...
首页> 外文期刊>The quarterly review of economics and finance >Using institutional multiplicity to address corruption as a collective action problem: Lessons from the Brazilian case
【24h】

Using institutional multiplicity to address corruption as a collective action problem: Lessons from the Brazilian case

机译:利用制度多样性解决腐败作为集体行动问题:巴西一案的教训

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The academic literature has traditionally framed corruption as a principal-agent problem, but recently scholars have suggested that the phenomenon may be more accurately described as a collective action problem, especially in cases of systemic and widespread corruption. While framing corruption as a collective action problem has proven useful from a descriptive point of view, it has not offered many helpful suggestions for policy reforms. This paper tries to address this gap by suggesting that "institutional multiplicity" (a concept used other areas of research but not in the corruption literature) could be a feasible reform strategy to deal with corruption as a collective action problem. The paper distinguishes between proactive and reactive institutional multiplicity, and argues that the latter's creation of separate institutions could potentially reduce the costs for those who are inclined to engage in principled behavior to deviate from the standard corrupt behavior that prevails in society. This allows for incremental, but potentially very transformative change. Also, institutional multiplicity allows for the creation of new institutions without dismantling the existing ones. It is therefore less likely to face political resistance from interests who benefit from the status quo. We provide some anecdotal evidence to support this claim by analyzing Brazil's recent surge of anti-corruption efforts which could be, at least in part, attributable to the existence of institutional multiplicity in the country's accountability system. In addition to offering a hypothesis to interpret recent experiences with combating corruption in Brazil, the paper also has broader implications: if the hypothesis proves correct, institutional multiplicity could help reformers in other countries where corruption is systemic.
机译:传统上,学术文献将腐败定为主要代理人问题,但最近学者提出,可以将这种现象更准确地描述为集体行动问题,尤其是在系统性腐败和普遍腐败的情况下。虽然从描述的角度来看,将腐败定为集体行动问题是有用的,但它并没有为政策改革提供许多有用的建议。本文试图通过建议“制度多样性”(一个概念在其他研究领域中使用,但未在腐败文献中使用)来解决这一差距,这可能是一种将腐败作为集体行动问题进行处理的可行的改革策略。该论文区分了主动的和反应性的机构多样性,并认为后者的创建是独立的机构,有可能降低那些倾向于从事有原则的行为而背离社会普遍存在的标准腐败行为的人们的成本。这允许进行增量更改,但可能会带来非常大的变革。此外,机构的多样性允许建立新机构而无需拆除现有机构。因此,它不太可能受到受益于现状的利益所带来的政治阻力。我们通过分析巴西最近反腐败工作的激增提供了一些轶事证据来支持这一主张,这至少可以部分归因于该国问责制中存在制度上的多重性。除了提供一个假设来解释巴西反腐败的最新经验外,本文还具有更广泛的含义:如果该假设被证明是正确的,那么制度上的多样性可以帮助其他腐败是系统性国家的改革者。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号