What is the Contribution of the Theory of Redistribution Systems to the Theory of Corruption?

• Authors: Tomáš Otáhal , Milan Palát , Petr Wawrosz
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Scholars making economic policy recommendations to resolve corruption problem use several approaches, the most dominant of which are the principal-agent and rent-seeking theories. In this paper, we argue that the principal-agent theory has problems to account for the environment in which the agents offering and accepting corruption operate, and explain the importance of agents for survival of their environment. The rent-seeking theory, on the other hand, finds it difficult to establish socially effective legislation and ways to determine the barriers to entry that motivate agents to behave corruptly. Both problems, however, are vital for solving the problem of corruption. Lacking the knowledge of the agent’s environment (system) and their significance for survival of the system, the theory cannot define incentives that would discourage the agent from acting in a corrupted way. If the rent-seeking theory does not determine the barriers to entry that motivate agents to behave corruptly, it cannot determine the proper legislation that would deter corrupt behaviour and lead to economic development. For these reasons we investigate if both problems can be explained and solved within the alternative theory of redistribution systems and its part - the theory of parallel redistribution games.

Keywords

EN

Corruption; redistribution system; parallel redistribution game; game theory

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Review of Economic Perspectives
• Year: 2013
• Volume: 13
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 92-107

Dates

published

2013-06-01

online

2013-07-09

Contributors

author

Tomáš Otáhal

• Department of Economics, FBE MENDELU in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic

author

Milan Palát

• Department of Territorial Studies, Faculty of Regional Development and International Studies, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic

author

Petr Wawrosz

• The University of Finance and Administration, Faculty of Economic Studies, Estonská 500, 101 00 Prague 10

References

• ACKERMAN, S. R. (1999). Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences, andReform. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
• BARDHAN, P. (1997). Corruption and Development: a review of issues. Journal ofEconomic Literature. 35(3), pp. 1320-1346.
• BENSON, B. L., BADEN, J. (1985). The Political Economy of Governmental Corruption: The Logic of Underground Government. Journal of Legal Studies. 14(2), pp. 391-410.[Crossref]
• BUCHANAN, J. M. (1979). Is Economics the Science of Choice? In What ShouldEconomist Do? Indianapolis (IN): Liberty Fund.
• COLOMBATTO, E. (2003). Why is corruption tolerated? Review of AustrianEconomics. 16(4), pp. 367-379.
• FURUBOTN, E. G., RICHTER, R. (2005). Institutions and Economic Theory. 2nd Edition. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.
• GROCHOVÁ, L., OTÁHAL, T. (2011). Corruption in the Czech and the Slovak Republics: Did the EU Pressure Improve Legal Framework and Its Enforcement? ActaUniversitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensi. 14(7), pp. 1-15.
• GROCHOVÁ, L., OTÁHAL, T. (2010). Podnikání a ekonomický rozvoj: jaký je rozdíl mezi neo-Rakouskou a novou institucionální ekonomií? Politická ekonomie. 58(5), pp. 623-640.
• JAJUGA, K. et al. (2002). Classification, Clustering and Data Analysis: RecentAdvances and Application. Berlin: Springer.
• JENSEN, M. C., MECKLING, W. H. (1974). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Cost and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics. 4(2), pp. 305-360.[WoS]
• KOHN, M. (2004). Value and Exchange. CATO Journal. 24(3), pp. 303-339.
• KUHN, P., RIDDELL, CH. (2010). The Long-Term Effects of a Generous Income Support Program: Unemployment Insurance in New Brunswick and Maine, 1940-1991. Industrial and Labor Relations Review. 63(2), pp. 183-204.
• LAMBSDORF, J. G. (2002). Corruption and rent-seeking. Public Choice. 113(1-2), pp. 97-125.[WoS][Crossref]
• LAMBSDORFF, J. G. (2007). The institutional economics of corruption and reform:theory, evidence, and policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• MIESES, L. (1949). Human action: a treatise on economics. New Haven: Yale University Press.
• MUSGRAVE, R. (2004). Public Finance in Theory and Practice. Noida: Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
• NYE, J.S. (1967). Corruption and Political Development: A Cost-Benefit Analysis. American Political Science Review. 61(2), pp. 417-427.[Crossref][WoS]
• OKUN, A. M. (1975). Equality and Efficiency - The Big Tradeoff. Brookings Institution Press.
• OTÁHAL, T. (2006). Ekonomická analýza definice korupce. Národohospodářský obzor. 4(1), pp. 50-60.
• OTÁHAL, T. (2007a). Corruption: A Theoretical Note. In Proceedings of International Bata Conference for Ph.D. Students and Young Researchers. Zlín: TBU in Zlín.
• OTÁHAL, T. (2007b). Why is Corruption a Problem of the State? Prague EconomicPapers. 7(2), pp. 165- 179.
• OTÁHAL, T. (2008a). Na obranu dobývání renty. Ekonomický časopis. 56(10), pp. 1019-1032.
• OTÁHAL, T. (2008b). Teorie podnikatelského objevování. Politická ekonomie. 56(5), pp. 669-683.
• OTÁHAL, T. (2009a). Korupce ve spontánním řádu. Scientia et Societas. 5(1), pp. 137-148.
• OTÁHAL, T. (2009b). Problém zastoupení v nové institucionální ekonomii. Politickáekonomie. 57(5), pp. 677-695.
• OTÁHAL, T. (2010). Srovnání teorií korupce. Scientia et Societas. 6(3), pp. 143-158.
• PALÁT, M. (2009). Analýza trhu práce v České republice s důrazem na nezaměstnanost vzhledem k dalším zemím Evropské unie. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae etSilviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis. 57(6), pp. 189-200.
• PERLOFF, J. M. (2008). Microeconomics: theory & applications with calculus. London: Pearson/Addison-Wesley.
• POTŮČEK, M. (1997). Nejen trh. Praha: Sociologické nakladatelství.
• RIZZO, M. J. (1979) Uncertainty, Subjectivity, and the Economic Analysis of Law. In RIZZO, M (Eds.), Time, Uncertainty, and Disequilibrium: Exploration of AustrianThemes. Massachusetts Toronto: Lexington Books D.C.
• SPECTOR, B. I. (2005). Fighting Corruption in Developing Countries: Strategies andAnalysis. Sterling: Kumarian Press.
• STIGLITZ, J. E. (2000). Economics of the Public Sector. New York USA: W. W. Norton & Company.
• TOLLISON, R. D. (1982). Rent Seeking: A Survey. Kyklos. 35(4), pp. 576-602.
• TREISMAN, D. (2000). The causes of corruption: A cross-national study. Journal ofPublic Economics. 76(3), pp. 399-457.
• TULLOCK, G. (1996). Corruption Theory and Practice. Contemporary EconomicPolicy. 14(3), pp. 6- 13.
• VALENČÍK, R. (2008). Teorie her a redistribuční systémy. Praha: VŠFS - Eupress. VALENČÍK, R., BUDINSKÝ, P. (2009). Teorie redistribučních systémů. Politickáekonomie. 57(5), pp. 644-659.
• WILHELM, P. G. (2002). International validation of the corruption perceptions index: Implications for business ethics and entrepreneurship education. Journal of BusinessEthics. 35(3), pp. 177-189.
• WALLIS, J.J. (2004). The Concept of Systematic Corruption in American Political and Economic History. NBER Working Paper 10952.
• WAWROSZ, P. (2011). Dosahování a narušování institucionální rovnováhy v redistribučních systémech. Politická ekonomie. 59(4), pp. 526-546.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/revecp-2013-0003