IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mes/eaeuec/v56y2018i6p504-521.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is Agribusiness Different? Firm-Level Evidence of Perceived Corruption in Post-Soviet Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Herzfeld
  • Iryna Kulyk
  • Axel Wolz

Abstract

We investigated firm-level perceptions of corruption, based on two enterprise surveys conducted across eight countries of the former Soviet Union. In addition to identifying the perceived major obstacles to business operations, the article looks at whether managers in the agribusiness sector perceive corruption differently than do managers in other sectors. The empirical analysis makes use of the most recent wave of the Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Survey (BEEPS) conducted between 2012 and 2013, complemented by our own survey conducted in 2016. The results paint a heterogeneous picture. One-fifth of the respondents to BEEPS agree that private payments or gifts to local officials have a moderate or high direct impact, whereas the rate of agreement declines when asked about parliamentarians or government officials. Results of a range of econometric models, however, do not reveal differences between agribusiness and other sectors at large. Only in two of ten specifications do respondents from agribusiness tend to perceive corruption as occurring less frequently than do respondents from other sectors. However, country effects seem to be more important than intersectoral differences in the perception of corruption.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Herzfeld & Iryna Kulyk & Axel Wolz, 2018. "Is Agribusiness Different? Firm-Level Evidence of Perceived Corruption in Post-Soviet Countries," Eastern European Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(6), pages 504-521, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:mes:eaeuec:v:56:y:2018:i:6:p:504-521
    DOI: 10.1080/00128775.2018.1503937
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00128775.2018.1503937
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00128775.2018.1503937?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nathan Nunn, 2007. "Relationship-Specificity, Incomplete Contracts, and the Pattern of Trade," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(2), pages 569-600.
    2. Jakob Svensson, 2003. "Who Must Pay Bribes and How Much? Evidence from a Cross Section of Firms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(1), pages 207-230.
    3. Jakob Svensson, 2005. "Eight Questions about Corruption," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(3), pages 19-42, Summer.
    4. Daniel Kaufmann & Aart Kraay & Massimo Mastruzzi, 2003. "Governance Matters III: Governance Indicators for 1996-2002," Macroeconomics 0308006, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Garabed Minassian, 2002. "The Economic Environment in Albania, Bulgaria, Macedonia FYR, and Greece: A Cross-Country Study," Eastern European Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 45-82, July.
    6. Heywood, Paul M. & Rose, Jonathan, 2014. "“Close but no Cigar†: the measurement of corruption," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(3), pages 507-529, December.
    7. Jensen, Nathan M & Rahman, Aminur, 2011. "The silence of corruption : identifying underreporting of business corruption through randomized response techniques," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5696, The World Bank.
    8. Elena Denisova-Schmidt & Yaroslav Prytula, 2017. "Trust and Perceived Corruption Among Ukrainian Firms," Eastern European Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(4), pages 324-341, July.
    9. Miriam A. Golden & Lucio Picci, 2005. "Proposal For A New Measure Of Corruption, Illustrated With Italian Data," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17, pages 37-75, March.
    10. Eifert, Benn & Gelb, Alan & Ramachandran, Vijaya, 2008. "The Cost of Doing Business in Africa: Evidence from Enterprise Survey Data," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1531-1546, September.
    11. Weber Abramo, Claudio, 2008. "How Much Do Perceptions of Corruption Really Tell Us?," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 2, pages 1-56.
    12. Axel Dreher & Thomas Herzfeld, 2005. "The Economic Costs of Corruption: A Survey and New Evidence," Public Economics 0506001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. World Bank, 2012. "Fighting Corruption in Public Services : Chronicling Georgia's Reforms," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 2234, December.
    14. Edwards, Mark R. & Shultz, Clifford J., II, 2005. "Reframing Agribusiness: Moving from Farm to Market Centric," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 23(1), pages 1-17.
    15. Clarke, George R. G. & Xu, Lixin Colin, 2004. "Privatization, competition, and corruption: how characteristics of bribe takers and payers affect bribes to utilities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(9-10), pages 2067-2097, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tingvall, Patrik, 2011. "Dynamic Effects of Corruption on Offshoring," Ratio Working Papers 182, The Ratio Institute.
    2. Krisztina Kis-Katos & Günther G. Schulze, 2013. "Corruption in Southeast Asia: a survey of recent research," Asian-Pacific Economic Literature, The Crawford School, The Australian National University, vol. 27(1), pages 79-109, May.
    3. Yan Leung Cheung & P. Raghavendra Rau & Aris Stouraitis, 2012. "How much do firms pay as bribes and what benefits do they get? Evidence from corruption cases worldwide," NBER Working Papers 17981, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Calogero Guccio & Domenico Lisi & Ilde Rizzo, 2019. "When the purchasing officer looks the other way: on the waste effects of debauched local environment in public works execution," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 205-236, September.
    5. Robert Gillanders & Sinikka Parviainen, 2018. "Corruption and the shadow economy at the regional level," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 1729-1743, November.
    6. Nicolas Campos & Eduardo Engel & Ronald D. Fischer & Alexander Galetovic, 2019. "Renegotiations and corruption in infrastructure: The Odebrecht case," "Marco Fanno" Working Papers 0230, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
    7. Liu, Tingting & Liu, Yu & Ullah, Barkat & Wei, Zuobao & Xu, Lixin Colin, 2021. "The dark side of transparency in developing countries: The link between financial reporting practices and corruption," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    8. Gauthier, Bernard & Goyette, Jonathan & Kouamé, Wilfried A.K., 2021. "Why do firms pay bribes? Evidence on the demand and supply sides of corruption in developing countries," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 463-479.
    9. Matthew Cole & Robert Elliott & Jing Zhang, 2009. "Corruption, Governance and FDI Location in China: A Province-Level Analysis," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(9), pages 1494-1512.
    10. Liu,Tingting & Ullah,Barkat & Wei,Zuobao & Xu,L. Colin, 2015. "The dark side of disclosure : evidence of government expropriation from worldwide firms," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7254, The World Bank.
    11. Gutmann, Jerg & Padovano, Fabio & Voigt, Stefan, 2020. "Perception vs. experience: Explaining differences in corruption measures using microdata," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    12. Steve Billon & Robert Gillanders, 2016. "State ownership and corruption," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 23(6), pages 1074-1092, December.
    13. Clarke, George R.G., 2011. "How Petty is Petty Corruption? Evidence from Firm Surveys in Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 1122-1132, July.
    14. Yan-Leung Cheung & P. Raghavendra Rau & Aris Stouraitis, 2021. "What Determines the Return to Bribery? Evidence from Corruption Cases Worldwide," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(10), pages 6235-6265, October.
    15. Fonseca-Mairena, María Haydée & Triossi, Matteo, 2019. "Incentives and implementation in marriage markets with externalities," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    16. Barth, James R. & Lin, Chen & Lin, Ping & Song, Frank M., 2009. "Corruption in bank lending to firms: Cross-country micro evidence on the beneficial role of competition and information sharing," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 361-388, March.
    17. Thuy Dieu Nguyen, 2020. "Does firm growth increase corruption? Evidence from an instrumental variable approach," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 55(1), pages 237-256, June.
    18. Pieroni, Luca & d'Agostino, Giorgio & Bartolucci, Francesco, 2013. "Identifying corruption through latent class models: evidence from transition economies," MPRA Paper 43981, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. José-Miguel Bello y Villarino, 2021. "Measuring Corruption: A Critical Analysis of the Existing Datasets and Their Suitability for Diachronic Transnational Research," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 157(2), pages 709-747, September.
    20. Diaby, Aboubacar & Sylwester, Kevin, 2014. "Bureaucratic competition and public corruption: Evidence from transition countries," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 75-87.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D22 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
    • P37 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Socialist Institutions and Their Transitions - - - Legal

    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:mes:eaeuec:v:56:y:2018:i:6:p:504-521. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/MEEE20 .

    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.