In developing countries, political activities are expensive. During campaigns,
candidates and parties incur the costs of hiring sta↵, advertising, traveling and potentially buying votes. Between elections, citizens exert pressure to receive private
benefits. Little is known, however, about how candidates and parties actually raise
funds. These candidates often campaign on development platforms, promising citizens that they will deliver quality public goods. It is not clear, though, that the
delivery of public goods is improving.
To examine these problems, I investigate the case of Ghana. Devoting one year to
field research, I observed the actions of political actors in 11 districts. I interviewed
over 200 local elites, including politicians, bureaucrats, private business owners and
traditional chiefs. I administered surveys to bureaucrats and gathered data on local
development projects.
Political financing and the quality of public–goods delivery are intertwined. Ghanaian
politics is financed by an “iron square” of politicians, bureaucrats, construction
contractors and party o"cials who covertly extract funds from public procurement.
Their actions reduce the funds available to build development projects, hinder the
ability of citizens to monitor project quality and drive honest contractors out of the
market. This system of political financing is ultimately sustained by the kinship
obligations that each player must satisfy.