Conceptualizing and Measuring “Governance”
Arunjana Das | February 8, 2015
February 8, 2015
Responding To: Week 3: The Conundrums about Governance
Micro-Corruption: Measuring Corruption from the Bottom Up
Alejandra Aponte
Corruption is a “negative” tax of the worst kind [1], most poignantly in poor countries. It is expensive, regressive, and produces damaging externalities [2]. The destructive consequences of corruption have long been captured by narrative and observation. Today, they are increasingly visible in the vast data offered by expert assessments, surveys of bribe payers and households, market analyses, and related measurement tools. It is no surprise that, in the face of increasing evidence of corruption’s negative outlays, development agencies have taken an active stance against corruption, enacting punishments such as debarment provisions. In an ideal world, debarment would provide a powerful incentive for good behavior. Unfortunately, in the real world, it often poses an empty threat due to the inability to identify and measure corruption at an appropriate level.
What actions constitute corruption? What indicators measure corruption? These questions are essential for the adequate implementation of debarment policies. Punishments can only be dispensed if there is clear evidence of a specific infraction. Unfortunately, while these questions have been widely addressed at the macro-level (ie. countries, economies, and sectors), there is little clarity on how to detect corruption on micro-level of specific contracts, service providers, and aid recipients. Identifying corruption at the micro-level is important as many anti-corruption punishments, particularly debarment, are actionable and may be more effective at this level. Debarring a corrupt contractor or agent linked to a specific contract is arguably simpler than debarring an entire government or sector. Punishments at the micro-level may be more effective as they affect corrupt agents directly and raise the probability of detecting bad behavior.
Focusing the detection and measurement of corruption on the micro-level is an important potential instrument for reducing corruption. Gains in effectiveness are two possible benefits. Research on corruption and policy design should focus on this area. Granted, identifying and quantifying corruption on this level will likely not be an exercise seeking generalizability; different actors, contracts, etc may require unique operating definitions and metrics of corruption. Knowledge about the processes anti-corruption initiatives must undertake including defining what constitutes corruption in specific cases and measuring such infractions can be helpful. With such processes in place, debarment and other anti-corruption measures will gain credibility and, perhaps, the corruption behemoth begin to fail from the bottom up, contract by contract.
Alejandra Aponte is a first year student at Georgetown’s McCourt School of Public Policy. After completing her degree, Aponte hopes to use the skills she is building at McCourt to improve education and health programs in Guatemala, her home country.
[1] In 2011, the Control Risks Group estimated that “fraud, corruption, and shady businesses” cost developing countries roughly one trillion dollars. While several scholars question the precision of this estimate, there is general consensus that costs of corruption are large and diverse for most members of society. See Runde, D., et.al. (February 2014). The Costs of Corruption: Strategies for Ending a Tax on Private Sector-Led Growth. Center for Strategic and International Studies. Available at: http://csis.org/files/publication/140204_Hameed_CostsOfCorruption_Web.pdf
[2] Many development agencies, including the World Bank, and academic studies support the notion that there is a strong, negative relationship between corruption and socio-economic development, equity, and business development, among other things. The nature of the relationship is remains under study and causality may be impossible to determine. Nonetheless, the existence of the relationship provides a powerful rational for tying anti-corruption efforts to development programs. See: World Bank. (September 1997). Helping Countries Combat Corruption: The Role of the World Bank. Available at: http://www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/anticorrupt/corruptn/cor02.htm Also see: Olken, B., Pande, Rohini. (February 2012. Corruption in Developing Countries. Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Label. Available at: http://economics.mit.edu/files/7589
Other Responses
![Migration, the “Unexploited Frontier” of Development [1]](https://s3.amazonaws.com/global-db-public/global-db-public/response/image/291/JBergmann_s_c_pass.jpg)
Migration, the “Unexploited Frontier” of Development [1]
Jonas Bergmann | February 8, 2015
Civil Society as an Anti-Corruption Catalyst
Lauren Corke | February 8, 2015
Ebola: A Preferential Option for Women?
Spencer Crawford | February 8, 2015