Political Corruption and Institutional Stability

Fjelde, Hanne; Hegre, Håvard

doi:10.1007/s12116-014-9155-1

Cited by 48 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Research on the causes, consequences and combat strategies of corruption are manifold and very revealing. Previous studies indicate, for example, that wellestablished democracies show lower levels of corruption than authoritarian regimes or young democracies [3][4][5][6]. At the same time, high levels of corruption undermine democracy.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Corruption and the impact of democracy

Kubbe

Engelbert

2017

Crime Law Soc Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corruption -broadly defined as the misuse of public office for private gains [1, 2] -costs every country a large amount of financial, political and social resources every year. Research on the causes, consequences and combat strategies of corruption are manifold and very revealing. Previous studies indicate, for example, that wellestablished democracies show lower levels of corruption than authoritarian regimes or young democracies [3][4][5][6]. At the same time, high levels of corruption undermine democracy. By diverting rare resources from disadvantaged people, it damages the rule of law, social justice and lowers the trust of citizens in political institutions and processes [7,8].The reciprocal democracy-corruption nexus has already been analyzed in several studies and is nowadays well-established [9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. Previous research shows that democracy does not guarantee clean and transparent governance at all and democratic systems are still fighting against corruption [16][17][18][19][20], even in countries that are often seen as almost free of corruption. Yet, frequent scandals like in the United Kingdom, Iceland, United States or Spain illustrate that corruption is a serious problem in nearly every state in the world (e.g. [21]).This Special Issue focuses on the relationship between corruption and the impact of democracy from diverse perspectives and different regions and countries around the world. Specifically, the following articles consider the role of democratic institutions in curbing corruption, the interrelation between democratic values and corrupt behavior, and the importance of corruption in democratization processes in post-conflict states. The findings of this issue illustrate that there is no 'one size fits all' solution for preventing corruption, yet there are certain mechanisms and elements in democratic and democratizing countries that support anti-corruption.Crime Law Soc Change

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Corruption and the impact of democracy

Kubbe

Engelbert

2017

Crime Law Soc Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Considering how corruption is defined in many official and academic texts, it would seem obvious that a more open and democratic society where the political process is transparent is better positioned to control the abuse of public power for private gain (Fjelde and Hegre, 2014). However, this link is not as straightforward as it seems.…”

Section: Anti-corruption Discourse Through the Lens Of Governmentalitmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corrupt governance: Self-defeating anti-corruption rhetoric and initiatives in Russia

Pavlova

2020

New Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resilience theory has been used to describe the “bounce back” effect—a system’s ability to recover to its normal state after a shock. While this usually applies to systems whose survival is seen in a positive light (such as democracy), this article emphasizes the other, darker side of this phenomenon. I demonstrate how anti-corruption discourse can support certain practices that actually contribute to the resilience of corruption. By comparing the anti-corruption discourses of the Russian government and its political opposition, this article shows the interdependence and mutual reinforcement of two practices: (I) the pervasive resolution of everyday problems by corrupt methods and (II) focusing on the corruption of particular actors as the main obstacle to the development of the country and society. The effect of this interdependence is ambivalent, as both practices challenge corruption and contribute to its resilience. In effect, this becomes a mode of government and I link the concept of resilience with the literature on governmentality to better illuminate the endurance of corruption in Russia despite sincere (and even well-intended) anti-corruption campaigns. This model of rethinking the resilience of corrupt practices with the special focus on anti-corruption rhetoric can be applied to other countries where corruption serves as a pivot of the social and economic system, as it does in Russia.

show abstract

“…In a variant of Keefer's hypothesis, Fjelde and Hegre () apply a dynamic multinomial regression model to data for 133 countries for the 1985–2008 period to study the relationship between political corruption and political regime stability. They find a “vicious” equilibrium in which high levels of political corruption stabilize nondemocratic and semidemocratic (hybrid) regimes and make them more resistant both to further democratization and to reductions in the level of corruption.…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Neo‐patrimonialism and Corruption: Evidence from 8,436 Firms in 17 Countries in Sub‐Saharan Africa

Araral

Pak

Pelizzo

et al. 2019

Public Administration Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article introduces four innovations to the literature on administrative corruption. First, it employs a neo‐patrimonialism framework by addressing measurement, identification, and endogeneity issues that beset the literature. Second, unlike cross‐country studies, it uses firms as the unit of analysis. Third, unlike the conventional literature, the article uses large‐n (n = 8,436) panel survey data of key informants in 17 countries in sub‐Saharan Africa. Finally, unlike the conventional literature, the article focuses on a particular type of corruption: the supply and demand for bribery. The authors find that the uncertainty associated with neo‐patrimonialism has a strong, positive, and significant effect on the propensity of civil servants to demand bribes in exchange for services and for firms to supply bribes in exchange for winning government contracts. The results are robust to controls on the characteristics of firms and their regulatory environments. The article concludes with implications for research and practice.

show abstract

Political Corruption and Institutional Stability

Cited by 48 publications

References 57 publications

Corruption and the impact of democracy

Corruption and the impact of democracy

Corrupt governance: Self-defeating anti-corruption rhetoric and initiatives in Russia

Neo‐patrimonialism and Corruption: Evidence from 8,436 Firms in 17 Countries in Sub‐Saharan Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About