Beaten by bribery: Why not blow the whistle?
AbstractA recent business survey in Norway reveals that firms rarely react to corruption, even when they have lost important contracts as a result. This disinclination to take action is explored in the light of market structures, business efficiency, judicial institutions and political corruption. The paper develops a theory about how these four variables deter firms from reacting against corruption, and, in particular, how the potential for collusion reinforces the incentives to remain silent. Considered separately, each of the factors are unable to explain the low frequency of anti-corruption reactions between firms. Considered in combination, however, the various impediments suggest a more complete explanation: When conditions in market structure suggest that the best response would be to take action, political conditions may favour inaction. When a potential whistle-blower expects support from local politicians or legal institutions, the given offender may be impervious to sanctions; its role in the market will not be altered by the given case. The sum of precondition for action suggests that firms rarely react against corruption. JEL L10, K42
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by CMI (Chr. Michelsen Institute), Bergen, Norway in its series CMI Working Papers with number WP 2006: 5.
Date of creation: 2006
Date of revision:
Corruption Whistleblowing Industrial organization Collusion JEL L10; K42;
Other versions of this item:
- Tina Søreide, 2008. "Beaten by Bribery: Why Not Blow the Whistle?," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 164(3), pages 407-428, September.
- L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
- K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2006-04-08 (All new papers)
- NEP-COM-2006-04-08 (Industrial Competition)
- NEP-REG-2006-04-08 (Regulation)
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.:
- Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky & Konstantin Sonin, 2006.
"Collusive Market Sharing and Corruption in Procurement,"
Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(4), pages 883-908, December.
- Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky & Konstantin Sonin, 2005. "Collusive market-sharing and corruption in procurement," PSE Working Papers halshs-00590773, HAL.
- Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky & Konstantin Sonin, 2003. "Corruption and Collusion in Procurement Tenders," Working Papers w0036, Center for Economic and Financial Research (CEFIR).
- Bergstrom, Theodore C & Varian, Hal R, 1985. "When Are Nash Equilibria Independent of the Distribution of Agents' Characteristics?," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(4), pages 715-18, October.
- Friedman, James W. & Thisse, Jacques-Francis, 1994.
"Sustainable collusion in oligopoly with free entry,"
European Economic Review, Elsevier,
Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 271-283, February.
- Friedman, J. & Thisse, J.F., 1992. "Sustainable Collusion in Oligopoly with Free Entry," Papiers d'Economie MathÃÂ©matique et Applications, UniversitÃÂ© PanthÃÂ©on-Sorbonne (Paris 1) 92-18, UniversitÃ© PanthÃ©on-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
- Friedman, J.W. & Thisse, J.-F., . "Sustainable collusion in oligopoly with free entry," CORE Discussion Papers RP, UniversitÃ© catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE) -1084, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Bjorvatn, Kjetil & Soreide, Tina, 2005. "Corruption and privatization," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 903-914, December.
- Ivaldi, Marc & Jullien, Bruno & Rey, Patrick & Seabright, Paul & Tirole, Jean, 2003. "The Economics of Tacit Collusion," IDEI Working Papers, Institut d'Ãconomie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse 186, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
- Kaufmann, Daniel & Vicente, Pedro C., 2005.
8186, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Schmalensee, Richard, 1987. "Competitive advantage and collusive optima," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 351-367.
- Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1994. "Politicians and Firms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, MIT Press, vol. 109(4), pages 995-1025, November.
- Villena, Mauricio G. & Villena, Marcelo J., 2010. "On the economics of whistle-blowing behavior: the role of incentives," MPRA Paper 35917, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 24 Mar 2010.
- Frédéric Boehm & Johann Graf Lambsdorff, 2009. "Corrupción y anticorrupción: una perspectiva neo-institucional," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 11(21), pages 45-72, July-Dece.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Robert Sjursen).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.