PENGARUH KORUPSI, DEMOKRASI DAN POLITIK TERHADAP KEMISKINAN DI DELAPAN NEGARA ASEAN DENGAN PERTUMBUHAN EKONOMI SEBAGAI VARIABEL MODERASI

Yolanda Yolanda - Universitas Negeri Padang

Abstract


This study aims the influence of corruption, democracy and politics on poverty in ASEAN countries with economic growth as a moderating variable. The method used is using the panel regression model. This data uses a combination method between time series data from 2013 - 2016 and a cross section consisting of 8 countries. Data obtained from World Bank annual reports, Transparency International and Freedom House. The results of this study indicate that (1) Corruption Perception Index (CPI) has a significant and negative effect on poverty, meaning that if the CPI increases then poverty will decrease (2) Democracy has no significant and negative effect on poverty. This means that if democracy increases, poverty will decrease (3) Politics has a significant and negative effect on poverty, meaning that if politics increases, poverty will decrease (4) Economic growth has a significant and positive effect on poverty, meaning if economic growth increases then poverty will decline (3) Economic growth unable to moderate the relationship between corruption, democracy and politics towards poverty in 8 ASEAN countries. Economic growth as an interaction variable is a predictor variable (Predictor Moderate Variable), which means that economic growth is only an independent variable.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Academia. 2004. Kemiskinan di Indonesia (Online) diakses tanggal 19 Januari 2019

Academia.2007. WacanaKorupsiEnkoding Media. (Online) Diaksestanggal 1 Januari 2019.

Aprianto, N. E. K. (2016). KebijakanDistribusidalam Pembangunan Ekonomi Islam. Al-Amwal: JurnalEkonomidanPerbankanSyari'ah, Volume 8(2).

Arifin, H. (2004). Cara memahamikerentananperempuanpengusahakecil. a way to understand the vulnerability of women-entrepreneurs), JurnalAnalisisSosial, Volume 9(2), 157-170.

Ashutosh Varshney. (2000). Democracy and Povery. University of Notre Dame

Chetwynd, E., Chetwynd, F& Spector, B. (2003). Corruption and poverty: A review of recent literature. Management Systems International, Volume 600, 5-16.

Data Boks. 2017. IndeksPersepsiKorupsi Indonesia Peringkat 4 di ASEAN. (Online)Diaksestanggal 19 januari 2019.

Dedi. Blogspot. 2013. PolitikdanKemiskinan di Indonesia. (Online) Diaksestanggal 17 Januari 2019.

Freedom House.2013-2018. Freedom World Data and Resources. (Online)Diaksestanggal 10 Januari 2019

Gujarati, Damodar N, 2010, Dasar – DasarEkonometrika ;SalembaEmpat

Gujarati, Damodardan Dawn C. Porter 2006.Dasar – dasarEkonometrikaJilid 2. Jakarta. SalembaEmpat.

JokoWaluyo. (2012). AnalisisHubunganKausalitasAntaraKorupsi, PertumbuhanEkonomi, DanKemiskinan: 1 SuatuStudiLintas Negara. BuletinEkonomi.

Jhingan, M.L, 2003. Ekonomi Pembangunan Dan Perencanaan. Jakarta : Raja GrafindoPersada

Kuncoro, M. (1997). Ekonomi Pembangunan: Teori, Masalah, dan Kebijakan. Unit Penerbit Dan Percetakan PN.

Kpunde, S. J. (2000). Corruption and Corruption Control in Africa.

Machmud Amir. 2016. “ Perekonomian Indonesia” Erlangga. Jakarta

Nawatmi, S. (2014).Korupsi Dan Pertumbuhan Ekonomi Negara - Negara Asia Pasifik. JurnalBisnisdanEkonomi, Volume 21(1)

Suryawati. 2004. TeoriEkonomiMikro. UPP.AMP YKPN. Yogyakarta: Jarnasy.

Suliyanto. 2011. Ekonometrika Terapan: Teori dan Aplikasi dengan SPSS. Yogyakarta: CV. Andi Offset.

World Bank. 2017. International Development, Poverty, and Sustainability, http://www.worldbank.org/. Diakses pada tanggal 9 Juli 2018.

Worldbank. 2017. Data. (Online) (https://data.worldbank.org/) Di aksestanggal 19 Januari 2019.

Transparency International (TI). 2016. Corruption Perception Index, http://www.transparency.org/. Diakses pada tanggal 9 Juli 2018




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24036/jkep.v1i3.7711