Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Corruption and anti-corruption: a folklore problem?

  • Published:
Crime, Law and Social Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Charbonneau Inquiry in Quebec, Canada, uncovered a complex nexus of collusion and corruption in the awarding of public works construction contracts. The aim of this article is to better illustrate and understand how corruption was perceived and collectively understood in the public works sector prior to the revelations of the Charbonneau Inquiry. This article argues that a ‘folklore’ of corruption was prevalent through which civil servants perceived the criminal phenomenon. This is achieved through a narrative analysis of two witness testimonies of civil engineers, who recounted their implication in the corrupt and collusive nexus in the city of Montreal during the commission’s hearings. This article makes a case for the importance of narratives in the study of corruption.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In French: Commission d’Enquête sur l’Octroi et la Gestion des Contrats Publics dans l’Industrie de la Construction, CEIC or widely known as the “Charbonneau Inquiry”.

  2. Corruption is defined using a broadly-used public-focused conceptualisation: the abuse of publicly entrusted power or office for personal gain ([20], 73; [22]

  3. The term ‘corruption reality’ designates the ‘true level’ of corruption such as discussed in Olken, B. A. (2009). Corruption Perceptions vs. Corruption Reality. Journal of Public Economics, 93(7–8), 950–964.

  4. This type of analysis accesses the actors’ perceptions through their reconstruction of the course of events, which, as Dodge et al. [8] underline: “links experiential knowing, which is based on practice, to presential knowing, which is based on narratives”. Furthermore, the authors explain that the analysis: “creates a comprehensive story of experience over time, highlighting extraordinary successes or failures”.

  5. “Q” denotes the question asked by the commission’s attorney

  6. The name and acronym have been changed

References

  1. Abbink, K. (2004). Staff rotation as an anti-corruption policy: An experimental study. European Journal of Political Economy, 20, 887–906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ashforth, B. E., & Anand, V. (2003). The normalization of corruption in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 1–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Atkinson, M. M. (2011). Discrepancies in perceptions of corruption, or why is Canada so corrupt? Political Science Quarterly, 126(3), 445–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Blais, A., et al. (2017). Partisanship, information and perceptions of government corruption. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 29(1), 95–110.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Borins, S. F. (2012). Making narrative count: A Narratological approach to public management innovation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 143–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Castillo, D. (2018). State, monopoly and bribery. Market reforms and corruption in a Swedish state-owned Enterprise. Economics and Sociology, 11(2), 64–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Commission d'Enquête sur l'Octroi et la Gestion des Contrats Publics dans l'Industrie de la Construction (CEIC). (2015). Rapport final. Montréal, Québec. Online. https://www.ceic.gouv.qc.ca/fileadmin/Fichiers_client/fichiers/Rapport_final/Rapport_final_CEIC_Integral_c.pdf. Accessed 25 Apr 2017.

  8. Dodge, J., Sonia, M. O., & Foldy, E. G. (2005). Integrating rigor and relevance in public administration scholarship: The contribution of narrative inquiry. Public Administration Review, 65(3), 286–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gans-Morse, J., Borges, M., Makarin, A., Mannah-Blankson, T., Nickow, A., & Zhang, D. (2018). Reducing bureaucratic corruption: Interdisciplinary perspectives on what works. World Development, 105, 171–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gorta, A. (1998). Minimising corruption: Applying lessons from the crime prevention literature. Crime, Law & Social Change, 30(1), 67–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Granovetter, M. (2007). The social construction of corruption. In V. Nee & R. Swedberg (Eds.), On Capitalism. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Graycar, A., & Sidebottom, A. (2012). Corruption and control: a corruption reduction approach. Journal of Financial Crime 19(4), 384–399.

  14. Groenendijk, N. (1997). A principal-agent model of corruption. Crime, Law and Social Change, 27(3), 207–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gupta, A. (2005). Narratives of corruption anthropological and fictional accounts of the Indian state. Ethnography, 6(1), 5–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hauser, C. (Forthcoming). Fighting against corruption: Does anti-corruption training make any difference? Journal of Business Ethics.

  17. Heywood, P. M. (2015). Measuring Corruption, Perspectives, Critiques and Limits. in. Heywood, P. M. (ed). Routledge Handbook of Political Corruption. New York, NY: Routledge. pp. 137–153.

  18. Hsu, C. L. (2001). Political narratives and the production of legitimacy: The case of corruption in post-Mao China. Qualitative Sociology, 24(1), 25–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hudon, P.-A., & Garzón, C. (2016). Corruption in public procurement: Entrepreneurial coalition building. Crime, Law and Social Change, 66(3), 291–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jain, A. K. (2001a). Corruption: A review. Journal of Economic Survey, 15(1), 71–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Jain, A. K. (2001b). The political economy of corruption. New York: NY: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  22. Johnston, M. (2001). The definitions debate. Old conflicts in new guises. In A. K. Jain (Ed.), The political economy of corruption (pp. 11–31). New York: NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Klitgaard, R. (1988). Controlling corruption. Los Angeles: CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Manion, M. (2004). Corruption by design. Building clean government in mainland China and Hong Kong. Cambridge: MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Mungiu-Pippidi, A. (2015). The quest for good governance. How societies develop control of corruption. Cambridge, U. K.: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  26. Myrdal, G. (1968). Asian Drama. An inquiry into the poverty of nations (Vol. 2). Penguin Books.

  27. Myrdal, G. (2011). Corruption as a hindrance to modernization in South Asia. Political Corruption: Concepts and Contexts. In A. J. Heidenheimer & M. Johnston (Eds.), Transaction (pp. 265–275). Publishers.

  28. Olken, B. A. (2009). Corruption perceptions vs. corruption reality. Journal of Public Economics, 93(7–8), 950–964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ospina, S. M., & Dodge, J. (2005). It’s about time: Catching method up to meaning—The usefulness of narrative inquiry in public administration research. Public Administration Review, 65(2), 143–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Osse, A. (1997). Corruption prevention: A course for police officers fighting organised crime. Crime, Law & Social Change, 28(1), 53–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Patton, M.Q. (2015). Designing qualitative studies. In. Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Thousand oaks, LA: Sage, 4th éd., pp. 244–326.

  32. Peiffer, C., & Alvarez, L. (2016). Who will be the ‘principled-principals’? Perceptions of corruption and willingness to engage in anticorruption activism. Governance, 29(3), 351–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Perera-Mubarak, K. N. (2012). Reading ‘stories’ of corruption: Practices and perceptions of everyday corruption in post-tsunami Sri Lanka. Political Geography, 31(6), 368–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Persson, A., Rothstein, B., & Teorell, J. (2013). Why anticorruption reforms fail - systemic corruption as a collective action problem. Governance, 26(3), 449–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Reeves-Latour, M., & Morselli, C. (2017a). Bid-rigging networks and state-corporate crime in the construction industry. Social Networks, 1–13.

  36. Reeves-Latour, M., & Morselli, C. (2017b). Fighting corruption in a time of crisis: Lessons from a radical regulatory shift experience. Law & Social Change: Crime.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Rose-Ackerman, S. (1999). Corruption and government: Causes, consequences and reform. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  38. Rothstein, B. (2011). Anti-corruption: The indirect 'Big Bang' approach. Review of International Political Economy, 18(2), 228–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Saint-Martin, D. (2015). Systemic corruption in an advanced welfare state: Lessons from the Québec Charbonneau inquiry. Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 53, 1), 1–1),30.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Scott, I. (2013). Institutional design and corruption prevention in Hong Kong. Journal of Contemporary China, 22(79), 77–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Scott, I., & Gong, T. (2015). Evidence-based policy-making for corruption prevention in Hong Kong: A bottom-up approach. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, 37(2), 87–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Tänzler, D., Maras, K., & Giannakopoulous, A. (2012). The social construction of corruption in Europe. New York: NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Dr. Étienne Charbonneau and Dr. David Talbot for their helpful comments on an earlier version of the paper, as well as the École Nationale d’Administration Publique for financial support. The author would also like to thank the constructive comments of the two anonymous reviewers. All shortcomings belong to the author.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. École Nationale d’Administration Publique, 4750, Avenue Henri-Julien, bureau 5092, Montréal, (Québec), H2T 3E5, Canada

    Nicholas Bautista-Beauchesne

Authors
  1. Nicholas Bautista-Beauchesne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicholas Bautista-Beauchesne.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bautista-Beauchesne, N. Corruption and anti-corruption: a folklore problem?. Crime Law Soc Change 73, 159–180 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-019-09856-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-019-09856-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation