Corruption and Its
Effect on Educational Institutions in the Middle East
Introduction
Over the last three decades, most states throughout the MENA region (the Middle East and North Africa) have increased spending on education, resulting in higher enrollment rates for all genders and social classes at the primary, secondary, and tertiary levels. However, the quality of educational systems, as measured by international exams, has not improved significantly. In general, children are spending more time in school, but curricula continue to focus on memorization over critical thinking, and students are not learning the skills necessary to obtain employment in the industrial and service sectors upon graduation. The MENA region is the only one in the world where college graduates have a higher unemployment rate than the rest of the population.[1] Why have educational institutions in the region failed to improve despite a significant increase in spending? This contradicts previous studies on education, which shows that expenditure is usually correlated with improvements in educational quality.
According
to the World Bank, spending on education in the MENA region increased from
approximately 12 percent of government expenditure in 1980 to over 20 percent
by the beginning of 2009 with most of the extra spending coming in the last two
decades. [2] Teacher’s salaries have increased
significantly, and the average length of time students spent in school doubled
from 1970 to 2000. Despite this,
classroom sizes have barely changed.
Although the ratio of students to teachers at primary schools decreased
from 25.1 in 1990 to 22 in 2010, the same ratio increased at the secondary
level from 18.1 to over 20 in the same time period. To put this number in perspective, the
number in first world countries today ranges from 10 to 15 students. Furthermore,
increased spending has not led to a significant increase in the quality of
learning. In 2003, nine out of ten MENA
countries who took part in the exams for Trends in International Mathematics
and Science Study (TIMSS) placed in the bottom third out of the 45 countries
that participated.[3] Only Israel scored well. Worse still, many of the test scores in the
MENA region declined between 1999 and 2003.
This helps us understand part of the reason why the unemployment rate in
the region for the youth (15 to 29 years old) has risen to over twenty five
percent in 2010 in comparison with only a rate of 11.4 percent for the rest of
the population.[4] Too many of the youth in the Middle East lack
the skills necessary to compete in the global economy. There are not enough jobs for graduates in
the industrial or service sectors as a result.
It is my contention that economic
investment is a necessary but not a sufficient variable to explain ways a
government can improve its educational system; it is not only about how much
money is spent on education but how public funds are used. Corruption
can significantly hinder the efficiency of a school system, producing graduates
that lack the critical skills necessary to perform their chosen profession with
competence. Reducing corruption in the
educational system is critical for the future of education in the Middle East,
and the only way to achieve this is by increasing political stability,
transparency, and accountability in the region.
In this essay, I will show that
there is a correlation between corruption and educational quality through a
large N study. To do this, I compared
international test results in the PISA exam with levels of corruption in 30
countries across the globe over the last decade. This essay will discuss the independent and
dependent variables, and how I established a link between the two. Furthermore, I will discuss various reforms
that are necessary to reduce corruption in educational systems.
The Dependent Variable: Educational Quality
The
general quality of an educational system is correlated with the level of
economic development in any given country.[5]
In other words, countries with a high
GDP per capita and a good score on the Human Development Index generally have quality
educational systems. Although it is
difficult to fully understand the causal links between the two given the great
difficulty in understanding how new ideas affect human behavior, it doesn’t
take a great deal of imagination to understand why education is important. Countries with citizens that are literate,
creative, open minded, well organized, analytical, and well read will have a
large pool of workers that can serve as highly qualified bureaucrats,
industrial labor, entrepreneurs, academics, and political leaders. This is simple enough to understand, but how
do we quantify the quality of an educational system?
One
of the more popular methods in the past was to use literacy rates, which
measure the general ability of citizens to read and write. Although literacy rates are one useful way of
measuring an output of schools, they tell us little about the overall quality
of a student. A person might be able to
read, but they might still lack the critical thinking skills and content
knowledge necessary to adapt in today’s industrial economy. The teaching philosophy of many schools and
educators throughout the Middle East still places too much emphasis on
memorization and not enough on soft skills like debating, research, and
abstract thinking.[6] Furthermore, there is almost no focus on
liberal arts subjects or learning skills that involve physical labor. In today’s world where technology and society
are changing quickly and citizens are expected to have a greater say in
governance, it is no longer enough to teach people how to memorize a textbook,
so literacy rates cannot tell us about the quality of an educational system.
Another
way to measure educational quality is to look at the average amount of time the
average student spends in school. The
United Nations Development Program uses this statistic as one of three
variables in their measure of Human Development known as the HDI index.[7] Enrollment and graduation rates can tell us
how many families throughout the country can afford to allow their children to
obtain an education instead of putting them to work at an early age. However, using this statistic by itself is
fraught with problems. Although the
average length of time spent in school can give us some useful info on
government outputs, it once again doesn’t tell us about the quality of the
educational system. Someone can spend
twelve years in school and still lack basic literacy or critical thinking
skills. Overcrowded classrooms,
unqualified teachers, a lack of good textbooks, and a corrupt educational
system waters down the quality of the degree they receive at the end of high
school or college. Furthermore, this
statistic tells us nothing about cultural attitudes towards education or the
amount of skills students learn outside the classroom. Good students are not only produced by
schools but by parents who encourage their children to engage in a variety of
activities to expand their skill sets.
A
better way to measure the quality of education in a country is to use
international exams that test a variety of critical thinking skills as well as
content knowledge in mathematics and science.
One of the most well known international exams is designed by the
Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), which is funded by the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).[8] The first exams were administered in the year
2000 in over sixty countries, and since then, it has been administered every
three years. The test assesses a
student’s math, science, and reading skills in three separate sections, and
students can earn a score of up to a thousand points each. Furthermore, questions are written in such a
way as to test critical thinking skills.
Like any other international exam,
there are issues with how the test is translated into different languages and
administered in different countries.[9] Cultural and geopolitical differences
throughout the globe make administering a single exam a complex challenge. Some countries are not eligible for the test because
they lack the security or the educational infrastructure necessary for the OECD
to administer it. Most countries in
Sub-Saharan Africa are noticeably absent from the statistics. Furthermore, this method of evaluation
penalizes students who don’t have great test taking skills but might otherwise
be well educated.
However, this test is one of the few
methods we have of assessing the quality of education in many countries across the
globe. Exams remain the best option for
evaluating students in general. Therefore,
I measured my dependent variable, the quality of education, using each
country’s PISA exam results from 2000 to 2012.
The Independent Variable: Corruption
Corruption
is an even more difficult variable to define, study, and measure. Those engaging in most forms of corruption try
to keep their activities hidden from the public eye after all. However, there are ways to measure the causes
and effects of corruption, and much has been written in the last two and a half
decades on the subject by writers such as David Chapman, Bertram Spector, and
Arvind Jain. These political scientists generally
define corruption as the misuse of public office for personal gain.[10] When political leaders misuse the powers of
their office for the benefit of a client in exchange for favors or bribes, this
is known as grand corruption. This kind
of misuse of public office often involves the manipulation of law codes and the
misappropriation of public goods on a large scale. However, most forms of corruption are petty;
this involves bureaucrats who accept small bribes in exchange for special
favors. Sometimes, bureaucrats may also
refuse to perform the basic tasks of their job unless they are compensated by
the client.
Although political scientists agree
on this basic definition, there are some disagreements over what exactly
constitutes the misuse of public office.[11] Is a bureaucrat with a very low salary
misusing his power when he accepts a small bribe in exchange for ignoring an
illogical law? Is a politician that
receives legal campaign financing from a teacher’s union engaging in corruption
if he writes laws that provide higher salaries and benefits for public school
employees? It is not always easy to
define what misusing public office means.
It is also difficult to assess the
effects of corruption. Political
scientists who study the subject seem to agree that in most instances,
corruption is negatively correlated with economic development as it produces
severe inefficiencies within government bureaucracies, making it more costly
and time consuming for the state to perform basic tasks.[12] Sometimes, the inefficiencies become so
overwhelming that bureaucracies perform no service at all for their country. Although some petty forms of corruption may
help create more efficiency in the short term by allowing clients to get around
illogical laws, in the long term, all forms of corruption create structural
costs. If various forms of petty
corruption are prevalent in a system, it means that there is a lack of the rule
of law, and this can lead to severe repercussions in terms of governance and
the loss of wealth. The American
non-governmental organization Global Financial Integrity estimates that 151
developing nations lost 991 billion dollars from corruption alone in 2012.[13]
However, despite the fact that political scientists agree that corruption is
costly, assessing the total economic costs of corruption is not easy.
Part
of the reason why is that it is difficult to measure. It is impossible to study it directly in most
instances. Instead, international
organizations have to study general perceptions of corruption. Various international organizations, including
Transparency International and the World Bank, have developed different ways to
do this.[14]
For this paper, I used Transparency
International’s Corruption Perception Index, which aggregates data from thirteen
separate surveys distributed to businessmen, government employees, NGO workers,
policy experts, and average citizens within each country. States are scored on a scale of zero to one
hundred, with zero being the most corrupt.
Some of the information these surveys gather is on a country’s judicial
system, legislative process, regulatory institutions, law enforcement agencies,
electoral systems, and law codes.[15] Based on the answers, we can learn about the
government’s capacity to create and enforce effective laws in a transparent and
unbiased manner. The rule of law is
critical for insuring good governance.
Furthermore, many of the survey questions ask people about their attitudes
towards corruption and whether or not they have engaged in bribery. A
country that is generally more tolerant of corruption and ignorant of its
social costs is likely to have a lot of political officials that think in the
same manner. Lastly, surveys are given
to evaluate the degree of political freedom and civil liberties in the
country. Countries that have competitive
elections, a free media, and an active civil society are less likely to have
problems with corruption since there is more political accountability in the
system. Of course, there are problems
with using this survey method. Most of
these questionnaires don’t directly study corruption itself but its underlying
causes and effects as well as perceptions of corruption within the
culture. Given that it is impossible to
directly study the phenomenon, using statistics like Transparency
International’s CPI Index is one of the few options available.
Corruption in Educational Systems
It
is important to clarify what the misuse of public office means in the
educational system and how we can measure it.
Corruption in the educational system can come from one of the following
four places: (1) government officials in the ministry of education, (2) school
administrators, (3) teachers, and (4) students.[16] Corrupt government officials in the ministry
of education can abuse their power by giving accreditation to underperforming
schools in exchange for bribes; misappropriating tax funds meant for schools
for personal gain; and distributing jobs in schools to loyal clients. This form of grand corruption is hardest to
assess as it is the least visible to the public eye. School administrators can misuse the powers
of their office by hiring unqualified teachers as a personal favor; accepting
bribes from students in exchange for giving them good grades when they were not
earned; and misappropriating the school’s financial resources for their own
private benefit. Teachers can misuse
their power by accepting bribes from students in exchange for good grades or
refusing to teach during class time so as to force students to pay for private
lessons after school. Students and
parents can engage in corruption through cheating on exams and paying off
school officials for better grades and preferential treatment.
The
effects of corruption in school systems are difficult to measure but clearly
have an effect on economic development.
One negative consequence of educational corruption is that many students
will graduate from high school or college with degrees that they did not
earn. Having too many doctors and
engineers that are unqualified can be dangerous for society. Furthermore, corruption in educational
systems creates problems for employers.
In a country with quality universities, employers can have greater trust
in the qualifications of a candidate if they came from a school with a good
reputation. However, if a country has no
high schools or universities that can guarantee a quality education, employers
are forced to rely on personal connections to hire employees instead of
qualifications. This can create problems
for students who actually worked hard but had problems finding a job after
graduation because of the lack of connections.
Unfortunately,
there is no standard index that measures corruption in educational systems
throughout the globe. The corruption perception
surveys of Transparency International and the World Bank focus more heavily on
understanding regulatory institutions and the judicial system in their
questionnaires, and there is less emphasis on understanding the affects of
corruption within education. The reason
why is that they consider the rule of law to be a critical factor in reducing
corruption. Without an independent
judicial system, corruption will thrive.
However, I argue that the same is true in the absence of an educational
system. Good schools can provide
bureaucracies with quality workers that will be more driven to perform their
jobs properly.
A few political scientists have tried
to measure the level of corruption within schools and assess the consequences. To measure corruption within Russia’s
educational system, Stephen Heyneman, Kathryn H. Anderson, and Nazym Nuraliyeva
distributed surveys to schools throughout the country to students, asking them
questions on their perceptions of corruption in their school, their attitudes
towards it, and how often they have cheated.[17] Data was than aggregated, and schools were
ranked based on their levels of corruption.
The authors found that there is a negative correlation between the level
of corruption in a school and the average earnings of the students after
graduation. As corruption goes up, salaries went down.
More studies like this are needed to
differentiate between levels of corruption within a country in general and
specifically within educational institutions.
It is often true that corruption in institutions like the judiciary or
the legislature will spill over into road construction, schools, hospitals, and
other governmental institutions.
However, some countries have successfully shielded their educational
institutions from corruption, even as it thrives elsewhere. For example, in South Korea, corruption is
rife between politicians and big businesses, but the government has
successfully insolated its educational system from these problems.[18] Even though South Korea has a moderately high
level of corruption for a developed country, its educational institutions are
some of the best in the world. In this
essay, I am using the CPI index with the assumption that countries that have
general problems with corruption also have issues with it in their educational
system. Although this is true most of
the time, there are many exceptions to the rule. Corruption can be contained by governments
under certain circumstances.
Showing a Correlation between Corruption and
Educational Quality
In
order to prove the existence of a correlation between corruption and educational
quality throughout the globe, I decided to do a big N study involving thirty
states. Each country was chosen based on
one of three factors:
1) They participated in the PISA
exam from 2000 to 2012
2) They are nations with
significant population sizes
3) The exam was distributed
throughout the entire country.
Island nations were left out of the study. Furthermore, states like China that only
allowed the exam to be distributed in individual provinces were also left out
to prevent the corruption of the data.
It is also important to note that only five Middle East countries have
participated in this exam. However, the
point of this study was to prove the general existence of a correlation between
corruption and educational quality, and to apply the results to our
understanding of corruption in the Middle East.
After choosing the thirty countries, I added up and averaged their PISA
test scores and CPI indexes from 2000 to 2012.
Upon uploading the data on an SPSS
and comparing the two variables, I found that a very strong correlation exists
between the two. The Pearson Correlation
number is .647. What this means is that
as the Corruption Perception Index score goes up, test scores generally go up
as well. The tables below show the
results:
Country
|
Average
CPI Index: 2000-2012
|
Average
PISA Test Score: 2000-2012
|
Spending
on Education per capita 2011
|
GDP
Per Capita
2011
|
Spending
On
Education
Per Capita
|
S. Korea
|
4.94
|
541.33
|
.052
|
24,156
|
1256.11
|
Finland
|
9.47
|
542.13
|
.068
|
50,791
|
3453.79
|
Japan
|
7.32
|
533.73
|
.038
|
46,204
|
1755.75
|
Canada
|
8.72
|
527.27
|
.054
|
51,791
|
2796.71
|
Australia
|
8.65
|
521.07
|
.051
|
62,134
|
3168.83
|
Germany
|
7.84
|
503.20
|
.051
|
45,871
|
2339.42
|
Slovenia
|
6.11
|
499.00
|
.057
|
24,965
|
1423.01
|
France
|
6.97
|
500.60
|
.057
|
43,810
|
2497.17
|
Poland
|
4.37
|
498.87
|
.052
|
13,680
|
711.36
|
United Kingdom
|
8.22
|
508.00
|
.062
|
40,972
|
2540.26
|
United States
|
7.42
|
491.63
|
.054
|
49,803
|
2689.36
|
Russia
|
2.42
|
469.47
|
.041
|
13,324
|
546.28
|
Greece
|
4.17
|
465.87
|
.041
|
25,964
|
1064.52
|
Croatia
|
3.90
|
478.44
|
.043
|
14,540
|
625.22
|
Israel
|
6.40
|
454.08
|
.056
|
33,276
|
1863.46
|
Turkey
|
3.91
|
445.17
|
.029
|
10,605
|
307.55
|
Serbia
|
3.28
|
435.33
|
.048
|
6,423
|
308.30
|
Uruguay
|
6.02
|
423.17
|
.045
|
13,961
|
628.25
|
UAE
|
6.17
|
435.67
|
.063
|
38,930
|
2452.59
|
Mexico
|
3.42
|
410.60
|
.052
|
9,803
|
509.76
|
Brazil
|
3.78
|
387.73
|
.037
|
12,576
|
465.31
|
Kazakhstan
|
2.55
|
407.50
|
.028
|
11,358
|
318.02
|
Malaysia
|
4.87
|
413.17
|
.059
|
10,068
|
594.01
|
Argentina
|
2.97
|
393.75
|
.063
|
13,694
|
862.72
|
Jordan
|
4.90
|
400.89
|
.035
|
4,666
|
163.31
|
Columbia
|
3.65
|
390.78
|
.044
|
7,125
|
313.50
|
Tunisia
|
4.59
|
384.67
|
.062
|
4,305
|
266.91
|
Indonesia
|
2.36
|
383.60
|
.030
|
3,470
|
104.10
|
Qatar
|
6.48
|
360.67
|
.025
|
88,861
|
2221.53
|
Peru
|
3.69
|
353.44
|
.025
|
5,759
|
143.98
|
Correlations
Between PISA Exam and CPI
|
||||||
Exam
Results 2000 to 2012
|
Average CPI
|
|||||
Exam
Results 2000 to 2012
|
Pearson
Correlation
|
1
|
.647**
|
|||
Sig.
(2-tailed)
|
.000
|
|||||
N
|
30
|
30
|
||||
Average CPI
|
Pearson
Correlation
|
.647**
|
1
|
|||
Sig. (2-tailed)
|
.000
|
|||||
N
|
30
|
30
|
||||
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
|
||||||
Mean
|
Std.
Deviation
|
N
|
||||
Exam Results 2000 to 2012
|
452.0274
|
57.62323
|
30
|
|||
AverageCPI
|
5.3186
|
2.06168
|
30
|
|||
What I also found is that corruption
is a necessary but not a sufficient variable to explain educational
quality. Some countries with relatively
low levels of corruption did not have high scores. For example, although Qatar and the United
Arab Emirates have a relatively low CPI index and both countries spend a
significant amount of money on education, their test scores were low. This might be explained by the fact that both
countries are rentier states with an enormous amount of oil wealth and a small population. Citizens are guaranteed significantly high
incomes as adults regardless of skills or qualifications, so there might be a
lack of motivation for many individuals to take their studies seriously.
Furthermore, there are other
variables that help explain educational performance like spending on education
per capita. After comparing spending on
education with the PISA test scores, the SPSS produced a Pearson correlation
number of .659, which indicates a positive correlation between the two variables. Although Jordan, Tunisia, South Korea,
Poland, and Greece all have relatively similar levels of corruption, the later
three spend significantly greater amounts of money on education. In the case of South Korea, they spend five
times more than Jordan on their educational system. Whereas Jordan’s PISA scores were low, South
Korea had the best average score in the world over the last twelve years.
Correlations
between Pisa Exams and Spending
|
|||
Exam
Results 2000 to 2012
|
Spending
on Education Per Capita
|
||
Exam Results 2000 to 2012
|
Pearson Correlation
|
1
|
.659**
|
Sig. (2-tailed)
|
.000
|
||
N
|
30
|
30
|
|
Spending on Education Per Capita
|
Pearson Correlation
|
.659**
|
1
|
Sig. (2-tailed)
|
.000
|
||
N
|
30
|
30
|
|
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
|
|||
Descriptive
Statistics
|
|||
Mean
|
Std.
Deviation
|
N
|
|
Exam Results 2000 to 2012
|
452.0274
|
57.62323
|
30
|
SpendingEducationPerPerson
|
1279.7032
|
1050.13112
|
30
|
There were also some other fascinating results that were
not expected. Countries in Eastern
Europe like Russia and Poland that have relatively high rates of corruption in
comparison with the West and relatively low levels of spending on education
performed decently on the exams. The same is true of countries in East
Asia. I do not have an explanation for
this anomaly and more study needs to be done to understand why this was the
result. It may be the case that
educational institutions in some of these countries are insulated. It is also possible that these countries might
also have a significant demographics issue where the number of old people outnumber
the number of you people, which might explain some of the low spending on
education per capita. There also might
be long term historical or cultural explanations for this phenomenon.
However, despite these anomalies, what the numbers show
is that there is a general correlation between the quality of educational
institutions and the levels of corruption.
Spending alone is not enough to increase the quality of education. More efforts are needed to reduce corruption
within educational institutions specifically and within the entire government
in general. Reducing corruption also
requires more than institutional reforms and public awareness campaigns.
Countries suffering from corruption usually also have problems with economic
and political stability. Corruption does
not exist in a vacuum; it is interconnected with other economic, political, and
social problems.[19]
Work Cited Page
1. Ahmad, Eatzaz, Muhammad Aman Ullah, and Muhammad Irfanullah
Arfeen. "Does Corruption Affect
Economic Growth," Latin American Journal of Economics, Vol. 49, No.
2, November, 2012: pg 277-305.
2. Chapman, David. “Education Quality in the Middle East,” International
Review of Education, Vol. 55, No. 4.
July, 2009.
3. Heyneman, Stephen, Kathryn H. Anderson, and Nazym Nuraliyeva. "The Cost of Corruption in Higher
Education," Comparative Education Review, Vol. 52, No. 1, February,
2008.
4. “Human Development Report,
2013: The Rise of the South, Human Progress in a Diverse World,” United
Nations Development Program: New York, 2013.
5. “Is Transparency
International’s Measure of Corruption Still Valid?,” www.theguardian.com,
December 3rd, 2013.
6. Jain, Arvind. “Corruption: A
Review,” Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 15, No.1, 2001: pg 71-121.
7. Kornai, Janos, Laszlo Matyas, and Gerard Roland, eds. Corruption, Development, and Institutional
Design. Palgrave Macmillan: New
York, 2009.
8. Lambsdorf, Graf. The
Institutional Economics of Corruption and Reform. Cambridge University Press: Great Britain,
2008.
9. “Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development: Key
Findings, 2000-2012,” www.oecd.org,
September, 2014.
10. “Public Spending on Education: 1980-2014,” The World Bank, http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.XPD.TOTL.GD.ZS?page=1,
2014.
10. Spector, Bertram. Detecting
Corruption In Developing Countries: Identifying Causes/Strategies for Action. Kumarian Press: United States, 2012.
11. Stewart, William. “Is PISA
Fundamentally Flawed?,” www.tes.co.uk,
September 16th, 2014.
12. “Transparency International: Global Perceptions Index 2013,” http://www.transparency.org/cpi2013/results,
2014.
13. Waldner, David. State
Building and Late Development.
Cornell University Press: New York, 1999.
14. Yadav, Vineeta. Political
Parties, Business Groups, and Corruption in Developing Countries. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2011.
[1]
“Human Development Report, 2013: The Rise of the South, Human Progress in a
Diverse World,” United Nations Development Program: New York, 2013.
[2]
“Public Spending on Education: 1980-2014,” The World Bank, http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.XPD.TOTL.GD.ZS?page=1,
2014.
[3]
Chapman, David. “Education Quality in
the Middle East,” International Review of Education, vol. 55, no.
4. July, 2009.
[4]
“Human Development Report, 2013: The Rise of the South, Human Progress in a
Diverse World,” United Nations Development Program: New York, 2013.
[5]
Heyneman, Stephen, Kathryn H. Anderson, and Nazym Nuraliyeva. "The Cost of Corruption in Higher
Education," Comparative Education Review, Vol. 52, No. 1, February,
2008.
[6]
Chapman, Ibid
[7]
“Human Development Report, 2013: The Rise of the South, Human Progress in a
Diverse World,” United Nations Development Program: New York, 2013.
[8]
“Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development: Key Findings,
2000-2012,” www.oecd.org,
September, 2014.
[9]
“Is Transparency International’s Measure of Corruption Still Valid?,” www.theguardian.com,
December 3rd, 2013.
[10] Chapman, David.
“Education Quality in the Middle East,” International Review of
Education, Vol. 55, No. 4. July,
2009; Jain, Arvind. “Corruption: A
Review,” Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 15, No.1, 2001: pg 71-121;
and Spector, Bertram. Detecting
Corruption In Developing Countries: Identifying Causes/Strategies for Action. Kumarian Press: United States, 2012.
[11] Lambsdorf, Graf.
The Institutional Economics of Corruption and Reform. Cambridge University Press: Great Britain,
2008.
[12]
Ahmad, Eatzaz, Muhammad Aman Ullah, and Muhammad Irfanullah Arfeen. "Does Corruption Affect Economic
Growth," Latin American Journal of Economics, Vol. 49, No. 2, November,
2012: pg 277-305
[13]
“Developing nations lose one trillion a year in dirty money,” Reuters, http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/12/16/funds-global-illicit-idINKBN0JT2JE20141216,
December 16th, 2014.
[14]
“Transparency International: Global Perceptions Index 2013,” http://www.transparency.org/cpi2013/results,
2014; and “Human Development Report, 2013: The Rise of the South, Human
Progress in a Diverse World,” United Nations Development Program: New
York, 2013.
[15]
Spector, Ibid.
[16]
Heyneman, Stephen, Kathryn H. Anderson, and Nazym Nuraliyeva. "The Cost of Corruption in Higher
Education," Comparative Education Review, Vol. 52, No. 1, February,
2008.
[17]
Heyneman, Ibid.
[18]
Waldner, David. State Building and
Late Development. Cornell University
Press: New York, 1999.
[19]
Spector, Ibid.
No comments:
Post a Comment