Who Shapes the Rural Vote? Socioeconomic Stratification and Electoral Independence in Khairpur, Sindh

This article analyzes the quantification of the electoral decision-making process in rural District Khairpur Mir's, in the context of the conditions in which the voters indicate that they make the choice independently, not mediated by the social environment. The analysis only draws on the structured household survey component of an overarching doctorate study, and does not include ethnographic observations and interview evidence. The data are drawn from 1504 households in 376 villages spread over the various areas of town committees and union councils. Descriptive statistics indicate that there is a high level of electoral participation, but the reported reasons for choosing a vote are largely relational, with 61 % citing biradari/wadera as the major influence on their choice of candidate, and 19 % citing Pir/Murshid as the major influence. Inferential analysis demonstrates significant associations between voting influence and education (χ² = 1031.520, df = 15, p < .001), occupation (χ² = 765.583, df = 18, p < .001), and monthly household income (χ² = 362.883, df = 9, p < .001). The strongest association is seen with education followed by occupation and income as shown by effect sizes calculated from the reported statistics. The survey also finds a significant accountability gap, with 60.9 % saying they were not satisfied or very not satisfied with their elected representatives, 85.4 % saying their representatives visited their villages rarely or not at all after their election and 68.2 % saying they did not receive any representation for the measured item. Despite the existence of religious authority, the latter is not always directive with 78% saying they received no guidance from a Murshid/Gadhi Nasheen on voting and 65.4% saying they didn't follow any instructions. The findings indicate that there is no lack of social stratification related to electoral independence in the rural areas. Overall the electorate seems to have more room for its own discretion regarding socioeconomic resources, with kinship and local authority still being the most important references for a significant portion of the electorate.