60923

13
ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻛﻠﻴﺔ ﺎﺩ- ﺍﳌﻮﺻﻞ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺪﺩ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﻓﺪﻳﻦ ﺗﻨﻤﻴﺔ١٠٩ ﳎﻠﺪ٣٤ ﻟﺴﻨﺔ٢٠١٢ ] ١٨٧ - ١٩٩ [ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﺍﺳﺘﻼﻡ ﺗﺄﺭﻳﺦ١٤ / ٣ / ٢٠١١ ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺮ ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﺗﺄﺭﻳﺦ٢٧ / ٦ / ٢٠١١ ﺍﻟﻔﺴﺎﺩ ﺃﺜﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﺍﻹﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﺘﺒﺎﻴﻥ ﻅل ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻡ ﻤﺅﺴﺴﺔ* ﻳﻮﻧﺲ ﺫﻧﻮﻥ ﻣﻔﻴﺪ ﺍﻟﺪﻛﺘﻮﺭ ﺍﲪﺪ ﺩﻫﺎﻡ ﻋﺪﻧﺎﻥ ﻣﺴﺎﻋﺪ ﺃﺳﺘﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﻛﻠﻴﺔ- ﺍﳌﻮﺻﻞ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ[email protected] ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﻋﻠﻮﻡ ﻣﺎﺟﺴﺘﲑ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺨﻠﺹ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﺴﺎﺩ ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﺒﺎﺴﺘﻘﺼﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻫﺘﻡ ﺍﻹﻗﺘﺼ ﺎﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴـﺎﺕ ﺘﺒـﺎﻴﻥ ﻅـل ﻓﻲ. ﺘﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻡ ﺩﻭل ﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻜﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﻹﺠﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﻋﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﺭﺕ، ﻭﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻟﻔﺴﺎﺩ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻭﺍﺴﻊ ﺘﺒﺎﻴﻥ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﻀﻤﺎﻥ ﺒﻬﺩﻑ، ﺘﻤـﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﻭل ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺕ ﻭﻨﻭﻉ ﻤﺼﺩﺍﻗﻴﺔ ﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﺼﻭل ﻴﻀﻤﻥ ﺒﻤﺎ ﺤﺎﻟﺘﻬﺎ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ. ﺘﻭ ﺘﻡ ﻟﻘﺩ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻨﺤﺩﺍﺭ ﻤﻌﺎﺩﻟﺔ ﻓﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻹﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ) ﺍﻹﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺘﺞ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﺩ ﺤﺼﺔ( ﺍﻟﻔﺴﺎﺩ ﻤﺅﺸﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺩﺍﻟﺔ، ﺘـﻡ ﻭﻗﺩ ﺍﻋﺘﻤ ﺍﻷﻭل ﺍﻟﻔﺴﺎﺩ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ ﻤﻥ ﻨﻭﻋﻴﻥ ﺎﺩ ﻤﻨﻅﻤـﺔ ﺘﺼـﺩﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﺘـﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﺴﺎﺩ ﻤﺩﺭﻜﺎﺕ ﻤﺅﺸﺭ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺸﻔﺎﻓﻴﺔ، ﺍﻟﺒ ﻋﻥ ﻴﺼﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺍﻟﻔﺴﺎﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﻁﺭﺓ ﻤﺅﺸﺭ ﻫﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺜﺎﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﻲ ﻨﻙ. ﻭﻗـﺩ ﺍﻷ ﺨﺫ ﺍﻹ ﺒﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﺭ ﻨﻤﻭﺫﺝ ﻭﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺜﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺨﺭﻯ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ، ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠـﻴﻡ ﻤﺅﺸﺭ، ﺍﻹﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻠﻲ، ﺍﻹﺴﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭ ﺍﻷﺠﻨﺒﻲ، ﺍﻟﺴﻜﺎﻥ ﻨﻤﻭ ﻭﻤﻌﺩل، ﻤﺘﻭﺴـﻁ ﺍﻋﺘﻤـﺎﺩ ﺘﻡ ﻭﻗﺩ ﺒﻠﺩ ﻜل ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺕ ﻟﻨﻭﻉ ﻜﻤﺅﺸﺭ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻙ ﻴﺼﺩﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻡ ﻤﺅﺸﺭﺍﺕ. ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﻓﻲ ﺴﻠﺒﻴﺎ ﻴﺅﺜﺭ ﺍﻟﻔﺴﺎﺩ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺒﻴﻥ ﻭﻗﺩ ﺍﻹﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ، ﺇﻟـﻰ ﺒﻠﺩ ﻤﻥ ﻴﺘﺒﺎﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﺒﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺠﻴﺩﺓ ﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺕ ﻟﺩﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻠﺩﺍﻥ ﻓﻔﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺕ، ﻨﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﺒﺎﻴﻥ ﺘﺒﻌﺎ ﺁﺨﺭ ﻗﻠﻴﻼ ﻟﻠﻔﺴﺎﺩ، ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺤﻴﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻜﺒﺭ ﺍﻟﻀﻌﻴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﻠﺩﺍﻥ ﻓﻲ. ﻭﺠﺩ ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﻜﺜﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻐﻴﺭ ﻴﻌﺩ ﺍﻟﻔﺴﺎﺩ ﺍﻹﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴـﺎﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻟـﺩﻭل ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﻀﻌﻴﻔﺔ. ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺘﺎﺤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻤﺎﺕ: اﻟﻔﺴﺎد اﻟﻨﻤﻮ اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣﺔ، اﻟﺤﻜﻢ، ﻣﺆﺳﺴﺔ، اﻹﻗﺘﺼﺎدي. * ﺭﺴﺎ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺴﺘل ﺒﺤﺙ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺠﺴﺘﻴﺭ ﻟﺔ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻭﺴﻭﻤﺔ" ﺍﻟﻨﻤـﻭ ﻓـﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﺴﺎﺩ ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻟﺴـﻨﻭﺍﺕ ﻻﻗﺘﺼـﺎﺩﻱ ﻤﺨﺘﺎﺭﺓ" ، ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺼل ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﻜﻠﻴﺔ، ٢٠١٠ .

Upload: rabie-dz

Post on 17-Dec-2015

215 views

Category:

Documents


3 download

DESCRIPTION

tutoral

TRANSCRIPT

  • - [-]

    // //

    *

    - moc.oohay@noonahtdeefum

    .

    .

    ( )

    .

    .

    .

    .

    : .

    " * . "

  • ][

    The Effect of Corruption on Economic Growth in the Light of Governance Variance

    Mofeed Th. Younis (PhD)

    Assistant Professor College of Political Sciences

    University of Mosul

    Adnan D. Ahmed Researcher

    Department of Economics University of Mosul

    Abstract

    This research aimed to investigate the effect of corruption on the economic growth in

    the light of governance variance. Cross sectional data for three years for many countries was fruitfully introduced into empirical research lately. Other independent variables have been included in an econometric model like, education index, investment, foreign direct investment, population growth rate. The mean of governance indexes has been used as an indicator to governance quality. It was concluded that corruption has significant negative effect on economic growth. This effect varied from country to another according to the governance quality. Research showed that these countries have good governance suffer weakly from corruption, but the effect of corruption become bigger in the countries that have poor governance. It is found also that corruption is the most important variable affect economic growth in the countries that have poor governance. Keywords: Corruption, Governance, Government, Economic Growth.

    .

    .

    .

    .

    . .

    : . .

  • [] ...

    .

    . )ycnerapsnarT lanoitanretnI(

    .)knaB dlroW(

    .

    . ) (.

    .(2 ,4002 ,samohT dna rehgaeM)

    .

    .(465 ,8991 ,iznaT)

    . .

    : .( )

    ( )

  • []

    ) .(

    .

    )

    .(

    . :

    . . .

    .

  • [] ...

    . .

    . )385,8991,iznaT(

    . .

    .

    - ) . (

    .

    ,nosriop( )42 ,9991 ,nnamdieW dna etieL( . )61 ,8991

    ( ) ( ) ,ffrodssbmaL )

    .(6 ,5002 )963 ,8991,.la te ittenurB(

    )705 ,2002 ,idoovaD dna debA( .

    .

    ( )

    .

    . .

    .

    % %

    (.7 ,5002 ,ffrodssbmaL )

  • []

    .

    .

    . .

    .

    . .

    (.4 ,9002 ,laaV dna nebbE)

    (.3 ,9002 ,relboD)

    .

    (.3 ,9002 ,relboD)

    .

    ) ecnanrevoG ,knaB dlroW21) ( -

    :(9002 srettaM : )ytilibatnuoccA dna ecioV( .

    .

    ytilibatS lacitiloP(: )ecneloiV fo ecnesbA dna .

    .

  • [] ...

    : )ssenevitceffE tnemnrevoG( . .

    : )ytilauQ yrotalugeR( . .

    : )waL fo eluR( .

    . : )noitpurroC fo lortnoC( .

    .

    ) (0002

    noitpecreP noitpurroC) : (xednI

    01 01

    . .

    01 ( IPC 01)

    . (noitpurroc fo lortnoC) :

    . (5.2-) . (+5.2)

    . .( 5.2) 5.2

    ( )

    .( )

    .

    .

  • []

    :

    )xedni noitacudE nL 2( + )noitpurroC nL 1( + 0 = atipac rep PDG nL )tnemtsevnI nL 4( + )tnemtsevni tcerid ngieroF nL 3( + )htworg noitalupoP nL 5( +

    . )ecnanrevoG(

    .

    )

    .( -

    () IPC -

    .

    F (. ) IPC ,%9.58( 2R . (%)

    . )%2.55 ,%1.96 ( 6002 96.22002 93.2 ) W.D

    ( 98.1) 4002 FIV .

    (. 5.2)

    % %. % . % .

    .

    .

    % % . % . % .

    .

  • [] ...

    .

    .

    F .

    2R .(%5) ( %04 ,%16 ,%95)

    . 2002 ( 60.2)

    4002 ( 07.1) (62.2) FIV .

    . 01

    % .% . %

    . % .

    .

    .

    .

    . .

    . :

    : . .

    . 2002 ( %5)

  • []

    ( ) atipac rep PDG :elbairav tnednepeD

    tnednepednI elbairav

    6002 4002 2002 dooG

    snoitutitsni daB

    snoitutitsni dooG

    snoitutitsni daB

    snoitutitsni dooG

    snoitutitsni daB

    snoitutitsni )67.6( 384.31 tnatsnoc

    983.9 )99.3(

    174.21 )90.8(

    260.31 )28.4(

    128.01 )27.5(

    741.91 )15.5(

    )95.2( 0094.0- ipc.ROC 8134.1- )86.1(

    0133.0- )73.2(

    569.2- )54.2(

    0964.0- )91.3(

    632.5- )41.3(

    )65.2( 244.4 noitacudE 1993.1 )99.3(

    602.5 )36.3(

    4655.1 )58.3(

    570.6 )13.5(

    2229.0 )50.2(

    tcerid ngieroF tnemtsevni

    58640.0- )06.0(

    42620.0 )33.0(

    42000.0 )00.0(

    3422.0- )32.2(

    72520.0- )13.0(

    81170.0 )97.0(

    )35.1( 6510.1- tnemtsevnI 8122.0 )94.0(

    3727.0- )34.1(

    3802.0 )35.0(

    0911.0- )12.0(

    2394.0- )32.1(

    )64.0( 4660.0- noitalupoP 4941.0- )50.1(

    3671.0- )26.1(

    2705.0- )49.1(

    9040.0 )12.0(

    5457.0- )28.1(

    %0.95 %9.58 %0.16 %1.96 %1.04 %2.55 R detsujdA 63.01 41.32 09.11 93.31 30.6 09.7 citsitats-F

    24 52 44 63 15 83 snoitavresbO scitsitats-t era sesehtnerap eht ni srebmun eht :etoN

    () - .

    F (. )

    2R (.%5) ( %% . % .)

    . W.D . . . ( 98.1) W.D FIV

    .

    % % . % . % .

    .

    .

    .

  • [] ...

    .

    . F .

    (%0.64 ,%8.16 ,%2.25) 2R . (%5)

    .

    % % . % . % .

    .

    .

    %

    . % . % . % . .

    4002

    . . .

    (.%5) 2002

    ( ) atipac rep PDG :elbairav tnednepeD

    tnednepednI elbairav

    6002 4002 2002 dooG

    snoitutitsni daB

    snoitutitsni dooG

    snoitutitsni daB

    snoitutitsni dooG

    snoitutitsni daB

    snoitutitsni tnatsnoc

    951.21 )18.5(

    330.01 )63.5(

    532.21 )27.7(

    204.01 )89.5(

    730.11 )07.5(

    009.11 )66.5(

    )67.2( 2754.0- w.ROC 7376.2- )48.2(

    7232.0- )19.1(

    566.2- )46.2(

    0693.0- )02.3(

    023.2- )38.1(

  • []

    atipac rep PDG :elbairav tnednepeD

    tnednepednI elbairav

    6002 4002 2002 dooG

    snoitutitsni daB

    snoitutitsni dooG

    snoitutitsni daB

    snoitutitsni dooG

    snoitutitsni daB

    snoitutitsni )74.2( 362.4 noitacudE

    0644.1 )43.4(

    425.5 )37.3(

    1706.1 )00.4(

    718.5 )88.4(

    5449.0 )29.1(

    ngieroF tcerid

    tnemtsevni 03640.0-

    )06.0( 94120.0 )82.0(

    02300.0 )50.0(

    4181.0- )77.1(

    33630.0- )34.0(

    82350.0 )55.0(

    )11.1( 4557.0- tnemtsevnI 7980.0 )12.0(

    7547.0- )24.1(

    9431.0 )53.0(

    3733.0- )55.0(

    8106.0- )83.1(

    )51.0( 6020.0- noitalupoP 7502.0- )05.1(

    3271.0- )35.1(

    0344.0- )76.1(

    4400.0- )20.0(

    7139.0- )11.2(

    %2.25 %0.68 %8.16 %2.76 %0.64 %3.65 R detsujdA 78.7 30.22 23.21 23.21 86.7 42.8 citsitats-F

    24 42 44 63 15 83 snoitavresbO scitsitats-t era sesehtnerap eht ni srebmun eht :etoN

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

  • ... ][

    .

    .

    -

    . . " " .

    . . -

    1. Abed, G. and H. Davoodi 2002, "Corruption, Structural Reforms, and Economic Performance", Governance, Corruption and Economic Performance, ed. by G.T. Abed und S. Gupta, International Monetary Fund, Washington D.C.: 489-537.

    2. Brunetti, A. and B. Weder 1998, "Investment and Institutional Uncertainty: A Comparative Study of Different Uncertainty Measures", Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, Vol. 134: 513-533.

    3. Dobler, C.,2009 "the Impact of Institutions, Culture, and Religion on per Capita Income" ISSN, 1618-5358 Nr. 28/2009.

    4. EbbenW., and A. deVaal, 2009 "Institutions and the Relation Between Corruption and Economic Growth" NICE, working paper 09-104.

    5. Lambsdorff, J., 2005," Consequences and Causes of Corruption What do We Know from a Cross Section of Countries?", Diskussionsbeitrag Nr. V-34-05, www. icgg.org/downloads/Causes and Consequences of Corruption Cross-Section. PDF

    6. Leite, C. and J. Weidemann 1999, "Does Mother Nature Corrupt? Natural Resources, Corruption, and Economic Growth", International Monetary Fund Working Paper, 99/85, July.

    7. Meagher, P. and M.Thomas, 2004 "A Corruption primer: An Overview of Concepts in The Corruption Literature" The IRIS discussion papers on Institutions and Development, No. 04/03.

    8. Poirson, H. 1998, "Economic Security, Private Investment, and Growth in Developing Countries", International Monetary Fund Working Paper, 98/4, January.

    9. Tanzi,V., 1998"Corruption Around the world: Causes, Consequences, Scope and Cures" Staff papers-International Monetary Fund, vol. 45, No.4

    10. Transparency International, Corruption Perception Index: 2002, 2004, 2006. 11. United Nation, Human Development report: 2004, 2006, 2008. 12. World Bank, "Governance Matters 2009" Release of worldwide Governance Indicators

    1996-2008. 13. World Bank, World Development indicators 2002, 2004, 2006. 14. World Bank, worldwide governance indicators: 2002, 2004, 2006.