DOI: 10.21202/1993-047X.13.2019.2.1215-1229

скачать PDF

---

The Behavior of Corruption: An Empirical Typology of Public Corruption by Objective & Method

---

Objective: to formulate the notion, features and types of corrupt behavior.

Methods: dialectical approach to cognition of social phenomena, allowing to analyze them in the historical development and functioning in the context of a set of objective and subjective factors, which determined the choice of the following research methods: formal-logical, comparative-legal, sociological.

Results: An analysis of more than 300 public corruption convictions occurring over a three-year period was conducted. A conclusion is made that corruption is misconduct beyond favors received for actions typical of a public official's position. This holding makes it unclear the degree to which the use of an official office for personal advantage, or that of another, can be considered corruption. At the same time, considering these issues is essential for effective prevention, identification and suppression of corrupt behavior.

 

Scientific novelty: the paper contributes to science in that an empirical typology of corruption behaviors was developed. The corpus delicti and methods for several hundred corruption cases were identified. It was discovered that eight distinct types of corrupt conduct exist, pursuing two broad illicit objectives. Therefore, despite the multiplicity of charges brought in corruption cases, there exist a limited number of behaviors that underlie this conduct. Besides, the authors compare these findings with the previous literature on corruption. The utility of the typology for understanding the underlying behavioral aspects of corruption is explained with implications for reducing its occurrence.

Practical significance: the key results and conclusions of the paper can be used in scientific, educational and law-enforcing activities when considering the issues related to prevention, identification and suppression of corrupt behavior.

Keywords :

Corruption; Corruption-generating aspects; Corrupt behavior; Public corruption; Typology; Behavior; Empirical research

Bibliography :

1. United Nations Convention Against Corruption, United Nations General Assembly, 2003, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/4374b9524.html
2. What is corruption?, Transparency International, 2017, available at: https://www.transparency.org/what-is-corruption/#define (access date: July 15).
3. Rose-Ackerman S., Palikfa B. J. Corruption and government: Causes, consequences, and reform, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
4. White R. What counts as corruption?, Social Research, 2013, Vol. 80, No. 4, pp. 1033–1056.
5. What is fraud and corruption?, World Bank, 2017, available at: http://www.worldbank.org/en/about/unit/integrity-vicepresidency/what-is-fraud-and-corruption
6. Ball C. What is transparency?, Public Integrity, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 293–307. DOI: 10.2753/PIN1099-9922110400
7. Gregory R. Government corruption in New Zealand: A view through Nelson's Telescope?, Asian Journal of Political Science, 2002, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 17–39.
8. Hellman D. Defining corruption and constitutionalizing democracy, Michigan Law Review, 2013, Vol. 111, No. 8, pp. 1385–1422.
9. Rose J. The meaning of corruption: Testing coherence and adequacy of corruption definitions, Public Integrity, 2018, Vol. 20, pp. 220–233.
10. Teachout Z. Corruption in America: From Benjamin Franklin’s snuff box to Citizens United. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014.
11. Ulman S.-R. Approaches to public integrity, Centre for European Studies (CES) Working Papers, 2015, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 340–356.
12. Rothstein B. What is the opposite of corruption?, Third World Quarterly, 2014, Vol. 35, No. 5, pp. 737–752.
13. Cordis A. S., Milyo J. Measuring public corruption in the United States: Evidence from administrative records from federal prosecutions, Public Integrity, 2016, Vol. 18, No. 127–148.
14. Bauhr M. Need or greed? Conditions for collective action against corruption, Governance, 2017, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 561–581. DOI: 10.1111/gove.12232
15. Corruption in Commercial Enterprise: Law, Theory, Practice, London, Routledge, 2018.
16. Johannsen L., Pedersen K., Vadi M., Reino A., Soot M. Private- to-private corruption. A survey on Danish and Estonian business environment, European Union, 2016, available at: https://pure.au.dk/ws/files/96570374/Johannsen_Pedersen_Vadi_Reino_S_t_private_to_private_corruption_2016.pdf
17. Piquero N. L., Albanese J. S. The relationship between corruption and financial crime, Handbook of global research and practice in corruption / ред. A. Graycar, R. G. Smith, Northhampton, MA, Elgar Publishing, 2012, pp. 189–202.
18. Andvig J., Fjldstad O., Amundsen I., Sissener T., Soreide T. Corruption: A review of contemporary research, Bergen, Norway, Michelsen Institute, 2001.
19. Shekshnia S., Ledeneva A., Denisova-Schmidt E. Managing business corruption: targeting non-compliant practices in systemically corrupt environments, Slavonic & East European Review, 2017, Vol. 95, No. 1, pp. 151–174.
20. MacWilliam S., Rafferty M. From development and grand corruption to governance, International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 2017, Vol. 6, pp. 12–28.

21. Nystrand M. J. Petty and grand corruption and the conflict dynamics in Northern Uganda, Third World Quarterly, 2014, Vol. 35, pp. 821–835.
22. The Knapp Commission Report on police corruption, New York, NY, George Braziller Publishers, 1972.
23. Friedrichs D. O. State crime or governmental crime: Making sense of the conceptual confusion, Controlling state crime, ed. J. I. Ross, New York, NY, Routledge, 2000, pp. 53–80.
24. Fazekas M., Tóth I. J. From corruption to state capture, Political Research Quarterly, 2016, Vol. 69, pp. 320–334.
25. Hellman J., Kaufmann D. Confronting the challenge of state capture in transition economies, Finance & Development, 2001, Vol. 38, No. 3.
26. Lord N. Establishing enforcement legitimacy in the pursuit of rule-breaking global elites: The case of transnational corporate bribery, Theoretical Criminology, 2016, Vol. 20, pp. 376–399.
27. Helping countries combat corruption: The role of The World Bank, World Bank, 1997, available at: http://www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/anticorrupt/corruptn/cor02.htm
28. Yanguas P., Bukenya B. ‘New’ approaches confront ‘old’ challenges in African public sector reform, Third World Quarterly, 2016, Vol. 37, pp. 136–152.
29. Lachman S. P., Polner R. Failed state: Dysfunction and corruption in an American statehouse, New York, State University of New York Press, 2017.
30. Schluter W. E. Soft corruption: How unethical conduct undermines good government and what to do about it, New Brunswick, NJ, Rutgers University Press, 2017.
31. Rothstein B., Varraich A. Making sense of corruption, Cambridge, U.K., Cambridge University Press, 2017.
32. Albanese J. S. Transnational crime and the 21st century: Criminal enterprise, corruption, and opportunity, New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2011.
33. Klitgaard R. Controlling corruption, Oakland, University of California Press, 1991.
34. Roman A. V. Refocusing perspectives on public corruption away from the individual: Insights from the Moldovan social matrix, Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 2014, Vol. 43, pp. 214–231.
35. Vargas-Hernández J. G. The multiple faces of corruption: Typology, forms and levels, Studies of Changing Societies: Comparative & Interdisciplinary Focus, 2012, Vol. 1, pp. 3–27.
36. Bussell J. Typologies of corruption: A pragmatic approach, Greed, corruption, and the modern state: Essays in political economy, ed. S. Rose-Ackerman, P. Lagunes, Cheltenham, UK, Elgar Publishing, 2015, pp. 21–45.
37. Gottschalk P., Stanislas P. Regional and national perspectives on procurement fraud, Boca Raton, FL, CRC Press, 2017.
38. Roebuck J. A., Barker T. A typology of police corruption, Social Problems, 1974, Vol. 21, pp. 423–437.
39. Jong-Sung Y., Khagram S. A comparative study of inequality and corruption, American Sociological Review, 2005, Vol. 70, pp. 136–157.
40. Diaby A., Sylwester K. Bureaucratic competition and public corruption: Evidence from transition countries, European Journal of Political Economy, 2014, Vol. 35, pp. 75–87.
41. Baboš P. Corruption experience, perception and anti-corruption trust: Different effects in various post-communist states, Romanian Journal of Political Science, 2015, Vol. 15, pp. 107–128.
42. Linde J., Erlingsson G. Ó. The eroding effect of corruption on system support in Sweden, Governance, 2013, Vol. 26, pp. 585–603.
43. Punch M. Police corruption and its prevention, European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 2000, Vol. 8, pp. 3–25.
44. Treisman D. The causes of corruption: A crossnational study, Journal of Public Economics, 2000, Vol. 76, pp. 399–457.
45. Savin-Baden M., Major C. H. Qualitative research: The essential guide to theory and practice, London, UK, Taylor & Francis, 2013.
46. Albanese J. S., Artello K., Nguyen L. T. Distinguishing corruption in law and practice: Empirically separating conviction charges from underlying behaviors, Public Integrity, 2019, Vol. 21, pp. 22–37. DOI: 10.1080/10999922.2018.1423859
47. Krippendorff K. The Changing Landscape of Content Analysis: Reflections on Social Construction of Reality and Beyond, Communication & Society, 2019, Vol. 47, pp. 1–27.
48. Riffe D., Lacy S., Fico F. Analyzing media messages: Using quantitative content analysis in research, 2nd ed., New York, NY, Routledge, 2006.
49. Lord N. Regulating transnational corporate bribery in the UK and Germany, Crime, Law and Social Change, 2013, Vol. 60, pp. 127–145.
50. Masters A. B., Graycar A. Making corruption disappear in local government, Public Integrity, 2016, Vol. 18, pp. 42–58.
51. Bussell J. Corruption and reform in India: Public services in the digital age, New York, NY, Cambridge University Press, 2012.

52. Gupta A., Sultan A., Washbrook D. Changing forms of corruption in India, Modern Asian Studies, 2017, Vol. 51, pp. 1862–1890.
53. Heywood P. Political corruption: Problems and perspectives, Political Studies, 1997, Vol. 45, pp. 417–435.
54. Bussell J. Explaining cross-national variation in government adoption of new technologies, International Studies Quarterly, 2011, Vol. 55, No. 12, pp. 267–280.
55. Lyrio M. V., J. L. R., Taliani E. T. Thirty years of studies on transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector: The state of the art and opportunities for future research, Public Integrity, 2018, Vol. 20, No. 5, pp. 512–533.
56. Sadiku L. Civil society and anti-corruption, Romanian Journal of Political Science, 2010, Vol. 10, pp. 34–62.
57. Pedersen, K. H., Johannsen, L. Corruption: Commonality, causes & consequences comparing 15 ex-communist countries. Paper prepared for the 13th NISPAcee Annual Conference, Moscow, Russia, 2008, May, available at: http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/nispacee/unpan021456.pdf
58. Albanese Jay S., Artello K. The Behavior of Corruption: An Empirical Typology of Public Corruption by Objective & Method, Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society, 2019, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 1–12.

Citation :

Albanese Jay S., Artello K. The Behavior of Corruption: An Empirical Typology of Public Corruption by Objective & Method, Actual Problems of Economics and Law, 2019, vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 1215–1229. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21202/1993-047X.13.2019.2.1215-1229

Type of article : The scientific article

Date of receipt of the article :
09.02.2019

Date of adoption of the print :
11.04.2019

Date of online accommodation :
25.06.2019