Explaining Corruption: Opportunities for Corruption and Institutional Trust
Kuupäev
2013-03-19
Autorid
Ajakirja pealkiri
Ajakirja ISSN
Köite pealkiri
Kirjastaja
Abstrakt
Doktoritöö eesmärk on täiendada korruptsiooniteooriat, selleks analüüsitakse korruptsioonivõimalusi ning uuritakse usalduse ja korruptsiooni vahelisi seoseid. Dissertatsioon põhineb autori kolmel eelretsenseeritavas rahvusvahelises teadusajakirjas avaldatud artiklil ning neid siduvas sissejuhatuses. Kõik kolm artiklit põhinevad autori empiirilistel originaaluuringutel.
Doktoritöö uurimisküsimused on: (1) milline on õiguskaitseasutuste juhtide roll sellise organisatsioonikultuuri loomisel, mis tauniks korruptsiooni; (2) millised tegurid mõjutavad inimeste suhtumist korruptsiooni; (3) millised tegurid mõjutavad inimeste karistushinnanguid ning kas need hinnangud on varaste ja korruptantide suhtes erinevad?
Doktoritöö sissejuhatuses lähtutakse James William Colemani (1987) valgekrae kuritegevust seletavast üldteooriast, mille peamisteks komponentideks on kultuur ja võimalused. Korruptsiooni puhul saab rääkida kahest peamisest kultuuripoolsest soodustajast ─ konkurentsikultuurist ning usaldusest. Korruptsiooni soosib vähene usaldus riigiinstitutsioonide vastu (inimesed, kes institutsioone ei usalda, on ka varmamad neid petma), aga ka vähene sotsiaalne usaldus (vähene usaldus inimeste vahel soosib samuti petmist) ning suurem nn omade usaldamine (soositakse neid, kes kuuluvad „siseringi“, nt parteisse) (Uslaner, 2001; Collins, Uhlenbruck & Rodriguez, 2009; Rothstein & Eek 2009; Bjørnskov, 2003; D’Hernoncourt & Méon, 2012; Marien & Hooghe, 2011). Kultuur võib luua soodsa tausta kuritegude toimumiseks, samal ajal võimalused kas soodustavad või pärsivad kuritegu. J. W. Colemanile tuginedes tulenevad korruptsioonivõimalused (1) seadustest ja nende rakendamisest, (2) sektoritest, (3) organisatsioonidest ja (4) ametikohtadest. Korruptsioonivõimalused on seotud näiteks seaduste selgusega, õiguskaitse ning kohtute sõltumatuse ja puhtusega, karistuste rakendamisega, otsustusprotsessi läbipaistvusega, vastutavusega, järelevalvega, vastutuse selgusega, värbamispõhimõtete ning õiglase palgaga, avalike vahendite kasutamisega, piiratud ressurssidega, finantstehingute eest vastutamisega, korruptsioonialase teadlikkusega, organisatsiooni protseduuridega jne.
Doktoritöös leitakse:
I Eesti õiguskaitseasutuste juhtide roll korruptsioonivastase organisatsioonikultuuri loomisel peaks olema märksa suurem, kui juhid oma rolli selles tajuvad. Uuring näitab, et juhid ei pea ennast korruptsiooni ennetava kultuuri aktiivseteks loojateks juhitavates organisatsioonides. Nad peavad korruptsiooni väljastpoolt pealesurutud teemaks, kus juhid ise on vaid passiivsed osalised. Leiti, et (1) juhid peavad korruptsiooni madalama taseme ametnike probleemiks, (2) juhid usuvad, et võime korruptsiooni ennetada tuleneb seaduste tundmisest ametnike poolt, (3) juhid arvavad, et kontrollimeetmed on parim vahend korruptsiooni vähendamisel. Selline mõtteviis omakorda tingib õiguskaitseasutuste suurema rõhuasetuse madalama taseme korruptsiooni uurimisele ning suurema rõhuasetuse kontrollimeetmetele.
II Avaliku sektori töötajate korruptsioonialast teadlikkust ning suhtumist korruptsiooni mõjutavad usaldus riigiinstitutsioonidesse, vanus ja rahvus. Suurem usaldus institutsioonide vastu toob kaasa negatiivsema suhtumise korruptsiooni ning täpsema arusaamise, mis korruptsioon on. Põhjus, miks usaldus mõjutab ametnike korruptsiooniteadlikkust ja sallimatust korruptsiooni suhtes, tuleneb ilmselt sellest, et usaldavamatel inimestel on ootused vastavate institutsioonide suhtes kõrgemad, mistõttu moraalinormide rikkumine vastavate institutsioonide esindajate poolt toob kaasa ka karmima hukkamõistu.
III Eesti elanikud soovivad korruptantidele karmimaid karistusi kui varastele. Sugu, rahvus ja vastaja sissetulek on parimad karistushinnangute prognoosijad korruptantide puhul, samas kui varaste puhul on selleks poliitiline usaldus. Põhjus, miks poliitikuid rohkem usaldavad inimesed soovivad kergemaid karistusi varastele, võib peituda nende üldiselt suuremas heaolutundes ja rahulolus ning väiksemas kuritegevushirmus. Samas ei anna need tulemused põhjust arvata, nagu poliitiline usaldus ei mõjutaks korruptantidele antavaid karistushinnanguid, vaid selle taga võib olla keerulisem suhe. Näiteks üks põhjus, miks mitte-eestlased sooviksid karmimaid karistusi korruptantidele võrreldes eestlastega, võib tuleneda nende võimust võõrandumises, seega viidates kaudselt poliitilise usalduse puudumisel.
The aim of this dissertation is to contribute to the theory of corruption. It will look at the opportunity structures of corruption, and examine the relation between trust and the aspects of corruption. The dissertation is based on three original publications, which are based on empirical studies accomplished by the author of the dissertation. The research questions of the thesis are: (1) What is the role of management in establishing anti-corruption organizational culture in law enforcement agencies? (2) Which factors influence attitudes towards corruption? (3) What are the factors influencing punitive attitudes? Do these differ in respect of thieves and corruption offenders? The introduction of this dissertation provides a theoretical framework for analysing corruption. It takes the existing structure of James William Coleman’s (1987) integrated theory of white-collar crimes, the main elements of which are culture and opportunities, and adjusts it for explaining corruption. Culture of competition contains conditions favourable to corruption, while opportunities define the probability of corruption. Trust, being a cultural factor, can have an effect on corruption - high levels of particularised social trust, low levels of generalised trust and lack of political trust create conditions favourable to corruption. According to Coleman’s framework the opportunities derive from four domains: law and enforcement, sectors, organizations and occupations. The list of opportunities to corruption range from: clarity of the laws, independence and cleanness of the judiciary and law enforcement authorities, enforceability of the punishments, transparency of the decision making process, accountability, supervision, clarity of responsibility, principles of recruitment and fairness of salary, the amount of public money in transactions, scarce resources, power and responsibilities for finances, awareness of corruption, to organizational procedures in place, to mention some. In respect of the research questions, it is demonstrated in the thesis: I The role of managers in establishing an anti-corruption organizational culture is by far more important than managers themselves perceive. The study outlines the reasons that contribute to failure of anti-corruption policies and points to the relevant general shortcomings in managerial skills, it contributes to the value-based approach to corruption. The thesis shows that (1) corruption is seen by managers mainly as a problem of the street level staff, (2) individual staff members’ ability to resist corruption is considered to be determined by their knowledge of the relevant legal definitions and sanctions, (3) control methods are considered to be the most effective means of curbing corruption. The result of such a way of thinking in practical terms is placing emphasis on tackling low-level corruption and preferring control methods over trust-building methods in curbing corruption. II Differences in awareness of and opinions about corruption can be explained by differences in the level of institutional trust and in certain socio-demographic factors such as age and ethnicity. When institutions are trusted more, corruption is found less tolerable and it is defined more ‘accurately’. It is assumed that the reason why trust is relevant in public officials’ awareness of corruption and the extent to which they are ready to condemn corruption, is because those with higher levels of trust would have higher expectations for institutions and would place more confidence in them, and therefore breaches of moral norms by state representatives are likely to entail a stronger condemnation from those who trusted them more. III The study demonstrates that people’s sentencing preferences are harsher in the case of corruption offenders than in the case of thieves. This is probably because corruption offenders are perceived as being more harmful than thieves. The variables influencing punitive attitudes are different in respect of thieves and corruption offenders. Gender, ethnicity and personal income are the best predictors of punitive attitudes towards corruption offenders, while trust in politicians can explain punitive attitudes in respect of thieves. The reasons why those who trust politicians would like to see thieves punished less severely, is presumably because they are more satisfied with life and less concerned with the crime situation and they feel more secure and do not see criminals as threat to society. This does not mean that political trust does not have an effect on penal attitudes concerning corruption offenders, yet, it might have through more complex ways. For example, it is proposed that the reason why non-Estonians would like corruption offenders to be punished more severely is because of alienation from the power, thus hinting at the lack of political trust.
The aim of this dissertation is to contribute to the theory of corruption. It will look at the opportunity structures of corruption, and examine the relation between trust and the aspects of corruption. The dissertation is based on three original publications, which are based on empirical studies accomplished by the author of the dissertation. The research questions of the thesis are: (1) What is the role of management in establishing anti-corruption organizational culture in law enforcement agencies? (2) Which factors influence attitudes towards corruption? (3) What are the factors influencing punitive attitudes? Do these differ in respect of thieves and corruption offenders? The introduction of this dissertation provides a theoretical framework for analysing corruption. It takes the existing structure of James William Coleman’s (1987) integrated theory of white-collar crimes, the main elements of which are culture and opportunities, and adjusts it for explaining corruption. Culture of competition contains conditions favourable to corruption, while opportunities define the probability of corruption. Trust, being a cultural factor, can have an effect on corruption - high levels of particularised social trust, low levels of generalised trust and lack of political trust create conditions favourable to corruption. According to Coleman’s framework the opportunities derive from four domains: law and enforcement, sectors, organizations and occupations. The list of opportunities to corruption range from: clarity of the laws, independence and cleanness of the judiciary and law enforcement authorities, enforceability of the punishments, transparency of the decision making process, accountability, supervision, clarity of responsibility, principles of recruitment and fairness of salary, the amount of public money in transactions, scarce resources, power and responsibilities for finances, awareness of corruption, to organizational procedures in place, to mention some. In respect of the research questions, it is demonstrated in the thesis: I The role of managers in establishing an anti-corruption organizational culture is by far more important than managers themselves perceive. The study outlines the reasons that contribute to failure of anti-corruption policies and points to the relevant general shortcomings in managerial skills, it contributes to the value-based approach to corruption. The thesis shows that (1) corruption is seen by managers mainly as a problem of the street level staff, (2) individual staff members’ ability to resist corruption is considered to be determined by their knowledge of the relevant legal definitions and sanctions, (3) control methods are considered to be the most effective means of curbing corruption. The result of such a way of thinking in practical terms is placing emphasis on tackling low-level corruption and preferring control methods over trust-building methods in curbing corruption. II Differences in awareness of and opinions about corruption can be explained by differences in the level of institutional trust and in certain socio-demographic factors such as age and ethnicity. When institutions are trusted more, corruption is found less tolerable and it is defined more ‘accurately’. It is assumed that the reason why trust is relevant in public officials’ awareness of corruption and the extent to which they are ready to condemn corruption, is because those with higher levels of trust would have higher expectations for institutions and would place more confidence in them, and therefore breaches of moral norms by state representatives are likely to entail a stronger condemnation from those who trusted them more. III The study demonstrates that people’s sentencing preferences are harsher in the case of corruption offenders than in the case of thieves. This is probably because corruption offenders are perceived as being more harmful than thieves. The variables influencing punitive attitudes are different in respect of thieves and corruption offenders. Gender, ethnicity and personal income are the best predictors of punitive attitudes towards corruption offenders, while trust in politicians can explain punitive attitudes in respect of thieves. The reasons why those who trust politicians would like to see thieves punished less severely, is presumably because they are more satisfied with life and less concerned with the crime situation and they feel more secure and do not see criminals as threat to society. This does not mean that political trust does not have an effect on penal attitudes concerning corruption offenders, yet, it might have through more complex ways. For example, it is proposed that the reason why non-Estonians would like corruption offenders to be punished more severely is because of alienation from the power, thus hinting at the lack of political trust.
Kirjeldus
Väitekirja elektrooniline versioon ei sisalda publikatsioone.
Märksõnad
avalik sektor, organisatsioonikultuur, usaldus, korruptsioon, vargused, karistused, hinnangud, hoiakud, Eesti, public sector, organizational culture, trust, corruption, thefts, punishments, assessments, attitudes, Estonia