Corruption the Relationship Between Corruption and Democracy

Corruption

The relationship between corruption and democracy as a political institution has been at the core of studies and researches for political science since its beginnings. The development made in the filed of Political Science along the years has influenced the way scientists perceived and analyzed the corruption phenomenon. Charles H. Blake nad Stephen D. Morris have gathered under the all embracing title Corruption and Democracy in Latin America, the works of several political analysts who approached the topic enunciated in the title of the book through different methods: theoretical studies or the presentation of illustrative case studies.

The book contains two parts, the first being dedicated to essays on the "Causes and Impacts of Corruption in Latin America," while the second presents case studies that complete the undertakings in the first part, by treating particular cases in particular countries. The editors who sign the introduction and the conclusion, explain their vision on the outline of this book and briefly present a literature review on the subject.

Strom C. Thacker opens the first part of the book with an essay that tackles the evolution and outcome of democracy in relationship with corruption in Latin America from the point-of-view of a data analysis that seeks to place the region in the global context of evolution from the same point-of-view. The author combines the quantitative methodology with the statistical data available for each Latin American country supplied by the World Bank and different sets of variables containing economic indicators. The economic factors and the corruption ratings are considered into the historical context of a country's democracy age.

The conclusion of this study shows that in spite of the general perception that Latin American countries continue to suffer form the high levels of political corruption since the establishment of democratic regimes in most of the countries, they actually fit the global pattern. The levels of political corruption in Latin American countries are as much dependent of the age of their democracies and the economical reforms undertaken since the change in political institutions as they are for the rest of the globe. Thacker ends his study with the example of two of the most successful Latin American countries in the field of corruption control that are maybe not accidentally the countries with the longest democratic history in the region.

Alfred Rehren presents a different view on the outcome and the development of democratic states since the third wave of democratization had swept across Latin America in the 1980s. He combines data related to corruption perception from Transparency International for a period between 1980 and 2005 with transparency measures for electoral campaigns data supplied by Pinto-Duschinsky in 2002 and concludes that the corruption levels do not show indicators of diminishing in the medium and long-term, when tanking into account the available data. Rehren's position related to the future of the Latin American nations in terms of a sound political structure, free of corruption is pessimistic. He emphasizes the importance of an objective, free pres a an effective means of control in the field of corruption, although he points out that in the short run, better conditions for the freedom of the press, such as those in Uruguay, Costa Rica and Chile are not necessary followed by the modified perception of corruption levels in the political structures. He also concludes that the adoption of economic measures and changing such as neoliberal reforms have a downside, too, in recently democratized Latin American countries: they create "propitious grounds for corruption within national political elites" (Rehren, 2009, p.59) for foreign actors interested in economic activities in the respective countries.

The third essay of the first part, by John Bailey goes into a more detailed approach of the notion of corruption and corruption types and it follows its links to the ways democracy is affected. Weak public support for governments and government institution expressed in different ways leads to different types of power exercising from the latter.

Since the contemporary public understanding of the meanings of "democracy" and "corruption" are varying to a certain degree in Latin America, but are relatively similar to those of the American public, for example, Bailey underlines Michael Johnston's suggestion of the necessity to include "perception and opinion" (Bailey, 2009, p. 62) to the definition of the both of the two aforementioned terms. "Perceptions of what constitutes trivial vs. serious corruption vary over time and across groups and strata defined in different ways. These perceptions, in turn, influence attitudes related to regime legitimacy and individual behavior (e.g. voting, obeying the law, and the like)" (Bailey, 2009, p. 63).

The major theories that political scientists have used in their approaches of the topic corruption are: the principal agent-model, sustained among others by Johann Graff Lambsdorff and the principle of the rational choice, forwarded by Johnston. Both Johnston in his book Syndromes of Corruption: wealth, power and democracy and the authors who contributed to the book Corruption and Democracy in Latin America point out the fact that the topic of corruption is a relatively new subject of interest for Political Science as well as for international organizations and the world powers. The changes that have occurred on the political arena since the end of the Cold war, preceded by the changes that have led to changing of the political systems in Latin America, since the beginning of the 1980s have brought into the light a series of causes and effects that reflected on the future of humanity as an organism governed by political rules. The globalizing era has also offered a subject of debate among politicians because some consider that corruption was a "necessary evil to cut bureaucratic tape, redistribute resources, and sustain socio-economic development in countries whose governments opposed communism" (Manzetti&Wilson 2009, p.78), the changes brought by the end of the cold war made political scientists consider new approaches and theories for their analysis of the phenomenon of corruption of the political system in democratic countries.

The analysis of the causes and consequences of corruption, regardless of the theories one might adopt in one's approaches should always start with defining the terms used in the analysis. Transparency International, whose statistical date is an important source of information and a component for the empirical analysis of modern political science defines corruption as "the use of public office for personal gain" (Thomas & Meagher 2004).

Grimot Nane who considers the definition incomplete, adds to this definition that takes into consideration only the public sector the private sphere ingredient that makes the medium complete. He arrives thus at the conclusion that Mishra's definition is the one that best describes the phenomenon of corruption in the contemporary world: "behavior that deviates from formal duties because of private gains" (Mshra 2006, cited by Nane 2007). The theories used in political science to analyze the phenomenon of corruption have developed as a natural consequence of the development and changes the societies underwent, especially during the last twenty years.

Modern economic relationships have made statistical date analyzing the level of corruption in different countries absolutely necessary in order to determine factors indicating the country risk and thus influencing the level of investment. Lambsdorff takes into account the literature that considered the way corruption influences investment in a certain country that and brings a further understanding of the relationship between corruption and investment by further making a differentiation between types of corruption and their respective effects on investment. Researchers who made cross-section countries studies of the impact corruption has on economic and social factors have found that local, foreign and public investments are directly and negatively influenced by corruption.

One the other hand, Labsdorff provides evidence form other authors who analyzed the statistical date in cross-section of countries analysis that the poor quality of the education system, the inequality aspects, a low GDP are factors that also influence the degree of corruption in a country.

The question corruption as sand or grease in the wheels is easily answered in the light of the latest data. Lambsdorff pays a close attention to the various outcomes corruption is proven to have in the light of the types and economic and social sectors that came under the scrutiny of these studies. The evidence gathered on the investments in the public sector depending on the corruption levels and predictability is mostly leading conclusions towards the idea that the higher the corruption, the lower the public investments.

However, Lambsdorff underlines that the some authors used methodologies that may become questionable when considering the results. The most reliable evidence-based effects corruption has on economic and social factors are in Lambdroff's opinion those related to the unofficial economy, the health care and education system. A cross-section of countries indicates that percentage of infant mortality and low-birth weight for example, are higher in countries with higher level of corruption than in other countries. Some researchers like Tanzi and Davoodi are shown by Lambsdorff to have found evidence that "1-point increase in corruption is associated with a 1.5 percentage point decline in total revenue relative to GDP, and a 2.7 percentage point decline in the ratio of taxes to GDP" (Lambsdorff).

In countries such as those in Central and Eastern Europe or in Latin America, corruption in health care or in education is, in fact, motivated primarily by the low level of wages in these sectors. On one hand, you have a highly qualified workforce (usually, studying to become a doctor takes, in the least, around 10 years, while also being a continuous process. The reasoning is similar for the educational sector), on the other, the level of the wages is either average or below that.

As the industry lacks other motivational factors, this translates into a process that encourages corruption. Following Mrsha's arguments, this does not mean necessarily a deviation from formal duties for private gains, but rather that individuals in the healthcare or the educational sector will sometimes condition their services and duties by the private gains, which are necessary to compensate the unreasonably low level of wages they otherwise receive. In general, this type of corruption will be seen in developing countries where some of the public sectors lack the necessary attention from the government and where the appropriate private mechanisms (like, for example, the private higher education in the United States) have not yet fully developed.

Other factors that are negatively influenced by corruption that have been found in cross-section countries studies are: the quality of the environment, the trust in civil servants. Similar studies show that crime levels are increasing in these countries. Indeed, corruption means that the individual or entity does not abide by his obligation in exchange for the personal gains he thus receives in this process. It is not necessarily the private gain that negatively influences the factors mentioned, but rather the fact that the obligations are not met. Bribing a governmental official could allow an entity to overrule its environmental norms. At the same time, the policeman who takes a bribe or the judge who reduces a criminal's penalty because of the personal gain will translate into an impact both of the perception of the population towards these social and professional classes and towards the increase of crime in society.

Lambsdorff concludes this part of the literature review dedicated to the cross-section of countries studies to determine the effects of corruption with the observation that: "some variables are so highly intertwined with corruption that they might just as well be the cause, and not only the result"(Lambsdorff, p.13).

Paradoxically, corruption appears to increase the number of students of law, depriving the other sectors of education of students who would become useful professionals in a healthier economic environment. Thus productivity levels decrease further while activities focused on the finding of ways to work around the laws flourish. This productivity decrease is in fact explained with the increase of the number of cases that come out of the evasion of the law. At the same time, the system needs to produce an additional number of employees to compensate and balance those employees who are corrupt.

Competitiveness on the market is another factor that has been found to be negatively influenced by higher levels of corruptions. The higher the number of countries taken into account in the cross-section of countries studies, the more relevant the evidence. The other way of influence was also found to be correct, based on the application of corruption data form BI and IMD: "economic competition as measured by the degree of a country's openness reduces corruption" (Lambsdorff, p.18). Lambsdorff considers these findings reaches by various researchers in their studies solid enough considering the strong evidence supporting the conclusions.

As one can see, the relationship between corruption and competitiveness on the market is mutually dependant and interconnected. The examples of Latin America and Central and Eastern Europe are relevant and can be used in this sense. As such, on one hand, the high level of corruption decreases the number of foreign investors willing to enter such developing markets. The corruption is a significant deterrent, because it brings additional elements into the calculation and analysis of costs and profitability. At the same time, corruption is usually a cost that is either difficult or simply impossible to evaluate and quantify.

On the other hand, a high competition on the market is likely to discourage corruption by actually encouraging a more transparent business environment, as well as by ensuring that for companies engages in such a dynamic and competitive business environment, it is simply no longer economically rational to invest in corruption and on governmental entities, but rather on improving their capabilities to remain or become competitive on the market.

The studies made on corruption depending on the period a country has had a democratic regime, tend to show that the longer the period of time a country has been governed by a democratic regime, the more chances are that the corruption levels decrease. After considering the numerous cross-section of countries studies that have led to different results, but mainly indicated that democracy is closely linked to the level f corruption in a country, Lambsdorff concludes that "democracy reduces corruption, but not the lukewarm type, not the type with little electoral participation and not immediately after its implementation" (Lambsdorff, p. 23).

Cultural considerations have added a new perspective when analyzing the balance between corruption and democracy and researcher have reached the conclusion that they are also an influencing factor. Democratic regimes rely on the trust and support of the electorates and the general level of trust in a certain nation is influencing the way the electorate will respond to the needs of the political candidates. Issues like general trust, community sense and civic responsibility, religious authority and gender are also sharing small fractions in the formula of corruption causes and effects. Lambsdorff concludes that although corruption has been found to go hand in had with all of the above indicators taken into account in his literature review, "the direction of causality for these indicators, however, is controversial" (Lambsdorff, p.27).

One can actually discuss the cultural considerations and the impact these have on corruption beyond the political perspective of the regime governing a certain country. Indeed, in some cultures, corruption is simply not perceive as much as a negative phenomenon as in other cultures. For example, in Latin America, giving an extra incentive for a governmental official to properly perform his duties is not always vilified to the degree to which this occurs in Europe and the Western cultures. The same argument can be supported for other cultures, such as the Arabic culture.

Michael Johnston declares his intentions to combine two analytical methodologies: the cross-sectional study of countries that draws conclusions based on comparison between statistical data gathered from as many countries as possible applied to certain variables and indicators and the methodology that focuses on the in-depth study of a case from the social, cultural and historical points-of-view. The latter lacks the perspective of comparison, while the former fails to take into consideration certain particularities of each case.

The rational theory that assumes that humans are mostly acting based on self-interest appears to oversimplify the topic of corruption. As Grimot Nane underlines in his article Does Rational Choice Explain Corruption and its Persistence Adequately? "Complexity in corruption, articulated by Githongo (2005) and Goudie & Stasavage (2004), is related to the intricate interplay of agents, systems and local / national jurisdictions involved in grand corruption" and "guarantees of impunity in corruption may well come from interests in a country other than where it is perpetrated."

The way public servants and government officials react after taking office to the external pressures is no long an indicator of their self-interest, thus making the principal- agent model of corruption the more realistic approach in identifying and explaining the reasons the public officials continue to nurture corrupt behavior and the public continues to give its support to corrupt government systems.

Blake draws a parallel between the Eastern European countries and Latin America from the point-of-view of people's lack of trust in the law enforcement organisms. Blake accentuates the role of the coefficient of people's level of confidence in the police as a variable that could influence people's tolerance for corruption that needs further inquiries and research. Blake makes an interesting observation that higher levels of poverty tend to influence people into being focused on their primary needs, thus disregarding the higher needs of the community they are part of.

The problem of cause vs. effect in the case of the relationship between corruption of the political system and the wealth of a nation is gaining a new perspective from this point-of-view. Political parties in more affluent societies are more inclined to represent the interests of the communities that elected them and less likely to tend to their own personal gains (Blake 2009, p. 100).

At the same time, many of the countries in Central and Eastern Europe, as well as those in Latin America, are still building their democracies after long years of Communist or military dictatorships. From this point-of-view, the direct relationship between an election process and accountability is not yet fully understood. Politicians in these countries still have to learn that accountability is not something that is strictly connected to the election time, but that it is actually something that spans the full four years of the election cycle.

Economic development frees citizens of the worries for their immediate survival and allows them to be more aware of their environment and pay more attention to the community life (idem, 100). Economic development is also offering the possibility to acquire higher education for more people and thus citizens who are having higher degrees of education become more informed. Information along with concern for the community leads to a development of the critical sense and the need to find ways to control those who are serving in the public offices and make them responsible for their failures to serve for the theoretical purpose they got into office. Both higher education and higher levels of trust are supposed to lead to "political engagement and horizontal networking within civil society that breed productive societal dynamics in the political and economic realms" (Blake, p. 101).

At the same time, education and trust are connected in a certain way. A larger number of individuals affording and receiving higher education will lead to a more educated political class and one that is likely to build more confidence with the individuals in the society. At the same time, they are also able to increase the levels of trust that the population puts in them, because of their higher qualifications.