Does Corruption Have Social Roots? The Role of Culture and Social Capital

Abstract

The aim of this work is to analyse the influence of sociocultural factors on corruption levels. Taking as starting point Husted (J Int Bus Studies 30:339-359, 1999) and Graeff (In: Lambsdorff J, Taube M, Schramm M (eds) The new institutional economics of corruption. Routledge, London, 2005) proposals, we consider both the interrelation between cultural dimensions and the diverse expressions of social capital with corruption. According to our results, the universalistic trust (linking and bridging social capital) constitutes a positive social capital that is negatively linked to corruption. In contrast, the particularistic levels of trust (bonding) can constitute a negative social capital directly related to corruption levels. Furthermore, cultures which are favourable to the legitimation of dependency relations and the formation of closed particularistic groups (power-distance and community factors) create a breeding ground for the development of these amoral rent-seeking structures.

Relationship between collectivism and corruption in American and Chinese books: A historical perspective

“…Furthermore, the beliefs and norms often play more important roles than objective institutional factors (Larmout, ). Previous research demonstrates that cultural factors such as power‐distance (Husted, ) and the social capital of strong bonds (Pena‐López & Sánchez‐Santos, ) can impact corruption. Besides that, collectivism is also considered as a critical cultural factor affecting corruption (Cheung & Chan, ; Huang et al, ; Mazar & Aggarwal, ; Triandis et al, ).…”

U.S. CEOs of SBUs in Luxury Goods Organizations: A Mixed Methods Comparison of Ethical Decision-Making Profiles

“…Studies have identified various psychobiological and social-environmental factors that contribute to this type of behavior. Some specific social attributes significantly contributing to the presence of corruption include secrecy, reciprocity, and dependency relationships (Pena López and Sánchez Santos 2014). In addition, studies show that corruption thrives in societies that maintain a high power distance and have an acceptance of the unequal distribution of wealth, also known as distributive justice (Pena López and Sánchez Santos 2014).…”

“…Some specific social attributes significantly contributing to the presence of corruption include secrecy, reciprocity, and dependency relationships (Pena López and Sánchez Santos 2014). In addition, studies show that corruption thrives in societies that maintain a high power distance and have an acceptance of the unequal distribution of wealth, also known as distributive justice (Pena López and Sánchez Santos 2014). Hofstede defines power distance as the degree to which the subordinate or less powerful members of a group expect and accept the unequal distribution of power and both the superiors and subordinates within the culture approve of this inequality (The Hofstede Center 2014).…”

“…These cultures foster a social distance between superior and subordinate, both in an organization and in society (Pena López and Sánchez Santos 2014). In high-power distance organizations, subordinates rely on their superiors for their ethics (Pena López and Sánchez Santos 2014).…”

Wicked webs: business partner networks and silence

“…Scholars have taken different approaches, such as the macro perspective, analyzing the impact of country-level factors -economic, social, legal and cultural -on corruption (Chen, Yasar, & Rejeus, 2008;Ferreira, Carreira, Li, & Serra, 2016;López & Santos, 2014;Martin, Cullen, Johnson, & Parboteeah, 2007;Mc Carthy, & Puffer, 2008;Svensson, 2003). Moreover, institutional factors such as political, legal, economic, and educational systems are at the same time antecedents and effects of corruption, creating a feedback loop which weaken national institutions (Judge, McNatt, & Xu, 2011).…”