ABSTRACT
The increased visibility of administrative corruption has become a persistent and disturbing feature of our times. Almost every issue of the daily press brings, it seems, fresh examples of allegedly corrupt behavior on the part of responsible public and private figures. Fortunately, obvious objections to research into corruption—problems of measurement, difficulties of access, bias, and evaluation—have been largely attenuated, if not overcome. For those interested in corruption as a social phenomenon, the traditional approach, which treated it in a moralistic manner, was inappropriate. Studies of corruption were vague as to definition, condemned it a priori, and looked for explanations in individual behavior. Corruption was treated in a moralistic manner. Its cause was seen as the gaining of positions of power and trust by evil and dishonest men. The solution was to "turn the rascals out". Corruption was therefore incidental to the working of society which might be safeguarded by appropriate laws and exhortations.
