Staff rotation, connection building and intermediaries in corrupt transactions

Yolsuzluk tarih boyunca pek çok toplumda önemli bir sorun olagelmiştir. Yolsuzluğu caydırma yolları konusunda geniş bir literatür bulunmaktadır; personel rotasyonu bu yollardan biridir. Bu makale temelde, personel rotasyonunun yolsuzluk üzerine etkilerine yoğunlaşmaktadır. Diğer taraftan, kamu görevlileri ile bağlantı kurmak ve aracılar gibi yolsuzluğu kolaylaştıran diğer faktörlerin etkisi de göz önünde bulundurulmaktadır. Personel rotasyonunun, bağlantı kurmanın ve aracıların rolleri üç farklı senaryoda ele alınmıştır: aracıların bulunmadığı tek sefer oynanan bir oyun, aracıların bulunmadığı sonsuz tekrarlanan bir oyun ve aracıların bulunduğu bir oyun. Model sonuçları, personel rotasyonunun, cezaların artırılmasının ve kamunun temiz bir imajının olmasının etkili yolsuzluk karşıtı politika araçları olduğunu göstermektedir. Aracıların var olması veya kamu görevlilieri ile vatandaşların uzun vadeli bir ilişki içinde olmaları zaman tutarsızlığı sorunlarını çözmekte ve böylece, öncesinde gerçekleştirilemeyen yolsuzluklar gerçekleştirilebilir hale gelmektedir. JEL Sınıflaması: K42, C72, D73.

Yolsuzluklarda personel rotasyonunun, bağlantı kurmanın ve aracıların etkisi

Corruption has been a major problem in many societies throughout history. There is an extensive literature about the ways to discourage corruption, with staff rotation being one of the suggestions given. This article primarily focuses on the effect of staff rotation on corrupt transactions, although it also considers other factors, like connection building and use of intermediaries, which facilitate corrupt transactions. The roles of staff rotation, connection building and intermediaries are examined in three different settings: a stage game without intermediaries, an infinitely repeated game without intermediaries, and a game with intermediaries. Results suggest that staff rotation, increased penalties and a clean image of public office can be effective anti-corruption policy tools. Existence of intermediaries or a long term interaction between officers and the clients can solve time inconsistencies, thus, some corrupt transactions, which are not implementable otherwise, become feasible. JEL Classification: K42, C72, D73.

___

  • ABBINK, K. (2004), Staff Rotation As an Anti-Corruption Policy: An Experimental Study, European Journal of Political Economy, 20, 887-906.
  • ANDVIG, J. C. (1991), The Economics of Corruption : a survey, Studi Economica, 46 (1), 55-94.
  • BAÇ, M. (2001), Corruption, Connections and Transparency: Does a Better Screen Imply a Better Scene?, Public Choice, 107 (1-2), 87-96.
  • BARDHAN, P. (1997), Corruption and Develeopment: A Review of Issues, Journal of Economic Literature, 35, 1326-1346.
  • BAYAR, G. (2005), The Role of Intermediaries in Corruption, Public Choice, 122(3), 277-298.
  • BAYAR, G. (2009), Corruption and Intermediaries-A Game Theoretical Approach, Middle East Technical University Studies in Development, 36(1), pp. 25-49.
  • BIGLAISER, G. (1993), Middlemen as Experts, RAND Journal of Economics, 24(2), 212-223.
  • CHOI, J. P., & Thum, M. (2003), The Dynamics of Corruption with the Ratchet Effect, Journal of Development Economics, 87, 427-443.
  • COSIMANO, T. F. (1996), Intermediation, Economica, 63, 131-143.
  • GEHRIG, T. (1993), Intermediation in Search Markets, Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 2(1), 97-120. “The Effect of Corruption on Administrative Performance”
  • GOULD, D. J., REYES, J.A.A. (1983), ““THE EFFECT OF CORRUPTION ON ADMINISTRATIVE Performance”, World Bank Staff Working Paper NO. 580.
  • KLITGAARD, R. (1991), Gifts and Bribes, Strategy and Choice, ed. R., Zeckhauser, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • LAMBERT-MOGILIANSKY, A., MAJUMDAR, M., RADNER, R. (2007), Strategic Analysis of Petty Corruption : Entrepreneurs and Bureaucrats, Journal of Development Economics, 83, 351-367.
  • LAMBERT-MOGILIANSKY, A., MAJUMDAR, M., RADNER, R. (2009), Strategic Analysis of Petty Corruption with an Intermediary, Review of Economic Design, 13, 45-57.
  • LAMBSDORF, J. G. (2001), “How Corruption in Government Affects Public Welfare A Review of Theory”, Center for Globalization and Europeanization of the Economy Discussion Paper, No.9.
  • LIZZERI, A. (1999), Information Revelation and Certification Intermediaries, Rand Journal of Economics, 30(2), 214-231.
  • MASTERS, A. (2008), Unpleasant Middlemen, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 68, 73-86.
  • MAURO, P. (1995), Corruption and Growth, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(3), 681-712.
  • MAURO, P. (1998), Corruption: Causes, Consequences and Agenda for Further Research Finance & Development 35(1), 11-14.
  • HASKER, K, and ÖKTEN, Ç. (2008), Intermediaries and Corruption, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 67, 103-115.
  • ROSE-ACKERMAN, S. (1999), Corruption and Government, Cambridge University Press, Cambride, UK.
  • RUBINSTEIN, A. and WOLINSKY, A. (1987), Middlemen. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 581–593.
  • SCHEVCHENKO, A. (2004), Middlemen, International Economic Review, 45(1), 1-24.
  • SHLEIFER, A., VISHNY, R.W. (1993), “Corruption”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108, 519-617.
  • TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL (undated), Anti- Corruption Handbook, Web site : (http://transparency.org/policy_research/ach/public_sector/public_sector_codes_of_conduct_discussion/good_practice, reached : 04.01.2009).
  • UNITED NATIONS. (1989), Corruption in Government, United Nations, New York.