Questioning Corruption
Nancy Zucker Boswell responds to Raymond Fisman and Edward Miguel’s "How Economics Can Defeat Corruption."
Raymond Fisman and Edward Miguel ("How Economics Can Defeat Corruption," September/October 2008) rightly argue that in fighting corruption "incentives matter" and that the forensic use of economic data can provide valuable insights into corruption schemes. Continuous, creative approaches are always needed to keep up with the ingenuity of the corrupters.
Raymond Fisman and Edward Miguel ("How Economics Can Defeat Corruption," September/October 2008) rightly argue that in fighting corruption "incentives matter" and that the forensic use of economic data can provide valuable insights into corruption schemes. Continuous, creative approaches are always needed to keep up with the ingenuity of the corrupters.
But, to suggest that "[o]nly then can we take up the much more difficult challenge of determining what to do about it" is to ignore a substantial body of evidence that can and should be put into action now. There is broad consensus among donors, governments, and the private sector that certain approaches are necessary — if not entirely sufficient. These include increased transparency of information, supervision, criminal enforcement, and, yes, rewarding accountability with incentives.
These and other basic pillars of an effective anti-corruption agenda that Transparency International has long espoused are now universally agreed upon and codified at the international level, most notably in the U.N. Convention Against Corruption and in the World Bank’s Governance and Anti-Corruption Strategy. Although further study is always welcome, action to implement these basic tenets is well overdue.
–Nancy Zucker Boswell
President
Transparency International — USA
Washington, D.C.
Raymond Fisman and Edward Miguel reply:
We fully agree with Nancy Zucker Boswell that immediate and direct action is required to root out corruption around the world, and that policymakers already have some tools in hand for doing so. We applaud those efforts that are already taking place, including those spearheaded by Transparency International.
However, there is far more we must learn about designing the most effective anti-corruption strategies. Beyond the methods we discuss in our article for reforming economic incentives and institutions, future research can also play a role in debunking certain elements of conventional wisdom regarding anti-corruption efforts that sound plausible in theory but might not be effective in practice.
The worst enemy of progress against corruption is complacency. So, yes, we should conduct anti-corruption actions now, but the rigorous reevaluation of public policy — which can often yield unexpected results and insights — must remain a top priority.
More from Foreign Policy
Can Russia Get Used to Being China’s Little Brother?
The power dynamic between Beijing and Moscow has switched dramatically.
Xi and Putin Have the Most Consequential Undeclared Alliance in the World
It’s become more important than Washington’s official alliances today.
It’s a New Great Game. Again.
Across Central Asia, Russia’s brand is tainted by Ukraine, China’s got challenges, and Washington senses another opening.
Iraqi Kurdistan’s House of Cards Is Collapsing
The region once seemed a bright spot in the disorder unleashed by U.S. regime change. Today, things look bleak.
Sign up for World Brief
FP’s flagship evening newsletter guiding you through the most important world stories of the day. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
