This article discusses the purposes and drivers of handouts in party primaries in Malawi. We argue that existing explanations of handouts are incomplete because they are developed to identify dynamics in presidential or legislative elections. Rules of national elections are constitutionally protected, and their fairness is monitored by both local and international observers. In contrast, rules guiding candidate selection in parties are less institutionalized, and, in some contexts, such as Malawi, a secret ballot cannot be taken for granted. This underlines the need for empirical studies of the logic of handouts at the candidate selection stage to study how differences in institutional context affect the strategic choices behind engaging in the practice. We demonstrate why such an analysis needs to be informed by an in-depth knowledge about the party organizations in which the candidate selection process itself takes place. Through qualitative interviews with members of selectorates and party primary contestants, we find that the institutional environment affects the propensity to use handouts. Mechanisms such as leadership interventions and the opportunity to stand as independent candidates make primary outcomes less final. This reduces the authority of local party organizations to control candidate selection and appropriates the use of patrimonial strategies.

中文翻译：

---

了解候选人选拔中的讲义：挑战马拉维的政党权威

本文讨论了在马拉维党内初选发放救济的目的和驱动因素。我们认为，现有对讲义的解释是不完整的，因为它们是为了识别总统或立法选举中的动态而开发的。全国选举规则受到宪法保护，其公平性受到当地和国际观察员的监督。相比之下，指导政党候选人选择的规则没有那么制度化，而且在某些情况下，例如马拉维，不能将无记名投票视为理所当然。这强调了在候选人选择阶段对讲义的逻辑进行实证研究的必要性，以研究制度背景的差异如何影响参与实践的战略选择。我们证明了为什么这种分析需要通过对候选人选择过程本身所在的党组织的深入了解来进行。通过对选拔者和党内初选候选人的定性访谈，我们发现制度环境会影响使用施舍的倾向。诸如领导干预和作为独立候选人的机会等机制使得主要结果不那么最终。这降低了地方党组织控制候选人选择的权力，并适当使用了世袭策略。我们发现制度环境会影响使用讲义的倾向。诸如领导干预和作为独立候选人的机会等机制使得主要结果不那么最终。这降低了地方党组织控制候选人选择的权力，并适当使用了世袭策略。我们发现制度环境会影响使用讲义的倾向。诸如领导干预和作为独立候选人的机会等机制使得主要结果不那么最终。这降低了地方党组织控制候选人选择的权力，并适当使用了世袭策略。