Yuen Yuen Ang, political science professor at
University of Michigan, has written an ambitious book. “China’s
Gilded Age: The Paradox of Economic Boom and Vast Corruption” is much more
than what one may infer from its title. Its goal is to redefine corruption,
reexamine the relationship between corruption and economic growth, and analyze (often
empirically) the role of corruption in China’s development during the past 40
years.
Ang begins with two important points:
to better understand it, corruption needs to be unbundled into different types because
they are likely to have different effects on economic growth. Second, it needs
to be weened away from a Western-centric view that, in part because of
inability to distinguish between different types of corruption, tends to
overlook typical Western corruptions (say, in lobbying or revolving doors
between private and public sectors) and present a biased view whereby corruption
exists only in less developed economies. That view, Ang argues, leads to a
mistaken belief that corruption is bad for growth (despite dearth of confirming
empirical evidence) and to an idealized view of development characterized by “inclusive
institutions” (Acemoglu-Robinson) or “open-access societies” (Douglass North).
They are both criticized by Ang.
She proposes a four-type breakdown of
corruption. First, petty theft (pay bribe rather than fine); second, speed
money: street-level corruption (get a shop license faster); third, grand theft
(embezzlement on a large scale—Nigeria’s Abacha); fourth, access money (giving
permissions to capitalists to engage in big projects). Only the latter, in Ang’s
view, is desirable. It has short-run positive effect on growth as it leads to large
investments, new infrastructural projects, removal of bottlenecks, and greater
employment. In the short-run, that type of collusive action between capitalists
and bureaucrats is growth-enhancing. Ang allows that in the longer-run it might
have negative consequence by misallocating resources away from other areas
where they might have been better used. An example is the real estate bubble in
China (“the tragic consequence is that the majority of Chinese people who need
homes cannot afford them while the minority who own homes do not live in them”,
p. 147) or infrastructural over-investment. However, one cannot exclude misallocation
of resources even without corruption: entrepreneurs make wrong decisions all
the time. We need to show that bribery leads to generally worse decisions.
The other three types of corruption
are not, according to Ang, growth-enhancing. The reasons for that are somewhat obscure:
why is speed-money which lets people get government services faster bad while
access money is good? This is not explained. The case is, of course, much stronger
for grand embezzlement which is difficult to justify on any grounds.
Ang then proceeds to a nice empirical
estimate of the four types of corruption in 15 countries. The results are interesting.
It turns out that access money corruption dominates in China and the United
States, speed money in India and Russia, grand theft in Nigeria. Yet the
differences in the relative importance of these various types of corruption between
countries are small. Just by looking at the numbers for Russia vs. China, or
China vs. India (pp. 36-41) would lead one rather to say that the countries are similar although, as Ang argues and many would agree, they are not.
Ang’s approach is, in my opinion, worth
pursuing in at least two directors: broadening the sample to all
countries in the world, and figuring out either empirically or analytically (more than she does) why
different forms of corruption may have positive or negative effect on growth.
In the next part of “China’s Gilded
Age” Ang moves to a temporal analysis of corruption in China, from the opening
under Deng to Xi’s anti-corruption campaign. A very nice section presents vignettes
of the two fallen idols: Bo Xilai, former member of the Politburo’s and rival
to Xi for the top party job, and Nanjing’s mayor Ji Jienye. The stories are interesting
and instructive and one wishes that Ang would have included a few more (as she obviously
could, given that some are tucked away in an Annex).
While the previous part of the book put
the accent on access money which is the type of corruption available to “tigers”,
Ang does not forget corruption available to “flies”. Here she argues that lower
level corruption in China follows a prebendist method of profit-sharing.
Salaries are uniform and low. But the fringe benefits, which according to Ang’s
empirical research account for 3/4 of bureaucrats’ wages, depend on local ability to raise taxes and fees. Bureaucrats are thus
incentivized to care about local investment and growth because a large share of
their salaries depends on them. If entrepreneurs shun their city, their own
wages will suffer. Ang quotes an almost religious injunction to local officials
to treat capitalists “as Gods” bringing bounty.
Profit-sharing also has a time
dimension: bureaucrats have to be conscious that increasing taxes and fees too
much can kill the goose that lays the golden eggs: their salaries may be increased
now to the detriment of the future. How that complicated game is played in real
life is not always clear. But possibly the fact that lower- and middle-level
bureaucrats are not shifted between the prefectures helps them retain interest in
local development.
The last part of the book is dedicated
to an empirical analysis of the fall from grace of city Party leaders (a
database of 331 local party leaders out of which 54 have been demoted or
punished in Xi’s anticorruption campaign). A more descriptive and less econometric
approach might have helped there. The main points though are that patron-client
relationship is important both for ascension to higher
positions as well as for downward mobility (when the patron falls, clients often
follow him), and Xi’s campaign cannot be explained only as a power-grabbing
exercise. It is more than that even if taking more power for himself and his supporters
is not something Xi would reject.
Corruption is endemic to the system
of political capitalism (as I also argued in “Capitalism,
Alone”) and the danger of anti-corruption campaigns is to lead to the opposite
problem to that of rampant corruption as under Hu Jintao’s leadership: inaction due to the fear that any decision
may be seen as a cause for dismissal. Bureaucrats are very good at that game:
the safest way to behave is to do nothing. And that obviously is not good for
growth.
It is an important book not only for
many who try to understand the roots of China’s success but for a much more
sober and less Western-centric view of corruption. Eventually, one hopes,
economists will move from their faux-moralizing attitude toward corruption and begin
to treat some forms of it as rental income.
----------
Note: There are several odd mistakes or implausible numbers. On p.
161, while explaining the position of the Standing Committee of the Politburo,
and the Politburo, Ang mentions that the Central Committee of CCP is elected by
the National People’s Congress, “China’s
legislative body”. In reality the Central Committee is elected by CCP’s (that
is, Party’s) National Congress. Investment is supposed to have accounted for
90% of Chongqing’s GDP under Bo Xilai (p. 131). This is very implausible. Chongqing’s
police chief did not ask for asylum in Chongqing’s American embassy, but
consulate (p. 133).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.