Corruption across countries

1. Corruption across countries • How measured? • Perceptions (Corruptions Perceptions Index by Transparency International (TI) - experts and business owners), • More recently- “experience based measures” (also TI- Global Corruption Barometer – “have you or any member of your household paid a bribe to any public official in last year?” UN survey – “has any government official, for instance a customs officer, police officer or inspector asked or expected you to pay a bribe for their services? • Relation between the two.

2. Why is corruption greater in some countries than others? --Greater economic development (wealth) – less corruption --Greater urbanization is associated with greater corruption across countries --Longevity and extent of democracy (Polity measure of democracy includes free and fair elections for leg and exec, minority groups having full political rights, right to organize a political party, political choices free from domination by military, parties, religious and economic groups, transparency) higher voter turnout, and high party competition are associated with lower corruption - these factors vary more across countries than within the U.S.

3. More factors explaining variation in cross-national corruption Greater press freedom Protestant tradition (disappears when consider level of economic development) Greater regulation (costs to start a business, red tape of bureaucracy) High natural resource endowment/dependence of economy on oil, gas, mineral exports

4. Johnston, “Syndromes of Corruption” * Focus not on causes/varying amounts of corruption in different countries, but TYPE of corruption – who is involved and what they do * Corruption manifests differently in different settings, depending on political institutions and level of economic development

5. “Ideal types” or syndromes of corruption Influence markets Elite Cartels Oligarchs and Clans Official Moguls

6. Influence markets – US, Canada(also Japan) * Established democracies, mature economies, open and competitive politics, strong political institutions (legislatures, courts, independent bureaucracies) * Corruption revolves around ACCESS TO ESTABLISHED INSTITUTIONS, Focus on influencing who wins office, government cotnracts, and specific details of legislation/bureaucratic regulations

7. Elite cartels (e.g South Korea, Botswana,also Italy) * Corruption about control more than influence. * Leaders face growing and unpredictable political competition, Judiciary and enforcement of property rights questionable, Bureaucracies not truly independent. * Corruption used to protect interests of high level– not to influence specific policies as in Syndrome 1, but to use one’s position in shifting situation to maintain/gain political and economic benefits

8. Oligarch and Clan Corruption (Russia, Mexico, Phillipines) Political and financial institutions weak, civil society/trust weak, Property not secure, Courts can’t resolve disputes. Political and economic gains must often be protected by corruption or violence. Corrupt activities here involve a small # of elites and their extended personal clans (in Russia, 2000, 4-8 oligarchs)

9. Oligarch and Clan Corruption continued Capital often goes abroad because pol. and fin. Institutions weak. [poverty and instability mean much econ. activity takes place outside formal system – black market) Organized crime linked to corruption is prevalent (e.g. in Russia) – mobsters who provide protection to business entrepreneurs, elites who control different sectors of economy. Reformers/business rivals and politicians sometimes assassinated; Corruption ensures ineffective investigations and lack of prosecution.

10. Official Mogul Corruption (China, Kenya, Indonesia) *Institutions very weak, politics undemocratic, economy being liberalized, opportunities exist for enrichment. *Political power is personal, not democratic. *This syndrome is least focused of the 4 on influence within official state processes – instead powerholders use patronage or intimidation to get and maintain what they can *Personalities and agendas of leaders matter a lot

11. Official Moguls continued Sometimes “ruthless exploitation” of state and economy (even foreign loans/aid) by political/military leaders) Abuse of power commonly includes theft of public land/public resources, smuggling, tax evasion – corruption is more blatant than trying to gain access over politicians operating within an established institutional system “Unconstrained abuse of official power” (not just state and party leaders but professionals like lawyers, doctors, teachers) State institutions incapable of, restraining this behavior (or don’t want to)

12. National corruption before 1900 Rule of righteous: 1620-1790 Government by gentry: 1790-1828 Government by the humble: 1828-1864 (Jackson and the spoils system)

13. Post- Civil War period (1865-1900) Grant administration – remembered for a lot of scandal: Credit Mobilier Sanborn Contracts Whiskey Ring Star Routes

14. Common theme in corruption of scandals through end of Civil War • President’s ASSOCIATES were the ones who enjoyed financial benefits from modernization • (support for modernization theory of corruption) – opportunities that come from a growing and expanding country and economy with gov’t playing increasing role in trade (customs offices), railroads (financing building of RRs), communications (post offices) • Fuels movement for civil service reform

15. Doss and Ross reading #7 in coursepack • Anti-corruption reform in 1800s – fueled by scandals discussed earlier • Main effort: Pendleton Act (1883) • Public officials can’t raise campaign donations on government property • Government employees should be selected by competitive exams (civil service/merit system), but at first applied to only 10% of federal government jobs. • Presidents can add new jobs to civil service • Technical expertise replaces political loyalty as the main qualification for public service