There is little or no requirement for funders, project owners or project participants to make public details of the funding, the underlying project and the identity of the project participants, including the identity of the contractor, joint venture partners, sub-contractors, consultants and agents.
Costs are as far as possible not disclosed, even when public money is spent. Commercial confidentiality has historically taken precedence over public interest. There may, therefore, be inadequate inspection of books and records which could uncover malpractice. Without such transparency, it is more difficult to detect, for example, suspicious funding arrangements, suspicious relationships between the participants which may facilitate corruption, projects which may have a corrupt purpose, projects which have been granted planning permission corruptly, or fraudulent contract pricing.
The extent of government involvement: The extent of government involvement in infrastructure is significant. Most major international infrastructure projects are government owned. Even privatised projects normally require government approvals, such as planning permission, or agreements with government as to the terms on which the public may use the end product. The power wielded by government officials in this regard, when combined with the structural and financial complexity of the industry referred to above, makes it relatively easy for government officials, for example, to commission projects for their own purposes, or to extract large bribes in exchange for the award of contracts or for approving inflated contract prices or fraudulent claims.
Bribery and deceptive practices seem to have become so engrained in some parts of the sector and in some territories, that in many cases they have become accepted as the norm. The following are some attempted justifications sometimes given by some participants in the sector:. Absence of project anti-corruption measures: Many infrastructure projects have few or no effective measures by which corruption during any project phase may be prevented, deterred or detected.
On some projects, some preventive measures may be in place, but these may focus on one or two aspects, such as monitoring of the tender process, and leave the rest of the project without sufficient safeguards. Proper anti-corruption measures which are imposed on projects by government departments, implemented by project owners, and required as conditions of funding by funders, are critical to the reduction of corruption.
If these were introduced and properly operated, then they would serve to reduce corruption on individual projects even where a large number of the other causes of corruption listed in this section remained outstanding. There are many factors at national level which facilitate corruption in the infrastructure sector. Corruption in government: Corruption in the governments of both developing and developed countries contributes to corruption in infrastructure.
Such corruption may occur, for example, where ministers or other political figures extort bribes or require projects to be carried out for corrupt personal benefit, or where government figures ensure, in exchange for political funding or personal benefits, that favoured contractors are awarded government contracts, and that they are protected from prosecution for corruption committed at home and abroad.
This corrupt support and protection will foster the continuation of corruption by these organisations, because they have little fear of prosecution at home or in the country where the project is located.
For example, a department responsible for international development may endeavour to encourage organisations to adopt ethical policies, to have laws against corruption strengthened, and to press for prosecution of those organisations which have acted corruptly. However, the department for trade, in the same government, whose interests may be primarily concerned with business success and profitability, may be more concerned to protect business interests, to make laws regarding corruption more lenient, to reduce requirements for disclosure and accountability, and to block prosecution for corruption.
On the one hand, the government is seeking to tackle corruption. On the other hand, it is undermining such efforts. Corruption will not be reduced unless this is made an unquestioned priority by all government departments. For recommended actions for governments, see Anti-Corruption Programme for Governments.
Insufficient reporting of corruption: Insufficient reporting of corruption fuels corruption, as the perpetrators do not fear detection. Some of the reasons for insufficient reporting of corruption are as follows:.
Insufficient prosecution of corruption: Insufficient prosecution of corruption, both in developing and developed countries, will facilitate corruption. Unless there is clear evidence that corruption will be prosecuted, unscrupulous individuals and organisations will continue to commit corruption at the expense of those ethical individuals and organisations who do not do so.
It may also be due to lack of resources, or lack of co-ordinated action at national or international level by governments, donors and industry practitioners. In addition, corruption will not be significantly reduced if there is only prosecution of low level employees and officials. It is only by prosecuting at higher levels that corruption will be significantly reduced.
The individual employees of such a department who are responsible for the selection and management of projects may be vulnerable to corruption for a number of reasons:. The above factors may encourage such employees to extort bribes in relation to the projects that they are overseeing, or may make such individuals obvious targets for bribery.
This, therefore, may encourages unethical contractors to submit inflated claims and to carry out sub-quality work. The vulnerability of other government employees to corruption: Other government departments may be involved in projects for the purposes of issuing visas, import permits, customs clearances, planning permissions, land clearance permits and other matters. In countries where corruption is widespread, the employees of such departments may have little incentive to act ethically, particularly where they are underpaid and are aware of large scale corruption higher up in government.
They may therefore resort to extortion to supplement their incomes. It is estimated that only 9 percent reported the issue to the authorities; and of this small minority, many suffered negative retaliation as a result. Evidence shows that women perceive and experience corruption differently than men, and that women suffer corruption to a greater extent due to the unequal power relations between men and women.
There are forms of corruption such as sexual extortion and petty corruption which constitute a heavy burden for women. Sexual extortion—one of the appalling gendered forms of corruption—can be defined as the abuse of power to obtain a sexual benefit or advantage. This phenomenon affects women and girls throughout Latin America, especially in low and middle-income countries and remote areas.
Sexual extortion is rarely included in the definitions of corruption, despite the fact that it has been documented that women and girls are often forced to provide sexual favors rather than money to access public services. For example, in a study of the sexual abuse of girls in schools in Botswana reported that 67 percent of female students had experienced sexual harassment by a teacher.
Aggressors were simply transferred to administrative positions or to other schools. Out of a sense of shame, girls endure violence and threats to their health and human dignity in silence; they have learned that they can be stigmatized if they speak out, while their offenders enjoy total impunity.
The trafficking of women is also related to corruption. Police complicity and acceptance of women as sexual objects interferes with efforts to reduce or eradicate human trafficking. Corruption robs girls and women of their dignity, impedes their full access to public health, education, and development opportunities, and in many cases threatens their lives.
The relationship between corruption and higher female mortality rates has also been well documented. Research published by Transparency International in revealed that the number of mothers dying during birth increases exponentially in countries where there is a higher incidence of bribery. Four hundred eighty-two women per , died during childbirth in countries where 60 percent of the population paid bribes, compared to only 57 women per , in countries where 30 percent or less of the population had been forced to pay bribes.
Among the multiple factors that intensify gender inequality in corrupt countries, one of the most important is the correlation with poverty. Detailed analysis of social prerequisites for resilience is described with reference to internationally adopted definitions as a basis for discussion of their interpretation and comparison, both historic and recent. Some worldwide corrupt practices and attitudes to them are described in contexts of resilience theory, its reality and its consequences.
Discussion of economic and social consequences of corruption is based upon Transparency International definitions and their shortcomings. Conclusions highlight a relationship between corruption, poverty and their impacts of natural hazards and causes of disasters. Depletion of national incomes by corruption relates to causes of poverty and the need for removal of corrupt practices at all social levels.
Improved quality of life may then permit emergence of required prerequisites for resilience. Investigated and published more often as a financial issue e. Drury et al.
Corruption is a cause of low development Zucman —55 and exacerbates poverty where poverty prevails; corruption, therefore, needs to be included amongst causes of the consequences of poverty, such as debt, incapacity, mental despair and despondency Ray Within influences as powerful as poverty, corrupt practices, in many forms and over long periods of time, may affect all and every exchange or transaction at every level of society, imposing additional insidious and negative influences upon the emergence of resilience.
Whatever resource and effort may be introduced for its purpose, resilience may be impeded, or may not materialise, where indigenous systems of control prevail and where social capacities are consequently inadequate. Prevailing incapacities may have been caused by a variety of circumstances, such as: long-term political repression Lewis a , ill-considered occupation or re-occupation of hazardous and damaged locations Lewis b , direct experiences of catastrophe, deaths, injury, shock or other consequences, or long-term poverty of a degree to so seriously deplete initiative and well-being as to induce physical and mental inertia Symons Any or all of these consequences may have been, or may yet be, experienced over long periods of time, separately or simultaneously, repeatedly or continuously.
In any context and at any level, if individuals are not resilient then how would community resilience come to prevail? Many less developed countries are internally perceived as most corrupt Transparency International b and some of the most corrupt are amongst those most vulnerable to natural hazards; Bangladesh, Nepal and the Philippines, for example. The ability of a system, community or society exposed to hazards to resist, absorb, accommodate and recover from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including through the preservation and restoration of its essential basic structures and functions.
A definition which may be read either as an assumption that ability exists or as a caution that it may not Lewis a. Nonetheless, requirements for resilience have come to assume a universal capability of people to absorb stress and to transform and adapt to managing risks.
Required is the capacity to adapt ability in the creation of capability for recovery Wisner Resilience-Scan Poverty and resilience cannot be assumed to go together Boubacar et al. External initiatives applied as preliminaries towards achievement of community resilience over time, for example, by the improvement of living conditions, healthcare and education as described in detail from Bangladesh Ahmed et al. Notwithstanding inculcation prior to crises to achieve the social capacity resilience requires, capacity may be annihilated or severely depleted in ensuing catastrophe and its aftermath.
Despondency, not resilience, may become the reality, expressing not ability but inert disability. Resilience may theoretically pre-exist as a basic human quality but cannot be assumed to prevail regardless of realities of physical, mental and psychological incapacities, especially in contexts of poverty.
It could be assumed from this description that the sufferer would not have had capacity for resilience. Fifty-three years later, Friedrich Engels [] wrote of England:. Everything that the proletarian can do to improve his position is but a drop in the ocean compared with the floods of varying chances to which he is exposed, over which he has not the slightest control. He is the passive subject of all possible combinations of circumstances … p. It may be impractical to assume resilience where, for example, many populations are striven by conflict and warfare, millions of people are on the move as refugees and migrants, where millions more are in abject poverty and more directly where people are immediate and longer-term victims of catastrophe.
Whereas destruction and damage are described in terms of physical impacts, these may transfer as mental, emotional, social and economic impacts upon individuals and communities.
For some time, primary resources of resilience, such as capabilities of creativity, energy and leadership, may therefore be scarce commodities. There is considerable analysis exploring the concept and the role of political will and the pressures that shape it:. Dealing with the challenge of ensuring there is political will for anti-corruption reforms has long been on the U4 research agenda.
A U4 Brief from unpacks the concept of political will to confront corruption. For particular considerations for development agencies, listen to these reflections on thinking and working politically , and review the work of the Thinking and Working Politically Community of Practice. For instance, informal social norms that value kinship ties can create pressures on public officials to extend favours to their extended family, and lead to more societal tolerance for nepotism.
Or when informal political party affiliations afford supporters access to scarce resources, they create powerful incentives for many people to join and maintain them, rather than dismantle these patron-client structures.
In such a setting, the conventional, formal rule-based anti-corruption approach is unlikely to succeed without supplementary alternative strategies. The U4 Informal contexts topic pages contains additional conclusions and implications for anti-corruption reform. See also the Basel Institute on Governance's work on informal governance , and summary findings of a Fletcher School research project on social norms and corruption Other analysts have focused precisely on the strategic implications arising from these insights.
They argue that to analyse and address high levels of corruption in contexts of scarce resources requires a different conceptual framework. In both cases, there are few incentives to abstain from corruption unless: 1.
Where such dynamics are in place, addressing corruption is also — as formulated in economic theory — a collective action problem that requires additional response strategies.
This is in contrast to a principal-agent problem, which conventional anti-corruption approaches imply. The challenges of transnational dimensions of corruption have likewise gained prominence in recent years.
When corruption is driven by international dynamics — eg increasing global demand for natural resources — an anti-corruption response must look beyond national systems. It also requires addressing the complex and opaque global financial architecture that helps corrupt officials hide or launder their illicit wealth, and the role of donor countries in creating or sustaining such opportunities. U4 topics Natural resources and energy , Oil, gas, and mining and Illicit financial flows examine some of these issues.
The above insights have generated new perspectives on alternative and supplementary anti-corruption strategies. They do not categorically reject conventional anti-corruption approaches. Instead, they highlight the complexity of the challenge and the relevance of factors outside formal governance systems — particularly the political economy and informal structures regulating the re distribution of resources.
The U4 Issue How change happens in anti-corruption identifies the main trends shaping emerging policy advice. A one-hour video of four talks in on New approaches to anti-corruption also shares useful reflections. The fact that an anti-corruption reform strategy must look beyond technocratic approaches is a common thread. By technocratic, we specifically include addressing weaknesses in laws, institutions, and governance systems through legislative and operational changes, capacity development, and other technical means.
Anti-corruption measures must also respond to contextual factors — informal dynamics in particular — that both constrain and also create opportunities for engagement. The importance of the specific reform context is broadly understood by now. Most practitioners recognise that good anti-corruption practices cannot simply be copied from one country to another.
However, the full extent and depth of requisite contextual knowledge — the political economy, the informal power relations, the societal norms — is only slowly becoming apparent.
0コメント