Transparency in politics can lead to greater corruption

Oct 10, 2008

Why are some countries more prone to political corruption? Viviana Stechina from Uppsala University, Sweden, has investigated why corruption among the political elite was more extensive in Argentina than in Chile during the 1990s. Among other things, her research shows that greater transparency does not necessarily lead to less corruption.

In her comparison of Chile and Argentina, Viviana Stechina focuses on the rules of the game of politics and on the actions of the political elite in situations that offer many incentives and opportunities for corruption. Through detailed examination of several privatization processes in the two countries, she identifies the institutional circumstances that heighten or reduce the risk of elite corruption. In her analysis she concentrates on four institutional aspects that corruption experts often put forward as relevant to understand the occurrence of corruption: the extent of intrastate accountability, the extent of transparency in policy-making, and the respective degrees of concentration of power and discretion among decision-makers.

The dissertation shows that political institutions play a major role in terms of how vulnerable the two countries are to corruption. Chile's political system, with stronger intrastate accountability and less power concentration, proved to be more resistant to corruption than the Argentine system. However, the extent of discretion among decision-makers proved to be less of a factor than corruption researchers normally claim.

The most remarkable finding is that the greater transparency found in Argentina did not lead to less corruption in the short run.

"Thanks to the extensive coverage by the press, the public in Argentina had greater access to information about political decisions and actions than in Chile, but this did not prevent the occurrence of corruption and abuses of power. Instead, media reports increased the public awareness not only of the extent of corruption but also of the impunity that politicians enjoyed. In the short run, this probably increased the incentives for corruption. In the long run, on the other hand, there have been advantages with greater transparency," says Viviana Stechina.

Source: Uppsala University

Explore further: Best of Last Week–Can space travel faster than light, another planet behind the Sun and should we allow head transplants

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Evolving robot brains

8 hours ago

Researchers are using the principles of Darwinian evolution to develop robot brains that can navigate mazes, identify and catch falling objects, and work as a group to determine in which order they should ...

Facebook fends off telecom firms' complaints

8 hours ago

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg fended off complaints on Monday that the hugely popular social network was getting a free ride out of telecom operators who host its service on smartphones.

Scientists find clues to cancer drug failure

8 hours ago

Cancer patients fear the possibility that one day their cells might start rendering many different chemotherapy regimens ineffective. This phenomenon, called multidrug resistance, leads to tumors that defy ...

Glass coating improves battery performance

8 hours ago

Lithium-sulfur batteries have been a hot topic in battery research because of their ability to produce up to 10 times more energy than conventional batteries, which means they hold great promise for applications ...

Recommended for you

Bribery 'hits 1.6 billion people a year'

Feb 27, 2015

A total of 1.6 billion people worldwide – nearly a quarter of the global population – are forced to pay bribes to gain access to everyday public services, according to a new book by academics at the Universities of Birmingham ...

How music listening programmes can be easily fooled

Feb 26, 2015

For well over two decades, researchers have sought to build music listening software that can address the deluge of music growing faster than our Spotify-spoilt appetites. From software that can tell you ...

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

CWFlink
4.5 / 5 (2) Oct 10, 2008
We banned commercials for alcohol and tobacco over the years on the belief that addiction to these drugs were harmful to the sheer health of society. If these "judgemental" actions were justified, shouldn't we also be judgemental about corruption?

If the news media presents reports on political corruption in such a way that it makes these crimes "justified" on the basis of "getting even with the other side" or making them "attractive" like all the vices of the celebrities have become, then indeed transparency does not solve the problem.

Transparency without moral judgement will not be a defense against corruption, and in fact may well become an advertisement for it.

Seems no matter how much research sociologist do, they seem to come back to proving the value of that ancient "invention": morality.

You can't replace it with mere transparency. You can't replace it with economic rewards or legal pressures. Invariably, it seems, there are humans who can corrupt any system that stops short of one that instills personal, self-directed "shame" for being "bad".

Transparency is a prerequsite in the battle against corruption, but not sufficient. We must also have a media and a society that assigns shame to those who practice it. So long as we "look the other way" or otherwise minimize the crimes, transparency only advertises the evil that corrupts the society.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.