It goes without saying that political clientelism slows economic development, vitiates democracy, and allows politicians to hold onto power longer than they otherwise would. Political clientelism is often defined as giving material goods in return for electoral support. It is a system where the client (voter) supports a patron (politician) in exchange for some special privilege or benefit.
In the Naga parlance, voters support a particular candidate for jobs, works contracts, cash or other goods in return; or the prevailing cash-for-vote malpractice is another case in point. While a cursory observation is all it takes to conclude that political clientelism exists in Naga society, it remains unknown if any student of political science has undertaken any research and analysis on the practice.
Another definition of political clientelism is that it refers to allocation of goods, such as jobs or grants, by a patron to his clients, with an expected return of favors that reinforces patron leadership. In this case, it is more like the patron (politician) is consolidating his position by giving grants and privileges to his supporters so that he will be re-elected in the next election. The problem here is that it involves a discretionary usage of public resources without accountability. Hence, corruption.
Interestingly, the paradox of political clientelism is that there is an element of reciprocity and voluntarism here. Example, the voter willingly sells his vote or supports a candidate expecting a personal benefit in return, or is reciprocating for a benefit he has already taken. The relationship here is voluntary.
Given the critical effects political clientelism has on society, the need to research and understand its dynamics, its causes, and its consequences is strongly felt. Findings from such a research would definitely be a potent tool for the Clean Election Campaign too.