ABSTRACT
Even in countries with a well-deserved reputation for widespread corruption, there is relatively little of it in their postal services or college admissions. Corruption may also vary across different functions in the same agency. A complete account of variations in corruption must be pursued in terms of differences in the ability to realize the potential gains from corruption; and this requires that we look at the countervailing actions (CA) which victims of corruption can take to resist their losses. The chapter examines the efficacy of CA in explaining variations in corruption across agencies vis-a-vis postal services, state-owned banks, passports, utility departments, irrigation, the police, college admissions, and a land-consolidation program. It also considers the possibility of CA against embezzlement in government. The examples of CA demonstrate that we have grasped an important social mechanism which, driven as it is by self-interest, acts automatically to set limits upon corruption.
