INTRODUCTION:
In his study on
Behavioural economics, Herbert Simon argues that firms and managers do not seek
to maximize profits, but rather engage in behaviour that satisfies both
parties. However, in the case of corruption the players are guided not with the
objective of profit maximization but with the objective of fulfilling their
desires and aspirations that emerge out of the incentives they have. The
Prospect Theory posits that a person behaves not only to obtain maximum utility
by optimising rationality but also takes into account their experiences and
probabilities of acquiring gains in the future. In the case of corruption in
India, these experiences are guided by the widely prevalent practice and
history of corruption which makes visible the gains they could acquire in
addition to their legal remittances. The choices made from these experiences
largely reflect the cultural phenomena of corruption that is prevalent in the
surroundings. Hence preferences are constructed from experiences. The strategy
chosen by a person engaging in corruption is guided by his/her moral and the
different strategies of people give different results for their engagement.
Corruption is a
strategic situation where the officials and the citizens collaborate with each
other to achieve their objectives. An agency relationship could be traced
between the government, people and the officials with the officials being the
agent acting on behalf of the government simultaneously.
The principal extends
public utility services to the people in return of civil obedience expected
from them. This mutual transaction occurs through the officials who act as the
agent. Corruption surfaces when the agent acts in his self interest guided by
certain incentives to accomplish his/her aspirations. This self
interest generates objectives in the agent that conflicts the best interest of
the principal and urges them to strategically perform an act to suit their
interest. Hence they endorse a dominant strategy of demanding a bribe to fulfill
their aspirations.
This dominant
strategy culminates in the desired payoff when the moral of the citizen parallels
that of the officer, as in the case of a person who wants an officer to perform
a function improperly and the officer concedes in return for a bribe. This
projects a case of Quid Pro Quo where the bribe is paid voluntarily and the
players are engaged in a mutually beneficial transaction. The alternate
scenario projects a bribe paid under duress where the various exogenous factors
that coerce the citizen to pay a bribe.
The self interest
that guides a dominant strategy of seeking a bribe looms from the various
incentives that create desires for fulfillment. The categorization of incentives
is as follows:
Monetary incentive:
Monetary incentive
emanates from the unequal distribution of resources and results in a desire to
increase the purchasing power either due to absolute of relative poverty.
Monetary incentive in the short run aims at fulfilling a monetary objective and
makes visible ascension in the social hierarchy in the long run.
Personal incentive:
Personal incentive
aims at fulfilling a personal desire out of which monetary benefits are not
expected to be availed. Sexual incentives form a part of personal incentive
where the impetus is to sexually demand more from the society from their
position of power. Sexual incentives are driven by the political dynamics
between two individuals due to patriarchal imposition.
Social incentive:
Monetary and personal
incentives feed into social incentives in the long run. An ascent along the
social hierarchy is presumed to be possible by increasing the purchasing power.
The stratification in the working class creates a psychological incentive to
engage in corruption and improve their social standing.
The different
categories of incentives are not exclusive to each other. Fulfilment of monetary
objectives in the short run becomes indicative of a social uplifting in the
long run and a higher social stature empowers the officials to monetarily
demand more from the society. There is a significant overlap between them
whereby they reinforce each other.
CATALYSTS OF RETAIL CORRUPTION
Incentives create the
desire to engage in corruption for monetary, social or personal fulfilment.
Catalysts drive the incentives. The distinction lies in what causes corruption
and what lubricates corruption.
Lack of monitoring
mechanism, punitive action and accountability are extrinsic motivators that catalyses
corruption. The path dependence shaped out of hostile peer and hierarchal
pressure escalates the vigour of this catalyst. It is the fear of social and
monetary cost of change that the society would incur that daunts a deviation
from path dependence. Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index posits
that a one-point increase of corruption on a scale from 10 to 0 lowers the
productivity by 4% of the GDP and decreases net annual capital inflow by 0.5%
of the GDP. With India’s score improving by a meagre 2 points over the last 2
years, India still remains to be one of the highly corrupt countries in the
world, with corruption causing immense leakage in the economy. The capital that
would be injected into the economy by a reduction of corruption in the long run
will surmount this social and monetary cost.
Trimming the severity
of this path dependence requires an operant conditioning that needs to be carried
out at the advocacy platform through a method of learning that involves rewards
and punishments. Although punitive action has been ruled out as being effective
in tackling this supply side issue, increasing the rates of detection and
social conditioning of the agent to be accountable to both the government and
the people might be a fruitful reform.
Monopoly power
exercised by the government in the provision of various services and prevailing
human interface catalyses corruption by triggering the exploitative ability the
power holds. This lack of alternative creates a positive reinforcement where a
desired outcome obtained by paying a bribe recurs and results in learned
helplessness. This results in an intrinsic motivation that guides people to
trail the same path as a consequence of their previous experiences.
Issues of scarcity
plague every developing country including India. In such a scenario when new
sources of wealth and power becomes visible the aspirations and greed of the
people increases and it feeds into their acquisitive instincts and
extrinsically motivates them to engage in corruption.
CONCLUSION
Economic rent seeking
activities such as corruption poses a heavy economic and social toll on the
country. The misallocation of resources that occur through corruption affects
the redistribution of wealth in the economy and deter sustained economic
development. The cost incurred from corruption signifies the redistributive
disparity that emerges from a lower marginal utility gained by an official
compared to a higher utility that could have been gained by the poor.
The acceptance given
to corruption is what needs to be broken. Breaking this compliance would
involve expanding the boundaries of rational decision making through capacity
building in both supply and demand side so that symmetry in information is
maintained and a psychic cost accompanying corruption is developed.
Incentives to
corruption cannot be deterred. Disincentives such as the introduction of technology
in service provision and an enhanced monitoring mechanism should be evolved so
as to subdue these incentives.
The only way to scale
down corruption is to break the acceptance enjoyed by it; by pointing out to
the younger generation a future with stable livelihoods even without engaging
in corruption. With India still holding a low 76th rank out of 177
in “Corruption Perception Index” and with the incentives pushing forward to a
more established culture of corruption, anticipating a sustained economic
development in India is forlorn.
Meera Rajukumar
B.A.
Economics, St. Xaviers, Mumbai
No comments:
Post a Comment