Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

From global problems to international norms: what does the social construction of a global corruption problem tell us about the emergence of an international anti-corruption norm

  • Published:
Crime, Law and Social Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article examines the ontological contestation that is inherent to the emergence of an international anti-corruption norm. First, the article briefly analyses the compatibility of an agenda on the social construction of problems from sociology and the well-established study of norms in constructivist IR. It argues that an analytical shift from the study of norms to the social construction of problems can shed light on the power relations that underlie international norms, and corruption in particular. The article traces the emergence of a global corruption problem up to the early 2000s when scholars have traditionally placed the establishment of an international anti-corruption norm. It first shows the contestation of corruption as a global issue on the level of problem definition, and then, it shows the role of venue shopping and venue shifting in the diffusion of anti-corruption talks and the norm cascade of the 1990s. The article concludes with an analysis of how the social construction of problems challenges the conventional approach of the emergence of an international anti-corruption norm.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. On norm contestation and the UNCAC in particular, see [2].

  2. The analysis of the trajectory of the global corruption problem is based primarily on archival data from the OECD, the UN, US Congress Hearings and the Oral History Project of the Securities and Exchange Committee. The findings are presented in further detail in a forthcoming book.

  3. When work advanced at the UN, co-ordination was necessary in 4 organizations and this was reflected in the Co-ordinated Position for the UN, adopted by the Council of the EU on the 28th of February 2001 [39].

  4. The ‘re-discovery’ of the 1906 Prevention of Corruption Act and the repercussions of the ‘cash for questions’ controversy had a definitive impact on the UK position and the new government (formed in May 1997) wanted to take a strong stance against corruption [47, 48].

  5. Senate Resolution 265 of 1975 specified GATT as the institutional forum for negotiations, but representatives of the US executive did not concur with this strategy as they judged it would have been highly unlikely to reach consensus at GATT.

References

  1. Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2002). Values and interests: International legalization in the fight against corruption. The Journal of Legal Studies, 31(1), 141–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gutterman, E., & Lohaus, M. (2017). What is the “Anti-Corruption” Norm in Global Politics? Norm Robustness and Contestion in the Transnsational Governance of Corruption. In I. Kubbe & A. Engelbert (Eds.), Corruption and Norms. Why Informal Rules Matter. London: Palgrave Macmillan (forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Rosenau, J., & Wang, H. (2001). Transparency International and corruption as an issue of global governance. Global Governance, 7(1), 25–49.

    Google Scholar 

  4. GAC (2007). World Bank country-level engagement on governance and anticorruption. http://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/evaluations/world-bank-country-level-engagement-governance-and-anticorruption. Accessed 17 Mar 2017.

  5. IMF (2017). Good governance: the IMF’s role. https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/exrp/govern/govindex.htm. Accessed 19 Mar 2017.

  6. Naim, M. (1995). Corruption eruption. Brown Journal of World Affairs, 2(2), 245–261.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Tanzi, V. (1998). Corruption around the world: Causes, consequences, scope, and cures. IMF Staff Papers, 45(1), 559–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. McCoy, J. L., & Heckel, H. (2001). The emergence of a global anti-corruption norm. International Politics, 38(1), 65–90.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(4), 887–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Wolff, J., & Zimmermann, L. (2016). Between banyans and battle scenes: Liberal norms, contestation, and the limits of critique. Review of International Studies, 42(3), 513–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wiener, A. (2014). A theory of contestation. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Niemann, H., & Schillinger, H. (2016). Contestation ‘all the way down’? The grammar of contestation in norm research. Review of International Studies, 43(1), 29–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Spector, M., & Kitsuse, J. (2009). Constructing social problems. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Krook, M. L., & True, J. (2012). Rethinking the life cycles of international norms: The United Nations and the global promotion of gender equality. European Journal of International Relations, 18(1), 103–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Blumer, H. (1971). Social problems as collective behavior. Social Problems, 18(3), 298–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Girling, J. (1997). Corruption, capitalism and democracy. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kaufmann, D., & Vicente, P. C. (2011). Legal corruption. Economics & Politics, 23(2), 195–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. von Alemann, U. (2004). The unknown depths of political theory: The case for multidimensional concept of corruption. Crime, Law and Social Change, 42(1), 25–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Rose-Ackerman, S. (1978). Corruption: A study in political economy. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Johnston, M. (1996). The search for definitions: The vitality of politics and the issue of corruption. International Social Science Journal, 48(149), 321–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Teachout, Z. (2014). Corruption in America: From Benjamin Franklin’s snuff box to citizens united. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Senturia, J. (1931). Corruption, political. In Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 4 (pp. 448–452). New York: The Macmillan Company (Macmillan).

  23. UNCTAD (1973). Address delivered by Mr. Salvador Allende Gossens, President of Chile at the inaugural ceremony on 13 April 1972. Proceedings of UNCTAD Third Session. Vol. 1 Annex VIII.

  24. U.N. General Assembly. (1975a). Chapter XIII: Questions concerning transnational corporations. In Yearbook of the United Nations, 1975, vol. 29 (pp. 484–490). New York: UN.

  25. U.S. Congress. House. Committee on International Economic Policy. (1975). The activities of American multinational corporations abroad: Hearing before the subcommittee on international economic policy of the committee on international relations. 94th Cong., 1st sess., June 5.

  26. Garavini, G. (2013). After empires. European integration, decolonisation and the challenge from the global south 1957–1986. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hamdani, K., & Ruffing, L. (2015). United Nations Centre on transnational corporations: Corporate conduct and the public interest. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  28. U.N. General Assembly. (1975b). 30th Session. “Resolution 3514: Measures Against Corrupt Practices of Transnational and Other Corporations, Their Intermediaries and Others Involved.” December 15, 1975, pp. 69–70 in Resolutions Adopted on the Reports of the Second Committee (A/RES/3514). New York: UN.

  29. IME(75)18. (1975). Draft guidelines on political involvement of multinational enterprises, note by the United States delegation, September 17. OECD Archives, Paris Headquarters.

  30. Broehl, W. G. (1996). The persisting case against the multinational corporation. Business and Economic History, 25, 159–165.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Puckett, B. (2010). Clans and the foreign corrupt practices act: Individualized corruption prosecution in situations of systemic corruption. Georgetown Journal of International Law, 41(4), 815.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (1988). Pub. L. no. 100-418, 3001-3604, 103 stat. 1372 (codified as amended in scattered sections of U.S.C. (1988)).

  33. Prashad, V. (2013). The poorer nations: A possible history of the global south. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Abdelal, R. (2006). Writing the rules of global finance: France, Europe, and capital liberalization. Review of International Political Economy, 13(1), 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. C(94)75/FINAL. (1994). Recommendation of the Council on Bribery in International Business Transactions, adopted by the Council at its 829th session, July 11. OECD Archives, Paris Headquarters.

  36. Council of Europe. (1999). Civil law convention on corruption: And explanatory report. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Pub.

    Google Scholar 

  37. CM(94)117. (1995). Conference of European ministers of justice. Administrative, civil, and penal aspects, including the role of the judiciary, of the fight against corruption: Proceedings, 19th conference of European ministers of justice, Valletta, Malta, June 14–15, 1994. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Pub.

  38. Common Position 97/661/JHA. (1997). Common position drawn up on the basis of article K.3 of the treaty on European Union on negotiations in the Council of Europe and the OECD relating to corruption: October 6. Official Journal L, 279, 1–2.

  39. Szarek-Mason, P. (2010). The European Union’s fight against corruption: The evolving policy towards member states and candidate countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  40. Pieth, M. (2007). Introduction. In M. Pieth, L. Low, & N. Bonucci (Eds.), The OECD convention on bribery: A commentary (pp. 1–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  41. Manfroni, C. A., & Werksman, R. S. (2003). The Inter-American Convention against Corruption: Annotated with commentary. Lanham: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Elliott, K. A. (1997). Corruption as an international policy problem: Overview and recommendations. In K. A. Elliott (Ed.), Corruption and the global economy (pp. 175–233). Washington, DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  43. DAFFE/IME/PI(93)1. (1993). Elements of recommendation - general considerations, Ad Hoc Group on Illicit Payments, notes by the Netherlands delegation, August 23. OECD Archives, Paris Headquarters.

  44. Feinberg, R. E. (1997). Summitry in the Americas: A progress report. Washington, DC: Peterson Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Vogl, F. (2012). Waging war on corruption: Inside the movement fighting the abuse of power. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  46. DAFFE/IME/BR/RD(95)1. (1995). Criminalisation of bribery of foreign public officials, Working group on bribery in international business transactions, October 11. OECD Archives, Paris Headquarters.

  47. Alldridge, P. W. (2012). The U.K. bribery act: The caffeinated younger sibling of the FCPA. Ohio State Law Journal, 73(5), 1181–1216.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Bean, B. W. (2012). Further to professor Alldridge’s “caffeinated” article: What “stuff” did the professor have in mind? Ohio State Law Journal Furthermore, 73, 77.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Blum, J. (2009). Testimony on the problem of curbing grand scale global corruption before the Committee on Financial Services, U.S. House of Representatives. 111th Cong., 1st sess., May 19, 2009.

  50. Ashe, D. P. (2004). Lengthening anti-bribery lasso of the United States: The recent extraterritorial application of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Fordham Law Review, 73(6), 2897–2945.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Glynn, P., Kobrin, S., & Naim, M. (1997). The globalization of corruption. In K. A. Elliott (Ed.), Corruption and the global economy (pp. 7–31). Washington, DC: Peterson Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  52. TI Press Release. (1998). G 7 Summit holds key to global anti-bribery treaty: Canada, France, Italy and UK must take first step. http://www.transparency.org/news/pressrelease/g_7_summit_holds_key_to_global_anti_bribery_treaty. Accessed 19 Mar 2017.

  53. G7 Meeting of Ministers and Central Bank Governors (1997). Communiqué from 27 Apr 1997. http://www.g8.utoronto.ca/finance/fm970427.htm. Accessed 17 Mar 2017.

  54. The White House (2017). Summit of the eight: the sherpas. http://clinton5.nara.gov/WH/New/Eight/sherpa.html. Accessed 17 Apr 2017.

  55. Department of State. (1997). Promoting the model business principles. Department of State Publication 104846. http://library.law.columbia.edu/urlmirror/4/PromotingtheModelBusinessPrinciples.htm. Accessed 17 Apr 2017.

  56. UN Economic and Social Council. (1996). 86th Session. Resolution 51/191. Declaration against corruption and bribery in international commercial transactions, December 16, 1996 (A/RES/51/191). New York: UN.

  57. UNTERM (2017). Draft International Agreement on Illicit Payments. http://unterm.un.org/dgaacs/unterm.nsf/8fa942046ff7601c85256983007ca4d8/52f9e4bc389a5e61852569fa00003a47?OpenDocument. Accessed 17 Mar 2017.

  58. Boswell, N. Z. (1997). Emerging consensus on controlling corruption. Journal of International Law, 18(4), 44–69.

    Google Scholar 

  59. U.N. General Assembly. (2000). 55th session (81st plenary meeting). An effective international legal instrument against corruption, December 4, 2000 (A/RES/55/61). New York: UN.

  60. Touq, M. (2013). UNCAC is the fastest convention in history. http://www.transparency.de/UNCAC-is-the-fastest-conventio.2414.0.html. Accessed 17 Mar 2017.

  61. UNODC (2017). Action against corruption and economic crime. http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/corruption/. Accessed 17 Mar 2017.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Social Science, Technical University of Braunschweig, Bienroder Weg 97, D-38106, Braunschweig, Germany

    Elitza Katzarova

Authors
  1. Elitza Katzarova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elitza Katzarova.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Katzarova, E. From global problems to international norms: what does the social construction of a global corruption problem tell us about the emergence of an international anti-corruption norm. Crime Law Soc Change 70, 299–313 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-017-9733-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-017-9733-z

Search

Navigation