Corruption in India

Corruption is widespread in India. India is ranked 85 out of 179 countries in Transparency Internationals Corruption Perceptions Index, although its score has improved consistently from 2.7 in 2002 to 3.4 in 2008. Corruption has taken the role of a pervasive aspect of Indian politics and bureaucracy. The economy of India was under socialist-inspired policies for an entire generation from the 1950s until the 1980s. The economy was shackled by extensive regulation, protectionism and public ownership, leading to pervasive corruption and slow growth. A 2005 study done by Transparency International (TI) in India found that more than 50 per cent of the people had first-hand experience of paying bribe or peddling influence to get a job done in a public office. Taxes and bribes are common between state borders; Transparency International estimates that truckers pay annually $5 billion in bribes. Officials often steal state property. In Bihar, more than 80 per cent of the subsidised food aid to poor is stolen.

The world would be a better place without corruption and it does impose a cost on the economy. But the contention, that it is our biggest problem and we need to eliminate it before meaningful change can occur, is not supported by evidence. We need to look beyond the simple answer to figure out what else is holding back economic growth in our country. Just as there are people who believe that overpopulation is our biggest problem, there are others who attribute most of our difficulties to corruption. There is no doubt that corruption is a pervasive and aggravating phenomenon but even a cursory comparative analysis should make one skeptical of the assertion that it is a major cause of our underdevelopment.

Corruption is as much a moral as a development issue. It can distort entire decision- making processes on investment projects and other commercial transactions, and the very social and political fabric of societies. The following are some of the consequences of corruption.

There is a much better grasp today of the extent to which corruption is a symptom of fundamental institutional weaknesses. Instead of tackling such a symptom with narrow intervention designed to “eliminate” it, it is increasingly understood that the approach ought to address a broad set of fundamental institutional determinants. However, the challenge of integrating this understanding with participatory process has barely begun. The implementation of institutional reforms can benefit significantly from the participatory process that is being developed for anti-corruption activities. Equally important, any participatory process, however sophisticated, ought to lead to concrete results beyond enhanced participation and heightened awareness. Thus, identifying key institutional reforms in India, and mobilising support for such reforms, needs to be fully integrated into the participatory process from very early on.