'What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs'

More documents

Recommendations

Info

What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsability of the implementing organisation or group to engage with other stakeholders, especiallygovernment authorities, was critical to the success of most programs. It is not surprising that theorganisations running successful programs against corruption optimised their internal factors beforetheir program was launched.External conditions were important, even highly influential, but appear to have less of an impact on thesuccess of the programs than the internal factors. For most organisations, external factors were akinto dynamics or limitations that their programs needed to work within. However it was certainlyimportant that organisations understood and considered carefully the possible impact of the externalenvironment on their community programs. Successful programs were therefore situated in a positionthat gave the implementing organisation room to manoeuvre within the local social, political andcultural context.Two external factors were important for a majority of programs: ‘different stakeholders recognisingcorruption as a problem’ and ‘community members discussing or talking about corruption’ were eachessential for nearly two thirds of the case studies. Only two programs did not depend on either one ofthese factors, namely Ethics and Sport and Children’s Movement for Civic Awareness. Interestingly,both these programs did depend on the factor of ‘external supporter publicly endorsing the program’.There were also unanticipated catalysts, external factors that were difficult to predict and had beenrealised as facilitating success only in hindsight. This was an external supporter offering unexpectedpublic endorsement of a program, or a crisis event that jolted people’s consciousness aboutcorruption. Catalysts are difficult to cultivate and predict, so it is helpful to note that in no case studywas an unexpected catalyst the sole reason for a program’s success.Overall only three factors appear to be universal and essential to the success of all programs. First isthe internal factor of determining a clear and defined focus and strategy for the program with in-builtflexibility, and second is the human resources component – having a skilled, competent team toimplement the program. Third, the trust of communities was also a universal reason for success. Thisis a special factor, as it is perhaps both an internal and external factor. Organisations and groups needto look inwards and structure their processes for maximum participation with community members.However, trust must come from the external community towards the program and the programimplementers.The most significant result of this research was that there was no single factor or catalyst thatunderpinned the success of a community anti-corruption program. Every program was successfulbecause of a combination of factors, sometimes only a few, but often up to six or seven significantreasons.Given the Australian aid program has a significant interest in supporting anti-corruption programs inthe Pacific region, this research also considered how lessons learnt could be applied in a Pacificcontext. Six case studies are recommended for further research and consideration for piloting in thePacific:a. Committees of Concerned Citizens (Case Study One, page 13)b. Textbook Count (Case Study Six, page 20)c. Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres (Case Study Seven, page 22)d. Ethics and Sport (Case Study Nine, page 25)e. Civic Clubs, Children’s Movement for Civic Awareness (Case Study 10, page 26)f. Anti-corruption coalitions (Case Studies 12-15), page 28)These short listed programs could be adapted for small, rural and isolated Pacific communities, aswell as small urban populations. Predominately these are programs that do not depend on political willfor reform in order to achieve short-term progress. They are also activities that do not require thecondition that communities are vocal about or are discussing corruption, appropriate for Pacificcommunities where corruption often remains a social taboo. These programs can build awareness andbreak down taboos about corruption in a non-confronting, non-threatening manner, such as thepositive angle of Ethics and Sport. Committees of Concerned Citizens can be established throughnetworks that are important in Pacific communities, such as through churches or with the endorsementof traditional leaders. Transparency International’s successful Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres- 6 -
What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programsparticularly deserve further investigation for their possible relevance for Pacific communities becauseof their capacity to confront corruption on many fronts: through education, support for individual victimsof corruption, empowering communities and capacity building of state accountability mechanisms.In concluding, this research should be considered a first step towards understanding why certaincommunity based anti-corruption programs have been successful, and investigating what might beappropriate for community anti-corruption programs for the Pacific. The following arerecommendations for Transparency International Australia’s next steps:• Field-based in-country research for six short-listed programs• Consultation with Transparency International Chapters in Pacific• Repeat or follow-up of NISPAC studies• Research into role of Pacific Island traditional governance systems in fighting corruption• Careful consideration of what Transparency International cannot do- 7 -
Page 1 and 2: TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL AUSTRALI
Page 4 and 5: What works and why in community-bas

'What works and why in community-based anti-corruption programs'

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?