Determinants of Vote Buying in Local Head Election in Indonesia

  • Heru Syah Putra Center for the Study and Education and Government Official Training IV, National Institute of Public Administration


The local head election in Indonesia suffers from vote buying. However, there is a lack of study compared to vote buying case in Indonesia, especially quantitative study. Therefore, this study aims to fill the gap. The purpose is to estimate the effect of individual and community characteristics on the probability of voter to consider money or gifts in a local head election. This study uses the data from Indonesia Family Life Survey 5 (IFLS5) conducted in 2014/2015 for 29,788 respondents. As the response is a binary data, the Linear Probability Model (LPM) and logit model is utilized.  The result shows that both individual and community characteristics affect vote buying in Indonesia. Voters with tertiary education are far less likely to consider money or gift by 29.1% than others. By using logit test, the coefficient is corrected. Voters with a university degree tend to not engage in vote buying by 0.27 times than the others. This study finds other interesting findings that gender matter in vote buying in Indonesia. Female voters tend to consider money or gift more than male by 2.44%. Voters who live in rural areas have a higher probability to consider vote buying by 4.55%. Living in the internet-connected community may reduce the probability of vote buying. The coefficient indicates that those with internet access have less probability to consider money or gift in an election by 1.35%.  Living in a community with high social awareness makes voters less vulnerable to vote buying. The coefficient indicates that they have less possibility to consider money by 2.44% than those living in communities with less social awareness. Thus, the strategy to eliminate vote buying should be adjusted to the character of voters in a certain community.


Ali, S. N., & Lin, C. (2013). Why People Vote: Ethical Motives and Social Incentives. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 5(2), 73–98.

Amos, B., Smith, D. A., & Ste. Claire, C. (2016). Reprecincting and Voting Behavior. Political Behavior, 39(1), 1–24.

Arceneaux, K., & Kolodny, R. (2009). Educating the Least Informed: Group Endorsements in a Grassroots Campaign. American Journal of Political Science, 53(4), 755–770.

Aspinall, E., & Rohman, N. (2017). Village Head Elections in Java: Money Politics and Brokerage in the Remaking of Indonesia’s Rural Elite. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 48(1), 31–52.

Aspinall, E., Rohman, N., Hamdi, A. Z., & Triantini, Z. E. (2017). Vote Buying in Indonesia: Candidate Strategies, Market Logic and Effectiveness. Journal of East Asian Studies, 17(1), 1–27.

Carreras, M., & İrepoğlu, Y. (2013). Trust in Elections, Vote Buying, and Turnout in Latin America. Electoral Studies, 32(4), 609–619.

Choi, N. (2007). Local Elections and Democracy in Indonesia: The Riau Archipelago. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 37(3), 326–345.

De La Poza, E., Jódar, L., & Pricop, A. (2017). Modelling and Analysing Voting Behaviour: the Case of the Spanish General Elections. Applied Economics, 49(13), 1287–1297.

Funk, P., & Gathmann, C. (2013). Voter Preferences, Direct Democracy and Government Spending. European Journal of Political Economy, 32, 300–319.

Gerber, A. S., Green, D. P., & Larimer, C. W. (2010). An Experiment Testing the Relative Effectiveness of Encouraging Voter Participation by Inducing Feelings of Pride or Shame. Political Behavior, 32(3), 409–422.

Gerber, A. S., & Rogers, T. (2009). Descriptive Social Norms and Motivation to Vote: Everybody’s Voting and so Should You. The Journal of Politics, 71(1), 178–191.

Gerber, E. R., & Lewis, J. B. (2004). Beyond the Median: Voter Preferences, District Heterogeneity, and Political Representation. Journal of Political Economy, 112(6), 1364–1383.

Hill, D. (2003). Communication for a New Democracy: Indonesia’s first Online Elections. The Pacific Review, 16(4), 525–547.

Kolstad, I., & Wiig, A. (2016). Education and Electoral Participation: Reported Versus Actual Voting Behaviour. Applied Economics Letters, 23(13), 908–911.

Liddle, R. W., & Mujani, S. (2007). Leadership, Party and Religion: Explaining Voting Behavior in Indonesia. Comparative Political Studies.

Nichter, S. (2008). Vote Buying or Turnout Buying? Machine Politics and the Secret Ballot. American Political Science Review, 102(1), 19–31.

Nichter, S. (2014). Conceptualizing Vote Buying. Electoral Studies, 35, 315–327.

Nurdin, A. (2011). Studi Perilaku Pemilih di Indonesia: Fenomena Pemilih Rasional - Pragmatis. Pandeglang.

Nurdin, A. (2016). Vote Buying and Voting Behavior In Indonesian Local Election: A Case In Pandeglang District. Global Journal of Political Science and Administration, 4(1), 10–19. Retrieved from

Persson, M. (2013). Is the Effect of Education on Voter Turnout Absolute or Relative? A Multi-level Analysis of 37 Countries. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 23(2), 111–133.

Pradhan, M., Suryadarma, D., Beatty, A., Wong, M., Alishjabana, A., Gaduh, A., & Artha, R. P. (2014). Improving Education Quality through Enhancing Community Participation: Results from a Randomized Field Experiment in Indonesia. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 6(2), 105–126.

Rauh, C. (2017). Voting, Education, and the Great Gatsby Curve. Journal of Public Economics, 146(Supplement C), 1–14.

Sandholt, P., & Justesen, M. K. (2014). Poverty and Vote Buying: Survey-based Evidence from Africa. Electoral Studies, 33, 220–232.

Schaffer, F. C., & Schedler, A. (2006). What Is Vote Buying? The Limits of the Market Model.

Teh, Y. K. (2002). Money Politics in Malaysia. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 32(3), 338–345.

Wooldridge, J. M. (2013). Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach. Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning.
How to Cite
PUTRA, Heru Syah. Determinants of Vote Buying in Local Head Election in Indonesia. Jurnal Bina Praja: Journal of Home Affairs Governance, [S.l.], v. 9, n. 2, p. 205-218, nov. 2017. ISSN 2503-3360. Available at: <>. Date accessed: 25 mar. 2018. doi: