“Corruption: Measuring the Unmeasurable,” (joint with Faiz-ur-Rahim) Humanomics, Vol 25, number 2, June 2009, p 117-126.
ABSTRACT
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to argue that corruption is inherently unmeasurable. Measures of corruption produced by different sources are highly unsatisfactory. Useful measures may be possible for specific purposes in limited contexts. Reasons why highly unsatisfactory measures are in use have to do with politics and power, rather than utility of these measures. Design/methodology/approach – The paper shows that different dimensions of corruption cannot be reduced to a single number without serious loss of information. For example the number and size of bribes cannot be reduced to a single index. The difference between perceptions of corruption and the reality also makes most popular indices useless. Findings – The paper shows that commonly used measures of corruption are useless for their ostensible purposes. Evidence is presented that they are calculated and used for political purposes. In particular, they provide convenient excuses for the widespread failure of the structural adjustment programs of IMF and World Bank. Originality/value – The paper’s findings cast doubt on the vast amount of research which takes the corruption measures as objective and factual, and attempts to find causal factors for corruption, as well as effects of corruption on growth and other variables.
REFERENCE
Cabelkova, I. (2000), GERGE-EI ‘‘Perception of corruption in Ukraine: are they correct?’’, discussion paper.
Chang, H. (2000), ‘‘The hazard of moral hazard: untangling the Asian crisis’’, World Development, Vol. 28 No. 4, April, p. 775.
Chotani, H.A., Razzak, J.A. and Luby, S.P. (2002), ‘‘Patterns of violence in Karachi Pakistan’’, Injury Prevention, Vol. 8. pp. 57-59.
Elert, G. (1992-2006), ‘‘The SAT: aptitude or demographics?’’ E-World.
George, T.A. and Hamid, D. (2000), ‘‘Corruption, structural reforms, and economic performance in transition economies’’, IMF Working Paper No. 2000-132.
Halberstam, D. (1972), The Best and the Brightest, Fawcett Books, New York, NY.
Hardisty, J. (2004), ‘‘Crime and political ideology,’’ The Public Eye Magazine, Vol. 18 No. 3, available at: http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v18n3/hardisty_crime.html.
(The) Hungarian Gallup Institute (1999), ‘‘Basic methodological aspects of corruption measurement: lessons learned from the literature and the pilot study’’, available at: http:// www.gallup.hu/Gallup/monitor/en/gsurveys.html
Koster, R.M. (2004), ‘‘Commentary on ‘Panama by Noriega’’’, Escape from America Magazine, Vol. 6 No. 3, available at: http://www.escapeartist.com/efam/56/panama_again.html.
Michell, J. (2003), ‘‘The quantitative imperative, positivism, naı¨ve realism and the place of qualitative methods in psychology’’, Theory and Psychology, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 5-31.
New York Times (1990), Rule One in the Noriega Case, 23 May, Wednesday, Editorial Desk, Late Edition – Final, Section A, P. 28, Column 1, 416 words.
Oxfam, (2003), ‘‘Robbing the poor to pay the rich? How the United States keeps medicines from the world’s poorest’’, Oxfam Briefing Paper 56, December, downloadable from: www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/issues/health/bp56_medicines.html.
Santiso, C. (2001), ‘‘Good governance and aid effectiveness: the world bank and conditionality’’, The Georgetown Public Policy Review, Vol. 7 No. 1, Fall, pp. 1-22.
Sik, E. (1999), ‘‘Some thoughts about the sociology of corruption from an East-European perspective’’, Princeton University, CEU Conference on Corruption, Budapest.
Stiglitz, J.E. and Bilmes, L.J. (2008), The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict, W.W. Norton, New York, NY. For the 5 trillion estimate, see interview of Stiglitz: available at: www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid¼20601087&sid¼acXcm.yk56Ko& refer¼home