پژوهش ها و چشم اندازهای اقتصادی

پژوهش ها و چشم اندازهای اقتصادی

شواهد جدیدی از تأثیر جهانی‌شدن بر فساد: کاربردی از مدل انتقال ملایم آستانه‌ای پانلی

نویسندگان
مجید بابایی آغ اسمعیلی 1
حسن خداویسی 2
1 دانشجوی دکتری اقتصاد ، دانشگاه ارومیه، ارومیه، ایران
2 دانشیار اقتصاد، دانشگاه ارومیه، ارومیه، ایران
10.22034/24.1.193
چکیده
در ادبیات اقتصادی، فساد به صورت سوء‌استفاده از قدرت عمومی برای سود شخصی تعریف می‏شود. فساد بر تولید ناخالص داخلی، توزیع درآمد، توسعه انسانی و به‌طور کلی بر ساختار اقتصادی و اجتماعی کشورها اثرات منفی داشته و اعتبار و قدرت رقابت‌پذیری آنها را در اقتصاد بین‏ المللی تحت‌تأثیر قرار می‏ دهد. اهمیت موضوع جهانی‌شدن از یک‌سو و گستردگی فساد از سوی دیگر، نیاز به بررسی رابطۀ این دو متغیر را پررنگ‏تر می‏نماید. در این مقاله، اثرات غیر‏خطی جهانی‌شدن بر شاخص کنترل فساد، در کشورهای عضو سازمان کنفرانس اسلامی (OIC) برای دورۀ زمانی 2003-2019 با استفاده از مدل رگرسیون انتقال ملایم پانلی(PSTR)، مورد بررسی قرار گرفته و بدین منظور از شاخص جدید جهانی‌شدن (KOF) به عنوان متغیر انتقال استفاده شده است. نتایج برآورد مدل، حاکی از وجود رابطۀ غیر‏خطی قوی میان متغیر‏های مورد مطالعه بوده و یک مدل دو رژیمی با حد آستانه‏ای 75/69 و پارامتر شیب 78/0 را پیشنهاد می‏شود. براساس یافته‏ های تحقیق، جهانی‌شدن در رژیم اول، تأثیر منفی و معنی‌دار و در رژیم دوم، تأثیر مثبت و معنی‌دار بر شاخص کنترل فساد دارد و بنابراین، فرضیه U شکل بین جهانی‌شدن و شاخص کنترل فساد در کشورهای مورد مطالعه، تأیید می‏ شود. همچنین با عبور متغیر انتقال (شاخص جهانی‌شدن) از حد آستانه‏ ای و در رژیم دوم، اثر مثبت توسعه اقتصادی بر شاخص کنترل فساد، کاهش یافته است. اندازه دولت و نرخ مشارکت زنان (جنسیت) در هر دو رژیم، به ترتیب، تأثیر منفی و مثبت بر شاخص کنترل فساد دارند. رابطۀ منفی آزادی اقتصادی و شاخص کنترل فساد در رژیم اول، به رابطه مثبت در رژیم دوم تبدیل شده است. اثر ثبات سیاسی قبل از حد آستانه ‏ای، مثبت و معنی‏ دار است و نهایتاً، تورم در هر دو رژیم، تأثیر معنی ‏داری بر شاخص کنترل فساد ندارد.
کلیدواژه‌ها
: جهانی‌شدن
فساد
مدل انتقال ملایم آستانه‌ای پانلی
کشورهای عضو سازمان کنفرانس اسلامی

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

New evidence of the impact of globalization on corruption: applying the panel smooth threshold regression model

نویسندگان English

Majid Babaei Agh Esmaili 1
Hassan Khodavaisi 2
1 Ph.D. Candidate in Economics, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran
2 Associate Prof. of Economics, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran
چکیده English

Introduction

The existing literature on corruption is divided into two categories. The first category focuses on the determinants of corruption. Various empirical studies show that the main factors affecting the scope and extent of corruption are the quality of urban services, the level of wages in the public sector, the rule of law, especially anti-corruption laws and access to natural resources, the level of development and the degree of competitiveness of the economy, globalization and industrial policy of the country . The second category of existing literature focuses on the consequences of corruption. In other words, we can refer to studies such as the impact of corruption on the growth, quality of public infrastructure and public investment, foreign direct investment, income inequality and poverty, and government spending.

In line with the first category of the above-mentioned studies, the effect of globalization on corruption is the main focus of this article. In other words, in this research, we seek to answer the question, does the spread of globalization affect the level of corruption? Considering that globalization can have different effects on corruption, which depends on the level of globalization of countries, so it is likely that there is a non-linear relationship between them. For this purpose, statistical data of member countries of the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) during the period 2003-2019, and the econometric method of panel smooth threshold regression have been used.

Methodology

For analyzing data, panel smooth transition regression (PSTR) model is used, which was presented and expanded by Gonzalez et al. (2005) and Colletaz & Hurlin (2006). We use the general model of the research, which is specified in the form of the following equation:





Where, COC: Corruption control index, KOF: Globalization index and The Control symbol indicates the control variables that are introduced below:

EF: economic freedom, GS: Government consumption expenditure as a percentage of GDP, a proxy for the size of the government, LGDP: the logarithm of real per capita income as an economic development index, INF: inflation rate, FL: the share of women among all employees (in percentage) used for the participation index of women or gender and PSI: Political stability index.

Results and Discussion

The results of the estimation suggest a strong nonlinear relationship between variables and represent a two-regime model with a threshold of 69.75 and a slope of 0.78. According to research findings, globalization has a negative and significant effect in the first regime and a positive and significant effect on the corruption control index in the second regime. Therefore, the U-shaped hypothesis between globalization and the corruption control index is confirmed in the studied countries. Also, with the transition variable (globalization index) passing the threshold limit and in the second regime, the positive effect of economic development on the corruption control index has decreased. The size of the government and the participation rate of women (gender) in both regimes have a negative and positive effect on the corruption control index, respectively. The negative relationship between economic freedom and corruption control index in the first regime has turned into a positive relationship in the second regime. The effect of political stability is positive and significant before the threshold limit, and finally, inflation in both regimes has no significant effect on the corruption control index.

Conclusion

Based on the results of this study, suggestions should be made to facilitate the identification and control of activities mixed with corruption:

1) Considering the direct effect of globalization in controlling corruption and its indirect effect through the removal of restrictions on trade and foreign investment (the channel of influence of the economic freedom variable), it is suggested that the countries under study have the necessary infrastructure to improve the globalization level through institutional and structural reforms, market liberalization, increasing competition and transaction transparency, and improving services in all economic sectors.

2) Legislators and statesmen of the studied countries should take the necessary measures for the fair distribution of income and reduce the class gap as a driving factor of corruption, in parallel with economic development.

3) Considering that with the size of the governments, the level of corruption has also increased, so comprehensive policies and programs should be implemented in order to make the government smaller, so more emphasis should be placed on privatization and reduction of government monopolies. In thix context, reducing the number of government employees, moving towards electronic government are among the actions that can lead to the shrinking of the public sector.

4) Increasing the relative share of women's employment reduces corruption. It is suggested to increase the share of women's participation in the government sector in these countries.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Globalization
Corruption
Panel Smooth Threshold Regression Model
Organization of the Islamic Conference
Attila, J. (2013). “Globalization and corruption: New evidence”. Oil, gas and energy quarterly, 541-562.
Akhter, S. H. (2004). “Is globalization what it’s cracked up to be? Economic freedom, corruption, and human development”. Journal of World Business, 39(3), 283-295.
Andvig, J., Fjeldstad, O-H, Amundsen, I., Sissner, T., & Søreide, T. (2000). “Research on corruption, A policy oriented study”. Commissioned by Norwegian Agency for the Development of Co-operation (NORAD), available online http://www.icgg.org/downloads/contribution07_andvig.pdf
Breen, M., Gillanders, R., McNulty, G., & Suzuki, A. (2017). “Gender and corruption in business”. The journal of development studies, 53(9), 1486-1501.
Bechtel, G. G. (2014). “Does globalization mitigate income inequality”. Journal of Data Science”. 12(1), 197-215.
Blackburn, K., Gonzalo, F., & Forgues, P. (2010). “Financial Liberalization, Bureaucratic Corruption and Economic Development”. International Money and Finance, 29, 1321-1339.
Brown, D.S., Touchton, M. & Whitford, A.B. (2005). “Political polarizationas a constraint ongovernment: Evidence from corruption”. Available online http://ssrn.com/abstract=782845.
Braun, M. & Di Tella, R. (2004). “Inflation, inflation variability, and corruption”. Economics and Politics, 16, pp. 77-100.
Bonaglia, F., De Macedo, J. B., & Bussolo, M. (2001). “How Globalization Improves Governance”. Discussion paper No. 2992. Paris, France, Center for Economic Policy Research, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Broadman, H. G., & Recanatini, F. (2001). “Seeds of corruption–Do market institutions matter? ”. MOST: Economic Policy in Transitional Economies, 11(4), 359-392.
Balestrini, P. P. (2001). “Amidst the digital economy, philanthropy in business as a source of competitive advantage”. Journal of International Marketing and Marketing Research, 26(1), 13-34.
Bhagwati, J.N. (1982). “directly unproductive, profit-seeking (DUP) activities”,. Journal of Political economy, 90(5), 988-1002.‌
Chang, T., & Chiang, G. (2011). “Regime-switching effects of debt on real GDP per capita the case of Latin American and Caribbean countries”. Economic Modelling, 28(6), 2404-2408.
Colletaz, G., & Hurlin, C. (2006). “Threshold effects of the public capital productivity: an international panel smooth transition approach”.
Chang, E. & Golden, M.A. (2004). “Electoral systems, district magnitude and corruption”. Paper presented at the 2003 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 28-31, 2003.
Dong, B., & Torgler, B. (2011). “Democracy, property rights, income equality, and corruption”.
Das, J., & DiRienzo, C. (2009). “The Nonlinear Impact of Globalization on Corruption” . The International Journal of Business and Finance Research, 3(2), 33-46.
Dreher, A., Gaston, N. & P. Martens (2008). “Measuring Globalization Gauging its Consequences”. New York: Springer.
Dollar, D., Fisman, R., & Gatti, R. (2001). “Are women really the “fairer” sex? Corruption and women in government”. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 46(4), 423-429.
De Sardan, J.O. (1999). “a moral economy of corruption in Africa? ”. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 37(1), 25-52.‌
Elliott, K. A. (2017). “Corruption as an international policy problem”. In Political Corruption (pp. 925-942). Routledge.
Esarey, J., & Chirillo, G. (2013). “Fairer sex or purity myth? Corruption, gender, and institutional context”. Politics & Gender, 9(4), 361-389.
Elbahnasawy, N. G., & Revier, C. F. (2012). “The determinants of corruption: Cross‐country‐panel‐data analysis”. The Developing Economies, 50(4), 311-333.
Fadaei, M., Golipour Mogadam, F., & Ghafari, S. (2017). “ Investigating the effect of good governance indicators and government size on the corruption index in BRICS countries and Iran”. The perspective of government management, 8(32), 65-88.
Frechette, G. R. (2006). “Panel data analysis of the time-varying determinants of corruption”.
Fok, D., Van Dijk, D., & Franses, P. H. (2005). “A multi‐level panel STAR model for US manufacturing sectors” . Journal of Applied Econometrics, 20(6), 811-827.
Fisman, R., & Gatti,R. (2002). “Decentralization and corruption: evidence across countries”. Journal of public economics, 83(3), 325-345.
González, A., Terasvirta, T., & Van Dijk, D. (2005). “Panel smooth transition regression models (Vol. 165) ”. School of Finance and Economics, University of Technology.
Gupta, S., Davoodi, H., & Alonso-Terme, R. (2002). “Does corruption affect income inequality and poverty? ”. Economics of governance, 3(1), 23-45.‌
Gupta, S., De Mello, L., & Sharan, R. (2001). “Corruption and military spending” European Journal of Political Economy, 17(4), 749-777.‌
Goudie, A. W., & Stasavage, D. (1998). “A framework for the analysis of corruption”. Crime, Law and Social Change, 29(2-3), 113-159.
Gupta, M. S. (1998). “Does corruption affect income inequality and poverty? ” International Monetary Fund.
Goudie, A. W., & Stasavage, D. (1998). “A framework for the analysis of corruption”. Crime, Law and Social Change, 29, 113-159.
Glynn, P., Kobrin, S. J., & Naim, M. (1997). “The globalization of corruption”. Corruption and the global economy, 6, 10-17.
Granger, C. W., & Terasvirta, T. (1993). “Modelling non-linear economic relationships. OUP Catalogue”.
Hellman, J. S., Jones, G., & Kaufmann, D. (2000). “Are foreign investors and multinationals engaging in corrupt practices in transition economies?” . Transition, 11(3-4), 4-7.
Jha, C. K. (2019). “Financial reforms and corruption: Evidence using GMM estimation”. International Review of Economics & Finance, 62, 66-78.
Jetter, M., Agudelo, A. M., & Hassan, A. R. (2016). “The effect of democracy on corruption: Income is key”. World Development, 74, 286-304.
Jude, E. C. (2010). “Financial development and growth: a panel smooth regression approach”. Journal of Economic Development, 35(1), 15.
Johnston, M. )1998(. “Corruption and Integrity Improvement Initiatives in Developing Countries”. chapter Cross-border corruption: points of vulnerability and challenges for reform, pages 13–23. United Nations.
Jansen, E. S., & Teräsvirta, T. (1996). “Testing parameter constancy and super exogeneity in econometric equations”. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 58(4), 735-763.
Khoshnoodi, A., Harati, J., & Baghchegi, A. (2019). “ Investigating the mutual effect of democracy and security of property rights on financial corruption in selected countries”. Economic Research Quarterly (Sustainable Growth and Development), 19(3), 109-144.
Khodavaisi, H., Najar gabel, S., & Ezzati, A. (2017). “ Investigating the relationship between globalization and income inequality: an application of the soft panel threshold transition model”. Journal of economic research, 52(1), 61-87.
KOYUNCU, J. Y., & ÜNVER, M. (2017). “The association between corruption and globalization in African countries”. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 6(4), 20-28.
Knack, S., & Keefer, P. (1997). “Institutions and Economic Performance:Cross Country Tests Using Alternative Institutional Measures”. Economics and Politics, 7(3), 67-90.
Lederman, D., Loayza, N. V., & Soares, R. R. (2005). “Accountability and corruption: Political institutions matter”. Economics & Politics, 17(1), 1-35.
Leite, C.A., & Weidmann, J. (1999). “Does Mother Nature corrupt? Natural resources, corruption, and economic growth”.‌
Lambsdorff, J. G. (1998). “An empirical investigation of bribery in international trade”. The European Journal of development research, 10(1), 40-59.
Leiken, R. S. (1996). “Controlling the global corruption epidemic”. Foreign Policy, (105), 55-73.
LaPalombara, J. (1994). “Structural and institutional aspects of corruption”. Social research, 325-350.
Mauro, P. (1998). “Corruption and the composition of government expenditure”. Journal of Public economics, 69(2), 263-279.
Murphy, K.M., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R.W. (1993). “Why is rent-seeking so costly to growth? ” The American Economic Review, 83(2), 409-414.‌
Nurudeen, A., & Waldemar Staniewski, M. (2019). “Determinants of corruption in Nigeria: evidence from various estimation techniques”. Economic research-Ekonomska istraživanja, 32(1), 3052-3076.
Olson, M. (1982). “The Rise and Decline of Nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation, and Social Rigidities”. Yale University Press.
Pellegrini, Lorenzo & Gerlagh. Reyer. (2008). “Causes of Corruption: A Survey of Crosscountry Analyses and Extended Results”, Econ Gov. 9: 245–263.
Prakash, A., & Hart, J. A. (2000). “Indicators of economic integration”. Global Governance, 6, 95.
Rahmani, T., & Esfahani, P. (2016). “Investigating the factors affecting the formation of corruption with emphasis on the combination of economic activities, the study of developing countries”. Quarterly Journal of Economic Research and Policies, 24(78), 207-228.
Rivas, M. F. (2013). “An experiment on corruption and gender”. Bulletin of Economic Research, 65(1), 10-42.
Rumyantseva, N. L. (2005). “Taxonomy of corruption in higher education”. Peabody Journal of Education, 80(1), 81-92.
Rauch, J.E. & Evans, P.B. (2000). “Bureaucratic structure and bureaucratic performance in less developed countries”. Journal of public economics, 75(1), 49-71.‌
Rose-Ackerman, S. (1999). “Corruption and government: Causes, consequences, and reform”. Cambridge Univ Pr.
Saleem, H., Jiandong, W., & Khan, M. B. (2020). “Determinants of corruption in China: a policy perspective”. Journal of Chinese Governance, 5(3), 297-321.
Sharif Karimi, M., & Shahab, A. (2020). “The effect of liquidity volume on corruption in selected countries of MENA region”. Monetary and financial economics researches, 27(19), 1-27.
Sepehrdoost, H., & Berjisian, A. (2018). “ The relationship between corruption and property rights, income inequality and democracy. Empirical evidence of selected countries”. two quarterly journals of economic research, 15(29), 143-172.
Sadegi, H., Sabagh Kermani, M., & Shagagi Shahri, V. (2008). “ Investigating the effects of financial decentralization on corruption control”. Journal of economic research, 43(85), 1-30.
Shabbir, G. & Anwar, M. (2007). “Determinants of corruption in developing countries”. Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWI) Paper 2-11.
Seldadyo, H., & de Haan, J. (2006). “The determinants of corruption: A literature survey and new evidence”. Paper prepared for the 2006 EPCS Conference, Turku, Finland, 20–23 April 2006.
Sameti, M., Shahnazi, R,. & Dehgani Shabani, Z. (2006). “ Investigating the effect of economic freedom on financial corruption (case study with panel data approach) ”. Iranian Economic Research Quarterly, 8(28), 89-110.
Sandholtz, W., & Gray, M. M. (2003). “International integration and national corruption”. International Organization, 57(4), 761-800.
Sung, H-E, & Chu, D. (2003). “Does participation in the global economy reduce political corruption? ”. International Journal of Comparative Criminology, 3(2), pp. 94 – 118.
Shleifer, A. & Vishny, R.W. (1993). “Corruption”. The quarterly journal of economics, 108(3), 599-617.‌
Treisman, D. (2000). “The causes of corruption: A cross-national study”. Journal of Public Economics 76, pp. 399-457.
Tanzi, V. (1998). “Corruption around the world: Causes, consequences, scope, and cures”. Staff Papers, 45(4), 559-594.‌
Tornell, A. & Lane, P. (1998). “Voracity and growth”. CEPR Discussion Paper No. 2001
Uroos, A., Shabbir, M. S., Zahid, M. U., Yahya, G., & Abbasi, B. A. (2022). “Economic analysis of corruption: evidence from Pakistan”. Transnational Corporations Review, 14(1), 46-61.
Van Rijckeghem, C. & Weder, B. (1997). “Corruption and the rate of temptation: do low wages in the civil service cause corruption? ”.‌
Williams, J. W., & Beare, M. E. (1999). “The business of bribery: globalization, economic liberalization, and the “problem” of corruption”. Crime, Law and Social Change, 32(2), 115-146.
Wei, S.J. (1997). “why is corruption so much more taxing than tax? Arbitrariness kills (No. w6255) ”. National Bureau of Economic Research.‌
Zouaoui, A., Arab, M. B., & Alamri, A. M. (2021). “Determinants of corruption in developing countries: case of Tunisia”. Journal of Financial Crime.
پژوهش ها و چشم اندازهای اقتصادی
دوره 24، شماره 1
بهار 1403
صفحه 193-222