Unit information: Corruption and Public Policy in 2019/20

Unit name	Corruption and Public Policy
Unit code	SPOLM0055
Credit points	20
Level of study	M/7
Teaching block(s)	Teaching Block 2 (weeks 13 - 24)
Unit director	Dr. Peiffer
Open unit status	Not open
Pre-requisites	None
Co-requisites	None
School/department	School for Policy Studies
Faculty	Faculty of Social Sciences and Law

Description including Unit Aims

This unit examines the relationship between corruption and public policy processes, as well as policies designed to control corruption. While it is widely accepted within development policy circles that corruption poses a serious threat to international development, the regular coverage of major corruption scandals in the Global North continue to highlight the ubiquitous nature of the phenomenon. Drawing on cases from several contexts, the unit will encourage a critical assessment of what is known and not known about the causes of corruption, where corruption is concentrated in the world, and its consequences for public policy, as well as the effectiveness of anticorruption policies.

The unit will consider how corruption is defined and measured by many groups and how influential definitions of corruption have shaped anticorruption policies and beliefs about who in global society is likely to perpetrate corruption. As identified in different literatures, it will consider the hypothesized causes and consequences of corruption. Within this area, students will engage with competing arguments that suggest that corruption is a symptom or cause of political, economic and social developmental trajectories. Finally, it will introduce specific examples of anticorruption policies from several countries and will critically engage with the evidence available and arguments that have been made for how, and if corruption can and should be controlled.

The unit aims are to:

• Develop an understanding for how corruption is thought to influence public policy processes in several different contexts.
• Identify how corruption is measured and defined, by various groups, and the implications different understandings of corruption has on beliefs about how and where anticorruption efforts should be targeted.
• Critically evaluate the evidence that exists for the causes of corruption and its consequences for developmental trajectories.
• Examine a selection of anticorruption policies and develop an understanding of the critique of anticorruption efforts as being a part of an ‘anticorruption industry.’

Intended Learning Outcomes

By the end of the unit, students will be able to:

1. Critically evaluate the reasons why corruption is thought to impact upon policy processes.
2. Assess how different definitions of corruption have impacted upon beliefs about where and who in global society is likely to perpetrate corruption.
3. Appreciate the methodological difficulties that exist to definitively establishing what impact corruption has on economic, social, and political outcomes.
4. Analyse the key theoretical debates around why anticorruption policies have seemingly failed.
5. Be well informed on the types of anticorruption policies that exist, and able to critically analyse a selection of anticorruption policies that are in use

Teaching Information

Interactive lectures, including groupwork; online discussion via VLE.

Assessment Information

Two x 2,000 word written assessments (50% each).

Assessment one will test the first 3 listed intended learning outcomes with a 2,000 word essay.

Assessment two will require students to produce a 2,000 word report for a policy-making audience, and will test the last 2 listed intended learning outcomes.

Reading and References

Rothstein, B & Varraich, A. (2017). Making Sense of Corruption. Cambridge University Press.

Mungiu-Pippidi, A. (2015). The Quest for Good Governance. How Societies Develop Control for Corruption. Cambridge University Press.

Whyte, D. (2015). How Corrupt is Britain? London: Pluto Press.

Rose, R. & Peiffer, C. (2015). Paying Bribes for Public Services: A Global Guide to Grass Roots Corruption. Palgrave.

Johnsøn, J., Taxell,N., and Zaum, D. (2012) Mapping Evidence Gaps in Anti-Corruption: Assessing the State of the Operationally Relevant Evidence on Donors’ Actions and Approaches to Anti-Corruption. U4 Issue, Chr. Michelson Institute (CMI)