Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Fighting corruption in Africa: do existing corruption-control levels matter?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Simplice A. Asongu

Abstract

Purpose – Are there different determinants in the fight against corruption across African countries? Why are some countries more effective at battling corruption than others? To assess these concerns this paper aims to examine the determinants of corruption control throughout the conditional distribution of the fight against corruption using panel data from 46 African countries for the period 2002-2010. Design/methodology/approach – The panel quantile regression technique enables us to investigate if the relationship between corruption control and the exogenous variables differs throughout the distribution of the fight against corruption. Findings – Results could be summarized in the following. Greater economic prosperity leads to less corruption control and the magnitude of the effect is more important in countries where the fight against corruption is high. Regulation quality seems bimodal, with less positive effects in the tails: among the best and least fighters of corruption. There is support for a less negative consequence of population growth in countries that are already taking the fight against corruption seriously in comparison to those that are lax on the issue. Findings on democracy broadly indicate the democratization process increases the fight against corruption with a greater magnitude at higher quantiles: countries that are already taking the fight seriously. The relevance of voice and accountability in the battle against corruption decreases as corruption control is taken more seriously by the powers that be. Good governance dynamics of political stability, government effectiveness and the rule of law gain more importance in the fight against corruption when existing levels of corruption control are already high. Social implications – The results of this study suggest that the determinants of corruption control respond differently across the corruption-control distribution. This implies some current corruption-control policies may be reconsidered, especially among the most corrupt and least corrupt African nations. As a policy implication, the fight against corruption should not be postponed; doing so will only reduce the effectiveness of policies in the future. The rewards of institutional reforms are more positive in countries that are already seriously engaged in the corruption fight. Originality/value – This paper contributes to existing literature on the determinants of corruption by focusing on the distribution of the dependent variable (control of corruption). It is likely that good and poor corruption fighters respond differently to factors that influence the fight against corruption. There are subtle institutional differences between corrupt and clean nations that may affect corruption-control determinants and government efficacy in the fight against corruption.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?issn=1446-8956&volume=12&issue=1&articleid=17085997&show=abstract
Download Restriction: Articles are not free to download

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Emerald Group Publishing in its journal International Journal of Development Issues.

Volume (Year): 12 (2012)
Issue (Month): 1 (February)
Pages: 36-52

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eme:ijdipp:v:11:y:2012:i:3:p:36-52

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com

Order Information:
Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK
Email:
Web: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ijdi.htm

Related research

Keywords: Africa; Corruption; Democracy; Government quality; Quantile regression;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Danila Serra, 2005. "Empirical determinants of corruption: A sensitivity analysis," Economics Series Working Papers GPRG-WPS-012, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  2. Simplice A, Asongu & Brian A, Jingwa, 2011. "Population growth and forest sustainability in Africa," MPRA Paper 35179, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  3. Chowdhury, Shyamal K., 2004. "The effect of democracy and press freedom on corruption: an empirical test," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 93-101, October.
  4. Jean-Jacques Laffont & Jean Tirole, 1993. "A Theory of Incentives in Procurement and Regulation," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262121743, December.
  5. Okada, Keisuke & Samreth, Sovannroeun, 2012. "The effect of foreign aid on corruption: A quantile regression approach," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 240-243.
  6. Richard M. Bird & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez & Benno Torgler, 2004. "Societal Institutions and Tax Effort in Developing Countries," CREMA Working Paper Series 2004-21, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
  7. Guriev, Sergei, 2003. "Red Tape and Corruption," CEPR Discussion Papers 3972, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  8. Jain, Arvind K, 2001. " Corruption: A Review," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 71-121, February.
  9. Billger, Sherrilyn M. & Goel, Rajeev K., 2009. "Do existing corruption levels matter in controlling corruption?: Cross-country quantile regression estimates," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 299-305, November.
  10. Grossman, G.M. & Helpman, E., 1992. "Protection for Sale," Papers 162, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Public and International Affairs.
  11. Bird, Richard M. & Martinez-Vazquez, Jorge & Torgler, Benno, 2008. "Tax Effort in Developing Countries and High Income Countries: The Impact of Corruption, Voice and Accountability," Economic Analysis and Policy (EAP), Queensland University of Technology (QUT), School of Economics and Finance, vol. 38(1), pages 55-71, March.
  12. Rajeev K. Goel & Michael A. Nelson, 2005. "Economic Freedom Versus Political Freedom: Cross-Country Influences On Corruption ," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 121-133, 06.
  13. Asongu Simplice, 2012. "On the effect of foreign aid on corruption," Working Papers 12/031, African Governance and Development Institute..
  14. Banerjee, A.V., 1997. "A Theory of Misgovernance," Working papers 97-4, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  15. Treisman, Daniel, 2000. "The causes of corruption: a cross-national study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 399-457, June.
  16. Peter McAdam & Ole Rummel, 2004. "Corruption: a non-parametric analysis," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 31(6), pages 509-523, October.
  17. Toke S. Aidt, 2003. "Economic analysis of corruption: a survey," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(491), pages F632-F652, November.
  18. Gary S. Becker, 1974. "Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach," NBER Chapters, in: Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment, pages 1-54 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  19. Banerjee, Abhijit V, 1997. "A Theory of Misgovernance," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 112(4), pages 1289-1332, November.
  20. Pranab Bardhan, 1997. "Corruption and Development: A Review of Issues," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 35(3), pages 1320-1346, September.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

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

Cited by:
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:ijdipp:v:11:y:2012:i:3:p:36-52. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Virginia Chapman).

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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