Intimate Dependencies in Policy Favoritism or Nepotism
When it comes to political leadership, there is often a strong emphasis on the notion that leaders must be independent and unbiased in their decision making.
Many studies have shown that this may not always be the case, as leaders can exhibit behaviors known as "intimate dependencies" where they prioritize the needs of individuals who are close to them over those of the general public. These intimate dependencies can manifest themselves in various ways, such as granting favors to family members, friends, or other associates, which can lead to patterns of policy favoritism or nepotism. This phenomenon has been observed across cultures and time periods, from ancient societies to modern nations.
One example of an intimate dependency behavior in leadership is favoritism towards family members. In some cases, leaders appoint relatives to positions of power, regardless of their qualifications or abilities.
In Nigeria's third republic, the military leader Ibrahim Babangida appointed his daughter Maryam as head of the National Planning Commission, despite her lack of experience in economics. Similarly, in Egypt under President Hosni Mubarak, his son Gamal was widely seen as being groomed for succession, even though he had no clear track record of achievements in government. Such practices can create a culture of cronyism within the government, where only those with connections to the leader are able to thrive.
Another form of intimate dependency behavior is the use of nepotism, where leaders give preferential treatment to friends or associates, rather than selecting the most qualified candidates for positions. This practice is often cited as one of the reasons for corruption in many countries, as it allows leaders to reward those who support them while ignoring more competent individuals.
In India, there have been numerous allegations that Prime Minister Narendra Modi awarded contracts to companies linked to his close supporters, leading to accusations of favoritism and potential misuse of public funds. Nepotism also exists in business, with corporate executives sometimes giving jobs to their children or other family members without considering their actual skills.
Intimate dependencies can also manifest themselves in less direct ways, such as through political patronage networks. These networks involve politicians offering favors, such as access to resources or protection from prosecution, in exchange for loyalty and support. In some cases, these networks may be based on personal relationships between individual leaders and their followers, which could lead to policy decisions that benefit certain groups at the expense of others. A well-known example is the patronage politics practiced by former Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos, who used his position to enrich himself and his inner circle at the expense of the country's economy.
Intimate dependencies in leadership can take various forms, including favoritism towards relatives, nepotism, and patronage networks. While these behaviors may seem harmless on the surface, they can ultimately undermine democratic processes and lead to corruption and abuses of power. It is crucial for leaders to resist these temptations and focus on serving the needs of all citizens, regardless of their connections or backgrounds.
In what ways do intimate dependencies of leaders manifest in patterns of policy favoritism or nepotism?
Although the specific mechanisms through which intimate dependencies impact policy decisions may vary depending on context, research has consistently shown that close personal relationships between individuals in power can lead to biased decision making in areas such as hiring practices, promotions, and resource allocation (for example, Kassinove & Shapiro 1987).