IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/deveco/v90y2009i2p299-305.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do existing corruption levels matter in controlling corruption?: Cross-country quantile regression estimates

Author

Listed:
  • Billger, Sherrilyn M.
  • Goel, Rajeev K.

Abstract

We examine the determinants of corruption using recent cross-sectional data for nearly one hundred countries. While the causes of corruption have drawn economists' interest in recent years, our main contribution is to examine the corruption determinants throughout the conditional distribution of corruption across nations. Are there different causes of corruption in highly corrupt nations compared to the least corrupt countries? For instance, we examine whether greater democracy and more economic freedom consistently reduce corruption among the most and the least corrupt. Our results for the significant determinants support some findings in the literature, but also provide new conclusions. In many cases, quantile regression estimates are quite different from those from OLS regressions. Among the most corrupt nations, larger governments and greater economic freedom do not appear to reduce corruption, but greater democracy seems to alleviate it. Our results suggest that some current corruption control policies may be reconsidered, especially among the most corrupt and least corrupt nations.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:deveco:v:90:y:2009:i:2:p:299-305
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304-3878(08)00079-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. La Porta, Rafael & Lopez-de-Silanes, Florencio & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert, 1999. "The Quality of Government," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 222-279, April.
    2. Joop Hartog & Pedro Pereira & Jose Vieira, 2001. "Changing returns to education in Portugal during the 1980s and early 1990s: OLS and quantile regression estimators," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(8), pages 1021-1037.
    3. 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, June.
    4. Koenker, Roger W & Bassett, Gilbert, Jr, 1978. "Regression Quantiles," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 33-50, January.
    5. 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.
    6. Banerjee, A.V., 1997. "A Theory of Misgovernance," Working papers 97-4, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
    7. Toke S. Aidt, 2003. "Economic analysis of corruption: a survey," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(491), pages 632-652, November.
    8. Pranab Bardhan, 1997. "Corruption and Development: A Review of Issues," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 35(3), pages 1320-1346, September.
    9. Jain, Arvind K, 2001. " Corruption: A Review," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 71-121, February.
    10. James May & William Pyle & Paul Sommers, 2002. "Does Governance Explain Unofficial Activity?," Middlebury College Working Paper Series 0201, Middlebury College, Department of Economics.
    11. Koenker,Roger, 2005. "Quantile Regression," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521845731.
    12. Danila Serra, 2006. "Empirical determinants of corruption: A sensitivity analysis," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 225-256, January.
    13. Graeff, P. & Mehlkop, G., 2003. "The impact of economic freedom on corruption: different patterns for rich and poor countries," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 605-620, September.
    14. Peter McAdam & Ole Rummel, 2004. "Corruption: a non-parametric analysis," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 31(6), pages 509-523, October.
    15. Goel, Rajeev K. & Nelson, Michael A., 2007. "Are corrupt acts contagious?: Evidence from the United States," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 839-850.
    16. Holger Görg & Eric Strobl, 2002. "Multinational Companies and Entrant Start-up Size: Evidence from Quantile Regressions," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 20(1), pages 15-31, February.
    17. repec:hrv:faseco:30747160 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Treisman, Daniel, 2000. "The causes of corruption: a cross-national study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 399-457, June.
    19. Guriev, Sergei, 2004. "Red tape and corruption," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 489-504, April.
    20. 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.
    21. Emerson, Patrick M., 2006. "Corruption, competition and democracy," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 193-212, October.
    22. Goel, Rajeev K & Nelson, Michael A, 1998. "Corruption and Government Size: A Disaggregated Analysis," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 97(1-2), pages 107-120, October.
    23. Abhijit V. Banerjee, 1997. "A Theory of Misgovernance," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 112(4), pages 1289-1332.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:eee:deveco:v:90:y:2009:i:2:p:299-305. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/devec .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.