1. Show or hide comments about the document.

  2. Search over the document's text.

  3. Share the document through social networks or e-mail.

  4. After selecting an area on the page.

  5. ...you can:
    copy the text
    share the segment
    comment
    cite the document

Summer 2017
ISSN 0890-913X
Volume 32, Number 2

Economic Freedom and Corruption: New Cross-Country Panel Data Evidence

Steven Yamarik, California State University
Chelsea Redmon, California State University
Download Share e-mail
  • << Back to editing
  • Previous version by
  • << Older
  • Newer >>
  • Revert to this one
  • Edit
  • Fullscreen
  • Show comments
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  • Zoom:
     
     
  • Page:  / 28
  •  
  •  
  •  
  • Line spacing:
     
     
  • Word spacing:
     
     
  • Search:FindClose
 
search results
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
432
648
1
0
/index.php?action=ajax&rs=GDMgetPage&rsargs[]=2017 Journal of Private Enterprise vol 32 no 2 Summer parte2.pdf&rsargs[]=0
TheJournalofPrivateEnterprise32(2),2017,1744EconomicFreedomandCorruption:NewCross-CountryPanelDataEvidenceStevenYamarikCaliforniaStateUniversityChelseaRedmonCaliforniaStateUniversity______________________________________________________AbstractThispaperexaminestheempiricalrelationshipbetweeneconomicfreedomandcorruption.Weuseaprincipal-agent-clientmodeltoidentifythepotentialcausallinkagesbetweencorruptionandthecomponentsofeconomicfreedom.Wethenestimateatwo-equationsystemwherefreedomdependsoncorruptionandviceversa.UsingaseriesofpanelGMMestimators,wefindthatcorruptionlowerseconomicfreedom,butthatfreedomdoesnotsignificantlyimpactcorruption.Theresultthatcorruptionlowersfreedomsupportsthegrabbinghandtheoryofcorruption,whereanonbenevolentgovernmentcreatesinefficientregulationandbarrierstoentrytogenerateeconomicrents.______________________________________________________JELCodes:D73,K40,O17,P50Keywords:economicfreedom,corruption,paneldata,GMMI.IntroductionAgrowingliteratureexaminestheempiricalrelationshipbetweeneconomicfreedomandcorruption.Thefirstandmoreprominentbranchofthisliteraturelooksattheroleplayedbyeconomicfreedominexplainingcross-countrydifferencesincorruption.Byestimatingdeterminantsofeconomicfreedom,Goldsmith(1999),ChafuenandGuzmán(2000),Paldam(2002),andShenandWilliamson(2005)findthateconomicfreedomisnegativelyrelatedtocorruption.Subsequentanalysisshowsthatthisnegativerelationshipdoesnotholdacrossallcomponentsoffreedom(GoelandNelson2005);levelsofincome(GraeffandMehlkop2003);WethankNoelJohnsonandthreeanonymousrefereesfortheirhelpfulsuggestions.Allremainingerrorsareourown.
GLIFOS-digital_archive