Approaches to anti-corruption – cautionary discussion
This article, in The Conversation, highlights the problems that we do see when trying to apply conventional approaches to anti-corruption.During the past few years, my colleagues and I have advocated for a very robust approach to corruption, using both sticks and carrots, and with the challenges in international leadership today, more must be done. As this article puts forward, “[o]ver the past few years, momentum has built to develop these new approaches – though it is still early to assess their effectiveness. Some focus on fixing government dysfunction. Others help unite people and groups trying to resist corruption. Some projects support “horizontal” monitoring by peer firms or communities, instead of government regulation, or try to “nudge” behaviors or change social norms.”
Why should we care and what should be done? This article reminds us that we must not be complacent. During the past nine months significant changes have occurred in the approach to cross border anti-corruption worldwide, and as the U.S.’s role is diminishing in policing foreign corruption, other international donor countries will need to fill the gap. What is equally concerning is the possibility of the U.S. model can also stop being positive force against corruption, but incorporate a self-serving view of anti-corruption efforts, which could encourage corrupt use of anti-corruption enforcement. For now, we need to rely on civil society and the international community, as well as law enforcement in many countries and the U.S. to see which way we are going and to make certain that we are all still going forward in the correct direction. The key thing in all of this is to remind everyone that corrupt behavior will not be tolerated, and strong enforcement mechanisms are there to support eliminating corruption everywhere.
Link: