Friedman (2005) contends in his
book, The World Is Flat, that economic development in today’s
society is the embracing of globalisation to increase the financial status of
countries. The overall standard of living increases and corporations expect
higher revenues due to the promises that globalisation increases opportunities
and platforms for engagements. However, the quality of the governmental
institution is put to the test as it will affect how much will the countries
benefit from this phenomenon. The higher quality institutions will lead to
great economic gains, but on the other hand, corruption will cause countries to
experience the negative side of globalisation. Several solutions have been proposed
in recent years like alleviating corruption through enforcing law and the use
of social media to garner support to identify companies that are guilty of
corruption. Both solutions’ effectiveness will be discussed further in this
essay.
Wei (2001) suggests the idea of
corruption as the abuse of public office in exchange for private benefits.
Corruption has a long history; however, it should not be neglected. Wei also
mentions that corruption is a hindrance to the economic growth of the country
brought by globalisation. The risk of doing businesses in the country increases
and it chases away foreign direct investments (FDI). The importance of FDI
cannot be underestimated in today’s context. Countries with low corruption rate
like Singapore depends heavily on FDI to sustain the high gross domestic product,
whereas countries like China are faced with this threat, where many of its
people are living under the poverty line.
Globalisation brings about more
flowing of FDI into many developing countries. Companies may be discouraged to
enter countries with high corruption rate and the people will suffer as a
result. Without a stable income, most of them will not be able to support their
families and everyone suffers. The ideal effect of globalisation is to bring
about a more equality income instead of the widening income gap for the rich
and poor (IMF, 2007). To reduce this negative impact, countries like China are
taking an aggressive approach of this problem. Currently, China was ranked
eighty out of one hundred and seventy-six countries in the Corruption Perceptions
Index and convicts nearly one hundred and fifty thousand for corruption since
2008 (Reuters, 2013). Lu (2000) suggests that the most prevalent corruption is
by graft, where officials receive bribes to reduce the red tapes of MNCs
operating in China. Fortunately, the new government led by Chinese Premier Xi
Jinping, has shown determination in eradicating corruption in the country. One
example is the conviction of ex-mayor of Dalian province to life imprisonment
for receiving bribes. The severity of the law imposed on officials receiving
bribes acts as deterrence and officials may think twice before accepting any
favours. Gu and Wu (2013) suggest that the prevalence of corruption may be due
to low salaries, therefore countries should review their pay structure of its
public officials to further prevent them from corrupting. Government devote
more resources to the existing anti-corruption agency to bring officials that
are guilty of corruption to justice. However, many resources need to be
allocated to these areas, therefore it is not possible for every countries to
follow the policies recommended.
Another solution is to identify the
companies that are guilty of providing bribes for the government. The Internet
can be used to disseminate information regarding the issue to other users
through popular social media platforms. People can use their consumers’ power to
stop purchasing products and services from these companies. The problem with
this situation is the difficulty in accurately identifying the companies that
are involved in corruption. The reports have to be factual, objective in nature
and not biased. Furthermore, the society cannot be tolerance against any kind
of corruption. Wei states that the Thai people have a high tolerance for the
misbehaviour of its government officials. The people must believe what is right
and have a firm stand on this issue. Ignorance is ‘not’ a bliss in this context.
In conclusion, the understanding
of how corruption can reduce the positive effect of globalisation and boost the
negative impact on its people is a worrying issue. It must be address by both
the government, through its policy and integrity, and the society, to keep the
government in check. Only through these efforts, the positive impact of
globalisation can be beneficial to the people.
References:
Friedman,
T. (2005). The World Is Flat. United
States.
X.
B. Lu. (2000). Cadres and Corruption.
Stanford University Press.
