This chapter has explored the virtuous scope of social capital because, or so we argue in later chapters, success in protecting and restoring the biosphere will ultimately depend on whether people are able to act collectively toward that goal. The neighbourhood, and from there through the larger spheres of community and civil society, is the channel citizens, should they be fortunate enough to reside in a benign political climate, have available to them for collective action. A general disposition to abide by agreements, to be truthful, to be able to
218 Dasgupta and Goyal (2019) study the notion of social identity when people assume the identity of networks to which they join for the benefits that brings them.
Chapter 6: Laws and Norms as Social Institutions
trust one another, and to act with justice is an essential lubricant of societies. The larger the population over which this disposition is cast by all, the better is the collective outcome.
But in a society where the reach of democracy is weak and trust is confined within groups, the disposition to be honest would be toward members of some particular group (e.g. one’s community, or ethnic or religious group), not others. This amounts to group loyalty. One may have been raised to be suspicious of people from other groups, one may have even been encouraged to dupe such others if and when the occasion arose. Society as a whole squanders resources when the disposition for honesty is restricted to certain groups. The forms social capital is able to take in these circumstances are far from benign. They range from street gangs that practise extortion to para-states that sell protection to households and local businesses. The distinction between rebels righting wrongs and extortionists running a business is slippery. Hobsbawm (1959) famously read the practice of banditry since medieval times as rebellion against an oppressive social order, but in a modern classic, Gambetta (1993) recorded interviews with members of the Sicilian Mafia to reveal a business enterprise.
Trust is not a given in any society. How people are able to channel their trust in ways that make for progress is not something that can be written on stone like an edict. We have to discover them continuously.
Annex 6.1 Corruption
The United Nations Convention against Corruption was adopted in 2003. Although there is no explicit reference to ‘grand’ corruption, the preamble of the Convention expresses concern over
“cases of corruption that involve vast quantities of assets, which may constitute a substantial proportion of the resources of States, and that threaten the political stability and sustainable development of those States”. The International Anti-Corruption Coordination Centre estimates that every year at least US$20-40 billion of assets are stolen by corrupt leaders and dispersed across the globe. Unlike petty corruption, grand corruption involves the distortion of central functions of government by senior public officials.219
Citizens of countries that enjoy large pools of natural resources but where governance is weak suffer from illegal resource extraction and the government corruption that fuels it (Biggs et al.
2017). One by-product of this is often biodiversity loss. A lack of alternative livelihoods serves to abet trade in illegally acquired resources. Conversely, robust democratic institutions can serve as a powerful deterrent to corruption.
A recent report by the UN Environment Programme and Interpol found that globally
environmental crime has been growing at 2-3 times the rate of global GDP growth (Nellemann et al. 2016). Grand corruption entrenches poverty and inequality, undermines good business practice and threatens the integrity of financial markets. It also exacerbates societal exclusion. As we see below, it also undermines biodiversity.
An abundance of natural resources can trigger grand corruption, for it creates opportunities for rent-seeking behaviour, especially when legal economic opportunities are scarce. Corruption is a feature of life when officials enjoy a monopoly over decisions over the use of natural resources, and are not accountable (Riley, 1998). Reforms in policy, for example towards greater public control of resources, become susceptible to corruption.
Bribery is an example of both petty corruption and grand corruption. The former – known also as petty bribery – involves citizens paying small bribes to public officials to hasten bureaucratic
219 One definition of petty corruption is: “Everyday abuse of entrusted power by public officials in their interactions with ordinary citizens, who often are trying to access basic goods or services in places like hospitals, schools, police departments and other agencies.” (Transparency International, n.d.)
Chapter 6: Laws and Norms as Social Institutions
processes or access to public services people are entitled to.220 Bribery of local officials in developing countries is seen by many as a “worthy, if not required, investment to penetrate otherwise closed markets or sources of natural resources and labour” (Liu, 2018). The distinction between private incentives and the common good is all important here.
High-level government corruption cannot be separated entirely from local-level corruption, for corruption begets corruption. A study on mining found that the activity increased bribery:
local officials began insisting on more bribes than previously once mines had begun operation (Kotsadam et al. 2015). Similar studies have found that preferential treatment over concessions and logging practice can be purchased by the payment of bribes to forestry regulators. Where corruption is widespread, government funds earmarked for conservation of natural resources are embezzled. That puts forest resources at a higher risk of overexploitation (Sundström, 2016).
Certain patterns of change in natural resource management can also increase the level of
corruption. Exploration for natural resources in remote locations is open to corruption. Deep-sea drilling and mining for coal and gas in high altitudes are examples. These activities are also hard to monitor.
220 Despite its name, the impact of petty bribery should not be thought to be petty. It can be pervasive, affecting citizens in their daily interactions with the state, their standards of living and well-being, as well as having a corrosive impact on growth, business operations, tax revenues, and ultimately the governance and regulatory environment of a country. Petty corruption, in terms of both money and economic distortions, may be as great, if not greater, than grand corruption (World Bank, 1997).