腐败、法治与民主:概念、边界与矛盾

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW
Stephen D. Morris
{"title":"腐败、法治与民主:概念、边界与矛盾","authors":"Stephen D. Morris","doi":"10.22201/IIJ.24485306E.2021.2.15338","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite heightened attention to corruption, multiple reform efforts, and democratization in the past few decades, corruption remains stubbornly per¬sistent throughout the world. Much of the research on corruption highlights an inverse relationship linking corruption to the rule of law and to democracy. But rather than concentrate on the relationships among these critical variables, this research note focuses its attention on the intense debates in the literature over how to define these key concepts and the competing definitions. Analysis differentiates thin and thick definitions of each of the three concepts, highlights their shared emphasis on limiting state power and their use of vague criteria to demarcate the conceptual boundaries. Amid intense debate, all three essentially ground their li¬mits on state power on rather vague notions of justice, equality, or the common or public good. The main argument here is that in many cases this results in a con¬ceptual overlap and blurred boundaries. Depending on the definition employed, corruption can be seen as conceptually embedded within the notion of the rule of law which, in turn, is encompassed within our understanding of democracy. At one level, these common conceptual components potentially fashion tautologies and oxymora, complicating questions about the theoretical relationships among them: is it even possible for a country to have high levels of corruption and strong rule of law? Or high levels of corruption and yet still be considered democratic? At an empirical level, the conceptual overlap complicates the examination of such theoretical linkages because of endogeneity potential. I illustrate this pro¬blem briefly by noting how in some cases the indices of democracy encompass measures of the rule of law or corruption, and vice versa. The essay concludes by highlighting how disaggregating the concepts raises other interesting questions and analytical challenges.","PeriodicalId":41684,"journal":{"name":"Mexican Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Corruption, Rule of Law and Democracy: Concepts, Boundaries and Oxymora\",\"authors\":\"Stephen D. Morris\",\"doi\":\"10.22201/IIJ.24485306E.2021.2.15338\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Despite heightened attention to corruption, multiple reform efforts, and democratization in the past few decades, corruption remains stubbornly per¬sistent throughout the world. Much of the research on corruption highlights an inverse relationship linking corruption to the rule of law and to democracy. But rather than concentrate on the relationships among these critical variables, this research note focuses its attention on the intense debates in the literature over how to define these key concepts and the competing definitions. Analysis differentiates thin and thick definitions of each of the three concepts, highlights their shared emphasis on limiting state power and their use of vague criteria to demarcate the conceptual boundaries. Amid intense debate, all three essentially ground their li¬mits on state power on rather vague notions of justice, equality, or the common or public good. The main argument here is that in many cases this results in a con¬ceptual overlap and blurred boundaries. Depending on the definition employed, corruption can be seen as conceptually embedded within the notion of the rule of law which, in turn, is encompassed within our understanding of democracy. At one level, these common conceptual components potentially fashion tautologies and oxymora, complicating questions about the theoretical relationships among them: is it even possible for a country to have high levels of corruption and strong rule of law? Or high levels of corruption and yet still be considered democratic? At an empirical level, the conceptual overlap complicates the examination of such theoretical linkages because of endogeneity potential. I illustrate this pro¬blem briefly by noting how in some cases the indices of democracy encompass measures of the rule of law or corruption, and vice versa. The essay concludes by highlighting how disaggregating the concepts raises other interesting questions and analytical challenges.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41684,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mexican Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mexican Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22201/IIJ.24485306E.2021.2.15338\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mexican Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22201/IIJ.24485306E.2021.2.15338","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

尽管在过去几十年里,人们对腐败、多重改革和民主化的关注度不断提高,但腐败在世界各地仍然顽固存在。许多关于腐败的研究都强调了腐败与法治和民主之间的反比关系。但是,本研究报告并没有集中于这些关键变量之间的关系,而是将注意力集中在文献中关于如何定义这些关键概念和相互竞争的定义的激烈辩论上。分析区分了这三个概念中每一个的薄定义和厚定义,强调了它们对限制国家权力的共同重视,以及它们使用模糊的标准来划定概念边界。在激烈的辩论中,三人基本上都将国家权力的限制建立在相当模糊的正义、平等或公共利益的概念之上。这里的主要论点是,在许多情况下,这会导致概念重叠和边界模糊。根据所采用的定义,腐败在概念上可以被视为嵌入法治概念,而法治概念又包含在我们对民主的理解中。在某种程度上,这些常见的概念组成部分可能会形成同义词和矛盾句,使它们之间的理论关系问题复杂化:一个国家是否有可能存在高度腐败和强大的法治?还是高度腐败,但仍然被认为是民主的?在经验层面上,由于内生性潜力,概念重叠使对这种理论联系的研究变得复杂。我简要地说明了这个问题,指出在某些情况下,民主指数如何包括法治或腐败的衡量标准,反之亦然。文章最后强调了分解这些概念如何引发其他有趣的问题和分析挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Corruption, Rule of Law and Democracy: Concepts, Boundaries and Oxymora
Despite heightened attention to corruption, multiple reform efforts, and democratization in the past few decades, corruption remains stubbornly per¬sistent throughout the world. Much of the research on corruption highlights an inverse relationship linking corruption to the rule of law and to democracy. But rather than concentrate on the relationships among these critical variables, this research note focuses its attention on the intense debates in the literature over how to define these key concepts and the competing definitions. Analysis differentiates thin and thick definitions of each of the three concepts, highlights their shared emphasis on limiting state power and their use of vague criteria to demarcate the conceptual boundaries. Amid intense debate, all three essentially ground their li¬mits on state power on rather vague notions of justice, equality, or the common or public good. The main argument here is that in many cases this results in a con¬ceptual overlap and blurred boundaries. Depending on the definition employed, corruption can be seen as conceptually embedded within the notion of the rule of law which, in turn, is encompassed within our understanding of democracy. At one level, these common conceptual components potentially fashion tautologies and oxymora, complicating questions about the theoretical relationships among them: is it even possible for a country to have high levels of corruption and strong rule of law? Or high levels of corruption and yet still be considered democratic? At an empirical level, the conceptual overlap complicates the examination of such theoretical linkages because of endogeneity potential. I illustrate this pro¬blem briefly by noting how in some cases the indices of democracy encompass measures of the rule of law or corruption, and vice versa. The essay concludes by highlighting how disaggregating the concepts raises other interesting questions and analytical challenges.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信