Complete Book PDF (4.12MB) - World Bank eLibrary

242 Diagnosing Corruption in Ethiopia
their practices. Where previously they may have turned a blind eye to
their staffs’ engagement in corrupt practices, they have now established
robust internal procedures in support of strict anticorruption policies. Yet
corruption persists in the sector, spurred on by the ease with which it can
be hidden and by the competitive pressures of globalization. There is no
single, or simple, solution to this problem, but much can be achieved by
creating more incentives for good practice and by better using existing
tools to improve transparency and accountability.
Warning Signs of Corruption in Construction
The link between weak governance and corruption. In any country,
many of the typical manifestations of corruption may also be the result
of innocent, though equally damaging, weaknesses in governance at any
level. It is therefore important not to jump to hasty conclusions. One of
the most effective ways to reduce corruption is to improve, clarify, and
communicate basic management processes and procedures so that when
corruption does arise, it can be readily identified as such and dealt with
accordingly.
Such processes include the establishment of an objective, quantifiable
basis for measuring whether, and to what extent, anticorruption measures
are proving effective. This study considers typical high-level indicators
and warning signs (both direct and indirect) of the risk of corruption
without addressing the more complex issue of ongoing monitoring of
progress against an established baseline.
The increased attention to corruption as a result of anticorruption
initiatives can have the effect of generating a temporary rise in perceptions
of corruption before the benefits of reform become fully apparent.
It is therefore quite possible that one of the short-term effects of the
Ethiopian government’s recent decision to assess and address the risk of
construction-related corruption may, ironically, be to increase the perception
of corruption in the sector.
Direct indicators. Direct indicators of corruption include the numbers of
prosecutions, and convictions, occurring as a result of corruption in the
construction sector. Even in developed countries, however, such data
should be viewed with caution because they are highly dependent on the
authorities’ willingness and capacity to detect and prosecute corruption.
The hidden nature and ease of concealment of corruption in construction
means that it can go undetected. Anticorruption agencies do
not necessarily possess the skills, nor the full authority, needed to