INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY Corruption destroys trust in institutions - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

yaron
institutional integrity corruption destroys trust in institutions n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY Corruption destroys trust in institutions PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY Corruption destroys trust in institutions

play fullscreen
1 / 12
Download Presentation
INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY Corruption destroys trust in institutions
99 Views
Download Presentation

INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY Corruption destroys trust in institutions

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITYCorruption destroys trust in institutions FRANCISCO CARDONA Senior Advisor OECD SIGMA Programme 2013 Building Integrity Conference Monterey, CA, USA 25-28 February 2013

  2. Institutional integrity is what makes that citizens and other institutions bestow confidence to a given institution or organisation, or to a governance system as a whole, or to a nation

  3. Two kinds of trust (Corruption destroys both) Trust is required for an international cooperation seeking to produce effective results Trust is a essential component of democratic societies: it enables public institutions to operate properly (citizens’ trust in governments)

  4. Trust for Effective International Cooperation The trust needed for effective international cooperation is based on: Like-mindedness Shared values Mutual recognition Mutual reassurancethat systemic safety is ensured Agreed rules to constrain the behaviour of the participants in a politico-administrative grouping as to reduce the transaction costs

  5. Citizens’ Trust-generators Breaking down trust into its components Credibility of policies: Reassurance that they serve the public interest while emerging from an orderly held democratic debate (transparency is a pre-condition for credibility) Reliability and Resilience of institutions and public bodies that are to implement the policies Predictability and Contestability of public decisions and actions, based on due process Accountability of those holding authority

  6. How to design institutions capable of garnering trust? -1 Institutional designs and managerial arrangements need to: Ensure that mechanisms to prevent or quickly remedy failure are anticipated in the building up of administrative and governance systems Guarantee a certain degree of resilience to make sure that the system is able to resist attacks or to reduce the recovery time once failure has occurred (adaptive efficiency) Acknowledge the complexity of the system and therefore that it necessitates constant attention, monitoring, supervision, evaluation and so forth (i.e. checks and balances)

  7. How to design institutions capable of garnering trust? (cont.) Put in place a sound reward scheme which encourages expected behaviour Respect expertise: trust correlates positively with deference to expertise (application of professional knowledge and demanding accountability from experts are crucial for trust) Decision-making procedures ensure predictability and contestability before independent instances

  8. Some past governance reforms have weakened trust and led to more corruption -1 Inappropriate deregulation and a fixation for reducing red-tape in an indiscriminate way Privatisation and contracting-out of many public functions without ensuring that outstanding contract management capacities are retained in the public administration Generalised denigration of public employees (Suleyman, 2003) and systematic downsizing of the public workforce

  9. Some past governance reforms have weakened trust and led to more corruption (cont.) Unrestricted application of a “market logic”, especially the idea of institutional competition instead of cooperation (and performance-related pay) Weakening impartial institutions providing checks and balances and reduction or elimination of controls, by seeking more flexibility and discretion in public management Reduction of the civil or service impartiality and professional autonomy for the sake of responsiveness to the partisan preferences of the government of the day

  10. Policy goals of any public governance reform intended to reduce corruption Improving policy credibility Ensuring institutional reliability and resilience Guaranteeing predictability and contestability of public decision-making Ensuring accountability of public office holders Breaking the “vicious circle of bad government” Approximation to a “good administration ideal”

  11. Managerial arrangements to put in place Strengthening core state institutions, in particular the institutions for checks & balances : administrative justice, ombudsman-type institutions, anti-corruption agencies, access to information commissioners, court of accounts/ SAI, etc. Factoring ethics and inequality reduction into the better regulation agenda Strengthening the professionalism of the public service (reduction of politicisation and enhancing the merit system) and personal accountability mechanisms Enhance the parliamentary oversight role Managerial improvements: internal financial control, integrity management, integrity plans (risk assessments) Enhance the better quality public services delivery agenda, including the management of expectations E-accessibility and E-government

  12. The vicious circle of bad government