Digitising the Anti-Corruption Sphere:
Taking Stock and Looking Ahead
Draft Paper
Niklas Kossow
PhD Candidate
Hertie School of Governance, Berlin
Prepared for the ECPR General Conference,
Hamburg, Germany
22-25 August 2018
2
Introduction
In 2018, more than half of the world’s population had access to the internet. The number
of mobile broadband subscriptions is rapidly rising (ITU, 2018). This rise of information
and communication technology (ICT) has severely impacted lives around the world- and
developed so fast that the notion of ICT in 2018 almost seems antiquated. Yet, as ICT are
helping to digitise most spheres of our lives, it has for long also influenced anti-corruption
programming around the world. Most new digital technology, such as blockchain1 are
tested for their potential to contribute to the control of corruption. The digitalisation of
anti-corruption is definitely in full steam.
Around the world, NGOs are eager to try new tactics to fight corruption. International
donors similarly seem more than willing to support such projects and contribute to their
documentation (Davies & Fumega, 2014; Kossow & Dykes, 2018). What is clear: The
possibilities offered by ICT in the context of anti-corruption work are manifold. They range
from e-government use to mobilisation using social media or the recently discovered
promises of distributed ledger technology. In academic research, a variety of scholars has
considered the impact that ICT can have in this context. This chapter tries to bring these
varieties of sources together in order to establish a state of the art of what we know about
the use of ICT in anti-corruption. In doing so, it wants to see in how far ICT can be seen as
an effective contributing factor to the control of corruption. The term ICT is used in this
context to encompass all types of digital tools. This starts by internet or telephone access
in itself and ends in fairly specific technology which is increasingly also used in an anti-
corruption context. By presenting the start of the art of previous research, the chapter will
identify gaps in the literature and formulate calls for future research.
What are we looking for?
In order to structure its approach, the chapter will look at research on three distinct
analytical levels to identify respective research questions and approaches.
First, it will look at research establishing a general link between ICT use and the control of
corruption on a macro level. This is to answer questions as to what extent ICT contribute
to the control of corruption. Most previous studies taking this approach are large-n
analysis, looking at corruption levels on a global or regional scale, constructing
correlations to ICT or more specific technologies. This also includes theoretical
1 Also known as distributed ledger technology
3
considerations on the issue and studies linking quantitative evidence to anti-corruption
theory.
Next, the chapter will look at corruption on an organisational level. By what mechanism
do ICT help to reduce corruption? How does it address corruption risks? To what extent
do specific tools change the rules of the game within organisations? The type of studies
analysed in this context are looking at the way specific ICT tools are used, or how
organisations use ICT in an effort to reduce corruption. Organisations can run from state
administrations, to regional or local administrations and even companies that introduce
ICT tools to fight corruption. This thus covers quite a wide range of potential research
questions and this chapter will try to establish which ones have already been answered. It
will group different studies by the type of tools that they look at, following a deductive logic.
Finally, the chapter will also consider research that looks at a micro level. How does ICT
use change individual calculations whether or not to engage in corrupt activities? To what
extent can individual decisions be influenced by offering ICT solutions? Here we expect to
find experimental and qualitative studies, often based on social psychology approaches.
This chapter reviews studies which are specifically focussing on the use of ICT in an anti-
corruption context. Consequently, related studies which do not have corruption in mind
are largely omitted. We will thus not consider, for instance, the growing body of research
looking at social media use for protest mobilisation, unless they specifically look at how
such mobilisation is targeting corruption and contribute to the control of corruption. This
should make a fairly complete review of the state of the art possible. The structure outlines
above should help to paint a comprehensive picture of what we know about the
digitalisation of anti-corruption before looking at what questions are yet left unanswered.
Theoretical approaches and macro-level perspectives
While this chapter will not review general anti-corruption theory and the variations of how
to understand corruption, it will consider the work of scholars who theorize specifically on
the questions as to how and why ICT use relates to corruption levels.
The most widely cited work in this context is an article by Bertot, Jaeger and Grimes
(2010a). They argue that ICT, e-government and social media in particular, can increase
transparency and provide citizens with information to hold governments to account. Their
work consists of a comprehensive review of the literature at the time, discussing if ICT can
create a “culture of transparency.” They see a potential for social media in particular to
have a transformative impact on our society, creating “an atmosphere of openness that
4
identifies and stems corrupt behaviour” (Bertot, Jaeger, & Grimes, Using ICTs to create a
culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption
tools for societies, 2010a, p. 269). With this article, the authors very much reflected the
zeitgeist at the time, optimistic about the impact of technology as a game changer for
transparency and openness. The authors later substantiated this view by analysing projects
and websites through content analysis. While identifying several obstacles to overcome,
they are maintaining a positive view on the potential of ICT and social media to create a
link between citizens and their governments (Bertot, Jaeger, & Grimes, 2012a). Already
several years earlier, Paul Sturges (2004) argued in a similar way. For him, the use of ICT
in government could induce greater transparency, but argue that both political will and a
strong civil society are needed to make the best use of to make it useful for anti-corruption.
Looking at African countries, Schroth and Scharma (2003) argue that technology more
generally, and internet access in particular, could help to fight corruption by providing
information, contributing to education and by helping to coordinate action against
corruption.
Robert Klitgaard also argues that “social media are growing in prominence in the fight
against corruption” (Klitgaard, 2012, p. 56), citing several projects around the world which
are using ICT tools to mobilise citizens. He stresses the importance of cooperation between
civil society actors, the public and state institutions in order to make the best use of such
technologies. Similarly, Mungiu-Pippidi (2013) stresses the potential of social media and
ICT to support collective action against corruption. For her, internet and social media
access help to turn citizens into watchdogs, ready to exert “normative constraints” on
government officials and thus contributing to the control of corruption. She is basing this
also on cross-sectional data from 153 countries, likewise to some of studies reviewed later
on in this chapter.
Several studies can be found looking specifically at the role of e-government for anti-
corruption. Abu-Shanab, Harb and Al-Zoubi (2013) are summarising previous studies and
literature on the issue. Additionally, they collected survey results from Jordanian
university students and teachers to gather their perceptions of e-government as an anti-
corruption tools- finding them to be largely positive. It is questionable, how solid these
results are, given the limited sample size. Yet, the literature they are providing gives some
insight. Makowski (2017), also gives an overview of literature, but with a focus on the
history and development of bureaucracy. To him the use of e-government is a way to open
up governments and enable information sharing: the resulting transparency can help to
control corruption. Markowski thus puts the development of e-government into the
5
tradition of the Weberian bureaucracy. To him, it can make government not only more
open, but also more participatory. In this context he also highlights the role of open data2
for greater transparency, which this chapter will also look at further on. All of the above
authors formulate a call to put the relationship between ICT use and corruption levels on
the research agenda. Yet, over the past 20 years, a considerable body of research
established this relationship and found some causality. To look at this evidence this
chapter will first consider quantitative studies.
Quantitative studies
Internet access
As mentioned in other chapters in this volume, corruption and its control are not easy to
measure. Building macro models trying to derive inference on them thus has to rely on
imperfect measures. While these will not be discussed here, we will discuss the
independent variables used to assess the potential role of ICT in controlling corruption.
DiRienzo et al. (2007) offer a study summarising perspectives on corruption and arguing
that access to information can be a useful tool against it. To measure this, they are building
a cross-sectional model covering 85 countries, using the Transparency International
Corruption Perception Index (CPI) to measure corruption and the Digital Access Index
(DAI) to measure access to information. This index measures access to fixed and mobile
telephones and internet, quality of ICT services, the actually usage of internet and
education, thus providing a measure that goes beyond only access but including use of
information. DiRienzo et al. found this measure to be positively correlated to lower levels
of corruption in the presence of several controls. They are supplementing this analysis by
a cluster analysis, showing a global pattern. Their paper, while still being fairly basic, gave
early indications that ICT access has a positive influence on the control of corruption. A
similar analysis is put together by Garcia-Murillo (2009). Pointing at the complexity of
corruption as a topic for analysis, she puts together a cross-sectional model taking into
account economic, political and technological factors and argues that internet and
information access “can support democratisation efforts, law enforcement, investment,
and education” (Garcia-Murillo, 2009, p. 28). Through these mechanisms, they can help
to control corruption. The analysis provided covers 170 countries and uses a cross section
weighted least squares regression, with the per capita income serving as weight. Garcia-
Murillo finds internet access (as measured by the number of users and the number of
2 Open data in this context refers to data that is freely available, machine readable and in an open format (Open Knowledge International, 2018). In the context of this paper it refers to as open government data.
6
internet hosts) to be significantly correlated with corruption levels. However, her model
remains fairly basic and, even though she does control for population size, it is
questionable that she uses the total number of internet users as a variable in her regression
analysis.
A slightly more nuanced approach is taken by Lio, Liu & Ou (2011). They are providing
evidence derived from a dynamic panel model, covering 70 countries between 1998 and
2005. Here, they are regressing internet adoption on the CPI, including several controls.
Employing a granger causality test they find internet adoption not only positively
correlated with the CPI, but also showing a causality between the two. However, the
causality found runs both ways- the effect that Lio, Liu and Ou are showing is rather small.
They argue that the internet’s potential to control corruption can be identified but is not
yet fully realised. A panel analysis is also provided by Bailard (2009) who is looking at the
question if mobile phone diffusion is positively correlated with the control of corruption.
Her parsimonious fixed-effect panel model relies on data from 46 African countries
between 1999 and 2006. It finds a strong negative correlation between the CPI and mobile
phone penetration. Bailard substantiates this result by also providing analysis of a country-
level analysis. Using survey data from the Afrobarometer as a measure for perceived
corruption, she finds higher mobile phone penetration in different regions in Namibia
significantly correlated with lower perception of corruption.
In some of these contributions, it is also noted that while correlation between internet
access and lower corruption levels seems to be established, the direction of the causation
is not so clearly defined (Bailard, 2009; Lio, Liu, & Ou, 2011). This argument is also made
by Charoensukmongkol & Moqbel (2014). They are running an OLS regression with panel
data from 42 countries observed between 2003 and 2007. Rather than focussing on
internet access, they are looking at investment in IT infrastructure, as provided by the
World Development Indicator database. They find a significant correlation between IT
investment and the CPI; however, it is presented as a u-curve: IT investment can lower
corruption up to a certain point, but overinvestment might even increase corruption. This
is persistent with perspectives that available resources lead to opportunities for corruption.
Also, it needs to be pointed out that the study by Charoensukmongkol & Moqbel has several
shortcomings with regards to data reliability and the fact that higher IT investment does
not mean that people are using IT infrastructure, let alone for the control of corruption.
Another interesting approach is taken by Andersen et al. (2011). They argue for a causal
relationship between changes in internet diffusion and the control of corruption. They are
doing so by providing an instrumental variable (IV) analysis, using lightning as an
7
instrument for internet diffusion. Lightning strike happens to be correlated with
corruption, but has a causal correlation with internet diffusion, since repair works are
more often done where lightning strikes and thus internet diffusions happens faster in this
area. While the authors are succesful in establishing this significant link, they do theorise
about a mechanism linking corruption levels and internet diffusion. Such mechanism is
very clearly provided by Goel, Nelsen & Naretta (2012). Using a dataset compiled of
internet searches about respective countries and “corruption” or “bribery” they are using
these as an indicator for corruption awareness. In several cross-sectional anaylses they are
regressing these on corruption indices, adding several controls. Their analysis shows fairly
robust and significant results, suggesting that more internet searches correlate with lower
corruption levels. The authors are linking this to work arguing that press freedom also has
a positive impact on the control of corruption. In a working paper, Nichols Sorak makes a
similar point, arguing that “the internet has the potential to act as a new form of press
freedom” (Sorak, 2016, p. 57). He argues in particular that online censorship will thus limit
the effect of internet access on the control of corurption, showing initial evidence in
multiple OLS regressions with n = 144. His analysis adds an interesting angle to this
debate, namely showing that internet access is often moderated by other factors with
censorship naturally being an important one.
E-government access
Internet and mobile communication are, as Andersen et al. (2011) also highlight, multi-
purpose technologies. They are affecting almost all areas of our lives, all strands of business
and, potentially, governance. As such, identifying the mechanism as to how they contribute
to the control of corruption is difficult. Starke, Naab & Scherer (2016) are looking at this
question from three perspectives: media freedom, internet access and e-government, with
the latter measured by the Online Service Index of the UN e-government survey. They are
running hierarchical OLS modes at three data points (2003, 2008, 2013). They find all
three factors to be significant in reducing corruption. The effect of internet access stays
constant over time, whereas they find that the effect of e-government increased
significantly between 2003 and 2013. Their work followed several other quantitative
studies that have looked specifically at the use of e-government and how it contributes to
controlling corruption.
Shim & Eom (2008) are testing this relationship using a score on e-government based on
a review of government website provided by Darrell West, as well as the UN e-participation
index that also measures if e-government stimulates deliberation between government and
citizens. Regressing these measures on the CPI, Shim & Eom are building a parsimonious
8
model that supports the hypothesis that e-government use is negatively correlated with
perceived corruption. They argue that its use reduces the discretion of civil servants by
removing decision-making powers and increasing the possibility to be monitored through
the internal collection of data. Additionally, they contend that ICT increases transparency
and enables the public to monitor public officials. In a later paper, Shim & Eom (2009)
investigate these ideas further. In this paper they are relying again on the UN e-
participation sore, but also on the UN e-government effectiveness score and internet
penetration. Additionally they are adding results from the World Value Survey to measure
social capital, specifically trust, social norms and participation in voluntary activities. Due
to data availability, their cross-section only relies on 57 to 128 cases, depending in
specification. They find that e-government and ICT, as well as social capital are “major
factors to reduce corruption” (Shim & Eom, 2009, p. 112), but that the relationship
between social capital and ICT is inconclusive. Interesting result from an econometric
perspective are delivered by Andersen (2009). He also uses West’s e-government index,but
regresses it on the Worldwide Government Indicator on the control of corruption.
Andersen tests the change in the control of corruption between 1996 and 2006 and finds
it positively correlated with better e-government scores. He also tests several instruments
which confirms his analysis: e-government proofs to be an important factor in supporting
the control of corruption, however, only in the context of non-OECD countries.
Kim (2014) is also using the CPI and the UN e-government development index to show the
impact of e-government on corruption levels. In a pooled OLS model, the analysis
presented here covers up to 190 countries between 2005 and 2007. Interestingly it
introduces the notion of rule of law3 as a decisive factor in controlling corruption. Kim
argues that e-government is more effective in contributing to the control of corruption, if
applied in a setting with effective bureaucracy and the rule of law. Choi (2014) uses data
from the UN e-government index to estimate e-government anti-corruption effects.
However, in this paper three dimensions of the index are taken into account separately:
online service provision, telecommunication infrastructure and human capital, meaning
the ability to use online tools effectively. In a cross-sectional analysis, based on data from
2010 covering 140 countries, Choi finds a positive correlation of all three dimensions of e-
government on the control of corruption, both individually and collectively. The paper
concludes that e-government can be effective against corruption but should be focussed on
areas in which corruption is pervasive. Similar results are presented by Nam (2018).
3 Kim uses data from the World Wide Governance indicators to estimate the rule of law- this can be seen as problematic since these indicators are collinear with the CPI.
9
Analysing regression results including the UN e-government survey and data on national
cultures, Nam finds that e-government can be effective in controlling corruption, but this
effect is often mitigated by national culture.
Quite widely cited is Elbahnasawy (2014) who provides evidence from a large panel
dataset. His data covers 160 countries during the period of 1995 to 2009. He runs a variety
of panel data models, including dynamic models. His results show that e-government
reduces corruption across all models and proof to be fairly robust, including causality tests
that e-government reduces corruption without reverse causality. However, his tests
confirm previous findings that causality between internet adoption and corruption runs
both ways. Another interesting study is provided by Garcia-Murillo (2013). Her analysis
gives evidence based in a global panel data set covering 208 countries over 6 years. It looks
at the influence of a government’s “web presence” on the control of corruption, as measure
by the UN E-government Readiness Survey. Garcia-Murillo derives an index based on the
survey. Using a fixed-effects model she finds strong evidence for a positive relationship
between a higher government web presence and a better control of corruption and grounds
these findings in anti-corruption theory. The paper also gives some indication on potential
mechanisms based on a short case-study description, arguing that the introduction of ICT
based system contributed to a cultural change in the context of government procurement
in Peru.
Social media
Beyond e-government, several of the above-mentioned scholars have suggested that the
use of social media is an important contributing factor to the power of ICT in controlling
corruption. It argued that social media helps citizens organise and share information and
manages to build a connection between government officials and citizens. Several studies
have also tried to investigate this fact empirically.
Mungiu-Pippidi & Dadašov (2016) are suggesting social media as one variable contributing
to their Index of Public Integrity. Together with internet access, they are using the number
of Facebook users per country as percentage of the population “as a proxy for collective
action” (Mungiu-Pippidi & Dadašov, 2016, p. 434). The resulting variable, titled “e-
citizenship”, is found to positively correlated with the control of corruption. They argue
that online tools, and social media in particular, empower citizens to exert social
accountability. They also test this by introducing interaction terms between “e-citizenship”
and press freedom, as well as “e-citizenship” and budget transparency respectively. Their
results show these variables have significant positive effect on the control of corruption.
10
This supports the argument that social media can support citizens in holding governments
to account. Analysis provided by (Jha & Sarangi (2017) also supports this argument.
Building cross-sectional OLS models using data from over 150 countries, they show that
internet access and Facebook penetration are positively correlated with the control of
corruption. They are further running falsification tests, precluding potential bias from
omitted variable. Furthermore, Jha & Sarangi argue that press freedom and Facebook
penetration have complimentary effects, with their data suggesting that Facebook use has
a stronger effect on the control of corruption where press freedom is weak.
Another quantitative study in this context is put forward by Kossow & Kukutschka (2017).
Also relying on data on internet access (internet users and broadband subscriptions) and
the percentage Facebook users in the population, they are constructing an Online
Connectivity Index. In a series of OLS models covering 154 countries they show this index
to be positively correlated with the control of corruption. Their argument, however, goes
further. By including data on civil society strength, they show that civil society and online
connectivity are not only both positively influencing the control of corruption but are also
reinforcing their effect. Kossow & Kukutschka are presenting marginal effects to show that
online connectivity can serve as a tool for civil society. It is only truly effective against
corruption if an active civil society is present to use online tools to hold governments to
account. Their analysis is, however, making a strong case for the importance of social
media in this context.
What have we learned so far?
Looking back at the last 10-15 years, a considerable body of research has established a
correlation between higher ICT access and a better control of corruption. Even with limited
data availability, various types of quantitative studies give evidence for this relationship.
Given the causality tests run by studies based on panel data, and attempts to introduce IV
analysis, we can also assume a causal relationship running from higher ICT access to better
control of corruption. There is some indication that there might be some reverse causality
in the context of internet access, potentially in relationship to infrastructure spending.
Similar to internet access, there is also evidence for mobile phone access contributing
positively to the control of corruption.
Furthermore, scholars clearly showed that e-government application play a crucial role in
this context. Their provision and use have been shown to be a positive factor in the control
of corruption, both through the provision of data and through more efficient processes.
Social media seems to be another avenue by which ICT contribute to the control of
11
corruption. While this general relationship seems to be established, the exact mechanism
as to how social media support the fight against corruption are not yet clear from the
review of quantitative studies. However, the research reviewed thus far show that there are
important complimentary effects and interdependencies between ICT access and other
contributing factors to the control of corruption, such as budget transparency, press
freedom or civil society engagement.
Studies on an organisational level
In the following, this chapter will now change its level of analysis and consider meso-level
research. It will thus look at analyses of specific projects, programs or tools which were
used on various levels of administration as a means to fight corruption. In this context this
can thus cover specific countries, branches of public administration or specific tools and
how they were used in a variety of contexts. A key question is asked by Recanatini, Prati &
Tabellini (2005): why are some public agencies less corrupt than others? Based on surveys
with employees working in public agencies in eight different countries, as well as
households or firm using the services of the agency they derived agency features which are
associated with less corruption. Amongst them were regular external and internal audits,
as well as open and transparent procedures- two key points which are associated with e-
government.
This section will be divided into four parts, according to different mechanisms by which
ICT tools contribute to the control of corruption:
• E-government: the digitalisation of government services reduces opportunities for
corruption and support internal and external monitoring mechanisms;
• Downward transparency: providing government data to citizens through
transparency platforms or open data portals can help civil society and citizens to
hold governments to account;
• Upward transparency: providing citizen data or data from local government offices
to the government can help to identify corruption risks or to prosecute specific cases
of corruption;
• Mobilisation: bringing together citizens through information platforms and social
media can both help in disseminating norms and anti-corruption principles, and
support to build a critical mass of citizens to provide social accountability.
12
This approach, also taken by Kossow & Dykes (2018) will help to structure the body of
largely qualitative research that is trying to assess the relationship between ICT and anti-
corruption on a meso level.
E-government
A very widely cited case is the OPEN4 system which was introduced in Seoul in 1999. The
system helps citizens to track public procedures, such as applications for construction
permits, through an online system. In this process, procedures were also standardised and
in many cases published, so that citizens can review decisions by public officials. Kim, Kim
& Lee (2009) present OPEN as an anti-corruption, based on survey data, qualitative
interview and internal and external assessments. They are identifying three mechanisms
how OPEN helped to fight corruption:
1. Normative mechanisms: The system created an expectation and demand for better
availability of information on public procedures. The introduction of the system led
to citizens expecting efficient and transparent service. This was supported by the
fact that the system was introduced after a series of corruption scandals. It lead to
both better access to information and empowerment of citizens.
2. Regulatory mechanisms: The administrative setup of Seoul Metropolitan
Government was adjusted to the system- OPEN was managed by the Audit Bureau
which had the power to take regulative measures to counter resistance of civil
servants unwilling to use the system. Since the Audit Bureau could track decisions
and follow feedback mechanisms, the system led to better enforcement. It also
helped the prevention of corruption through standardisation, simplification and
de-personification of procedures.
3. Resources and training: public officials were systematically trained to use the
system, thus leading to capacity building and awareness about corruption
Kim, Kim & Lee additionally stress the importance of political will and the leadership of
the Seoul mayor who strongly supported the introduction of the system which later on was
adopted in nationwide in a slightly adjusted form. The OPEN case study confirms some of
the theories on e-government use which were outlined above and was also documented by
Choi & Ahn (2001) and Iqbal & Seo (2008), as well as several reports by international
organisations.
4 Online Procedures ENhancement for civil application.
13
The OPEN case inspired many governments and researchers and led to a number of
speculative studies on the potential of e-government ot reduce corruption in a specific
setting. Nurunnabi & Ullah (2009) and Seo & Mehedi (2016), are considering the case of
Bangladesh. Both are stating corruption in public administration as a problem for
Bangladesh and are describing the efforts of the government to introduce e-government
applications. However, their articles demonstrate that while public offices were
computerised, the introduction of e-government fell short due to poor IT infrastructure
and lack of political commitments. So far, e-government could not contribute to anti-
corruption in Bangladesh.
Based on survey results, Pathak et al. (2009) analysed the potential for e-government in
reducing corruption in Fiji. Looking at citizens’ perceptions of corruption as expressed in
surveys, they argue that the introduction of e-government services could reduce red-tape
and lead to greater access to information and social accountability, and thus support the
fight against corruption. The authros also note, however, that Fiji’s IT infrastructure is
weak and considerable efforts would be needed to introduce e-government applications.
Similar results were found in a study carried out in Ehtiopia. Pathak et al. (2007) also
found considerable potenital for e-government to reduce corruption, especially as it could
improve trust between governments and citizens. The results of these two studies are also
presented in a paper comparing the two cases (Pathak, Singh, Belwal, Naz, & Smith, 2008).
The same researchers saw their results confirmed by survey data from India (Pathak &
Prasad, 2006), even though highlighting that the citizen-government relationship seems
to be comparatively more important in Ethiopia (Singh, Pathak, Belwal, & Naz, 2010). A
similar, but less professionally conducted study in Nigeria also argued that ICT could be
used to curb corruption in the country, but that political will to introduce it might be low
(Eddy & Akpan, 2008). The results of these studies should be taken with a grain of salt,
since the survey results which are presented could be questioned due to endogeneity. Even
more questionnable is the approach by Hasani & Beleraj (2013) who only present plans
taken by the Albanian government to introduce e-governmet in order to show that this
might provide a tool against corruptoin, without substantiating this claim.
Sheryazdanova & Butterfield (Sheryazdanova & Butterfield, 2017) are providing a
preliminary analysis of the e-government system introduced in Kazakhstan. The country
made a concerted effort to introduce e-service, starting in 2004, and was recognised as
making considerable progress in the UN E-Government Development Index. Several
government services can by now be handled online, including business registration, license
and permit applications and public procurment. Kazakhastan introduced so-called one-
14
stop shop public service centres in 2007, rolling out over 300 by 2015. These are service
centres in which citizens can acccess digital government services, including tax payments.
Sheryazdanova & Butterfield base their analyse only on secondary sources. However, they
do show that the e-government initaitive is fairly successful in limiting contact between
citizens and public officials. Where e-services were introduced, Kazakhstan showed
advances in the World Bank’s Doing Business Index. They conclude that e-government
does not address the entrenched high-level corruption in the country, but was successful
in lowering petty corruption.
An interesting study is provided by Prasad & Shivarajan (2015). Based on a survey of 101
managers of domestic and multinational companies in India, they are developing a
transaction cost approach to the applicability of e-government as an anti-corruption tool.
They argue that e-government can reduce corruption by providing information (and thus
reducing uncertainty resulting from information assymetries) and by reducing the need
for face-to-face interaction between public officials and managers. They also review Indian
government websites and find them to lack in interactivity.
E-procurement
A subset of e-government applications that have been subject to anti-corruption research
is the field of public procurement. Within the OECD, government procurement amount on
average to 29.1% of all state spending; as such, it is a big resource for corruption. The OECD
notes that an increasing number of its member states are introducing e-procurement
systems, “enabling more open, innovative and trustworthy government” (OECD, 2017, p.
175). These benefits of e-procurement are also highlighted by Neupane, Soar, & Vaidya
(2012a). They are looking at corruption in the procurement through a principal-agent
approach and are analysing risk factors in relation to different stakeholders. Citing several
case studies they argue that e-procurement can reduce information asymmetries, power
monopolies and opportunities for corruption.
Similarly to e-government, the Republic of Korea is a widely cited case study in reference
to e-procurement. The country’s Government e-Procurement System (GePS)5 was already
introduced in 2002 and soon after handled 80% of its bidding processes. The system
enables transparency in the procurement process and competitive bidding. It minimises
face-to-face interactions between public servants and bidders (Iqbal & Seo, 2008). A recent
OECD (2016) report on the system also highlights this and notes that the system “greatly
expanded” transparency in the procurement process. E-procurement is also argued to
5 Also titled KONEPS- Korean ON-line E-Procurement System
15
create efficiency gains, as Singer et al. (2009) demonstrate in reference to the case of Chile.
Showing that it reduces corruption is, however, much more difficult. However, using data
gained through digital procurement should make measuring corruption in this context a
possibility, as Fazekas, Tóth, & King (2016) show with their suggestion of a corruption risk
index based on procurement data.
Rotchanakitumnuai (2013) presents research on the Thai e-procurement system which
includes procurement auctions. The paper is based on a survey among 169 procurement
professionals that was followed up by interviews with two respondents. While this data
base seems a bit thin, some interesting conclusions are drawn from the Thai case: despite
the e-procurement system, interactions between vendors and service providers are still
commonplace and offer opportunities for corruption. The authors stress that a strict
enforcement of rules is needed to truly limit corruption in procurement processes. This
finding implies that greater transparency in the procurement process does not always
mean less corruption. Coppier & Piga (2006) share this view in reference to game
theoretical models. They argue that “countries where corruption is more pervasive and less
easy to eradicate will stop short of implementing the level of transparency in procurement
that would dissolve corruption” (ibid., p. 203). However, they also say that e-procurement
might change this as transparency becomes less costly and makes it easier to involve
citizens in monitoring procurement. In a working paper on an unnamed Asian country,
Tran (2008) presents data from a firm that imports electronics to this country. The author
analysed 562 contracts between the firm and its government buyers, all but three of which
involved a bribe (hence the anonymity). Despite the paper not being fully developed in peer
review, the results are interesting. Looking at the e-procurement auction process that the
government introduced, Tran finds that best-value auctions did not reduce corruption.
However, later introduced best-price auctions significantly reduced corruption since they
gave public officials less discretion on who to award the contract to.
Based on a survey conducted among Nepalese public officials, Neupane, Soar, & Vaidya
(2012b) analysed why e-procurement is perceived as useful in the context of a developing
country like Nepal. They find that potential benefits – including ease of use and increased
trust between government and those bidding for public contracts – are likely to contribute
to the control of corruption. However, their study remains highly speculative, since it is
based on civil servants’ perceptions on a system that wasn’t yet introduced. Also slightly
speculative is the study provided by Habtemchael & Cloete (2009)who based their analysis
on the role of ICT in anti-corruption in South Africa on 15 expert interviews, as well as on
the review of government documents. They conlude that corruption has to be addressed in
16
a more systemic way and that the e-government applications South Africa were not
integrated and up-to-date enough to make a difference in the fight against corruption. In
particular they criticse the lack of an e-procurement system due to increased corruption in
this context.
Downward transparency
ICT inducing downward transparency aims at providing information from the government
to citizens, civil society organisations or the private sector. They can use this information
to hold the government to account. Generally speaking we can see two types of tools using
this mechanism: transparency or open data portals and citizen outreach tools, such as
specific websites or social media applications.
Transparency/open data platforms
Joel Gurin (2014) looks at the provision of open data from a conceptual perspective. He
highlights that thus far the main efforts in publishing government data in open formats
were concentrated in the United States and the United Kingdom, as well as other developed
nations. However, he stresses the potential of open data in development and writes that
“open data can boost economic development, improve trust in government, and fight
corruption” (Gurin, 2014, p. 72). Generally, we can witness a perspective that these types
of portals such contribute to greater transparency and thus support the fight against
corruption (Gray, 2016; Lourenço, Piotrowski, & Ingrams, 2017). However, so far there is
little empirical evidence to support this claim.
Some research in this context was done in Latin America. In a conference paper (Matheus,
Vaz, & Ribeiro (2011) are comparing different transparency portals in 16 countries in the
region. Thereby the highlight the potential of these portals to contribute to transparency
and anti-corruption efforts by promoting “social control of public administration” (ibid.,
p.27). They warn of the digital divide that might cause an issue for these effects but are also
stressing that there still is a lot of room for development. In a paper based on the same
research, Matheus et al. (2012) explore online monitoring systems of Brazilian court of
accounts. They are exploring the websites of all courts of accounts to map the existence of
transparency portals that show characteristics of an anti-corruption tool. They find that
online few online tools provided by courts of accounts show proper characteristics of an
anti-corruption portal. Despite this and other challenges, portals contribute to increasing
transparency in this context. Yet, Matheus et al. fall short of giving an analysis in how far
the presence of these portals actually contributed to decreased corruption within the courts
of account.
17
An interesting perspective on this question comes from Murillo (2015). Looking at Latin
American transparency portal from a principal-agent perspective, he tries to assess if these
portals are successfully reducing information asymmetries between the agent and the
principal. For this purpose, he develops a data openness index (DOI) for 16 Latin American
countries, that takes into account legislation, as well as specific indicators assessing the
provision and availability of data. Murillo finds reasonably decent data availability in many
cases, but in no cases the data was relevant or accessible enough to affect areas in which
inefficiencies or corruption are generally present. While data availability thus has the
potential to reduce information asymmetries and thus contribute to better control of
corruption, this does show itself in the Latin American cases.
This case study gives a fairly gloomy picture on the potential of open data and transparency
portals as an anti-corruption tool. However, it mainly points out that, at least in Latin
America, these portals fail due to bad implementation. Yet, there is still a need for more
research into how effective downward transparency can to support the control of
corruption and what circumstances make it effective or not. This also depends on how
governments will look at open data in the future. Sieber & Johnson (2015) outline four
different models along which government data publication could develop in the future. It
would be interesting to see if and how this will affect the anti-corruption movement.
Government outreach
Some more research is available on the use of outreach tools by different levels of
governments. Bertot et al. (2010b) are showing how several governmental agencies in the
US embrace social media for citizen outreach already prior to 2010. They stress that to
make these media a useful tool in creating more transparent and open government, they
also need to properly used, for instance, through participation in governance processes. A
related paper argues that social media use by governments depends on underlying policies
which often have not been adapted to provide for the use of social media in government.
Looking at the legislative framework in the United States it is argued that some policies
need to be examined and potentially adjusted (Bertot, Jaeger, & Hansen, 2012b). While
not talking about its anti-corruption potential, Magro (2012) also stresses the need for
change in policy and governance culture if social media are supposed to be a successful
addition to e-government efforts.
Bonsón et al. (2012) are providing an analysis of social media use by EU local governments.
Looking at a sample of 75 local governments in the 15 first EU member states, they
evaluated both government websites and publications, as well as their social media
18
channels. From these data sources they derived a “Sophistication Index” that ranks local
governments according to 13 binary data points. Analysing the data, they found that overall
local governments use social media for sharing information with citizens and thus to create
greater transparency. However, they did not find increase citizen to government exchange
through the use of social media and concluded that “it does not seem feasible that Web 2.0
tools are going to lead, for the moment, to a significant revolution in government-to-citizen
relationships” (Bonsón et al., 2012, p. 131). In a later study, Bonsón, Royo, & Ratkai (2015)
analyse the content of local government posts on Facebook and put it in the context of e-
government and different styles of public administration. While they found that posts and
citizens’ reactions depend on the type of public administration, they also found overall that
local governments do not make full use of the possibilities offered by social media. Citizen
participation and potential direct links between governments and citizens are not fully
realised, mainly due to content which often is marketing related. They cannot find clear
evidence about Facebook as a communication channel changing the relationship between
government and citizens.
As it was already pointed out, measuring corruption is difficult and the impact that certain
policies have on corruption is thus equally hard to grasp. Song & Lee (2016), however,
provide some related evidence. Based on survey results on US citizens published by the
Pew Research centre, they look at how social media interaction of citizens with
governments influenced their opinion on the government itself. Their results suggest “that
social media in government enable citizens to gain easier access to government and be
more informed about current events, policies, or programs, heightening their perception
of transparency in government” (Song & Lee, 2016, p. 443). However, they also find that
trust in government only increases if social media are actually used to increased
transparency and participation. Perceptions of transparency significantly mediate effects
of social media on trust. In a study looking at citizens’ perceptions of local governments in
Mexico, Valle-Cruz, Sandoval-Almazan, & Gil-Garcia (2016) analyse survey data. They find
that citizen perception of transparency, efficiency and corruption can be improved by
governments use of technology. Specifically, the authors argue that websites, Twitter and
use of mobile technologies are strongly associated with better citizen perceptions.
Upward transparency
Another way of engaging citizens against corruption is through tools supporting upward
transparency, so the transfer of information from citizens to different levels of government
or from lower-ranked public officials to their superiors. In this context there are several
19
studies that looked at the use of crowdsourcing6 in anti-corruption. Additionally, the use
of whistleblowing tools also contributes to upward transparency
Crowdsourcing
The most widely known corruption reporting tools using crowdsourcing is
IPaidABribe.com, based in India. It gives citizens the opportunity to anonymously report
corruption and are displaying reports on their website. Janaagraha, the organisation
behind the website, also provides analysis based on all reports. They also give the
possibility for citizens to wave their anonymity, so the organisation can follow up on
reports. Citizens also have the possibility to report honest oficials. In India,
IPaidABribe.com is seen as a success story since it managed to engage a large amount of
people. An interesting case study is provided by Ang (2014) who looks at why the project
was sucesssful in India, but failed when it was introduced in China. She attributes the
failure not only to direct restraints on the functioning of the website (i.e. censorship), but
also to indirect restraints like libel, failure to organise and undermining the discourse
advanced by the project. The rules keeping the NGO that tried to establish the project from
professionalising and from self-organising were a key part in this failure. Ang’s study also
shows that that the mere privision of a tool is not enough: it needs an organisation to back
it up.
To assess how effective this type of project can be, Ryvkin, Serra, & Tremewan (2017)
provide insight from bribe-paying experiments. They find that in its current form, a system
like IPaidABribe.com does not reduce demand for bribes on the side of public officials.
Demand is only significantly decreased if the system demands specific information about
reported offices and is only available to citizens. This is currently not the case for
IPaidABribe which does not report on specific location of government offices that
demanded bribes. To Ryvkin, Serra and Tremewan the fat that IPaidABribe in its current
form is not very effective is not surprising since, as they write, it was not intended as tool
to fight corruption, but rather to raise awareness.
Hellström & Bocast (2013) are considering at the Ugandan project “Not In My Country”
which is a tool soliciting reports on bribes from Ugandan university students. The authors
found that while the project gained recognition among students, very few actually reported
bribes. Based on a survey and a focus group, they argue that motive alignment is key in
ensuring crowdsourcing success: students were often themselves benefitting from corrupt
practices and thus had no motive to report bribery cases – even if they were in principle
6 Acquiring resources by engaging a large and open group of individuals, mostly internet users.
20
supporting anti-corruption ideals. In a conference paper, Mittal & Rubin (2012) present
results from a survey on a newly established tool called Bribecaster. Their paper talks
about the technical implementation of the tool, using the survey to argue for its usefulness.
It does not, however, address the practical merits of this crowdsourcing tool.
Looking at the case of the Phillipines, San Juan & Resurreccion (2015) are making an
argument for crowdsourcing based in principal-agent theory. They propose that
crowdsourcing tools have the ability to engage the public (as the principal) in direct
participation and thus help to ensure that governments (as the agent) fulfil their mandates.
Also, looking at anti-corruption theory is an interesting paper on crowdsourcing anti-
corruption tools by Dieter Zinnbauer (2015). Looking at several implementations of these
tools, he brings in the perspective of corruption as a collective action problem. Zinnbauer
is looking for answers in why many of these platforms experience a slow uptake. He finds
this in the design of many platforms, which often does not focus on solutions. The article
gives several suggestions on how crowdsourcing platforms could look like in the future and
how they could be more successful. Suggestions on the future of crowdsourcing in anti-
corruption also comes from Noveck et al. (2018). In a report for the Interamerican
Development Bank they lay out an approach they title smart crowdsourcing. They suggest
thirteen data and technology-based solutions to six distinct policy problems. This also
relies heavily on engaging the public in anti-corruption efforts by various means.
Whistleblowing
Noveck et al. (2018) also highlight the importance of online whistleblowing systems in the
context of anti-corruption strategies. These are said to be more secure and thus could
encourage whistleblowers to come forward and report corruption. Academic evidence for
this is, however, quite rare.
Apaza & Chang (2011) are comparing the two cases from Peru and South Korea to see if
whistleblowing was an effective tool. In both cases they noted a need for whistleblower
protection and a better system to make sure cases of whistleblowing are followed up on
and lead to proper investigations with regards to corruption. However, the mechanism
they look at are internal whistleblowing systems and media reporting. They do not refer to
online whistleblowing tools which have the advantage that they can be anonymous and
thus protect those who are blowing the whistle. This particular aspect was, however,
considered by Asiimwe, Wakabi, & Grönlund (2013). They are looking at two case studies
from Uganda where ICT tools were used to encourage whistleblowing based on interviews
and focus group discussions. They argue that users were more likely to report corruption
21
thanks to the efficiency of the systems and the ease of use. However, lack of ICT skills and
mistrust in officers handling complaints were issues deterring reports. Overall the study
does not derive inference on whether or not ICT whistleblowing mechanism lead to a better
control of corruption. ICT seems nonetheless provide a more efficient means to encourage
whistleblowing.
Mobilisation
The final groups of tool that this chapter is looking at is those aiming at mobilising citizens
against corruption. This can on the one hand be news reporting websites providing
information on corruption related issues and on the hand be social media tools, including
different types of social networks and blogs.
An interesting case study in this context is Russia. Known for being a country struggling
with high levels of corruption, Russia has also seen a particularly active online sphere with
many citizens being users of social networks and an unusually active sphere of web blogs.
Alexanyan et al. (2012) present results from a three-year research project analysing the
Russian internet. They found several examples of collective action that was inspired by
online movements, as well as a public sphere based around blogs. In this context they
found several examples where cases of corruption caused a strong online response. Their
paper, of course, was written in 2012 already and the Russian online sphere has changed
since. Nevertheless, in recent paper Enikolopov, Petrova, & Sonin (2018) present highly
interesting results from analysis on Russian social media data. Specifically, they analyse
blogposts about corruption in Russian state-controlled companies, published by blogger
Alexey Navalny. Navalny runs a crowdsourcing project gathering information from
minority shareholders of Russian state-controlled companies and publishes information
on his LiveJournal blog. Enikolopov, Petrova, & Sonin analysed blogposts between 2008
and 2011 and looked at their effects on the companies they covered. They are able to show
a direct link between stock price changes and staff turnover at these companies. Blogposts
reporting on corruption have a direct negative effect on stock prices. They also find the
indirect effect of blogposts being associated with higher staff turnover and less conflicts
with minority shareholders in those companies that were covered in specific posts. They
are thus associated with “increased accountability within state-controlled companies” and
the researchers conclude that “social media can improve the quality of governance in
places that need it the most.” (Enikolopov, Petrova, & Sonin, 2018, p. 171)
An analysis of an online anti-corruption campaign using social media is provided in a
conference paper by Breuer & Farooq (2012). Through survey results, they are considering
22
if citizens who participate in online campaigns are more likely to get politically engaged
otherwise. They do so by examle of the Brazilian anti-corruption campaign Ficha Limpa.
Breuer & Farooq are weary to call the campaign successful on a policy level. However, they
higlight that the use of online campaigns was efficient and cost-effective. Individuals did
not seem to become more politically active after participating in the generalised campaign.
However, having taken part in a more targetted campaigns seesm to be associated with
people taking “offline” political action. Social media can, however, also influence the policy
agenda by setting the agenda of traditional media. Writing about the 2011 Indian anti-
corruption movement and its leader Anna Hazare, Rodrigues (2014) argues that the
movement started on social media and through online activism successfully managed to
push the issue on the agenda of the media and thus into the policy space.
Micro-level studies
Having considered studies that look at the use of ICT in controlling corruption on a meso-
level, we see that there are still several gaps in the literature. These will be outlined further
below. Before, this chapter will look at the limited amount of studies which can be found
looking at the micro-level, namely individual motivations affecting corruption. Those type
of studies are often based on experiments. As such they often make reference to social
psychology in trying to figure out motivations to engage in corruption or not. However,
very few of these studies have looked specifically at ICT use and how it affects individual
motivation to engage in corruption.
Interesting research is presented by Köbis, Carter & Starke (2018) who stress that
corruption always depends on social norms held by individuals (and also collectively).
Differentiating between descriptive norms (describing the frequency of corruption acts)
and injunctive norms (describing their permissibility), they are considering different
avenues of how these norms are shaped. Thereby they stress the role of the media, as well
as collective efforts to change norms. Considering some of the research that was outlined
earlier in this paper, we can see how ICT, and social media in particular, can contribute to
changing social norms on corruption. But, how does the empirical evidence look in this
context?
Some evidence, as mentioned above, is provided by Ryvkin, Serra, & Tremewan (2017) who
argued that platforms like IPaidABribe in their current form do not serve as a deterrent for
officials to not demand bribes. Several studies using experimental settings to analyse
behaviour in the context of bribe paying where also conducted with a focus on public
procurement. Tkachenko, Yakovlev, & Rodionova (2017) are presenting results from a
23
natural experiment in the context of a large Russian public sector organisation. The
organisation changed its procurement rules and introduced increased monitoring.
Analysing procurement data before and after the change, the authors argue that
procurement proceures and especially stricter monitoring can indeed improve
procurement efficiency.
Looking ahead: what have we learned and where are the
gaps?
This chapter presented a rich amount of studies that look at the use of information and
communication technology in anti-corruption. Clearly, the digitalisation of the anti-
corruption sphere is already well advanced. Researchers have made considerable efforts to
grasp the effect of different ICTs that were used in anti-corruption contexts. Our review of
macro-level studies showed that there clearly is a link between higher ICT access and use
and a better control of corruption. This is particularly the case for internet access generally,
the use of e-government and social media connectivity.
Reviewing a large number of organisational-level studies allowed use to boil this down to
four type of tools that use different mechanisms by which ICT contribute to the control of
corruption: e-government, downward transparency, upward transparency and
mobilisation. These case studies give some indication why and in what way ICT tools were
able to support better control of corruption:
• E-government: the digitalisation of government services can reduce corruption by
removing opportunities of public officials to extort bribes, through decreased face-
to-face interaction. Since e-government also provides for more accurate paperwork
that is easier to follow up, it can introduce additional means of accountability. By
making government processes more efficient, e-government can also result in less
red tape and thus also less opportunities for corruption. Public procurement can be
seen as particular area of interest in which digitalisation can make a difference in
the fight against corruption. Some case studies showed efficiency gains and
decreasing corruption after the introduction of e-procurement systems.
• Downward transparency: reducing information asymmetries and providing better
access to data was often hailed as a major contribution of ICT tools. Yet, case studies
actually suggest little to no effect of better data provision on the control of
corruption since the data is rarely used properly. Similarly, government outreach
efforts using ICT can increase perceptions of transparency and sometimes support
24
to build trust between citizens and governments. However, so far, social media and
online outreach efforts do not seem to be a gamechanger in citizen-government
relations or in anti-corruption.
• Upward transparency: gathering data through crowdsourcing or whistleblowing
tools was for several years a popular policy to implement as part of anti-corruption
programming. Several case studies suggest that the effect of such tools, however, is
also limited. They also show that design of these tools is crucial in making them at
least marginally successful. Evidence about secure whistleblowing using ICT also,
so far seemed not available.
• Mobilisation: some evidence points at mobilisation against corruption via digital
tools as an effective strategy. At least in some cases, social media strategies can have
an impact on corrupt organisations and lead to higher accountability. Yet, these
case studies are quite rare. While there is a larger body of research available linking
social media to protest mobilisation, this does not necessarily mean that protest,
even if directed against corruption, lead to a better control of corruption.
There is an increasing amount of micro-level studies providing experimental evidence on
individual behaviour in the context of corruption. However, no studies were found that
directly look at the impact of ICT on individual decisions.
Open questions
This leads us to look at the questions which are still open for research. Obviously, given the
lack of micro-level studies here is the first area, in which further research would be needed:
• How do individual calculations take into account greater transparency and the
availability of ICT anti-corruption tools?
• What effect do social media have in comparison to traditional media?
• In what settings do e-government tools change the behaviour of civil servants?
While there is more evidence on an organisation-level, open questions also remain in this
context. It has to be noted that most studies in this context consider ICT a valuable tool to
reduce petty corruption. The area of grand corruption is less well researched in this
context. However, the budding research on e-procurement could be promising in this
context. To answer these questions, much better data from individual organisations is
needed. Case studies often stand by themselves and are too rarely compared. Using mixed-
methods could contribute to making case studies more reliable and help to answer the
following questions.
25
• Under which societal circumstances are specific ICTs successful tools in the fight
against corruption?
• How can emerging technologies like artificial intelligence or distributed ledger
technology be used for the control of corruption and how effective are they?
• In what configurations do ICT contribute to an organisational culture change?
• When are whistleblowing tools effective in controlling corruption?
• How can open data be used to support the control of corruption?
• In what way do ICT tools interact with different anti-corruption policies and
institutions?
• Since some macro-level studies pointed this way: can the use of ICT also lead to
higher corruption levels? If yes, in what way?
While macro studies were extremely helpful to establish general relationships between
various ICT approaches and corruption levels. However, in this context anti-corruption
researchers should now move beyond macro-level studies. The dynamics through which
ICT can play a part in anti-corruption are varied and need more thorough investigation,
both on an organisational- and a micro-level.
References
Abu–Shanab, E. A., Harb, Y. A., & Al–Zoubi, S. Y. (2013). E–government as an anti–
corruption tool: citizens perceptions. International Journal of Electronic
Governance, 6(3), 232-248.
Alexanyan, K., Barash, V., Etling, B., Faris, R., Gasser, U., Kelly, J., . . . Roberts, H. (2012).
Exploring Russian Cyberspace: Digitally-Mediated Collective Action and the
Networked Public Sphere. The Berkman Center for Internet & Society Research
Publication Series, 12(2), 1-16.
Andersen, T. B. (2009). E-Government as an anti-corruption strategy. Information
Economics and Policy, 21(3), 201-210.
Andersen, T. B., Bentzen, J., Dalgaard, C.-J., & Selaya, P. (2011). Does the Internet reduce
corruption? Evidence from US states and across countries. The World Bank
Economic Review, 25(3), 387-417.
Ang, Y. Y. (2014). Authoritarian restraints on online activism revisited: Why “I-paid-A-
bribe. Comparative Politics, 47(1), 21-40.
Apaza, C. R., & Chang, Y. (2011). What makes whistleblowing effective: Whistleblowing in
Peru and South Korea. Public Integrity, 13(2).
26
Asiimwe, E. N., Wakabi, W., & Grönlund, Å. (2013). Using technology for enhancing
transparency and accountability in low resource communities: experiences from
Uganda. Spider ICT4D Series: ICT for anti-corruption, democracy and education
in East Africa, 6, 37-51.
Bailard, C. S. (2009). Mobile phone diffusion and corruption in Africa. Political
Communication, 26(3), 333-353.
Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2010a). Using ICTs to create a culture of
transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption
tools for societies. Government information quarterly, 27(3), 264-271.
Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2012a). Promoting transparency and
accountability through ICTs, social media, and collaborative e-government.
Transforming. Government: People, Process and Policy, 6(1), 78-91.
Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Hansen, D. (2012b). The impact of polices on government
social media usage: Issues, challenges, and recommendations. Government
information quarterly, 29(1), 30-40.
Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., Munson, S., & Glaisyer, T. (2010b). Social media technology and
government transparency. Computer, 43(11), 53-59.
Bonsón, E., Royo, S., & Ratkai, M. (2015). Citizens' engagement on local governments'
Facebook sites. An empirical analysis: The impact of different media and content
types in Western Europe. Government Information Quarterly, 32(1), 52-62.
Bonsón, E., Torres, L., Royo, S., & Flores, F. (2012). Local e-government 2.0: Social media
and corporate transparency in municipalities. Government information quarterly,
29(2), 123-132.
Breuer, A., & Farooq, B. (2012). Online political participation: Slacktivism or efficiency
increased activism? Evidence from the Brazilian Ficha Limpa campaign. ICA
Annual Conference. San Francisco. Retrieved August 15, 2018, from
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2179035
Charoensukmongkol, P., & Moqbel, M. (2014). Does investment in ICT curb or create more
corruption? A cross-country analysis. Public Organization Review, 14(1), 51-63.
Choi, J.-W. (2014). E-government and corruption: A cross-country survey. World Political
Science, 10(2), 217-236.
Choi, S., & Ahn, M.-S. (2001). OPEN The government: Online procedures enhancement
for civil applications. 62nd National Conference, American Society for Public
Administration. Newark, NJ: Rutgers University .
Coppier, R., & Piga, G. (2006). Why do transparent public procurement and corruption go
hand in hand? Rivista di Politica Economica, 96(1), 185-206.
Davies, T., & Fumega, S. (2014). Mixed incentives: Adopting ICT innovations for
transparency, accountability, and anti-corruption. Bergen: Chr. Michelsen
27
Institue. Retrieved August 20, 2018, from https://www.u4.no/publications/mixed-
incentives-adopting-ict-innovations-for-transparency-accountability-and-anti-
corruption/
DiRienzo, C. E., Das, J., Cort, K. T., & Burbridge, J. (2007). Corruption and the role of
information. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(2), 320-332.
Eddy, E. N., & Akpan, E. E. (2008). Nigerian government, the public sector and the fight
against corruption: The role of information and communication technology.
International NGO Journal, 3(10), 162-166.
Elbahnasawy, N. G. (2014). E-government, internet adoption, and corruption: an
empirical investigation. World Development, 57, 114-126.
Enikolopov, R., Petrova, M., & Sonin, K. (2018). Social media and corruption. American
Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 10(1), 150-174.
Fazekas, M., Tóth, I. J., & King, L. P. (2016). An objective corruption risk index using public
procurement data. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 22(3),
369-397.
Garcia-Murillo, M. (2009). The effect of internet access on government corruption.
Electronic Government, an International Journal, 7(1), 22-40.
Garcia-Murillo, M. (2013). Does a government web presence reduce perceptions of
corruption? Information Technology for Development, 19(2), 151-175.
Goel, R. K., Nelson, M. A., & Naretta, M. A. (2012). The internet as an indicator of
corruption awareness. European Journal of Political Economy, 28(1), 64-75.
Gray, J. (2016). Datafication and democracy: Recalibrating digital information systems to
address broader societal interests. Juncture, 23(3), 197-201.
Gurin, J. (2014). Open governments, open data: A new lever for transparency, citizen
engagement, and economic growth. SAIS Review of International Affairs, 34(1),
71-82.
Habtemichael, F. S., & Cloete, F. (2009). The role of ICTs in reducing administrative
corruption in the South African public sector. Administration Publica, 17(4), 75-93.
Hasani, N., & Beleraj, B. (2013). E-government as an anti corruption tool. The case of
Albania. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 2(8), 712-716.
Hellström, J., & Bocast, B. (2013). Many “likers” do not constitute a crowd: The case of
Uganda’s Not In My Country. Spider ICT4D Series: ICT for anti-corruption,
democracy and education in East Africa, 6, 27-36.
Iqbal, M. S., & Seo, J.-W. (2008). E-governance as an anti corruption tool: Korean cases.
한국지역정보화학회지, 11(2), 51-78.
28
Jha, C. K., & Sarangi, S. (2017). Does social media reduce corruption? Information
Economics and Policy, 39, 60-71.
Kim, C.-K. (2014). Anti-Corruption Initiatives and E-Government: A Cross-National
Study. Public Organization Review, 14(3), 385-396.
Kim, S., Kim, H. J., & Lee, H. (2009). An institutional analysis of an e-government system
for anti-corruption: The case of OPEN. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1),
42-50.
Klitgaard, R. (2012). Public-Private Collaboration and Corruption. In M. Pieth, Collective
Action: Innovative Strategies to Prevent Corruption (pp. 41-66). Zurich/St Gallen:
Basel.
Köbis, N. C., Iragorri-Carter, D., & Starke, C. (2018). A Social Psychological View on the
Social Norms of Corruption. In I. Kubbe, & A. Engelbert, Corruption and Norms
(pp. 31-52). Cham: Palgrave Machmillan.
Kossow, N., & Dykes, V. (2018). Embracing Digitalisation: How to use ICT to strengthen
Anti-Corruption. Eschborn: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale
Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. Retrieved August 20, 2018, from
https://www.giz.de/de/downloads/giz2018-eng_ICT-to-strengthen-Anti-
Corruption.pdf
Kossow, N., & Kukutschka, R. M. (2017). Kossow, N., & Kukutschka, R. M. B. (2017). Civil
society and online connectivity: controlling corruption on the net? Crime, Law and
Social Change, 68(4), 459-476.
Lio, M.-C., Liu, M.-C., & Ou, Y.-P. (2011). Can the internet reduce corruption? A cross-
country study based on dynamic panel data models. Government Information
Quarterly, 28(1), 47-53.
Lourenço, R. P., Piotrowski, S., & Ingrams, A. (2017). Open data driven public
accountability. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 11(1), 42-
57.
Magro, M. J. (2012). A review of social media use in e-government. Administrative
Sciences, 2(2), 148-161.
Makowski, G. (2017). From Weber to the Web… Can ICT Reduce Bureaucratic Corruption?
In A. Paulin, L. Anthopoulos, & C. Reddick, Beyond Bureaucracy (pp. 291-312).
Cham: Springer.
Matheus, R., Vaz, J. C., & Ribeiro, M. M. (2011). Anti-Corruption online tools: Online
monitoring systems against corruption in Latin America. First Global Conference
on Transparency Research (pp. 1-40). Newark, NJ: Rutgers University.
Matheus, R., Vaz, J. C., Ribeiro, M. M., & de Souza, C. A. (2012). Anti-corruption online
monitoring systems in Brazil. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on
Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (pp. 419-425). Albany, NY: ACM
Press.
29
Mittal, M., & Rubin, S. (2012). Bribecaster: documenting bribes through community
participation. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported
Cooperative Work Companion (pp. 171-174). New York, NY: ACM.
Mungiu-Pippidi, A. (2013). Controlling Corruption Through Collective Action. Journal of
Democracy, 24(1), 101-115.
Mungiu-Pippidi, A., & Dadašov, R. (2016). Measuring control of corruption by a new index
of public integrity. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 22(3), 415-
438.
Murillo, M. J. (2015). Evaluating the role of online data availability: The case of economic
and institutional transparency in sixteen Latin American nations. International
Political Science Review, 36(1), 42-59.
Nam, T. (2018). Examining the anti-corruption effect of e-government and the moderating
effect of national culture: A cross-country study. Government Information
Quarterly, 35(2), 273-282.
Neupane, A., Soar, J., & Vaidya, K. (2012a). The potential of e-procurement technology for
reducing corruption. International Journal of Information Technology and
Management, 11(4), 273-287.
Neupane, A., Soar, J., & Vaidya, K. (2012b). Evaluating the Anti‐ Corruption Capabilities
of Public e‐ Procurement in a Developing Country. The Electronic Journal of
Information Systems in Developing Countries, 55(2), 1-17.
Noveck, B. S., Koga, K., Garcia, R. A., Deleanu, H., & Cantú-Pedraza, D. (2018). Noveck,
Beth Simone, et al. "Smarter Crowdsourcing for Anti-Corruption: A Handbook of
Innovative Legal, Technical, and Policy Proposals and a Guide to their
Implementation. Washington, DC: Interamerican Development Bank. Retrieved
August 10, 2018, from https://publications.iadb.org/handle/11319/8892
Nurunnabi, A. A., & Ullah, K. T. (2009). E-Governance as an Anti-Corruption Tool for
Government in Bangladesh. AIUB Journal of Business and Economics, 8(2), 143-
164.
OECD. (2016). The Korean Public Procurement Service: Innovating for Effectiveness.
Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2017). Government at a Glance 2017. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/gov_glance-2017-en
Open Knowledge International. (16. August 2018). Open Government Data and Content .
Von Open Defintion: https://opendefinition.org/government/ abgerufen
Pathak, R. D., & Prasad, R. S. (2006). Role of e-governance in tackling corruption: The
Indian experience. The role of public administration in building a harmonious
society: Selected Proceedings from the Annual Conference of the Network of Asia-
Pacific Schools and Institutes of Public Administration and Governance
(NAPSIPAG) (pp. 434-463). Beijing: ADB & NAPSIPAG.
30
Pathak, R. D., Naz, R., Rahman, M. H., Ingram Smith, R. F., & Agarwal, K. N. (2009). E-
governance to cut corruption in public service delivery: A case study of Fiji.
International Journal of Public Administration, 32(5), 415-437.
Pathak, R. D., Singh, G., Belwal, R., & Smith, R. F. (2007). E-governance and Corruption-
developments and Issues in Ethiopia. Public Organization Review, 7(3), 195-208.
Pathak, R. D., Singh, G., Belwal, R., Naz, R., & Smith, R. F. (2008). E-governance,
corruption and public service delivery: A comparative study of Fiji and Ethiopia.
JOAAG, 1, 65-79.
Prasad, A., & Shivarajan, S. (2015). Understanding the role of technology in reducing
corruption: a transaction cost approach. Journal of Public Affairs, 15(1), 22-39.
Recanatini, F., Prati, A., & Tabellini, G. (2005). Why are some public agencies less corrupt
than others? Lessons for institutional reform from survey data. Sixth IMF Jacques
Polak Annual Research Conference on Reforms (pp. 1-35). Washington, DC:
International Monetary Fund.
Rodrigues, U. M. (2014). Social media's impact on journalism: a study of media's coverage
of anti-corruption protests in India. Global media journal: Australian edition, 8(1),
1-10.
Rotchanakitumnuai, S. (2013). The governance evidence of e-government procurement.
Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 7(3), 309-321.
Ryvkin, D., Serra, D., & Tremewan, J. (2017). I paid a bribe: An experiment on information
sharing and extortionary corruption. European Economic Review, 94, 1-22.
San Juan, R. R., & Resurreccion, E. I. (2015). Protecting the Public Trust: A Framework
for Online Anti-Corruption Crowdsourcing. Phil. LJ, 89, 802.
Schroth, P. W., & Sharma, P. (2003). Transnational law and technology as potential forces
against corruption in Africa. Management decision, 41(3), 296-303.
Seo, J. W., & Mehedi, H. M. (2016). E-government Efforts against Corruption in
Bangladesh: What We Have Done and What We Have to Do. Society & Change,
X(1), 38-49.
Sheryazdanova, G., & Butterfield, J. (2017). E-government as an anti-corruption strategy
in Kazakhstan. Information Technology & Politics, 14(1), 83-94.
Shim, D. C., & Eom, T. H. (2008). E-government and anti-corruption: Empirical analysis
of international data. International Journal of Public Administration, 31(3), 298-
316.
Shim, D. C., & Eom, T. H. (2009). Shim, D. C., & Eom, T. H. (2009). Anticorruption effects
of information communication and technology (ICT) and social capital.
International review of administrative sciences, 75(1), 99-116.
Sieber, R. E., & Johnson, P. A. (2015). Civic open data at a crossroads: Dominant models
and current challenges. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 308-315.
31
Singer, M., Konstantinidis, G., Roubik, E., & Beffermann, E. (2009). Does e-procurement
save the state money? Journal of Public procurement, 9(1), 58-78.
Singh, G., Pathak, R. D., Belwal, R., & Naz, R. (2010). E-governance for improved public
sector service delivery in India, Ethiopia and Fiji. International Journal of Public
Sector Management, 23(3), 254-275.
Song, C., & Lee, J. (2016). Citizens’ use of social media in government, perceived
transparency, and trust in government. Public Performance & Management
Review , 430-453.
Sorak, N. (2016). Internet, Censorship, and Corruption. The impact of online censorship
on the internet’s potential to reduce corruption. QOG Working Paper, 17.
Starke, C., Naab, T. K., & Scherer, H. (2016). Free to expose corruption: The impact of
media freedom, internet access and governmental online service delivery on
corruption. International Journal of Communication, 10, 4702-4722.
Sturges, P. (2004). Corruption, transparency and a role for ICT? International Journal of
Information Ethics, 2(11), 1-9.
Tkachenko, A., Yakovlev, A., & Rodionova, Y. (2017). Organizational Forms and Incentives
in Public Procurement: Natural Experiment at a Large Public Sector Organization
in Russia. International Journal of Public Administration, 1-17.
Tran, A. (2008). Can Procurement Auctions Reduce Corruption? Evidence from the
Internal Records of a Bribe-Paying Firm. Working Paper. Retrieved August 10,
2018, from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Khanh_Tran11/publication/228549999_C
an_Procurement_Auctions_Reduce_Corruption_Evidence_from_the_Internal_
Records_of_a_Bribe-Paying_Firm/links/00b495375e9f1311c7000000/Can-
Procurement-Auctions-Reduce-Corruption-Evidence
Valle-Cruz, D., Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2016). Citizens' perceptions of
the impact of information technology use on transparency, efficiency and
corruption in local governments. Information Polity, 21(3), 321-334.
Zinnbauer, D. (2015). Crowdsourced corruption reporting: What petrified forests, street
music, bath towels, and the taxman can tell us about the prospects for its future.
Policy & Internet, 7(1), 1-24.
