Ambivalence, Political Consensus and Conditionality: Support for Whistleblowing among Danish Employees

1Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Whistleblower research is understandably focused around the protagonists of the practice. We still know surprisingly little about how whistleblowing is perceived in the wider population. Drawing on a representative survey of Danish employees (N = 1,709), this paper analyses how whistleblower public support is distributed along variables such as political preference, political interest and job type, and tests whether it is conditional on whistleblower motivation and type of wrongdoing. The paper finds that public support is strong but also ambivalent. It shows that support is evenly distributed along party preference. It also demonstrates that support is not uniform but conditional on the characteristics of the whistleblower situation. These insights are important for both social and political reasons in the present situation where whistleblowing seems to be on the rise. From a policy perspective, it offers policymakers an important evidence-based navigation tool in devising whistleblower legislation.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Olesen, T. (2021). Ambivalence, Political Consensus and Conditionality: Support for Whistleblowing among Danish Employees. Scandinavian Political Studies, 44(1), 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.12188

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free