Corruption factor through the prism of social-demographic aspects: political and economic context

Objective: to determine the impact of socio-demographic factors and characteristics of political and economic changes on corruption.

Methods: the work uses the methods of comparative analysis, construction of conjugation tables, and the index method; the information base is the public opinion monitoring data in Vologda oblast, with 1,500 respondents filling in questionnaires at their place of residence. The sample is random and quota; representativeness is ensured by the proportions observed between the residents of settlements of different types, gender and age structure of the population; sampling error does not exceed 3 %.

Results: manifestations of corruption have been the subject matter of scientific discourse for quite a long time, but the research approaches have been constantly expanding from the historical, legal, and economic points of view. The article considers corruption as a multidimensional phenomenon and analyzes it from the perspective of an integrative approach, which implies taking into account territorial aspects, socio-demographic factors, and the citizens’ perception of the political and economic situation in the country and in the region. The analysis of the assessment results of the public opinion about the corruption level in the region showed that the authorities and the health care system are the most susceptible to corruption. The assessment of the territorial prevalence of corruption showed that the corruption index values along the “center – periphery” line are higher in the regional center than in the districts. It was also revealed that differences in the socio-demographic characteristics insignificantly influence the perception of changes in the corruption level, unlike the perception of corruption depending on the economic and political situation in the region.

Scientific novelty: Based on the analysis of the results of the corruption level monitoring in the region, it is shown that positive assessments of the political and economic situation are associated with an unchanged or decreased level of corruption perception. Hence, good and very good assessments of the economic situation were more often associated with a decrease in the corruption level last year.

Practical significance: the identified links between corruption, socio-demographic, political and economic factors can serve as a basis for adjusting and improving anti-corruption policy at the regional and state level.

1. Acemoglu, D., & Johnson, S. (2005). Unbundling Institutions. Journal of Political Economy, 113(5), 949–995. https://doi.org/10.1086/432166

2. Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. A. (2005). Chapter 6: Institutions as a Fundamental Cause of Long-Run Growth. In Handbook of Economic Growth (vol. 1, part A, pp. 385–472). https://doi.org/10.1016/s1574-0684(05)01006-3

3. Aidt, Toke S. (2003). Economic Analysis of Corruption: A Survey. The Economic Journal, 113(491), F632–F652. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0013-0133.2003.00171.x

4. Amundsen, I. (2006). Political corruption. Bergen: Chr. Michelsen Institute (U4, Iss. 6, 36 p.). http://www.u4.no/publications/political-corruption/

5. Barr, A., & Serra, D. (2010). Corruption and Culture: An Experimental Analysis. Journal of Public Economics, 94(11–12), 862–869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.07.006

6. Bicchieri, C., & Ganegoda, D. (2017). Determinants of Corruption: A Sociopsychological Analysis. In P. Nichols & D. Robertson (Eds.), Thinking about Bribery: Neuroscience, Moral Cognition and the Psychology of Bribery (pp. 177–178). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316450765.008

7. Bondarenko, S. V. (2002). Corrupted societies. Rostov-on-Don: Rostizdat. (In Russ.).

8. Brunetti, A., & Weder, B. (2003). A Free Press is Bad News for Corruption, Journal of Public Economics, 87, 1801–1824. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0047-2727(01)00186-4

9. Burmakin, V. M. (2020). Corruption and pre-corruption situations (socio-philosophical aspect). Context and Reflection: Philosophy of the World and Human Being, 9(5А), 139–147. (In Russ.). http://www.publishing-vak.ru/file/archive-philosophy2020-5/17-burmakin.pdf

10. David, R., & Brierly, J. (1978). Major Legal Systems in the World Today, (3d Ed.). London: Stevens and Sons.

11. De Long, J. B., & Shleifer, A. (1993). Princes and Merchants: European City Growth before the Industrial Revolution. Journal of Law and Economics, 36(2), 671–702. https://doi.org/10.1086/467294

12. Finer, S. E. (1997). The history of government from the earliest times. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.

13. Fjelde, H., & Hegre, H. (2014). Political Corruption and Institutional Stability. Studies in Comparative International Development, 49(3), 267–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-014-9155-1

14. Getz, K. A., & Volkema, R. J. (2001). Culture, Perceived Corruption, and Economics: A Model of Predictors and Outcomes. Business and Society, 40(1), 7–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/000765030104000103

15. Glaeser, E. L., Porta, R. La, Lopez-de Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (2004). Do Institutions Cause Growth? Journal of Economic Growth, 9, 271–303. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:joeg.0000038933.16398.ed

16. Glaeser, E. L. (2005). Inequality. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.

17. Goldstein, M., & Udry, C. (2008). The Profits of Power: Land Rights and Agricultural Investment in Ghana. Journal of Political Economy, 116(6). https://doi.org/10.1086/595561

18. Graeff, P., & Mehlkop, G. (2003). The impact of economic freedom on corruption: Different Patterns for Rich and Poor Countries. European Journal of Political Economy, 19, 605–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0176-2680(03)00015-6

19. Jones, E. (1981). The European Miracle: Environments, Economies and Geopolitics in the History of Europe and Asia. New York: Cambridge University Press.

20. La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Vishny, R. (1998). The Quality of Government. NBER Working Paper, 6727. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.

21. Karepova, S. G. (Ed.) (2019). Corruption as a societal phenomenon: sociological, social-psychological and economic aspects of analysis. Moscow, Saint Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriya. (In Russ.).

22. Huntington, S. (2004). Political order in changing societies. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya. (In Russ.).

23. Mocan, N. (2004). What Determines Corruption? International Evidence from Micro Data. NBER Working paper, 10460. https://doi.org/10.3386/w10460

24. North, D. (1991). Institutions. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.5.1.97

25. Olken, B. A. (2009). Corruption Perceptions vs. Corruption Reality. Journal of Public Economics, 93(7–8), 950–964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2009.03.001

26. Olson, M. (2000). Power and Prosperity: Outgrowing Capitalist and Communist Dictatorships. New York: Basic Books.

27. Papakostas, A. (2016). Civilizing the public sphere: distrust, trust and corruption. Moscow: VTSIOM. (In Russ.).

28. Rimskii, V. L. (2007). Bureaucracy, clientelism and corruption in Russia. Politiya, 1(44), 65–84. (In Russ.).

29. Rose-Ackerman, S. (2010). Corruption and government. Causes, consequences, reforms Moscow: Logos. (In Russ.).

30. Seleznev, Yu. A. (2010). Problem of corruption in researches of the Russian scientists. Tomsk State University Journal, 4(84), 186–189. (In Russ.).

31. Summers, L. (1997, June 10). Speech to the Summit of Eight. Denver, Colorado.

32. Treisman, D. (2007). What have we learned about the causes of corruption from ten years of cross-national empirical research? Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 211–244. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.081205.095418

33. Van Rijckeghem, C., & Weder, B. (2001). Bureaucratic Corruption and the Rate of Temptation: Do Wages in the Civil Service Affect Corruption, and by How Much? Journal of Development Economics, 65, 307–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/s03043878(01)00139-0

34. Weingast, B. R. (1995). The Economic Role of Political Institutions: Market-Preserving Federalism and Economic Development. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jleo.a036861

35. Zhuravlev, A. L., Yurevich, A. V. (2012). Psychological factors of corruption. Prikladnaya yuridicheskaya psikhologiya, 1, 8–21. (In Russ.).