Frequently Asked Questions

Why has UNDP published a Report on corruption in the Asia Pacific region?

Poverty and corruption go hand in hand. Corruption leads to the unfair distribution of income and inefficient use of resources, deepening poverty and widening inequality. A system where accountability, transparency and political freedoms prevail is more likely to be responsive to the needs of its citizens. Corruption affects the poor disproportionately. A Regional Human Development Report is a means to explore the linkages between human development and corruption. Across the Asia-Pacific region, corruption is being pushed more into the foreground and challenged as being damaging and unacceptable. By the end of 2007, 104 governments across the globe had ratified or acceded to the United Nations Convention Against Corruption. Now is the time to seize the moment. Just as most countries in the Asia-Pacific, in order to improve the conditions of their poorest communities, are designing targeted policies and programmes to eliminate poverty and meet the other Millennium Development Goals, so too can they devise programmes specifically to tackle corruption.

What is the connection between corruption and human development?

Corruption deepens poverty, debases human rights, degrades the environment and derails development (including private sector development) by creating disincentives for investment.

Countries in the region with higher levels of human development have lower perceived levels of corruption, as measured by the control of corruption index. There is a two-way relationship between corruption and human development. Corruption costs the developing world billions of dollars every year. It drains scarce resources and diminishes a country’s prospects for development. Constrained government revenue presents serious problems for the delivery of public services (health, education, safe drinking water, electricity). Employment, inequality and delivery of public services are then linked to human development, which can also have an independent and direct effect on corruption.

How was the theme of the Report chosen?

Stakeholders and experts from Asia-Pacific countries identified corruption as one of the most pressing concerns for the region and it was approved by the management board.

What are the types of corruption?

In grand corruption the agents are typically high-level politicians or officials who collude with corporations by, for example, accepting large bribes from contractors.

Petty corruption − also referred to as ‘street’ or ‘retail’ corruption − involves transactions that are smaller but usually more frequent. It generally involves agents or sub-agents demanding or accepting ‘speed money’ to issue licenses, for example, or to provide access to schools, hospitals or water supplies.

State capture refers to a situation in which private interest has effectively taken over certain state functions, a type of corruption generally less understood by the public or by the media. One example is when an international mining company is largely determining the contours of a country’s mining policy.

The following are the most common forms of corruption, as described in the United Nation Anti-corruption Toolkit:

• Bribery

• Embezzlement, theft and fraud

• Extortion

• Abuse of discretion

• Favouritism, nepotism and clientelism

• Conduct creating or exploiting conflicting interests

• Improper political contributions

 
What are the common characteristics of corruption?

Corruption is such a complex phenomenon that attempting a universal definition of it is fraught with difficulties. To understand the phenomenon better, we may identify some core characteristics or prerequisites for a corrupt act. Here are six:

• Gap between group and individual interest or between short- and long-term benefits
• Two or more parties since one can hardly be corrupt with one’s own self
• Consenting adults that have a common understanding, with reciprocity, explicit or understood, whether by collusion, coercion, through perceived lack of choice, passive or facilitative
• Benefit furtherance, be it private, sectional, or political party interest
• Existence of power that could be grabbed, usurped, entrusted or otherwise available; corruptors (givers) can have power; it should be available, whether in public or private hands or both
• Misuseof the power that often drives a wedge between intended and stated positions, for unintended benefits

Has globalization increased the risk of corruption?

Globalization has increased the risk of corruption but has also increased the opportunities to curb it. The most important step in the latter has been the United Nations Convention Against Corruption. At the end of 2007 in the Asia-Pacific region, out of 35 developing countries 19 have signed, seven have ratified and three countries have recently acceded. One of the aims of cross-border cooperation is to control transnational corporations (TNCs) – which generally operate more responsibly in developed countries where they are under closer scrutiny. While many TNCs have developed their own codes of conduct, a number of international agencies and civil society organizations have also established guidelines for them. For developing countries, one of the main problems is that the proceeds of corruption are laundered through offshore banks and tax havens, outside of Asia-Pacific and within. As a response to this, and to help developing nations recover assets stolen by corrupt leaders, UNODC and the World Bank in 2007 launched the Stolen Asset Recovery initiative. A rise in access to information and the growing influence of the media have increased public awareness about corruption and its consequences, meanwhile.

Is corruption only a problem of the developing world?

Corruption is a phenomenon that affects any country in the world. Corrupt ruling parties can be removed from office. Corrupt presidents, prime ministers, parliamentarians, corporate leaders in developed and developing countries have lost their jobs due to corrupt activities.

Is corruption primarily a problem of national concern?

Corruption can and does cross national borders. Most large-scale cases of corruption feature the collusion of political leaders or high government officials with transnational companies to strike deals that result in benefits for the officials and large profits for the companies.

What role can the media play in tackling corruption?

The media can serve many important functions, not just exposing corruption but also sustaining an open and transparent flow of information and fostering a climate of opinion that is increasingly intolerant of corruption. Publicity can be particularly effective against extortion, which victims may be willing to report to the press. Another type of corruption that the press can expose is collusion; neither bureaucrats nor their clients have any incentive to expose malfeasance, but journalists do – motivated either by their professional ethos or the prospect of a good story. As well as exposing individual cases, investigative journalism can lead to more profound reforms – uncovering serious systemic flaws and catalyzing public discussion and debate.

The media is one of the main channels for exposing corruption but it will only be effective if they are free from government or private sector influence. Even then the media cannot fight corruption alone. An empowered citizenry and the rule of law are important as well. 

Is technology the way to fight corruption?

Information technology (IT) is a useful tool for increasing transparency, accountability and efficiency in government services but it is not a magic bullet.

IT has already shown its value in a number of countries by speeding up court processes and systems of land registration. It is also, for example, allowing public utilities to establish ‘one-stop shops’ where all the elements required to achieve a new power connection are brought together for their convenience, without having to traipse from one office to another with multiple bribes harvested en route.

Communications and information technology also can permit transparency and the right to information. Governments and service providers can use new technology to become more accountable and responsive. In India, for example, the Central Vigilance Commission uses its website to publish the names of officers against whom corruption investigations have been ordered or on whom penalties have been imposed.

But there are dangers. Corrupt officials too may also be able to exploit such systems to their own advantage. Many governments have placed the development of national        e-governance plans in the hands of IT staff. Since they may not be very familiar with corruption issues, they need therefore to work with legal and anti-corruption experts.

How does access to information help in fighting corruption?

Information empowers and when citizens are able to demand information from public institutions they are in a better position to seek redressal and put pressure on those in authority to punish the guilty. Eight Asia-Pacific countries, including China and India, now have right to information (RTI) legislation. This defines key categories of information that all public bodies are required to publish, and establishes citizens’ rights to receive specific information on request. Legislation is, however, only the first step. The highest levels of government also have to sustain their support of RTI and public officials have to engage positively and meet their obligations fulsomely, so it is important that officials are engaged from the outset, and understand not only their obligations, but also the benefits they can derive. One development that should permit transparency and the right to information is the introduction of information and communications technology and the
extension of e-governance.

What should governments do to make anti-corruption agencies effective?

An important factor is where the anti-corruption agency (ACA) is located in government; if it reports to the office of the prime minister, for example, it can be used as a weapon against political opponents. Ideally the ACA should be a completely independent body. The autonomy of the ACA can be strengthened by ensuring that the selection and appointment of the executive(s) of the ACA is a shared responsibility of several institutions. The ability of the ACA to work in an unbiased way will depend on appropriate checks and balances as well as constant scrutiny through various oversight mechanisms. The most successful agencies have a clear focus, meanwhile. Whether a country has chosen a single or multi-agency approach, success in the fight against corruption depends to a great extent on cooperative relationships with other elements of government. Steps should be taken to ensure the ACA’s credibility among members of the public, too.

There are a number of common options from the Reports seven-point agenda which can make anti-corruption agencies more effective:

• Join with international efforts – All countries in the region should join the United Nations Convention Against Corruption.

• Establish benchmarks of quality – To judge their success, a starting point could be international benchmarks, which could be then tailored to country contexts.

• Strengthen the civil service – Some governments could raise salaries, but all should be able to ensure merit-based recruitment and promotion – along with more rigorous systems of control. Governments and donors will clearly need to invest much more in local government.

• Encourage codes of conduct in the private sector – The private sector should also play its part in controlling corruption, showing a determination first of all to obey the law and also to add its own expertise to the struggle against corruption.

• Establish the right to information – All countries in the region could enact laws on the right to information – and encourage public officials, the media and civil society organizations to take advantage of this right.

• Exploit new technology –Information technology and e-governance offer fresh opportunities to break the information monopoly of corrupt officials.

• Support citizen action – Local governments should publish the basic information on contracts to facilitate citizen auditing; individuals can do much as citizens and consumers, including keeping themselves informed and networked.

In the hands of a clean government, an ACA can be an asset. But since it can also be deployed as a political weapon, such an agency should not be created until there is a sufficient political consensus on an anti-corruption strategy.

If corruption is hidden, how can it be measured?

No single metric can measure corruption. Most corruption measurement indicators are based on people’s perceptions and are subjective. Perhaps the two most widely known and used measures of corruption are Transparency International’s corruption perception index and The World Bank’s control of corruption index. Both measures are perceived to be a reflection of the prevailing level of corruption for a given country as a whole.  However, going behind the indices, we see that both measures are business-oriented, attempting to gauge the ‘temperature’ of the investment climate for international capital, based on what selected ‘experts’ perceive. It is not clear if those living outside national capitals are surveyed and whether the perceptions of the poor are also included.

Are women less corrupt than men?

Apparently, not. This is a popular myth and rests on a fallacy of small numbers - an erroneous foundation. Many ministers are not comfortable with a female departmental head, especially in ministries of finance, commerce, public works, commercial taxes, home, etc. – the so called ‘wet posts’ – at least partly due to this myth, for fear that they may interfere with the ‘natural rate of corruption’ or the ‘velocity of circulation of funds’.  Since there seems to be more corrupt men than women, we cannot really conclude that women are less corrupt than men. It may be that women simply have fewer opportunities than men.

Is corruption always illegal?

This perception that corruption is illegal stems from a law-based understanding of corruption and the assumption that what is legal is always ‘good’ in some fundamental way. But that would rely on what the legislature passes as law. While there is certainly a large overlap between what is illegal and corrupt, the two can be quite distinct. Can an act be legal but corrupt? Can an act be illegal but ethical? While many corrupt acts are illegal (e.g., a private construction company bribing a public official to bypass building urban development control rules), others may be corrupt but perfectly legal.  This can be done for example, through offshore tax havens, electoral funding or political executives that may be immune to prosecution by law.