1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Political Science
  4. Volume 18, 2015
  5. Article

Annual Review of Political Science

Volume 18, 2015

Realism About Political Corruption

Abstract

This article explores how realism in political theory can inform our understanding of political corruption. Whereas political moralists see corruption as a problem of implementation, which does not undermine their values, realists see corruption as posing a more fundamental problem, challenging the very nature of politics and undermining the attempt to establish and exercise authority in the ordering of conflict and the allocation of resources. Recent realist work has sought to characterize a discrete type of “institutional” corruption, and to construct political corruption as the antithesis of good governance or impartiality. Other work has focused on the micro level, drawing on new insights from psychology and experimental economics to analyze individual decisions and motivations to behave corruptly. This article challenges scholars to build future research upon a richer understanding of the realities of political life that are intrinsic to both individual and institutional patterns of corruption.

Keyword(s): accountability, ethics, experiments, impartiality, institutions, norms, political conduct, political realism, rationality
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-092012-134421
2015-05-11
2024-04-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/polisci/18/1/annurev-polisci-092012-134421.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-092012-134421&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Abbink K, Irlenbusch B, Renner E. 2002. An experimental bribery game. J. Law Econ. Organ. 18:2428–54 [Google Scholar]
  2. Abbink K, Serra D. 2012. Anticorruption policies: lessons from the lab. See Serra & Wantchekon 2012 77–115
  3. Abbink K, Wu K. 2013. Reward self-reporting to deter corruption: an experiment on mitigating collusive bribery Disc. Pap. No. 42, Monash Univ., Sydney, Australia 13
  4. Barr A, Serra D. 2009. The effects of externalities and framing on bribery in a petty corruption experiment. Exp. Econ. 12:4488–503 [Google Scholar]
  5. Barry B. 1995. Justice as Impartiality Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  6. Bauhr M, Grimes M. 2014. Indignation or resignation: the implications of transparency for societal accountability. Governance 27:291–320 [Google Scholar]
  7. Becker G. 1968. Crime and punishment: an economic approach. J. Polit. Econ. 76:169–217 [Google Scholar]
  8. Blundo G, Olivier de Sardan JP. 2006. Everyday Corruption and the State: Citizens and Public Officials London: Zed Books
  9. Buchan B, Hill L. 2014. An Intellectual History of Political Corruption Palgrave Macmillan
  10. Cameron L, Chaudhuri A, Erkal N, Gangadharan L. 2009. Propensities to engage in and punish corrupt behavior: experimental evidence from Australia, India, Indonesia and Singapore. J. Public Econ. 93:7843–51 [Google Scholar]
  11. Dimant E, Hehenkamp B. 2014. More money more problems? An experimental investigation on the impact of wage raises on individual corruptibility under uncertainty Mimeo. Inst. Econ. & Economic Policy, Univ. Paderborn, Ger.
  12. Drugov M, Hamman J, Serra D. 2014. Intermediaries in corruption: an experiment. Exp. Econ. 17:78–99 [Google Scholar]
  13. Elster J. 1986. The market and the forum: three varieties of political theory. Foundations of Social Choice Theory J Elster, A Hyland 103–32 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  14. Fahr R, Djawadi B. 2013. The impact of risk perception and risk attitudes on corrupt behavior: evidence from a petty corruption experiment IZA Disc. Pap. No. 738. Forsch.inst. Zukunft Arbeit (Inst. Stud. Labor), Bonn, Ger.
  15. Galston W. 2010. Realism in political theory. Eur. J. Polit. Theory 9:385–411 [Google Scholar]
  16. Gino F, Ayal S, Ariely D. 2009. Contagion and differentiation in unethical behavior: the effect of one bad apple on the barrel. Psychol. Sci. 20:3393–98 [Google Scholar]
  17. Gino F, Bazerman M. 2009. When misconduct goes unnoticed: the acceptability of gradual erosion in others' unethical behavior. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 45:4708–19 [Google Scholar]
  18. Gino F, Galinsky AD. 2012. Vicarious dishonesty: when psychological closeness creates distance from one's moral compass. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 119:115–26 [Google Scholar]
  19. Granovetter M. 2007. The social construction of corruption. On Capitalism V Nee, R Swedberg 152–72 Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  20. Hopkin J. 2002. States, markets and corruption: a review of some recent literature. Rev. Int. Polit. Econ. 9:3574–90 [Google Scholar]
  21. Johnston M. 2002. Measuring the new corruption rankings: implications for analysis and reform. Political Corruption AJ Heidenheimer, M Johnston 865–84 Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Books [Google Scholar]
  22. Kahneman D, Tversky A. 1973. On the psychology of prediction. Psychol. Rev. 80:237–51 [Google Scholar]
  23. Kaufmann D. 2005. Myths and realities of governance and corruption Brookings Inst., Washington, DC
  24. Kirk U, Harvey A, Montague PR. 2011. Domain expertise insulates against judgment bias by monetary favors through a modulation of ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 108:2510332–36 [Google Scholar]
  25. Lessig L. 2011. Republic Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress—and a Plan to Stop It Boston: Hachette
  26. Lessig L. 2013. “Institutional corruption” defined. J. Law Med. Ethics Fall:2–4 [Google Scholar]
  27. Makdisi U. 2000. Corrupting the sublime sultanate: the revolt of Tanyus Shahin in nineteenth century Ottoman Lebanon. Comp. Stud. Soc. Hist. 42:1180–208 [Google Scholar]
  28. Maynor J. 2003. Republicanism in the Modern World Oxford, UK: Blackwell
  29. Miller S. 2010. Moral Foundations of Social Institutions Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  30. Mungiu-Pippidi 2006. Corruption: diagnosis and treatment. J. Democracy 17:386–99 [Google Scholar]
  31. Offe C. 2002. Controlling political corruption: conceptual and practical issues Presented at Collegium Budapest Conf. Honesty and Trust, Budapest, Hungary, Dec 13–14
  32. Olivier de Sardan J-P. 1999. A moral economy of corruption in Africa?. J. Mod. Afr. Stud. 37:25–52 [Google Scholar]
  33. Pettit P. 1997. Republicanism Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  34. Philp M. 2006. Corruption, definition and measurement. Measuring Corruption C Sampford, A Shacklock, C Connors, F Galtung 45–56 Aldershot, UK: Ashgate [Google Scholar]
  35. Philp M. 2008. Delimiting democratic accountability. Polit. Stud. 57:128–53 [Google Scholar]
  36. Philp M. 2012. Realism without illusions. Polit. Theory 40:5629–49 [Google Scholar]
  37. Polanyi K. 1944. The Great Transformation New York: Farrar & Rinehart
  38. Rothstein B. 2011. The Quality of Government: Corruption, Social Trust, and Inequality in International Perspective Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  39. Rothstein B. 2014. What is the opposite of corruption?. Third World Q. 35:5737–57 [Google Scholar]
  40. Rothstein B, Teorell J. 2008. What is quality of government? A theory of impartial government institutions. Governance: Int. J. Policy Adm. Inst. 21:2165–90 [Google Scholar]
  41. Schmitt C. 1976 (1927). The Concept of the Political trans. G Schwab New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press. From German
  42. Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ, Griskevicius V. 2007. The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychol. Sci. 18:5429–34 [Google Scholar]
  43. Senior I. 2007. Corruption: The World's Big C London: IEA
  44. Sequeira S. 2012. Advances in measuring corruption in the field. See Serra & Wantchekon 2012 145–75
  45. Serra D, Wantchekon L. 2012. New Advances in Experimental Research on Corruption Bingley, UK: Emerald Group
  46. Skinner Q. 1998. Liberty Before Liberalism Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  47. Snow N. 2009. Virtue as Social Intelligence: An Empirically Grounded Theory London: Routledge
  48. Stark A. 2003. Conflict of Interest in American Political Life Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  49. Thaler RH, Sunstein CR. 2008. Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
  50. Thompson D. 1993. Mediated corruption: the case of the Keating Five. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 8:2369–81 [Google Scholar]
  51. Thompson D. 1995. Ethics in Congress Washington, DC: Brookings Inst. Press
  52. UK Cabinet Office, Behavioural Insights Team 2012. Applying behavioural insights to reduce fraud, error and debt https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/60539/BIT_FraudErrorDebt_accessible.pdf
  53. Walzer M. 1983. Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality New York: Basic Books
  54. Warren M. 2004. What does corruption mean in a democracy. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 48:2328–43 [Google Scholar]
  55. Warren M. 2006. Corruption as duplicitous exclusion. PS Polit. Sci. Polit. 34:4:803–7 [Google Scholar]
  56. Warren M. 2015. The meaning of corruption in democracies. The Routledge International Handbook on Political Corruption P Heywood 42–56 London: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  57. Williams B. 2005. In the Beginning was the Deed Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  58. World Bank 2000. Anti-Corruption in Transition Washington, DC: World Bank
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-092012-134421
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

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