Siyasi Yolsuzluğun Sosyal Refah Politikası Üzerindeki Etkisi: Malezya'nın Refah Sistemi ve Siyasi Finansmanı Üzerine Sistematik Bir İnceleme

Year 2024, Issue: 12, 33 - 44, 31.12.2024

Kamal Jaafar

https://doi.org/10.58618/igdiriibf.1593043

Abstract

Bu çalışma, siyasi yolsuzluk, finansman mekanizmaları ve sosyal refah politikalarının gelişimi arasındaki ilişkiyi, Malezya odaklı olarak incelemektedir. Kamu görevlerinin kişisel çıkar için kötüye kullanılması olarak tanımlanan siyasi yolsuzluk, refah politikalarının oluşturulması, finanse edilmesi ve uygulanmasını önemli ölçüde etkilemektedir. Yolsuzluk, toplumsal eşitsizlikleri gidermek ve temel hizmetlere erişimi artırmak yerine kamu kaynaklarını saptırarak ve politika önceliklerini çarpıtarak adaletsiz sonuçlara yol açmaktadır. Bütçe manipülasyonu ve dış finansmanın siyasi amaçlarla kullanılması, yoksulluğu azaltmaya, sağlık hizmetlerini iyileştirmeye ve eğitime erişimi artırmaya yönelik refah programlarını daha da zayıflatmaktadır. Malezya'nın zayıf denetim ve merkezi kontrol ile karakterize edilen patronaj temelli siyasi sistemi, yolsuzluğa zemin hazırlamaktadır. Bu sistem, refah politikalarının seçici bir şekilde uygulanmasına olanak tanıyarak siyasi destekçileri ödüllendirirken savunmasız grupları marjinalize etmektedir. Sosyo-ekonomik eşitsizlikler ve etnik dinamikler bu zorlukları daha da artırmakta, politikaların toplumsal ihtiyaçlardan çok siyasi teşviklere öncelik vermesine neden olmaktadır. Çalışma, yolsuzlukla mücadele etmek ve adil refah politikalarını sağlamak için kurumsal reformların gerekliliğini vurgulamaktadır. Mali hesap verebilirlik, şeffaflık ve kapsayıcı yönetişimin güçlendirilmesi, refah sistemlerini siyasi manipülasyondan korumak için hayati önem taşımaktadır. Temel bulguları sentezleyen bu inceleme, yolsuzluğun etkilerini azaltmayı, kaynak tahsisini iyileştirmeyi ve siyasi olarak hassas ortamlarda sosyal refah politikalarını güçlendirmeyi hedefleyen politika yapıcılar ve araştırmacılar için uygulanabilir içgörüler sunmaktadır.

Keywords

Siyasal yolsuzluk, Finansman mekanizmaları, Sosyal refah politikası, Kurumsal reform, Sosyo-ekonomik dinamikler, Siyasal yapılar

The Impact of Political Corruption on Social Welfare Policy: A Systematic Review of Malaysia's Welfare System and Political Financing

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between political corruption, funding mechanisms, and social welfare policy development, with a focus on Malaysia. Political corruption, defined as the misuse of public office for private gain, significantly affects the formulation, funding, and implementation of welfare policies. Rather than addressing social inequities and enhancing access to essential services, corruption redirects public resources and distorts policy priorities, resulting in inequitable outcomes. Budget manipulation and the use of external funding for political purposes further undermine welfare programs aimed at poverty alleviation, healthcare improvement, and education access. Malaysia's patronage-based political system, characterized by weak oversight and centralized control, fosters corruption. This system allows welfare policies to be selectively implemented, rewarding political supporters while marginalizing vulnerable populations. Socio-economic disparities and ethnic dynamics exacerbate these challenges, as policies often prioritize political incentives over societal needs. The study underscores the need for institutional reforms to combat corruption and ensure equitable welfare policies. Enhancing financial accountability, transparency, and inclusive governance is vital to safeguarding welfare systems from political manipulation. By synthesizing key findings, this review provides actionable insights for policymakers and researchers aiming to mitigate corruption's effects, improve resource allocation, and strengthen social welfare policies in politically sensitive environments like Malaysia.

Keywords

Political corruption, Financing mechanisms, Social welfare policy, Institutional reform, Socio-economic dynamics, Political structures

Ethical Statement

The study has been prepared in accordance with the rules required by research and publication ethics. It does not involve any situation that requires ethical committee approval.

Supporting Institution

No support has been received from any institution or organization for this study.

References

• Bunce, V., & Wolchik, S. (2011). Defeating authoritarian leaders in post-communist countries. Cambridge University Press.
• Carlson, M. (2007). Money politics in Japan: New rules, old practices. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
• Gomez, E. T. (1994). Political business: Corporate involvement of Malaysian political parties. James Cook University of North Queensland.
• Gomez, E. T. (2014). Struggling for power: Policies, coalition politics, and elections in Malaysia. In Seminar on Dominant Party Systems.
• Gomez, E. T., & Tong, A. H. (2017). The state of Malaysia: Ethnicity, equity and reform. Routledge.
• Graycar, A. (2015). Corruption: Classification and analysis. Policy and Society, 34(2), 87-96.
• Groenendijk, N. (1997). A principal-agent model of corruption. Crime, Law and Social Change, 27(3-4), 207-229.
• Hu, Y. (2011). The manipulation of political finance regulations by authoritarian regimes. Academic Press.
• IDEAS. (2014). Political finance regulations: An international perspective. International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.
• IMF. (2023, October). World Economic Outlook Database. IMF website. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/October
• Jamaie, H. (2015). UMNO's Work in Politics and Business of Malaysia. Unpublished manuscript.
• Jomo, K. S. (2004). The New Economic Policy and interethnic relations in Malaysia. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development.
• Klitgaard, R. (1988). Controlling corruption. University of California Press.
• Levitsky, S., & Way, L. (2010). Competitive authoritarianism: Hybrid regimes after the Cold War. Cambridge University Press.
• Ministry of Economy. (2024, February). Public Sector Data. Official Portal of Ministry of Economy. https://www.ekonomi.gov.my/en/socio-economicstatistics/economic-statistics/public-sector
• Mungiu-Pippidi, A. (2006). Corruption: Diagnosis and treatment. Journal of Democracy, 17(3), 86-99.
• Norris, P., & Van Es, A. (2016). Checkbook elections: Political finance in comparative perspective. Oxford University Press.
• Özdil, M. A., & Konuralp, E. (2024). Dressing the Future: The Bibliometric Interplay Between Sustainability and Fashion Studies Amidst the Neoliberal Era. Fashion Practice, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/17569370.2024.2405485
• Peschard, J. (2006). Authoritarian regimes and political finance. Cambridge University Press.
• Rose, R. (2018). Understanding corruption: Its causes and consequences. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Shahriza, N. Z., & Irlisuhayu, K. (2013). Money politics and electoral corruption in Malaysia. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 48(3), 344-357.
• Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1993). Corruption. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3), 599-617.
• Siddiquee, N. A., & Zafarullah, H. (2022). Corruption and its control in Asian countries. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Templeman, K. (2012). Electoral authoritarianism in Southeast Asia. Stanford University Press.
• Transparency International Malaysia (TI-M). (2014). Reforming political financing. Transparency International Malaysia.
• Ufen, A. (2015). Political finance and corruption in Southeast Asia. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Zainudin, Z. (2021). National social welfare policy in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Social Policy and Society, 18(1), 32-48.