I am trying to see different aspects of this debate. Publications and textbook references would be helpful. Thank you.
Ojide:
Pardon, but I guess I did not understand your question. Well, corruption is only able to facilitate more corruption. Corruption is a problem and never a solution.
For possible suggestions on the topic, I suggest reading the reports of the UN / UNDP Surely, you will find references for your search.
yes, corruption facilitates development with the condition that, there already exists lack of enthusiasm to work hard with respect to developing countries. so a next best alternative is to promote the work culture though you have to pay a cost, otherwise promote the underdevelopment . But i think corruption takes its own course with the process of development.
Perhaps if you institutionalize the corruption more formally, by offering payouts for achieving targets, or for getting things done more quickly?
In Canada, for example, many government services can be accessed with 1 or 3 day turnaround if you pay some hundreds of dollars premium, compared to much longer turnaround.
Institutionalizing corruption in this kind of way can lead to better results if it offers formal incentives to get things done better and faster.
But then it's not really corruption any more ...
For example, if the road is built on time, you get an extra million dollars. If it's in objective state of repair x1 in five years, you get a million dollars, objective state of repair x2 in five years you get half a million dollars.
But that's not really corruption either :)
Corruption is, of course, a culturally imbued concept. So for me, an important point would be how you define corruption. I would recommend looking at human geography, political science and anthropology journals for critical work on concepts such as good governance, corruption, etc. Here are some suggestions:
Andrews, M., 2010. Good government means different things in different countries. Governance: An international Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 23 (1), 7-35.
Grindle, M.S., 2004. Good enough governance: Poverty reduction and reform in developing countries. Governance 17 (4), 525-548.
Richardson, T., Cashmore, M., 2011. Power, knowledge and environmental assessment: the World Bank’s pursuit of ‘good governance’. Journal of Political Power 4 (1), 105-125.
Taylor, I., 2004. Hegemony, neoliberal 'good governance' and the International Monetary Fund: A Gramscian perspective. In: Bøås, M., McNeill, D. (Eds.) Global institutions and development: Framing the world?. Routledge, London, pp. 124-136.
In my opinion only in the short term. But on the long term most research suggests that the effects are quite opposite; corruption has a negative impact on economic growth, as NGO's and institutions as Transparency International and the Worldbank regulary point out. Aspects as trust, quality and stability, which are important conditions for economic growth, or negatively influenced by corruption.
Though the dominant thinking on corruption and development in developing countries is that corruption does not "grease" the wheels of development, yet other views have questioned this over-simplified assumption. Even where supporters are often painted as anti-democratic elements, corruption and development, in a way and historically too, have supported each other. But to say that corruption aids development in any setting is to familiarise yourself with the various manifestations and contexts of corruption. Simply but broadly put: functional, 'organised' and/or centralised corruption vs. dysfunctional, disorganised and decentralised corruption. Again, your conceptualisation of development will also slant your judgement on the likely connection. When you use the term, do you mean national development or group (which Peter Ekeh might have located in his primordial public) development?
Though various bodies are trying to press the demand for eradicating the menace of corruption, but for me does they own a right to deal with these matters when they are themselves involved with these nap-sum activities. in that respect i feel NGOs are really acting as a cons training factor for poor countries, making money from the destitute.
Theoretically- In bureaucratically economies corruption can grease the wheels of development. Corruption speeds up the process of getting the commodity or a service done. Generally a worse off situation than a corrupt bureaucratic economy will be a bureaucratic economy with no corruption as it mean it will take long for individuals and firms to achieve their objectives. Corruption can also hinder economic growth by soiling the wheels of economic development. In this case corruption can act as a barrier in getting the best method or talent to develop economy especially due to inability to bribe the officials.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publications