Revisiting the impact of corruption on income inequality worldwide

Abstract The relationship between corruption and income inequality has been widely studied, but there is no consensus on whether corruption increases or reduces inequality. We conduct an extreme bounds analysis (EBA) to test the robustness of the explanatory variables proposed in the literature. Using a sample of up to 150 countries, with data mostly going back to 1980, we find that corruption does not appear to have a clear positive effect on inequality or may even reduce it. Also, contrary to what is sometimes suggested in the literature, the results do not support an inverted U‐shaped effect of corruption on income distribution. A more important role in explaining income distribution seems to be played by the level of financial development, the old‐age dependency ratio, the unemployment rate, the capital stock to GDP ratio and the population growth rate. These are often found to be significant drivers of inequality, regardless of the set of control variables and the definition of corruption used.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Kyklos
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/kykl.12415
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Corruption and Economic Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.53
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Revisiting the impact of corruption on income inequality worldwide

Jochen Hartwig, Jan‐Egbert Sturm
4 citations
Kyklos
Corruption and Economic Development
4.53
article

Revisiting the impact of corruption on income inequality worldwide

Jochen Hartwig, Jan‐Egbert Sturm
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Abstract The relationship between corruption and income inequality has been widely studied, but there is no consensus on whether corruption increases or reduces inequality. We conduct an extreme bounds analysis (EBA) to test the robustness of the explanatory variables proposed in the literature. Using a sample of up to 150 countries, with data mostly going back to 1980, we find that corruption does not appear to have a clear positive effect on inequality or may even reduce it. Also, contrary to what is sometimes suggested in the literature, the results do not support an inverted U‐shaped effect of corruption on income distribution. A more important role in explaining income distribution seems to be played by the level of financial development, the old‐age dependency ratio, the unemployment rate, the capital stock to GDP ratio and the population growth rate. These are often found to be significant drivers of inequality, regardless of the set of control variables and the definition of corruption used.

KyklosVol. 78(1)
Ifo Institute for Economic Research (DE), Chemnitz University of Technology (DE), ETH Zurich (CH), Hans Böckler Foundation (DE), Swiss Finance Institute (CH)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Corruption and Economic Development
4.53
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.