Corruption in Higher Education: Conceptual Approaches and Measurement Techniques

Abstract

Corruption is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. Forms of corruption are multiple. Measuring corruption is necessary not only for getting ideas about the scale and scope of the problem, but for making simple comparisons between the countries and conducting comparative analysis of corruption. While the total impact of corruption is indeed difficult to measure and even more so internal changes in corruption, some aspects of corruption may be quantified and measured. This article presents major conceptual approaches to corruption and develops a technique for measuring the distribution of graft in a higher education industry by using some ideas about bribery and other forms of corruption among the faculty members in higher education institutions in transition and developing nations. In order to measure the level of corruption and its changes over time or changes due to government intervention and other anticorruption efforts, the author combines two indicators, namely the number of corrupt faculty members who take bribes in a given period of time and the value of the average bribe, calculated as weighted average. The author also introduces the Distribution index (DI), the weighted DI, and the share weighted DI in order to capture internal changes in the distribution of graft. The proposed methodology may be applied in measuring corruption in higher education across the nations and making comparisons.

Recuo ao cientificismo, paradoxos da transparência e corrupção em educação

“…O impacto global da corrupção é difícil de medir, embora alguns aspectos possam ser quantificados (OSIPIAN, 2007). Mas essa dificuldade ocorre também em aspectos específicos, como acontece, por exemplo, quando se pretende verificar o impacto da corrupção nos resultados escolares 2002).…”

Education Corruption, Reform, and Growth: Case of Post-Soviet Russia

“…There are some methodologies that allow approaching the issue of corruption and measuring it (see, for instance, Bellver and Kaufmann, 2005;Besançon, 2003;Kaufmann and Kraay, 2003;Osipian, 2007a), including legalistic (Kaufmann and Vicente, 2005;Osipian, 2009e;Zimring and Johnson, 2005) and economic ones (Kaufmann et.al., 2000;Rose-Ackerman, 1978, 1999. Lancaster and Montinola (1997) suggest that studies of corruption should assess rival explanations.…”

Vouchers, tests, loans, privatization: Will they help tackle corruption in Russian higher education?

“…The reliability of surveys and interviews is undermined by the sensitivity of the topic, since corruption is illegal. Some methodologies do make it possible to approach the issue of corruption and measure it; see, for instance, Bellver and Kaufmann 2005;Besançon 2003;Kaufmann and Kraay 2003;and Osipian 2007a. Some of these methods also involve law (Kaufmann and Vicente 2005;Osipian 2008f;2009c;Zimring and Johnson 2005) and economics (Kaufmann et al 2000;Rose-Ackerman 1978;.…”