Controlling Extortion and Collusion: Morality, Peer‐Effect, and the Strategies Beyond Punishment

Dyuti S. Banerjee, Panchali Banerjee and Vivekananda Mukherjee

Journal of Public Economic Theory, 2025, vol. 27, issue 5

Abstract: We explore the interaction between enforcement and individual‐specific sensitivity to moral standards in determining the scope of extortion and collusion in a bureaucracy consisting of corruptible officers. The moral standard is determined by the number of corrupt officers in the bureaucracy, which is a function of both the penalty and the probability of conviction of collusion. Both a higher penalty and a more active independent auditor, like the media, keep the number of corrupt officers in check in a “low” and “medium” penalty situation and incentivize compliance. Extortion occurs only under a “low penalty, low compliance cost” situation. Increases in penalty or judicial accuracy in judging extortion cases or active independent auditing keep extortion in check. Controlling the rent of the firms induces compliance and reduces both extortion and collusion incidents in an economy, having a greater impact on collusion than extortion.

Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/jpet.70061

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:jpbect:v:27:y:2025:i:5:n:e70061

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=1097-3923

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Public Economic Theory is currently edited by Rabah Amir, Gareth Myles and Myrna Wooders

More articles in Journal of Public Economic Theory from Association for Public Economic Theory Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().