IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/185558.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Herzfeld, Thomas
  • Kulyk, Iryna
  • Wolz, Axel

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

  • Herzfeld, Thomas & Kulyk, Iryna & Wolz, Axel, 2018. "Is Agribusiness Different? Firm-Level Evidence of Perceived Corruption in Post-Soviet Countries," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 56(6), pages 504-521.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:185558
    DOI: 10.1080/00128775.2018.1503937
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/185558/1/Herzfeld_2018_Is_Agribusiness_Different.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    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
    ---><---

    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. repec:bla:ecopol:v:17:y:2005:i::p:37-75 is not listed on IDEAS
    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, August.
    14. Weber Abramo, Claudio, 2007. "How Much Do Perceptions of Corruption Really Tell Us?," Economics Discussion Papers 2007-19, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    15. 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(01), pages 1-17.
    16. 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. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Staffan Andersson & Paul M. Heywood, 2009. "The Politics of Perception: Use and Abuse of Transparency International's Approach to Measuring Corruption," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(4), pages 746-767, December.
    6. 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).
    7. 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.
    8. Razafindrakoto, Mireille & Roubaud, François, 2010. "Are International Databases on Corruption Reliable? A Comparison of Expert Opinion Surveys and Household Surveys in Sub-Saharan Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1057-1069, August.
    9. Heyman Fredrik & Tingvall Patrik Gustavsson, 2015. "The Dynamics of Offshoring and Institutions," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 15(4), pages 1975-2016, October.
    10. Benno Torgler & Marco Piatti, 2013. "Extraordinary Wealth, Globalization, And Corruption," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 59(2), pages 341-359, June.
    11. 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.
    12. 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).
    13. 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.
    14. Singh, Sunny Kumar & Bhattacharya, Kaushik, 2017. "Does easy availability of cash affect corruption? Evidence from a panel of countries," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 236-247.
    15. Germana Corrado & Luisa Corrado & Giuseppe De Michele & Francesco Salustri, 2017. "Are Perceptions of Corruption Matching Reality? Theory and Evidence from Microdata," CEIS Research Paper 420, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 14 Dec 2017.
    16. Pieroni, L. & d'Agostino, G., 2013. "Corruption and the effects of economic freedom," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 54-72.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Christian Bjørnskov, 2011. "Combating Corruption: On the Interplay between Institutional Quality and Social Trust," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(1), pages 135-159.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    agribusiness; business obstacles; CIS countries; quality of institutions;
    All these keywords.

    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:zbw:espost:185558. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.