1 DECISIONS MADE IN THE FRAME Rational Choice, Institutional Norms and Public Ethos Against Corruption in Mauritius Teodora Heim Malmö University, Kultur och Samhälle Leadership and Public Organization: One-year master programme Masters’ Thesis, 15 HP VT2019 Tutor: Anders Edvik 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... 4 2. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 6 2.1. The purpose of this study and the research questions ............................................................ 6 2.2. A short research overview ...................................................................................................... 7 2.3. Definitions .............................................................................................................................. 9 2.3.1. The definition of corruption in this study ........................................................................... 9 2.3.2. The definitions of the public officers ................................................................................ 10 2.4. Disposition of the report ....................................................................................................... 10 3. THEORETICAL DISCUSSIONS ............................................................................................. 10 3.1. Rational Choice + New Institutionalism = Rational Choice Institutionalism ..................... 11 3.2. The public ethos .................................................................................................................... 13 3.3. The theory about social construction of the institutional reality ......................................... 15 3.4. A model for the analysis ....................................................................................................... 17 4. METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS ......................................................................... 20 4.1. Selection of the departments ................................................................................................. 20 4.2. Selection of the interviewees ................................................................................................ 21 4.3. The documents ...................................................................................................................... 22 4.4. Delimitations ........................................................................................................................ 22 5. EMPIRICAL DATA ................................................................................................................... 23 5.1. A reasoning about the choice of Mauritius .......................................................................... 23 5.2. The society ............................................................................................................................ 25 5.3. The tools of the policy-makers .............................................................................................. 26 5.3.1. The Prevention of Corruption Act (POCA) ...................................................................... 26 5.3.2. The Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) ............................................. 27 5.3.3. The Public Service Commission & Disciplined Forces Service Commission (the PSC) . 29 5.4. The public sphere ................................................................................................................. 29 5.5. The local governments and their organizational design ...................................................... 29 5.5.1. The workflow at the departments ..................................................................................... 30 5.5.2. The control system in the public administration .............................................................. 32 5.5.3. Observations from the interviews with the public officers ............................................... 33 6. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................... 37 6.1. The layers of the institutional frame ..................................................................................... 37 6.1.1. The society and its influence on the public sphere ........................................................... 38 6.1.2. The public sphere and the question if the public ethos is present .................................... 40 6.1.3. The public administration and its impact on the public servant’s choices ...................... 42 6.2. The individual’s rational calculation and choice ................................................................. 46 6.3. What is the role of the public ethos in the rational calculation? ......................................... 48 7. CLOSING DISCUSSIONS ......................................................................................................... 51 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................... 54 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................. 57 APPENDIX 1 – The Interview Questions .......................................................................................... 58 3 FIGURES Figure 1: Lundquist's concept of the public ethos (1998:106) .............................................................. 14 Figure 2: The analysis model ................................................................................................................ 18 Figure 3: The analysis model highlighting the layer of the society ....................................................... 38 Figure 4: The analysis model highlighting the layer of the public sphere ............................................ 40 Figure 5: The analysis model highlighting the layer of the public administration ............................... 42 Figure 6: The analysis model showing the influence of the layers on the institutional frame .............. 44 Figure 7: The analysis model highlighting the public servant in the institutional frame ...................... 46 I would like to express my gratitude to the Mauritian team of Transparency International and especially to Mr. Rajen Bablee for the help and support I got when working in Mauritius and during the whole project. I would also like to thank all the officers at the municipalities in Port Louis and in Rivière du Rempart who took their time to meet me and shared their thoughts. A special thanks to the officers at the ICAC who helped me by sharing their expert knowledge. 4 1. ABSTRACT The purpose of this thesis is to increase our knowledge about corruption issues. It examines the connection between the institutional frame and the individual’s choice made in his institutional role. The study is based on the theories of rational choice institutionalism and public ethos and the empirical data is analyzed from a social constructivist perspective. The addressed research questions are: - How is the institutional frame within the Mauritian public sphere being created, with special focus on shaping the norms saying that corruption is not accepted? - Does the institutional frame, and specifically the public ethos as a norm, influence the individual’s rational choice when deciding not to act corruptly? The empirical material has been collected in Mauritius, and the study uses the Mauritian local government as the example for the institution. According to the theory of rational choice institutionalism, public servants make rational choices, within the frames of the institution. Institutions are to be seen as a wider concept, where both the formal and informal institutions are included, such as norms, institutionalized actions and processes. The public ethos, a norm specifically connected to the democratic, public areas of the society, states that the public servant’s institutional role is different from a private person’s role. According to the theory about the social construction of the reality, the individual’s perception and understanding of his surroundings, the image of his reality, is shaped by the institutional frame and this frame delimits the options to choose among. The analysis is made with the help of a model which illustrates the layers of the institution, and the individual in the institutional frame, which thereby affects his rational calculations. The model is also used to illustrate the result of the analysis, by showing the factors that influence the norm-shaping process. The analysis and the conclusions of the study indicate that the creation of the institutional frame is strongly influenced from the society with an anti-corruption agenda, in form of legislation and government agencies, which have a resilient effect on the norm-shaping. Further, the presence of the public ethos norm is shown as an element of the institutional frame. The public servant, when making a rational calculation to decide to act or not to act 5 corruptly, is situated within this institutional frame. The conclusion of the thesis indicates that the individual’s rational choice is strongly affected by the institutional frame, showing that the public servant does take in consideration the public ethos norms in his institutional role. Even though economic reasons influence