Public Choice

, Volume 131, Issue 1–2, pp 1–21 | Cite as

Lobbying, corruption and political influence

  • Nauro F. Campos
  • Francesco Giovannoni
Original Article


Conventional wisdom is that lobbying is the preferred mean for exerting political influence in rich countries and corruption the preferred one in poor countries. Analyses of their joint effects are understandably rare. This paper provides econometric evidence on lobbying, corruption and influence using data for almost 4000 firms in 25 transition countries. Our results show that (a) lobbying and corruption are substitutes; (b) firm size, age and ownership as well as political stability are important determinants of lobby membership; and (c) lobbying is a much more effective instrument for political influence than corruption, even in less developed countries.


Lobbying Corruption Transition Institutions 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aidt, T. (2003). Economic analysis of corruption: A survey. Economic Journal, 113(491), F632–F652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Austen-Smith, D., & Wright, J.R. (1994). Counteractive lobbying. American Journal of Political Science, 38(1), 25–44.Google Scholar
  3. Bardhan, P. (1997). Corruption and development: A review of issues. Journal of Economic Literature, 35, 1320–1346.Google Scholar
  4. Baldwin, R.E., & Robert-Nicoud, F. (2002). Entry and asymmetric lobbying: Why governments pick losers. NBER Working Paper 8756.Google Scholar
  5. Beck, T., Clarke, G., Groff, A., Keefer, P., & Walsh, P. (2001). New tools in comparative political economy: The database of political institutions. World Bank Economic Review, 15, 165–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bennedsen, M., & Feldmann, S. (2005). Informational lobbying and political contributions. Journal of Public Economics, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  7. Bischoff, I. (2003). Determinants of the increase in the number of interests groups in western democracies: Theoretical considerations and evidence from 21 OECD countries. Public Choice, 114, 197–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Campos, N., & Giovannoni, F. (2006). The determinants of asset stripping: Theory and evidence from the transition economies. Journal of Law and Economics, 49, 681–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Coate, S., & Morris, S. (1999). Policy persistence. American Economic Review, 89, 1327–1336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dahm, M., & Porteiro, N. (2004). The carrot and the stick: Which is the lobby's optimal choice? Working Paper, Kellogg School of Management.Google Scholar
  11. Damania, R., Fredricksson, P. G., & Mani, M. (2004). The persistence of corruption and regulatory compliance failures: Theory and evidence. Public Choice, 121, 363–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Drazen, A. (2000). Political economy in macroeconomics. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Frye, T. (2002). Capture or exchange: Business lobbying in Russia. Europe-Asia Studies, 54, 1017–1036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goldberg, P., & Maggi, G. (1999). Protection for sale: An empirical investigation. American Economic Review, 89, 1135–1155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grossman, G., & Helpman, E. (1994). Protection for Sale. American Economic Review, 84, 833–850.Google Scholar
  16. Grossman, G., & Helpman, E. (1999). Competing for endorsements. American Economic Review, 89, 501–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grossman, G., & Helpman, E. (2001). Special interest politics. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  18. Harstad, B., & Svensson, J. (2005). Bribe or lobby? (It's a Matter of Development). Mimeo. Northwestern University.Google Scholar
  19. Hellman, J., & Kauffman, D. (2002). The inequality of influence. Mimeo, World Bank.Google Scholar
  20. Hoff, K., Horowitz, S., & Milanovic, B. (2005). Political alternation as a restraint on investing in influence: Evidence from transitions countries. World Bank, Mimeo.Google Scholar
  21. Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Zoido-Lobaton, P. (1999). Aggregating governance indicators. Policy Research Working Paper 2195, The World Bank.Google Scholar
  22. McKenzie, D., & Rapoport, H. (2004). Network effects and the dynamics of migration and inequality: Theory and evidence from Mexico. Mimeo, Stanford University.Google Scholar
  23. Mitra, D., Thomakos, D., & Ulubasoglu, M. (2002). ‘Protection for Sale’ in a developing country: Democracy vs. Dictatorship. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84, 497–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Newey, W. (1987). Efficient estimation of limited dependent variable models with endogenous explanatory variables. Journal of Econometrics, 36, 231–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Persson, T., & Tabellini, G. (2000). Political economics. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  27. Persson, T., & Tabellini, G. (2003). The economic effects of constitutions. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  28. Potters, J., & Sloof, R. (1996). Interest groups: A survey of empirical models that try to assess their influence. European Journal of Political Economy, 12, 403–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Recanatini, F., Prati, A., & Tabellini, G. (2005). Why are some public agencies less corrupt than others? Lessons for Institutional Reform from Survey Data. Mimeo.Google Scholar
  30. Ribar, D. (1994). Teenage fertility and high school completion. Review of Economics and Statistics, 76(3), 413–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rivers, Douglas & Quang Vuong (1988). Limited information estimators and exogeneity tests for simultaneous probit models. Journal of Econometrics, 39, 347–366.Google Scholar
  32. Sobel, R., & Garrett, T. (2002). On the measurement of rent seeking and its social opportunity cost. Public Choice, 112, 115–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Solanko, L. (2003). Why favor large incumbents? A note on lobbying in transition. BOFIT Online, N.6.Google Scholar
  34. Svensson, J. (2003). Who must pay bribes and how much? Evidence from a cross section of firms. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 207–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Svensson, J. (2005). Eight questions about corruption. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(3), 19–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yalcin, E., & Damania, R. (2005). Corruption and political competition. Mimeo.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nauro F. Campos
    • 1
    • 2
  • Francesco Giovannoni
    • 3
  1. 1.CEPRBrunel UniversityIZA-BonnUK
  2. 2.IZABrunel UniversityWDI-MichiganUK
  3. 3.Department of Economics and CMPOUniversity of BristolBristolUK

Personalised recommendations