New “bribery game” shows that sometimes, transparency makes things worse

Enlarge (credit: Dave Barger)

In many developing countries, the struggle for economic growth is set back by rampant corruption. According to figures in a new study of the issue, people in urban areas of Kenya typically pay bribes 16 times a month. That's a drain on the economy, and it adds a layer of complexity between citizens and essential government services.

While a variety of policy approaches have attempted to limit corruption, it's difficult to track their effectiveness. Now, an international team of researchers has developed a game-theory approach to teasing out the factors that contribute to corruption. Their results show that under the wrong circumstances, a common method of limiting corruption-government transparency-can actually make matters worse.

Cooperation vs. the freeloaders

The foundation of this work is what's called a "public goods game," which measures people's willingness to cooperate. In this game, everyone starts with a pool of cash and is given the opportunity to contribute to a common, public pool. The resulting pool is then multiplied, and its contents are distributed evenly among the players. The group as a whole works out best if everyone cooperates, contributing the maximum amount to the pool. But individuals do best if they freeload: contribute nothing, then take their share of the public pool.

Read 11 remaining paragraphs | Comments