1932

Abstract

Normative theorists of corruption have developed an institutional conception that is distinct from both the individualist approaches focused on quid pro quo exchanges and other institutional approaches found in the literature on developing societies. These theorists emphasize the close connection between patterns of corruption and the legitimate functions of institutions. The corruption benefits the institution while undermining it. Reforms therefore should be directed toward finding alternatives for the functions the corruption serves. Also, institutional corruption does not require that its perpetrators have corrupt motives, and it is not limited to political institutions. This review examines four leading theories and discusses criticisms of their approach. A tripartite framework for analyzing the elements of institutional corruption is proposed. Although the theories are useful for distinguishing institutional corruption from the more familiar forms of individual corruption, they could be enriched by giving greater attention to the work on individual corruption in its structural forms in developing societies.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-120117-110316
2018-05-11
2024-04-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/polisci/21/1/annurev-polisci-120117-110316.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-120117-110316&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Acemoglu D, Robinson J 2010. The role of institutions in growth and development. Leadership and Growth D Brady, M Spence 135–64 Washington, DC: World Bank
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Aidt TJ, Dutta J, Sena V 2003. Economic analysis of corruption: a survey. Econ. J. 113:Nov.632–52
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Amit E, Koralnik J, Posten A-C, Muethel M 2017. Institutional corruption revisited: exploring open questions within the institutional corruption literature. South. Calif. Interdisc. Law J. 26:d447–67
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bussell J 2015. Typologies of corruption: a pragmatic approach. Greed, Corruption and the Modern State S Rose-Ackerman, P Lagunes 21–45 Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ceva E 2018. Political corruption as a relational injustice. Soc. Philos. Policy. In press
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Ceva E, Ferretti MP 2014. Liberal democratic institutions and the damages of political corruption. Ateliers de l'éthique/Ethics Forum 9:1126–45
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Ceva E, Ferretti MP 2017. Political corruption. Philos. Compass 7:21–10
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Ceva E, Ferretti MP 2018. Political corruption, individual behavior, and the quality of institutions. Political Philos. Econ. In press
  9. Dincer O, Johnston M 2015. Illegal and legal corruption in American states Safra Res Lab Work. Pap. No. 58, Harvard Univ Cambridge, MA: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2579300
  10. Dobel JP 1978. The corruption of a state. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 72:3958–73
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Euben JP 1989. Corruption. Political Innovation and Conceptual Change T Ball, J Farr, RL Hanson 220–45 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Ferretti MP 2018. A taxonomy of institutional corruption. Soc. Philos. Policy. In press
  13. Friedrich CJ 1972. The Pathology of Politics New York: Harper & Row
  14. Gutmann A, Thompson D 1996. Democracy and Disagreement Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  15. Hasen RL 2013. Is “dependence corruption” distinct from a political equality argument for campaign finance laws? A reply to Professor Lessig. Election Law J 123:305–16
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Hellman D 2012–13. Defining corruption and constitutionalizing democracy. Mich. Law Rev. 111:81385–422
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Huntington SP 1968. Political Order in Changing Societies New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
  18. Institute of Medicine. 2009. Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press
  19. Johnston M 2014. Corruption, Contention and Reform: The Power of Deep Democratization Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  20. Kesselheim AS, Robertson CT, Myers JA, Rose SL, Gillet V et al. 2012. A randomized study of how physicians interpret research funding disclosures. N. Engl. J. Med. 367:121119–27
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Kurer O 2015. Definition of corruption. Routledge Handbook of Political Corruption PM Heywood 30–55 Abington, UK: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Le V-H, de Haan J, Dietzenbacher E 2013. Do higher government wages reduce corruption? Evidence based on a novel dataset CESifo Work. Pap. Ser. No. 4254 Cent. Econ. Stud./ifo Inst Munich, Ger: www.ifo.de/w/cAgtE4gt
  23. Lessig L 2011. Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress—and a Plan to Stop It New York: Hatchette
  24. Lessig L 2012. A reply to Professor Hasen. Harvard Law Rev. Forum 126:61–74
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Lessig L 2013.a “Institutional corruption” defined. J. Law Med. Ethics 413:553–55
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Lessig L 2013.b Institutional corruptions Safra Res. Lab Work. Pap. No. 1, Mar. 15 Harvard Univ Cambridge MA: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2233582
  27. Lessig L 2014. What an originalist would understand corruption to mean. Calif. Law Rev. 102:11–24
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Miller S 2010. The Moral Foundations of Social Institutions: A Philosophical Study Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  29. Miller S 2011. Corruption. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy EN Zalta. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2011/entries/corruption/
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Miller S 2016. Corruption and Anti-Corruption in Policing—Philosophical and Ethical Issues Cham, Switz: Springer Int.
  31. Miller S 2017. Institutional Corruption: A Study in Applied Philosophy Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  32. Miller S, Roberts P, Spence E 2005. Corruption and Anti-Corruption Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall
  33. Montesquieu BDE 1949–1951. De L'ésprit des Lois. Montesquieu: Oeuvres Complètes R Caillois 349–66 Paris: Gallimard
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Moore DA, Tetlock PE, Tanlu L, MH Bazerman MH 2006. Conflicts of interest and the case of auditor independence: moral seduction and strategic issue cycling. Acad. Manag. Rev. 31:110–29
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Mungiu-Pippidi A 2006. Corruption: diagnosis and treatment. J. Democr. 17:386–99
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Mungiu-Pippidi A 2013. Controlling corruption through collective action. J. Democr. 24:1101–15
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Néron P-Y 2014. Á quoi sert la conception institutionelle de la corruption. ? Ateliers de l'éthique/Ethics Forum 9:1103–25
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Newhouse ME 2014. Institutional corruption: a fiduciary theory. Cornell J. Law Public Policy 23:553–94
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Nye J 2007. Corruption and political development: a cost-benefit analysis. Political Corruption: Concepts and Contexts AJ Heidenheimer, M Johnston 281–300 New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. , 3rd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Olken BA, Pande R 2012. Corruption in developing countries. Annu. Rev. Econ. 4:479–509
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Peisakhin LV 2012. Transparency and corruption: evidence from India. J. Law Econ. 55:1129–49
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Peisakhin LV, Pinto P 2010. Is transparency an effective anti-corruption strategy? Evidence from a field experiment in India. Regul. Governance 4:3261–80
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Persson A, Rothstein B, Teorel J 2012. Why anticorruption reforms fail. Governance 26:3449–71
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Peters BG 2016. Institutional analysis: progress and problems. Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Political Science H Keman, JJ Woldendorp 127–40 Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Philp M 1997. Defining political corruption. Political Corruption PM Heywood 20–46 Oxford, UK: Blackwell
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Philp M 2015. The definition of political corruption. Routledge Handbook of Political Corruption PM Heywood 17–29 Abington, UK: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Philp M, Dávid-Barrett E 2015. Realism about political corruption. Annu. Rev. Political Sci. 18:387–402
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Potter JD, Tavits M 2011. Curbing corruption with political institutions. International Handbook on the Economics of Corruption S Rose-Ackerman, T Soreide 252–78 Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
    [Google Scholar]
  49. PricewaterhouseCoopers. 2008. Confronting corruption: the business case for an effective anti-corruption programme Rep. PricewaterhouseCoopers Global Anti-Corruption Serv. https://www.pwc.co.za/en/assets/pdf/pwc-confronting-corruption-08.pdf
  50. Rawls J 2005. Political Liberalism expanded New York: Columbia Univ. Press
  51. Robertson CT, Kesselheim AS 2016. Blinding as a Solution to Bias: Strengthening Biomedical Science, Forensic Science, and Law Amsterdam: Elsevier Acad.
  52. Rose-Ackerman S, Palifka BJ 2016. Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences, and Reform New York: Cambridge Univ. Press. , 2nd ed..
  53. Rothstein B 2011.a Anti-corruption: the indirect “big bang” approach. Rev. Int. Political Econ. 18:2228–50
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Rothstein B 2011.b Quality of Government Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  55. Rothstein B, Varraich A 2017. Making Sense of Corruption Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  56. Serafeim G 2014. Firm competitiveness and detection of bribery Work. Pap. No. 14–012, Harvard Bus School, Cambridge, MA: July. http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/14-012_42a7455b-4a8a-4393-a16a-18b0de5278ba.pdf
  57. Shulman JL, Bowen WG 2002. The Game of Life: College Sports and Educational Values Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  58. Stark A 1995. The appearance of official impropriety and the concept of political crime. Ethics 105:326–51
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Stark A 2004. Conflict of Interest in American Public Life Cambridge MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  60. Svallfors S 2013. Government quality, egalitarianism, and attitudes to taxes and social spending: a European comparison. European Political Sci Rev 5:3363–380
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Teachout Z 2014. Corruption in America Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  62. Thompson DF 1993. Mediated corruption: the case of the Keating Five. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 87:2369–81
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Thompson DF 1995. Ethics in Congress: From Individual to Institutional Corruption Washington, DC: Brookings Inst.
  64. Thompson DF 2005.a Two concepts of corruption. Geo. Wash. Law Rev. 73:1036–69
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Thompson DF 2005.b Representatives in the welfare state. Restoring Responsibility99–126 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Thompson DF 2013. Two concepts of corruption Safra Res. Lab Work. Pap., Harvard Univ Cambridge, MA: Soc. Sci. Res. Netw. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2304419
  67. Thompson DF 2017. Designing responsibility: the problem of many hands in complex organizations. Designing Ethics J Van Den Hoven, S Miller, T Pogge 32–56 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Transparency International. 2010. Regulating the revolving door Transparency Int. Work. Pap. No. 06/2010. https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/working_paper_06_2010_regulating_the_revolving_door
  69. Treisman D 2007. What have we learned about the causes of corruption from ten years of cross-national empirical research?. Annu. Rev. Political Sci. 10:1211–44
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Underkuffler L 2013. Captured by Evil: The Idea of Corruption in Law New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
  71. Uslaner EM 2008. Corruption, Inequality, and the Rule of Law Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  72. Warren ME 2004. What does corruption mean in a democracy?. Am. J. Political Sci. 48:2328–43
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Warren ME 2006.a Democracy and deceit: regulating appearances of corruption. Am. J. Political Sci. 50:1160–74
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Warren ME 2006.b Political corruption as duplicitous exclusion. PS Political Sci. Politics 39:4803–7
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Warren ME 2015. The meaning of corruption in democracies. Handbook of Political Corruption PM Heywood 42–55 Abington, UK: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Wedel JR 2012. Rethinking corruption in an age of ambiguity. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 8:453–98
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Whitaker R, Cosgrove L 2015. Psychiatry under the Influence: Institutional Corruption, Social Injury, and Prescriptions for Reform New York: Palgrave Macmillan
  78. White A 2015. Untold Stories: How Corruption and Conflicts of Interest Stalk the Newsroom London: Ethical Journal. Netw.
  79. Wilson JQ 1974. Corruption is not always scandalous. Theft of the City: Readings on Corruption in Urban America JA Gardiner, DJ Olson 29–32 Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-120117-110316
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error