CORRUPTION Syndromes of Corruption

18 Syndromes of Corruption
way to extensive agreement. The definitions issue has not so much been
resolved as bypassed – wisely, for the most part – in order to focus upon
processes that would qualify as corrupt by any definition. Still, bribery –
particularly at high levels in the course of international aid, trade, and
investment – has become a de facto synonym for corruption. Within that
relatively narrow focus there is little debate anymore as to broad effects:
strong theory and evidence suggest that corruption delays and distorts
economic growth, rewards inefficiency, and short-circuits open competition
(Kaufmann, Kraay, and Zoido-Lobatón, 1999; Rose-Ackerman,
1999: chs. 2–5; Hall and Yago, 2000; Mauro, 2002). Findings relating
to democratic development are less plentiful (Doig and Theobald,
2000; Moreno, 2002), in part because within the consensus politics
and the state have often been seen as impediments to economic liberalization.
Still, evidence suggests moderate-to-low levels of corruption in
most democracies (for a dissenting view see Lipset and Lenz, 2000).
Far more serious problems occur where state institutions (Knack and
Keefer, 1995; Rose-Ackerman, 1999), civil society (Ruzindana, 1997;
Johnston, 2005a) and civil liberties (Isham, Kaufmann, and Pritchett,
1995) are weak, where political competition is impaired (Johnston,
2002; Della Porta, 2004), and where officials operate with impunity.
Relativism – a sense that each society’s corruption issues are shaped in
unique ways by historical and cultural variations, and that comparisons
among diverse societies are therefore suspect – reflected laudable
motives but discouraged all but the vaguest generalizations. That position
has been overrun by numerical rankings of countries on worldwide
league tables of corruption, and to propositions and findings extending
across large numbers of societies (see, for example, Friedman, Johnson,
Kaufmann, and Zoido-Lobatón, 2000; Sandholtz and Koetzle, 2000;
Triesman, 2000; Kaufmann, 2004). Reticence about discussing corruption
in developing countries and in agencies and programs seeking to
aid them has given way to a recognition that it can no longer be written
off as a matter of differing customs or values.
Partial visions
Whether or not it fully qualifies as a ‘‘consensus’’ this outlook has
moved us beyond some old, stale debates. We know much more than
we did a generation ago, and there are far more resources with which
to study the problem. But in other respects there may be too much
consensus. The revival of interest has been driven primarily by business,
and by international aid and lending institutions – groups that
tend to view corruption as cause and consequence of incomplete