TY  - JOUR
A1  - Ledeneva, AV
A1  - Barsukova, S
Y1  - 2014/02/28/
IS  - 2
EP  -  132
JF  - Voprosy Ekonomiki/ ??????? ?????????
AV  - public
ID  - discovery1451381
N1  - This version is the author accepted manuscript. For information on re-use, please refer to the publisher?s terms and conditions.
VL  - 2014
CY  - Moscow
N2  - ? ?????? ??????????? ????????????? ?????? ???? ????????: ????????????? ????????? ??? ??????? ???????????, ??????????? ????????????? ???????? ? ?????? ?????????, ? ??????? ???????????? ???????, ????????????????? ?????? ??????????, ?? ????????? ??????? ? ??????? ????????????? ???????. ????????????? ?????????, ?????????? ??????? ??????????????? ? 1990-? ????, ?????????? ?? ???? ??????????????: ????????? ????? ????? ??????????, ???????? ? ??????????. ????? ?????? ????? ? ?????? ????????????? ???????????? ? ??????????? ???????? ????????????????? ????????. ? ?????? ????????????????? ??????? ????????????? ?????????. ?????? ????? ? ???, ??? ??????? ????????????????? ???????? ??????? ?? ??????? ? ????????? ???????????? ????, ??????? ? ???????????????? ?????? ? ??????????????? ????????????? ?????????, ?????????? ???? ?????????? ????????????? ????????? ? ????????? ???????? ???????????? ???????.

The article compares two approaches to the analysis of corruption: the global corruption paradigm - a downstream view on corruption promoted by international organisations and policy makers, the so-called outsiders, and the analysis of informal practices - an upstream, or bottom-up, perspective of insiders, which contextualises motives and meaning of corrupt practices. The global corruption paradigm rests on the premises that corruption can be defined, measured and controlled. Since the 1990s, data on corruption have been systematically collected and monitored, yet there has been little progress in combatting the phenomenon across the globe. Success cases are rare, and policy makers are increasingly dissatisfied with existing indicators and approaches to anti-corruption policies. On the one hand, the paper articulates the critique of assumptions, preconceptions and methodology implicit in the prevailing corruption paradigm. We question the cultural and historical neutrality of the definition of corruption, problems with its measurement, and implications for policy-making. On the other hand, the paper argues for the 'disaggregation' of the corruption paradigm and the necessity to integrate local knowledge and insiders' perspectives into corruption studies. The combination of the two approaches will provide for more effective ways of tackling the challenges of corruption, especially in endemically corrupt systems.
TI  - From global corruption paradigm to the study of informal practices: outsiders vs. insiders/ ?? ?????????? ????????????? ????????? ? ???????? ???????????? ???????: ???????? ? ???????? ??????????? ? ??????????
KW  - corruption paradigm
KW  -  public private division
KW  -  informal practices
KW  -  anticorruption policy
KW  -  perception of corruption
KW  -  measurement of corruption
KW  -  particularism
SP  - 118 
UR  - http://dlib.eastview.com/browse/doc/39116085
ER  -