Evidence on the relationship between government size and corruption is mixed, and might be misleading, as government size is usually measured by fiscal size. The core hypothesis in this research is that the type of government intervention in the economy – rather than the size of government – is a key explanatory factor for corruption. The empirical analysis disentangles the effects of the two main government tools for intervention: fiscal and regulatory. The main result is that fiscal burden does not present any significant relationship with corruption. In contrast, a consistent and significant positive association is found between regulatory burden and corruption. Furthermore, legal origins and democratic experience contribute to explaining differences in corruption. [Correction added on 22 April 2021, after first online publication: In the Abstract, the word ‘quality’ has been replaced with ‘burden’.]

中文翻译：

---

超越政府规模：政府干预和腐败的类型

关于政府规模与腐败之间关系的证据参差不齐，并且可能具有误导性，因为政府规模通常以财政规模来衡量。本研究的核心假设是，政府干预经济的类型——而不是政府规模——是腐败的关键解释因素。实证分析阐明了两种主要的政府干预工具的影响：财政和监管。主要结果是财政负担与腐败没有任何显着关系。相比之下，监管负担与腐败之间存在一致且显着的正相关关系。此外，法律渊源和民主经验有助于解释腐败的差异。[在首次在线发布后于 2021 年 4 月 22 日添加的更正：