Corruption is no longer a marginal issue: scandals in politics, business and administration show the extent to which it jeopardizes trust, efficiency and ultimately democratic processes. At the same time, digitalization and more complex organizational structures are creating new risks – but also new opportunities for effective prevention.
Prof. Dr. Carsten Stark is an expert in this field who is in constant demand throughout Germany: the sociologist heads the Economic and Organizational Sociology (WOS) course at Hof University of Applied Sciences and the Institut für Korruptionsprävention e.V. He also advises the Deutsche Bundesbank and various international companies on corruption issues.
Prof. Stark, what circumstances in the social context encourage corruption?
“Apart from situational, spontaneous corruption, it is above all long-term and personal relationships that encourage corruption. Such social relationships create trust and dependencies that can be exploited for corrupt purposes. Since both donors and recipients are liable to prosecution, a very high level of trust between the parties involved is an important component.”
Are there areas that are particularly susceptible to corruption – such as construction or the service sector?
“The construction sector was always the main focus, because there were often long-standing relationships here and it is difficult, if not impossible, to subsequently compare service descriptions and actual services. But we have now moved away from this focus. In recent years, we have learned that corruption also occurs in cultural offices, immigration and social welfare offices, in the prison system and, of course, at universities. To name just a few examples.”
But does every “favour” equal corruption, where does the line lie and which forms of corruption are the most difficult to recognize (everyday life)?
“You can also be friendly and helpful as a public official, at least it’s not forbidden. You should just be very careful not to accept any personal benefits, i.e. gifts or the like, in these contexts. The paradox is that many forms of corruption are easily recognizable in everyday life; giving money or vouchers to nursing staff, teachers or refuse collectors, for example, is a punishable offence. At my last federal election, I saw a donation box for election workers at the polling station. This is very easy to observe because it is somehow covered by “culture” and “tradition”.
It is difficult when the immense increase in administrative complexity in procurement or approval procedures makes it difficult even for insiders and auditors to recognize the informal agreements on file. Or to put it in a nutshell: Administrative procedures are now so complicated that cleverly crafted corruption is hardly noticeable. As a rule, the only thing that helps here is Commissioner Chance, “nice” neighbors or a divorced spouse.”
What role do power relations actually play in the development of corrupt networks?
“A very big one. The bureaucracy is still characterized by a strong hierarchy. The higher up you go, the less actions and decisions are questioned. The influence of politics on the administration should also not be underestimated.”
To what extent does corruption influence people’s trust in democratic institutions?
“Very strongly! Corruption attacks trust in democracy on several levels. Firstly, it destroys the idea of equal treatment. Secondly, it short-circuits formal regulations and political decisions, so to speak. Usually with the intention of distorting competition. The taxpayer is then asked to pay. If it then becomes public that millions disappear into private coffers, the damage is considerable.”
How would you assess the current state of corruption in Germany or the EU?
“That’s difficult to say. The Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) records all relevant cases. But the figures are very dependent on whether something has been uncovered at the time. We must and should assume that there is a large dark field. If only to ensure that prevention and prosecution are not neglected.”
How does corruption affect the economic development of a country?
“That varies. From an economic perspective, it has now been recognized that corruption can have a positive impact on economic development. Ultimately, the only thing that is certain is that it undermines the belief in the legitimacy of political decision-making (democracy) or the functionality of the state economy (one-party rule). In China, for example, corruption is a problem for the state if it undermines the economic power of the Communist Party. However, there is also the theory that the planned economy of the GDR would have collapsed much earlier without corruption. From an economic point of view, money doesn’t disappear, it just changes hands.”
Are there actually cultural differences in the perception and tolerance of corruption – after all, there are countries that have been considered prone to corruption for generations and where one could perhaps raise the question of actual awareness of the problem? Or are these just prejudices?
“You can’t answer that easily. There are cultural factors, of course. For example, Protestant cultures are less corrupt than Catholic cultures, even today. But these general assumptions become prejudices when they are projected onto individual cases.”
Where do you see the greatest weaknesses in existing control systems?
“The existing control systems make already highly complex administrative procedures even more complex. This means more work for the authorities and therefore meets with little approval. It would be more important to simplify administrative processes and thus make them manageable and transparent. However, people have been talking about this for decades. Unfortunately, the opposite is the case. The rationality behind it is wrong. I fear that the idea is to become more and more legally compliant with more and more specifications and regulations. The unintended consequence is that the greater the complexity, the greater the opportunities for corruption. Unfortunately, this simply doesn’t occur to the traditional administrative lawyer.”
What role do fear or loyalty play when people do not report corruption? Or to put it another way: should whistleblowing be better protected by law?
“We now have the Whistleblower Protection Act. After a long period of hesitation, European regulations have also been implemented in Germany. But I fear that even these regulations will not really help to improve the situation. I think fear plays a major role here. Due to the complexity of the administration, really relevant information can in principle only come from experts and these are usually colleagues in the authority.”
How can corruption in general be better combated by the state?
“By strengthening the key public prosecutor’s offices, better staffing of the tax investigation and tax audit departments, simplifying administrative procedures and tightening regulations in relation to politics. In principle, elected officials should be subject to the same regulations as public officials.”
What successful examples of combating corruption do you know of?
“The fight against corruption is constantly successful in everyday life. The still existing trust of citizens in the integrity of the administration is the benchmark for this.”
It is often said that some international corporations hide money for corruption in their balance sheets in order to obtain contracts in countries that are supposedly susceptible to corruption – contracts that in turn maintain or secure jobs in the home country. Or think of the often questionable awarding of major sporting events, from which many people also benefit. Heretically asked: can corruption even be considered “functional” in certain situations – or how should the ethical component be assessed?
“Of course it is. Corruption can be functional and make economic sense. The problem addressed here is more of a legal, ethical and political dilemma. In these cases, the “bribe money” does not flow into the budget for schools and hospitals in the respective countries, but is used for private consumption. That is always the case. The money is then missing elsewhere. In Ukraine, for example, on the front line or for infrastructure maintenance. The taxpayer always ends up paying the price.”
What role could AI and data analysis play in uncovering corruption?
“As far as AI is concerned, we are only at the beginning. Data analysis, on the other hand, is already being used extensively. Ultimately, however, it’s more about cases of dishonesty or fraud. Manipulating data is no longer as easy as it was twenty years ago.”
Is digitalization making corruption easier or more difficult overall?
“Our experience is that digitized data develops a certain factuality and is no longer really compared with reality. Once it’s in the system, it stays there. Also, when administrative procedures are digitized, only the formal aspects become part of the workflow. The problem with corruption, however, is the informal agreements that the digital process never reflects.”
Thank you for the interview!
