IMPACT OF CORRUPTION (Development, Social, Political)
What
are the Major Costs and Impacts of Corruption?
COSTS IMPACT OF CORRUPTION
Democracy
and good governance undermined: By subverting rule
of law, reducing accountability, corrupting elections,
and reducing equal provision of government services
Government institutions eroded: By siphoning
off resources, maintaining incompetent public officials,
and making government procedures and regulations overly
complex
Legitimacy of government undermined: By reducing
public trust in government
Economic development reduced: By creating economic
inefficiencies, increasing the costs of doing business,
reducing competition, and scaring potential investors
Economic distortion in the public sector: By
diverting public funds from services that benefit citizens
and reducing compliance with regulations
The
body of theoretical and empirical research that objectively
addresses the economic impact of corruption has grown
significantly in recent years. It leads, in general,
to the following conclusions
:
Bribery is widespread, but there are significant variations
across and within regions. For example, survey responses
suggest that Botswana and Chile have less bribery than
many fully industrialized countries.
Bribery raises transaction costs and uncertainty
in an economy.
Bribery usually leads to inefficient economic outcomes.
It impedes long-term foreig n
and domestic investment, misallocates talent to rent-seeking
activities, and distorts sectoral priorities and technology
choices (by, for example, creating incentives to contract
for large defense projects rather than rural health
clinics specializing in preventive care). It pushes
firms underground (outside the formal sector), undercuts
the state's ability to raise revenues, and leads to
ever-higher tax rates being levied on fewer and fewer
taxpayers. This, in turn, reduces the state's ability
to provide essential public goods, including the rule
of law. A vicious circle of increasing corruption and
underground economic activity can result.
Bribery is unfair. It imposes a regressive tax that
falls particularly heavily on trade and service activities
undertaken by small enterprises.
Corruption undermines the state's legitimacy.
Some observers have argued that bribery can have positive
effects, under certain circumstances, by giving firms
and individuals a means of avoiding burdensome regulations
and ineffective legal systems. But this argument ignores
the enormous discretion that manypoliticians and bureaucrats
have (particularly in corrupt societies) over the creation
and
interpretation of counterproductive regulations. Instead
of corruption being the "grease" that lubricates
the "squeaky wheels" of a rigid administration,
it fuels the growth of excessive and discretionary regulations.
The argument that bribery can enhance efficiency by
cutting down on the time needed to process permits is
also questionable. The possibility of bribery may be
what causes the process to slow down in the first place.
Available empirical evidence refutes the grease and
"speed money" arguments by showing a positive
relationship between the extent of bribery and the amount
of time that enterprise managers spend with public officials.
Responses from more than 3,000 firms in 59 countries
surveyed in the World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness
Survey for 1997 indicate that enterprises reporting
a greater incidence of bribery also tend--even after
taking firm and country characteristics into account--to
spend a greater share of management time with bureaucrats
and public officials negotiating licenses, permits,
signatures, and taxes (Chart 1). And the evidence also
suggests that the cost of capital for firms tends to
be higher where bribery is more prevalent. Further,
there is no empirical evidence that "East Asia
is different," as some people argued during its
years of high growth: the same relationship between
bribery and additional management time spent with officials
applies there as elsewhere.
In any society, there should also be a core of laws
and regulations that serve productive social objectives,
such as building codes, environmental controls, and
prudential banking sector regulations. The grease argument
is particularly troublesome in this context, since bribes
can override such regulations and cause serious social
harm, such as illegal logging of tropical rain forests
or failure to observe building codes designed to ensure
public safety. Bribers can also purchase monopoly rights
to markets--as, for example, in the energy sectors in
some formerly communist countries, where unprecedented
amounts of grease payments buttress gigantic monopolistic
structures. Finally, the obscure insider lending practices
and improper financial schemes inherent in poorly supervised
financial systems have contributed to macroeconomic
crises in Albania, Bulgaria, and--very recently--in
some countries in East Asia
International
Resources
Understanding corruption
Social
impact in Tanzania
Developmental
impact
World
Bank to Rate All Projects for Gender Impact
World
Bank to Rate All Projects for Gender Impact
Developing
Countries Impact of Corruption and Economic Growth/Naunihal
Singh
The
Impact of Enlargement on Evolving Stadards for Anti-corruption
Policy and Judicial Reform in the EU
|