IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jinsec/v13y2017i04p917-939_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Political institutions, lobbying and corruption

Author

Listed:
  • CAMPOS, NAURO F.
  • GIOVANNONI, FRANCESCO

Abstract

Although firms use various strategies to try to influence government policy, with lobbying and corruption chiefly among them, and political institutions play an important role in determining policy choices, very little research has been devoted to these topics. This paper tries to fill this gap. Using cross-country enterprise-level data, it investigates (1) the effect of a key political institution, namely electoral rules, on the probability that a firm engages in lobbying activities and (2) the impact of lobbying on influence, accounting for corruption and political institutions. The main conclusion is that lobbying is a significantly more effective way of generating political influence than corruption, and that electoral rules are a key mediating political institution. Our baseline estimate is that the probability of influencing government policy is 16% higher for firms that are members of lobbying groups than for those firms that are not.

Suggested Citation

  • Campos, Nauro F. & Giovannoni, Francesco, 2017. "Political institutions, lobbying and corruption," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 917-939, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:13:y:2017:i:04:p:917-939_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744137417000108/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Folorunsho M. Ajide, 2023. "Institutions and Entrepreneurship in Africa: Does Democracy Matter?," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 32(3), pages 553-589, November.
    2. Pierre-Guillaume Méon & Khalid Sekkat, 2016. "A time to throw stones, a time to reap: How long does it take for democratic transitions to improve institutional outcomes?," Working Papers CEB 16-016, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Fernando del Río, 2021. "The impact of rent seeking on social infrastructure and productivity," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 1741-1760, August.
    4. Emery, Thomas & Mélon, Lela & Spruk, Rok, 2023. "Does e-procurement matter for economic growth? Subnational evidence from Australia," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 318-334.
    5. Adeleke, Olaitan & McSharry, Patrick E., 2022. "Female enrollment, child mortality and corruption are good predictors of a country’s UN Education Index," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    6. Andris Zimelis, 2020. "Corruption research: A need for an integrated approach," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 23(3), pages 288-306, September.
    7. Abbas Khandan, 2022. "Externalities in the rent-seeking strategies of lobbying and bribery," Public Sector Economics, Institute of Public Finance, vol. 46(3), pages 421-450.
    8. Lisciandra Maurizio & Miralles Asensio Antonio & Monteforte Fabio, 2024. "Search and Matching in Political Corruption," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 24(1), pages 69-96, January.
    9. del Río, Fernando, 2018. "Governance, social infrastructure and productivity," MPRA Paper 86245, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 16 Apr 2018.
    10. Hannah Charlotte Joos & Dodo zu Knyphausen-Aufseß & Ulrich Pidun, 2020. "Project Stakeholder Management as the Integration of Stakeholder Salience, Public Participation, and Nonmarket Strategies," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 72(3), pages 447-477, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:13:y:2017:i:04:p:917-939_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.