Definition of Corruption What
is corruption? There are several answers to this question. Analytically
speaking, the most promising answer is the one made by Vito Tanzi: “Corruption
is the intentional non-compliance with the arm’s-length principle aimed at
deriving some advantage for oneself or for related individuals from this
behavior.” There are three basic elements of this definition.
1. The first element deals with the arm’s-length principle as it requires that
personal or other relationships should play no part in the economic decisions
that involve more than one party. Equal treatment of all economic agents is
essential for a well-working market economy. Bias towards particular economic
agents defi nitely violates the arm’s-length principle and fulfills a necessary
condition for corruption. “If there is no bias, there is no corruption”.
There are two additional necessary conditions for corruption, or rather
conditions that must be fulfilled for observed bias (“non-compliance with the
arm’s-length principle”) to be specified as corruption. The first condition is
that the bias must be intentional accidental violation of the arm’s-length
principle because of, for example, imperfect information, does not represent
2. Second, there must be some advantage for the individual who commits a
violation of the arm’s-length principle; otherwise, there is no corruption.
Violating impartiality may sometimes represent racism, but it is not corruption.
Deriving some advantage, or seizing some benefit for the corrupted economic
agent, can have diff- erent forms. It is a rather widespread notion that
corruption is receiving money (this form of corruption is most often called
bribery), but similar gain can imply expensive gifts or various favors returned.
Giving expensive jewelry to the wife of the person who violated the arm’s-length
principle and providing a well paid job (with little work) for his son is
3. Seizing some benefit or deriving some advantage can be carried out
simultaneously with a violation of the arm’s-length principle, but those two
actions can be taken at different times. Namely, biased behavior of the one who
is corrupted makes an informal, but sometimes binding obligation of the
corruptor to return or repay the favor, and that obligation does not grow
obsolete, so that seizing the benefits from the one who is corrupted moves into
the future. If the returned favor is a well-paid job for the son, and the son
has just started college, it is obvious that there is a time gap between the two
actions. Furthermore, in formulating the corruption contract, the returned favor
is sometimes not even specified, but the obligation is assumed.
There is an alternative definition of corruption frequently used by the World
Bank that specifies corruption as “the abuse
Consequences of Corruption As to the consequences of corruption, it should be
recognized that the bribe itself is nothing but a redistribution of income. In
other words, the bribe itself is not a welfare loss – the scale of social
welfare does not change, only its distribution. Although strictly speaking this
is true, emphasizing only distributional aspects of corruption is one of the
major fallacies of corruption research.
The first reason is the existence of huge transaction costs from corruption. As
it has been pointed out, corruption is an illegal contract, and therefore its
transaction costs are massive. And transaction costs are real costs:
At last I wouold like to say the opportunity, if we are not prevent corruption
in our all department’s province level or area level Region level a time soon
coming when we like a wood condition in which the white ants eat all .inside.
The Holy Quran and Allah order teach us all aspects to stop the Corruption.