Complete Book PDF (4.12MB) - World Bank eLibrary

Overview 7
and group discussion with a field survey of shallow boreholes using a
submersible camera—lowered down the borehole—to ascertain whether
construction standards matched design specifications and invoices.
In terms of policy making and regulation, the chapter notes that few
opportunities for rent seeking appear to exist for politicians because
funding mechanisms and prioritization is systematized, reasonably transparent,
and rules-based. In addition to recommendations for improving
sector governance and efficiency, the authors propose (a) that the position
of state-owned drilling companies be clarified to reduce perceptions
of malpractice or unfair competition, and (b) that licensing procedures
for drilling contractors be relaxed somewhat to lower entry barriers and
encourage competition.
In terms of planning, budgeting, and financial transfers, corruption risk
is viewed as low despite the speed of program development, investment,
and decentralization. In tendering and procurement, the study highlights
major variations in stakeholder perceptions of corruption risk but does
not uncover concrete evidence of malpractice. Recommendations focus
on the need to strengthen record keeping and ensure greater transparency
and access to information about tender processes.
In borehole construction and management, the postconstruction survey
of 26 shallow drinking water boreholes in the Oromia region and
the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and People’s Region (SNNPR)
highlighted corrupt practice in the form of short-drilling in 10 percent
of the sample and concerns about a further 20 percent. Calow,
MacDonald, and Cross suggest that spot checks on construction (using
the approach piloted) and improvements in site supervision of drilling
contractors by government staff, combined with stronger community
oversight and monitoring of headwork construction, would help improve
construction standards and reduce corruption risk.
Chapter 5: Justice Sector Corruption in Ethiopia
Linn A. Hammergren assesses the levels of corruption in the justice sector
as being relatively low. Mixing informant interviews, focus groups,
performance statistics provided from the agencies covered, and document
analysis, her study finds that corruption risks center primarily on
political interference in high-profile cases and payments or solicitation
of bribes to change decisions or pretrial actions in both criminal and
civil cases.
Of the two types of risks, the latter—payment or solicitation of bribes
to alter preliminary actions (for example, arrests, witness summonses, and