Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorGabriel Lenz.en_US
dc.contributor.authorLim, Kevin (Kevin Shun Wei)en_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Political Science.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-04-25T16:04:27Z
dc.date.available2011-04-25T16:04:27Z
dc.date.copyright2010en_US
dc.date.issued2010en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/62471
dc.descriptionThesis (S.M. and S.B.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Political Science, 2010.en_US
dc.descriptionCataloged from PDF version of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (p. 64-67).en_US
dc.description.abstractForeign bribery - the payment of bribes across borders - poses a classic collective action problem in theory. A firm may extract benefits through the payment of bribes to foreign public officials without its own country bearing the associated costs of governmental corruption, and hence while eliminating foreign bribery may be in the best interests of all who are engaged with the global economy, there are few obvious incentives for any one national government to be the first to take action. Over the last two decades, however, an unprecedented degree of multilateral cooperation on the issue of foreign bribery has been achieved. In particular, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has been a key institutional locus of activity, serving as the coordinating body for the monitoring and enforcement of a comprehensive anti-bribery convention that was adopted in 1997. This convention appears to have been largely successful at least in terms of spurring legislative change: all OECD member countries as well as several nonmember nations have since adopted laws that explicitly criminalize the act of bribing foreign public officials, and the capacity of the state to monitor, detect, and prosecute the offense of foreign bribery has ostensibly been enhanced. Given the potential for collective action problems to develop, it is thus important to ask whether the legislative action that has been taken thus far is meaningful in any measurable sense. I answer this question by constructing an original measure of the strictness of foreign bribery legislation, which I then employ as the main independent variable in an empirical study of export data, utilizing both difference-in-difference estimators and regression analysis. The results of my analysis provide support for the hypothesis that the enactment of stricter foreign bribery legislation amongst the countries party to the OECD convention has reduced exports to more corrupt countries more so than it has exports to less corrupt countries. These findings are robust to a variety of sensitivity tests, and I thus conclude that the OECD's multilateral anti-bribery initiatives have indeed had a meaningful impact on business decisions in the international economy.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Kevin Lim.en_US
dc.format.extent76 p.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectPolitical Science.en_US
dc.titleEstimating the effects of foreign bribery legislation in the international economyen_US
dc.title.alternativeEstimating the effects of anti-bribery legislationen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeS.M.and S.B.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Political Science
dc.identifier.oclc711896655en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record