Corruption is once again high on the international policy agenda as a result of globalization, the spread of democracy, and major scandals and reform initiatives. But the concept itself has been a focus for social scientists for many years, and new findings and data take on richer meanings when viewed in the context of long-term developments and enduring conceptual debates. This compendium, a much-enriched version of a work that has been a standard reference in the field since 1970, offers concepts, cases, and fresh evidence for comparative analysis. Building on a nucleus of classic studies laying out the nature and development of the concept of corruption, the book also incorporates recent work on economic, cultural, and linguistic dimensions of the problem, as well as critical analyses of several approaches to reform. While many authors are political scientists, work by historians, economists, and sociologists are strongly represented. Two-thirds of the nearly fifty articles are based either on studies especially written or translated for this volume, or on selected journal literature published in the 1990s. The tendency to treat corruption as merely a synonym for bribery is illuminated by analyses of the diverse terminology and linguistic techniques that help distinguish corruption problems in the major languages. Recent attempts to measure corruption, and to analyze its causes and effects quantitatively are also critically examined. New contributions emphasize especially: corruption phenomena in Asia and Africa; contrasts among region and regime types; comparing U.S. state corruption incidence; European Party finance and corruption; assessments of international corruption rating project; analyses of international corruption control treaties; unintended consequences of anti-corruption efforts. Cumulatively, the book combines description richness, analytical thrust, conceptual awareness, and contextual articulation.
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
This study breaks new ground in examining how political factors helped lead three countries with highly regarded education systems to evolve quite different structures and processes in their secondary and higher education sectors. Their educational "ladders" are disparate because the techniques and timing for selecting students for further educational opportunities vary both among the three nations, and within the German and Swiss federal systems. The comparative analysis seeks to place the Japanese trajectory with reference to European developments, and to account for some of its unique aspects. Building on an extensive record of publication on comparative education policies and welfare state development, Heidenheimer places special emphasis on exploring the network of relationships between the various levels of the educational system and tiers of government.Following a strategy of integrated comparative analysis, the various national school and university types are directly compared as to their permeability, nature of administrative supervision, curricula, and examination practices. Contrasting the ways in which political parties and bureaucracies have made and adapted policies helps clarify how and why specific innovations became political issues, at the national and regional levels. Through close contextual case analysis, the study probes why, despite great differences hi political institutions, some secondary school policies became especially embattled in all three countries.Heidenheimer explains why the German Lander have maintained a monopoly in the university sector, whereas in both "centralized" Japan and "decentralized" Switzerland national governments operate and finance key parts of the university sector. Also analyzed is the impact of post-unification developments on East German university expansion. Whereas many Swiss schools have no principal, German courts have ruled that principals have tenure in their jobs. This comparative treatment by a political scientist complements studies of education by sociologists and economists analyzing how differences in political institutions have helped shape some distinctive policy emphases. Based on original research and a broad command of the literature, Disparate Ladders will appeal to school administrators, educators, political scientists, social historians, sociologists, and multiculturalists.
This is a study in the reestablishment of de mocratic party politics in divided and occupied Germany after the downfall of the National Socialist tyranny. Its subject is the growth of the Christian Democratic Union and the rise to power of its leader, Konrad Adenauer. Closely associated with the success of the German Federal Republic in achieving prosperity, political and military power and the status of an ally of the Western powers, the CDU has yet been the subject of widely varying evaluations. Like the regime with which it is associated, it suffers from the fact that for many observers admiration for some German post-war achievements is mixed with residual distrust and skepticism. In addition, understanding of the CDU has been handicapped by confused images of the forces it represents, lack of knowledge about its internal organization, and the overwhelming position which its leader has achieved in recent years. To observers both in Germany and abroad the dominant Chancellor and party leader appears to overshadow both party and government with the result that the 1950'S, the vital period of German reconstruction, has already been labelled the Adenauer Decade.
Students of government and social power recognize that wherever governmental systems embrace popular elections, the functions and mechanisms of political finance constitute inevitable links of influence between economic structures and political processes. The transmu tation of economic power into political power has been of historic concern from ancient philosophers to modern political scientists. Efforts to discern and interpret the political roles of those engaged in funding candidates and political parties have intensified in recent years. Attention given the subject has deepened substantially in the United States since World War II and, while there have been differ ences in range and quality, serious analytical interests have also developed in numerous other nations around the world. These trends have been accompanied by increasingly more energetic and sophisti cated attempts at comparative analysis. Problems in transnational studies of political processes have always been formidable. The comparative study of political finance has been retarded by difficulties in defining units of analysis that make it possible to identify in some measurable way the effects of political fmance in precise phases of the governing process, e. g. , in the per suasion of voters, in party nominating processes, in executive decision making. Cash transactions, even when known with confidence, consti tute only a partial aspect of political finance. Other shades of economic power may be equally relevant, involving services or goods directly provided, credits and other economic benefits extended or withheld, and the exercise of less tangible but equally potent influence.
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.