Abstract

Corruption, broadly defined as the abuse of entrusted power for personal gain, is a global phenomenon that affects societies across political, economic, and social systems. However, its perception, interpretation, and social acceptability vary significantly across cultures. This study examines the cultural relativity of corruption, exploring how different societies understand, tolerate, or condemn corrupt practices based on their historical, social, and moral frameworks. While international bodies like Transparency International or the United Nations promote a relatively universal definition of corruption, the lived experience and societal judgment of what constitutes corrupt behavior are shaped by local norms and values. In some cultures, practices such as gift-giving, nepotism, or facilitating payments may be viewed as acceptable or even expected components of social exchange and relationship-building. In others, the same actions may be considered unethical or illegal. This cultural divergence challenges the notion of a universally applicable definition of corruption. The study uses a comparative lens to analyze how corruption is perceived in collectivist versus individualist cultures. In collectivist societies—such as those in parts of Asia, Africa, and the Middle East—relationships, loyalty to family, and community obligations often take precedence over strict legal codes. Practices like favoritism or patronage may be culturally normalized, blurring the lines between corruption and social duty. Conversely, individualist cultures—such as in many Western countries—tend to emphasize impartiality, rule of law, and individual accountability, often viewing the same actions as clear violations of integrity. Furthermore, the study explores the role of power distance, a cultural dimension identified by Hofstede, in shaping corruption perceptions. In high power distance cultures, hierarchical structures are accepted, and those in authority may be seen as entitled to privileges, making certain forms of corruption less likely to be challenged. In low power distance cultures, citizens are more likely to question authority and demand transparency. Religious and philosophical traditions also influence attitudes toward corruption. For instance, Confucian, Islamic, Christian, or tribal values may shape distinct ethical boundaries and social expectations. The study finds that even within the same legal framework, people’s understanding of what is corrupt can differ dramatically based on cultural conditioning and collective moral reasoning. The paper highlights that cultural perceptions of corruption are not fixed but evolve with modernization, democratization, and global exposure. While corruption may be rationalized in certain traditional settings, growing awareness, education, and international scrutiny are influencing public attitudes and legal reforms. Ultimately, the research underscores that while the consequences of corruption—such as inequality, inefficiency, and mistrust—are universally harmful, the perception and tolerance of corrupt acts are deeply rooted in cultural context. Recognizing these differences is essential for designing effective anti-corruption strategies, especially in international governance, development aid, and multinational business practices. Universal solutions must be culturally sensitive and locally adapted to foster genuine reform and accountability.