Red Tape, Corruption and ICT

  • Poulomi Bhattacharya
  • Vivekananda MukherjeeEmail author


This chapter focuses on that aspect of ICT which reduces the length of red tape and analyses the desirability of introduction of ICT from the stakeholders’ perspective. In a theoretical model, we show that the support for such a reform depends on the stakeholders’ profile, the nature of the public good/service and the initial length of red tape. The implementation of ICT in delivery of public goods/services may create demand for an honest regime. However, paradoxically, the support for ICT reform is expected to be lower in countries marred with long red tape and entrenched corruption. The chapter also provides empirical support for the theoretical results.


Corruption Red tape Screening ICT 

JEL Classification

D73 O38 


  1. Ahlin, C., & Bose, P. (2007). Bribery, inefficiency, and bureaucratic delay. Journal of Development Economics, 84(1), 465–486. Scholar
  2. Ali, M. S. B., & Gasmi, A. (2017). Does ICT diffusion matter for corruption? An economic development perspective. Telematics and Informatics. Scholar
  3. Banerjee, A. (1997). A theory of misgovernance. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4), 1289–1332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banerjee, A., Duflo, E., Imbert, C., Mathew, S., & Pande, R. (2016). E-governance, accountability and leakage in public programs: Experimental evidence from a financial management reform in India (Working Paper 22803). National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.Google Scholar
  5. Bhatnagar, S. (2003). Transparency and corruption: Does E-government help? Retrieved from:
  6. Bussell, J. (2012). Corruption and reform in India: Public services in the digital age. New Delhi: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fredriksson, A. (2014). Bureaucracy intermediaries, corruption and red tape. Journal of Development Economics, 108, 256–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Guriev, S. (2004). Red tape and corruption. Journal of Development Economics, 73(2), 489–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Koutrakou, V. N. (2006). The Greek e-government. Journal of E-government, 3(2), 75–98. Scholar
  10. Mimbi, L., & Bankole, F. O. (2016). ICT and public service value creation in Africa: Efficiency assessment using DEA approach. In Proceeding of the 27th Australian Conference on Information System, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
  11. MukabetaMaumbe, B., Owei, V., & Alexander, H. (2008). Questioning the pace and pathway of e-government development in Africa: A case study of South Africa’s Cape Gateway project. Government Information Quarterly, 25(4), 757–777.Google Scholar
  12. Muralidharan, K., Niehaus, P., & Sukhtankar, S. (2016). Building state capacity: Evidence from biometric smartcards in India. American Economic Review, 106(10), 2895–2929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Raj, R., Sen, K., & Kar, S. (2018). De Jure rules meet De facto deals: The political economy of business-state relations in Indian states. Paper Presented at ICAS-MP Workshop on Political Economy of India, CSSS, Kolkata, 11–12 January, 2018.Google Scholar
  14. Reddick, C. G., Abdelsalam, H. M. E., & Elkadi, H. A. (2012). Channel choice and the digital divide in e-government: The case of Egypt. Information Technology for development, 18(3), 226–246.Google Scholar
  15. Saha, B. (2001). Red tape, incentive bribe and the provision of subsidy. Journal of Development Economics, 65(1), 113–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Schwab, K. (2017). Global competitiveness report 2017–18. World Economic Forum, Geneva, Switzerland. Retrieved from
  17. Svensson, J. (2005). Eight questions about corruption. Journal of Economic Perspective, 19(3), 19–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Transparency International. (2018). Corruption perception index. Retrieved from
  19. Twinomurinzi, H., & Ghartey-Tagoe, K. B. (2011). Corruption in developing countries and ICT: The urgent need for work systems to precede E-government. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Social Implications of Computer in Developing countries, Kathmandu, Nepal.Google Scholar
  20. UN E-Government Survey. (2004). UN E-government knowledgebase. Retrieved from
  21. UN E-Government Survey. (2008). UN E-government knowledgebase. Retrieved from
  22. UN E-Government Survey. (2010). UN E-government Knowledgebase. Retrieved from
  23. UN E-Government Survey. (2012). UN E-government knowledgebase. Retrieved from
  24. UN E-Government Survey. (2014). UN E-government Knowledgebase. Retrieved from
  25. UN E-Government Survey. (2016). UN E-government Knowledgebase. Retrieved from
  26. World Bank. (2014a). Doing business report 2014. Retrieved from:
  27. World Bank. (2014b). Enterprise survey report. Retrieved from:
  28. World Bank. (2018). Enterprise survey 2006–18. Retrieved from:

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsJadavpur UniversityKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations