascaline Dupas & Shin Kanaya, 2019. "Demand and Welfare Analysis in Discrete Choice Models with Social Interactions," CREATES Research Papers 2019-09, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    17. Voigt, Stefan, 2022. "Determinant of Social Norms," ILE Working Paper Series 58, University of Hamburg, Institute of Law and Economics.
    18. Nan Zhang & Qiaozhuan Liang & Huiying Li & Xiao Wang, 2022. "The organizational relationship–based political connection and debt financing: Evidence from Chinese private firms," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(1), pages 69-105, January.
    19. Kere, Eric Nazindigouba & Choumert, Johanna & Combes Motel, Pascale & Combes, Jean Louis & Santoni, Olivier & Schwartz, Sonia, 2017. "Addressing Contextual and Location Biases in the Assessment of Protected Areas Effectiveness on Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazônia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 148-158.
    20. Yann Algan & Quoc-Anh Do & Nicolò Dalvit & Alexis Le Chapelain & Yves Zenou, 2015. "How Social Networks Shape Our Beliefs: A Natural Experiment among Future French Politicians," Working Papers hal-03459820, HAL.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:cbscwp:330. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gsuchus.html .

    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.