Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Individual and institutional determinants of corruption in the EU countries: the problem of its tolerance

  • Published:
Economia Politica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper deals with the problem of corruption, with a focus on both individual and country-specific institutional factors that may affect this problem. We analyse the determinants of the incidence of corruption as well as the tolerance of corruption. We used logit regressions that utilised data derived from Eurobarometer. The results strongly suggest gender, age, and education are important factors. We may say that anti-corruption policy ought to be targeted towards younger, less-educated, self-employed people with no children. On the other hand, a better-educated man in his early 30s seems to be a typical victim of corruption. The same is true for those having problems paying their expenses. Furthermore, contact with public officials appears to be one of the key issues, with Internet-based interactions with the government perhaps serving as the most effective solution to this problem. The rule of law, government effectiveness, and public accountability seem to be other factors that negatively correlate with the level of corruption within a country.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Source: Eurobarometer 79.1 (2014)

Fig. 2

Source: Author based on Eurobarometer 79.1 (2014)

Fig. 3

Source: Eurobarometer 79.1 (2014)

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andersen, T. B. (2009). E-Government as an anti-corruption strategy. Information Economic and Policy, 21(3), 201–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ata, A. Y., & Arvas, M. A. (2011). Determinants of economic corruption: A cross-country data analysis. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(13), 161–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brollo, F., & Troiano, U. (2016). What happens when a woman wins an election? Evidence from close races in Brazil. Journal of Development Economics, 122, 28–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buehn, A., & Schneider, F. G. (2009). Corruption and the shadow economy: a structural equation model approach. IZA discussion papers No. 4182. http://ftp.iza.org/dp4182.pdf. Accessed 12 January 2016.

  • Dreher, A., Kotsogiannis, C., & McCorriston, S. (2007). Corruption around the world: Evidence from a structural model. Journal of Comparative Economics, 35(3), 443–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2013). Eurobarometer 79.1: E-Communications in the Household and Corruption, February-March 2013. Cologne, Germany: GESIS/Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. doi:10.3886/ICPSR35083.v1.

  • Gerring, J., Thacker, S. C., & Moreno, C. (2005). Centripetal democratic governance: A theory and global inquiry. American Political Science Review, 99(4), 567–581. doi:10.1017/S0003055405051889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goel, R. K., & Nelson, M. A. (1998). Corruption and government size: A disaggregated analysis. Public Choice, 97(1–2), 107–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, S., Davoodi, H., & Alonso-Terme, R. (2002). Does corruption affect income inequality and poverty? Economics of Governance, 3(1), 23–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gyimah-Brempong, K. (2002). Corruption, economic growth, and income inequality in Africa. Economics of Governance, 3(3), 183–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heywood, P. M., & Rose, J. (2014). “Close but no Cigar”: The measurement of corruption. Journal of Public Policy, 34(3), 507–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, J., & Jones, P. (2008). Corruption and military expenditure: At ‘no cost to the king’. Defence and Peace Economics, 19(6), 387–403. doi:10.1080/10242690801962270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, J., Williams, C., Orviska, M., & Nadin, S. (2012). Evaluating the impact of the informal economy on businesses in South East Europe: Some lessons from the 2009 World Bank Enterprise Survey. South East European Journal of Economics and Business, 7(1), 99–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunady, J., & Orviska, M. (2015). Does the internet usage reduce the corruption in public sector? The short run and long run causality. Acta Aerarii Publici, 12(1), 22–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauro, P. (1995). Corruption and growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(3), 681–712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melgar, N., Rossi, M., & Smith, T. W. (2010). The perception of corruption. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22(1), 120–131. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edpo58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mocan, N. (2008). What determines corruption? International evidence from microdata. Economic Inquiry, 46(4), 493–510. doi:10.1111/j.1465-7295.2007.00107.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mutascu, M. I. (2010). Corruption, social welfare, culture and religion in European Union 27. Transition Studies Review, 16(4), 908–917. doi:10.1007/s11300-009-0118-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neudorfer, N. S. (2015). Development, democracy and corruption: how poverty and lack of political rights encourage corruption. Journal of Public Policy, 35(3), 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olken, B. A. (2009). Corruption perceptions vs. corruption reality. Journal of Public economics, 93(7), 950–964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrini, L., & Gerlagh, R. (2008). Causes of corruption: a survey of cross-country analyses and extended results. Economics of Governance, 9(3), 245–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rehman, H. U., & Naveed, A. (2007). Determinants of corruption and its relation to GDP: A panel study. Journal of Political Studies, 12(2), 27–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rizzica, L., & Tonello, M. (2015). Exposure to media and corruption perceptions. Bank of Italy Temi di Discussione (Working Paper) No, 1043.

  • Rose, R., & Mishler, W. (2010). Experience versus perception of corruption: Russia as a test case. Global Crime, 11(2), 145–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose-Ackerman, S. (1975). The economics of corruption. Journal of public economics, 4(2), 187–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serra, D. (2006). Empirical determinants of corruption: A sensitivity analysis. Public Choice, 126, 225–256. doi:10.1007/s11127-006-0286-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shim, D. C., & Eom, T. H. (2008). E-government and anti-corruption: Empirical analysis of international data. International Journal of Public Administration, 31(3), 298–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stapenhurst, F., & Langseth, P. (1997). The role of the public administration in fighting corruption. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 10(5), 311–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swamy, A., Knack, S., Lee, Y., & Azfar, O. (2001). Gender and corruption. Journal of Development Economics, 64(1), 25–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgler, B., & Valev, N. T. (2006). Corruption and age. Journal of Bioeconomics, 8(2), 133–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgler, B., & Valev, N. T. (2010). Gender and public attitudes toward corruption and tax evasion. Contemporary Economics Policy, 28(4), 554–568. doi:10.1111/j.1465-7287.2009.00188.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Truex, R. (2011). Corruption, attitudes, and education: Survey evidence from Nepal. World Development, 39(7), 1133–1142. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2010.11.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H., & Rosenau, J. N. (2001). Transparency international and corruption as an issue of global governance. Global Governance, 7(2001), 25–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2015). World databank: Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI). http://databank.worldbank.org/data/reports.aspx?source=Worldwide-Governance-Indicators. Accessed 14 December 2015.

  • Zhao, X., & Xu, H. D. (2015). E-government and corruption: A longitudinal analysis of countries. International Journal of Public Administration, 38(6), 1–12. doi:10.1080/01900692.2014.942736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Slovak Research and Development Agency under the Contract No. APVV-15-0322. The author would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Hunady.

Appendices

Appendix 1

figure a

The representation of respondents in the sample based on the residence country. Source: Author based on the Eurobarometer 79.1 (2013)

Appendix 2

Description of socio-economic variables included in the regressions.

All data are retrieved from Eurobarometer 79.1 (2013)

Name of the variable

Description of dependent variables and their coding

Experienced corruption

In the last 12 months, have you experienced any case of corruption? Yes = 1; no = 0

Reported corruption (exclusively victims)

Did your reported experienced corruption to anyone or not?

Those that reported corruption = 1

Those that did not report a case of experienced corruption or did not experience corruption in the last 12 months = 0

Corruption tolerance (recoded as follows: acceptable or tolerated = 1, unacceptable = 0)

Talking more generally, if you wanted to get something from the public administration or public services, to what extent do you think it is acceptable to do any of the following money (always acceptable = 3; sometimes acceptable = 2; never acceptable = 1): (1) to give money, (2) to give a gift, (3) to do a favour. Based on the answers to previous question the index of tolerance to corruption is calculated. (recoded to binary variable as follows: acceptable or tolerated = 1; unacceptable = 0)

Know where to report

If you were to experience or witness a case of corruption, would you know where to report it to? Yes = 1; no = 0

Education

How old were you when you stopped full-time education? (exact age)

Married

Married = 1; unmarried = 0

Gender

Male = 1; female = 0

Age

How old are you? (exact age)

Rural/urban

Would you say you live in a…? Rural area or village = 1; Small or middle sized town = 2; Large town = 3

Children

Are there any children less 14 years old living in the household? (yes = 1; no = 0)

Tv

Which of the following goods do you have?…Television (yes = 1; no = 0)

Car

Which of the following goods do you have?…Car (yes = 1; no = 0)

Problems with paying bills

During the last twelve months, would you say you had difficulties to pay your bills at the end of the month…? Most of the time (coded = 3), From time to time (=2); almost never/never (=1)

Unemployed

Did you do any paid work in the past? What is your current occupation?…

Unemployed or temporarily not working (yes = 1, no = 0)

Self employed

Did you do any paid work in the past? What is your current occupation?…

Self employed (yes = 1, no = 0)

Top management

Did you do any paid work in the past? What is your current occupation?…

General management, director or top management (yes = 1, no = 0)

Employed professional

Did you do any paid work in the past? What is your current occupation?…

Employed professional (employed doctor, lawyer, accountant, architect…) (yes = 1, no = 0)

Contact with authorities

Over the last 12 months, have you had any contact with any of the following: police, customs, tax authorities, social security and welfare authorities, public prosecution service, politicians, political parties, officials awarding public tenders, officials issuing building or business permits, health-care system, the education sector and inspectors in your country (yes = 1, no = 0)

Appendix 3

Country-specific variables included in the regressions.

Variable name

Description of dependent variables and the coding

Source

Corruption perception (the country average)

How widespread do you think the problem of corruption is in your country?

We calculated the country specific means of corruption as perceived by the respondents in each country

Eurobarometer 79.1 (2013)

Internet interaction with government

Individuals using the internet for interaction with public authorities within 12 months before the survey (% of individuals aged 16–74)

Eurostat database (code: tin00013)

Tertiary education

Population with tertiary educational attainment level (% of total population)

Eurostat database (code: edat_lfse_07)

Rule of law

Rule of Law captures perceptions of the extent to which agents have confidence in and abide by the rules of society, and in particular the quality of contract enforcement, property rights, the police, and the courts, as well as the likelihood of crime and violence. The estimate gives the country’s score on the aggregate indicator, in units of a standard normal distribution

World bank database: Worldwide Governance Indicators. http://databank.worldbank.org/data/reports.aspx?source=worldwide-governance-indicators

Government effectiveness

Government Effectiveness captures perceptions of the quality of public services, the quality of the civil service and the degree of its independence from political pressures, the quality of policy formulation and implementation, and the credibility of the government’s commitment to such policies. The estimate gives the country’s score on the aggregate indicator, in units of a standard normal distribution

Public voice accountability

Public voice and Accountability captures perceptions of the extent to which a country’s citizens are able to participate in selecting their government, as well as freedom of expression, freedom of association, and a free media. The estimate gives the country’s score on the aggregate indicator, in units of a standard normal distribution

Political stability

Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism measures perceptions of the likelihood of political instability and/or politically-motivated violence, including terrorism. The estimate gives the country’s score on the aggregate indicator, in units of a standard normal distribution

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hunady, J. Individual and institutional determinants of corruption in the EU countries: the problem of its tolerance. Econ Polit 34, 139–157 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40888-017-0056-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40888-017-0056-4

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation