Government’s Accountability and

Transparency: A Powerful Force in Nation-

Building
(MODULAR APPROACH)

Mark Christian C. Amabilis

Sarah Guzman
Jay-ar Bautista
Page 1 of 27
Meesage

About the Author

Page 2 of 27
Page 3 of 27
Rationale

“Knowledge is knowledge only when the participant’s do at their best on what they learn. “ This module is the
first part of the DYLC Agenda. It is intended to make the teaching and learning process a more inter-active and productive
endeavor. In each lesson are learning activities, concept development and drills/exercises. Productive and constructive
teaching methodologies are presented and hopefully utilize to build the participant’s competencies which include among
others: professional writing style, oral presentation skills, critical analytical thinking skills, political and administrative
decision-making systems, discipline-specific knowledge (government, non-profit management, and corporate
management skills), public service skills, research skills, proper documentation, library skills, technology skills, and
globalization.

This module also builds the knowledge base in governance and eventually will be applied by students in the latter
part of the DYLC Agenda. It also prepares and develops participants to succeed as leaders, managers, analysts and
administrators in meeting change and challenges of governance in the public and non-profit sectors.

Hence this module attempts to discuss the concepts of governance according to different authors and institutions; the
key actors in governance as well as the characteristics of good governance and the accountability and transparency of the
government to become god governance. A governance model of implementation is also explored as a theoretical
alternative that offers the potential to synthesize disparate models and bring networks into the governance paradigm.

Lesson 1 presents the basic discussions to introduce the nature, concept and theoretical framework of governance. It also
provides students an understanding of the difference of governance from government as well as its evolution which will
eventually develop students’ ability to apply these concepts to current issues on governance and development.

Lesson 2 this will encourage them to develop their own ideas for enhancing Government transparency of the state and
how the youth was connected with this.

Lesson 3 this will encourage them to develop their own ideas for enhancing Government Accountability of the state and
how the youth was connected with this two.

Lesson 4 presents the issues and challenges on governance. In here, participants are required to give their insights and
opinions with regards to the issues and challenges

Each Lesson has topics which the developed through the following phases:

You’re Objectives-states the expectations in line with what you should know, understand, and able to do, produce or
performs to show there is transfer of learning.

Your Initial Tasks- activates your prior of knowledge and prepares you for higher-level tasks.

Your Text- presents the main reading that lead to acquire knowledge, make sense of, and construct meaning out of the
information and experiences contained therein.

You’re Discovery Tasks- includes activities that will expand, enrich, enhance, and broaden your understanding of the
target concepts and skills.

My Treasure- enables you to express your insights, learning, and realization on the lesson. This part contains prompts
and other organizers that will help you sum and synthesize what you have learned.

We hope that through material, you will be provided with meaningful learning experiences and relevant
competencies necessary for you to successfully meet the demands of the 21 st century.

General Objectives:

Upon the use and application of this module as a guide for learning, the students should be able to:

1. Describe the development of the definition of governance as well as the current perspectives on the word governance;

2. Discuss How Youth Connected with this DYLC Agenda

3. Discuss the functional and critical role of the Government Accountability and Transparency to become

4. Define the meaning and essence of “good governance” and internalize the importance of good governance in the
development process;

5. Apply governance concepts and perspectives to a variety of real world situations.

Page 4 of 27
6. Manifest higher order thinking skills such as mental inquisitiveness, critical thinking as well as reflective thinking
when given situations or issues related to governance.

Lesson 1

Introduction to Governance and Government

Introduction

What is Governance and Government?

This is the first leg of the module on governance and government. In this module, the instructor provides a
practical introduction in the study of governance and development to analyze an array of definitions and
meaning of the concept of governance. Later on, the participant’s will be asked to crystallize their own notion
of governance and how it may be applied in the real world.

Your Objectives

Page 5 of 27
At the end of the lesson, the learners should be able to:

1. Explain the significance of the shift in how people and nations perceive governance and how it differs from
government;

2. Critically define the meaning of good governance;

3. Comment on and criticize the meanings and implications of various definitions of governance and develop
your own definition of the concept of governance;

4. Trace the evolution of new public management which led to the definition of governance;

5. Synthesize the related and theoretically related concepts of governance;

6. Understand and criticize the eight characteristic of Good Governance

Your Initial Tasks

Direction: The participant must analyze the picture and give their opinion or insight regarding on the picture.

Your Text
THE CONCEPT OF GOVERNANCE and Government

In most dictionaries “government” and “governance” are interchangeably used, both denoting the
exercise of authority in an organization, institution or state. Government is the name given to the entity
exercising that authority. Authority can most simply define as legitimate power. Whereas power is the ability
to influence the behavior of others, authority is the right to do so. Authority is therefore the based on an
acknowledged duty to obey rather than on any form of coercion or manipulation. Weber distinguished between
three kinds of authority, based on the different grounds upon obedience can be established; traditional authority
is rooted in history, charismatic authority stems from personality
and legal-authority is grounded in a set of impersonal rules. To
study government is to study the exercise of authority.
(Heywood, 1997) Government is closely related to politics.

To study politics is in essence to study government or

more broadly, to study the exercise of authority. Politics is the art
of government, the exercise of control within the society through

Page 6 of 27
the making and enforcement of collective decisions. (Heywood 1997) The realm of politics is restricted to
state actors who are consciously motivated by ideological beliefs, and who seek to advance them through
membership of a formal organization such as a political organization. This is the sense in which politicians are
described as “political” whereas civil servants are seen as “nonpolitical”, the state as “public” and the civil
society as “private”. The institutions of the state (the apparatus of the government, the courts, the police, the
army, the society-security system and so forth) can be regarded as “public” in the sense that they are responsible
for the collective organization of the community life. Moreover, they are funded at the publics.

Expense, out of taxation. In contrast, civil society consists of what Raymund Burke called the little
platoons, institutions such as the family and kinship groups, private businesses, trade unions, clubs, community
groups and so on that are private in the sense that they are set up and funded by individual citizens. On the
basis of this public/private life division, government is restricted to the activities of the state itself and the
responsibilities which are properly exercised by public bodies. Although civil society can be distinguished from
the state, it nevertheless contains a range of institutions that are thought as “public” in a wider access.

One of its crucial implications is that it broadens our notion of the government transferring the economy
in particular from the private to the public realm. Now, the conception of politics and government move
beyond the narrow realm of government to what is thought as “public life” or “public affairs.” Since, the
government doesn’t only decide for all and the civil society and the private sectors play vital role in the
community, thus, the conception of the word “governance”. Governance is a broader term than government. In
its widest sense, it refers to the various ways in which social life is coordinated. Government can therefore be
seen as one of the institutions in governance; it

Is possible to have governance without government? (Heywood, 1997)

The Art of Governing

To govern is to exercise power and authority over a territory, system or organization. This applies to
both government and governance3. The exercise of authority is uppermost in government and remains
significance in governance but is no longer the single focus. This is because the power in governance is not so
much wielded as shared and authority is defined not so much by control of the ruler as by the consent and
participation of the governed. Is a state weak under a regime of governance? Not necessarily for it can be
stronger than ever before except that the acts expected of it are different from the role of the state as
government.

In traditional parlance, government rules and controls, but in governance, it orchestrates and manages.
These contrasts may seem overdrawn, but we will flesh out and qualify them as the discussion proceeds.

Ruling and orchestrating rest on different bases. To rule is to be the sole authority, for which the
appropriate response is to obey. A government that rules relies on force to exact compliance, and we know
from introductory from the introductory political science that the state has the monopoly of legitimate violence.
It enacts laws binding on all the inhabitants and metes out sanctions according to these laws. It delivers services
to passive recipients who have little influence in the definition of the programs or their eligibility requirement
and methods.

By contrast, to orchestrate is to call on everyone to play a part in moving the society. Power rests on the
trust the players have on the director and on each other. Because built on trust, transparency in the conduct of
governing is essential. Laws still bind all, but they are laws they had a part in bringing about. Accountability is
shared, and they who have the greatest power bear the greater responsibility.

To control is not to manage, as Landau and Stout maintained in a classic article. We have not found a
definition of governance that uses control instead of management.

To control is to direct what each part of the system must do. It assumes that the controller knows the
goals and is certain how an action it requires can lead to it. Deviation will be viewed as error in a context of full
knowledge.
Page 7 of 27
 Controlling assumes a law (using the term in scientific sense) but to manage is to act on a hypothesis.
The manager works on incomplete information and tests if the hypothesis is borne out in a given situation. A
manager then must be open to inputs from outside him which might provide new information and to methods
other than those originally promulgated that could lead to the specified goal. Governance chooses management
over control because its system is permeable, admits outside the influences, assumes no omnipotence or
omniscience on the part of the decision-maker, and subjects decisions to the evaluation and critique of all those
with a stake in them.

All governing is an act of leadership, of moving a society towards a preferred direction. While
government can have a connotation of being interested only in maintenance and in preserving peace and order,
governance implies leadership toward societal development. This is shown in the following passage from the
International Institute of Administrative Sciences.

Governance is the process whereby elements in society wield power and authority, and influence and
enact policies and decisions concerning public life, economic and social development.”

This shows that the concept is indeed a product of the late twentieth century when development became
a preoccupation of societies and states. The definition of development shall be discussed on the succeeding
modules.

The Need for Good Governance: Why Governance Matters

Good governance creates a strong future for an organization by continuously steering towards a vision
and making sure that day-to-day management is always lined up with the organization’s goals. At its core,
governance is about leadership.

An effective board will improve the organization’s results, both financial

and social, and make sure the owners' assets and funds are used
appropriately. Poor governance can put organizations at risk of commercial
failure, financial and legal problems for directors/trustees or allow an
organization to lose sight of its purpose and its responsibilities to its
owners and people who benefit from its success.

The Rights-Based Approach to governance implies that the holders of

rights should also participate fully in deciding how those rights are
fulfilled, such as through participation and greater empowerment. And as
the Millennium Declaration emphasizes, one of the most important
requirements for achieving this and the MDG is “governance” The report points out that Asia and the Pacific
has many diverse forms of democratic governments4. In some cases these have involved highly centralized
administrations that have offered a limited space for popular participation. Nevertheless, in recent years there
have been significant changes. One of the most dramatic examples has been in Indonesia, which for decades
until the late 1990s had a strongly centralized administration. Now the democratic Government in Indonesia
has not only offered free and fair elections; it has also enacted a radical process of decentralization.

Another vital attribute of governance in MDGs is efficient and effective administration. The Government of
India, for example, is determined to be more responsive and accountable to the public. A further governance
priority in Asia and the Pacific is the fight against corruption, which degrades the quality of governance and hits
hardest at the poorest. The Government of China for example is among those taking firm measures to combat
corruption and promote integrity in governance.

Governance refers to the development of governing styles in which boundaries between and within public
and private sectors has become blurred.

 The essence of governance is its focus on mechanisms that do not rest on recourse to the authority and
sanctions of government….Governance for (some) is about the potential for contracting, franchising and
new forms of regulation. In short, it is about what (some) refer to as the new public management.
However, governance …is more than a new set of managerial tools. It is also about more than achieving

Page 8 of 27
 greater efficiency in the production of public services (1998, p. 17-18). Peters and Pierre agree, saying
that governance is about process, while NPM is about outcomes (1998, p. 232).

The authority and sanctions of government….Governance for (some) is about the potential for contracting,
franchising and new forms of regulation. In short, it is about what (some) refer to as the new public
management. However, governance …is more than a new set of managerial tools. It is also about more than
achieving greater efficiency in the production of public services (1998, p. 17-18). Peters and Pierre agree,
saying that governance is about process, while NPM is about outcomes (1998, p. 232).

Governance is ultimately concerned with creating the conditions for ordered rule and collective action
(Stoker, 1998; Peters and Pierre, 1998; Milward and Provan, 2000). As should be expected, all efforts to
synthesize the literature draw from theories found in the separate traditions. Berman owes debts to Van Meter
and Van Horn (1975, 1976) and Goggin, et al (1990), among others. See Kaboolian (1998) for a description of
reform movements in the public sector that collectively comprise “New Public Management” (NPM). I adopt
her definition of NPM as a series of innovations that – considered collectively – embody public choice
approaches, transaction-cost relationships, and preferences for efficiency over equity. Notes, the outputs of
governance are not different from those of government; it is instead a matter of a difference in processes (1998,
p. 17).

Governance refers to the development of governing styles in which boundaries between and within public
and private sectors have become blurred. The essence of governance, and its most troublesome aspect,
according to its critics, is a focus on mechanisms that do not rest on recourse to the authority and sanctions of
government (Bekke, et al, 1995; Peters and Pierre, 1998; Stoker, 1998; Rhodes, 1996, 1997). Stoker (1998, p.
18) draws five propositions to frame our understanding of the critical questions that governance theory should
help us answer. He acknowledges that each proposition implies a dilemma or critical issue.

As Peters and Pierre note, “governance is about maintaining public-sector resources under some degree
of political control and developing strategies to sustain government’s capacity to act” in the face of management
tools that replace highly centralized, hierarchical structures with decentralized management environments.

Good governance is about both achieving desired results and achieving them in the right way.

Since the "right way" is largely shaped by the cultural norms and values of the organization, there can be no
universal template for good governance. Each organization must tailor its own definition of good governance to
suit its needs and values.

There is plenty of room for different traditions and values to be accommodated in the definition of good
governance. At the same time, all is not relative. There are some universal norms and values that apply across
cultural boundaries.

A number of multilateral organizations and institutions (e.g. the United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP), the Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development (OECD), the Asian Development Bank)
have reflected on the elements of good governance and on their relation to development. As the ethos and
experience of these institutions vary, so, too do their perception of what constitutes good governance.

The challenge for all societies is to create a system of governance that promotes supports and sustains human
development - especially for the poorest and most marginal. But the search for a clearly articulated concept of
governance has just begun.

Good governance is, among other things, participatory, transparent and accountable. It is also effective and
equitable. And it promotes the rule of law. Good governance ensures that political, social and economic
priorities are based on broad consensus in society and that the voices of the poorest and the most vulnerable are
heard in decision-making over the allocation of development resources.

THE EIGHT CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD GOVERNANCE BY UNDP

Good governance is participatory, consensus oriented, accountable, transparent, responsive, effective

and efficient, equitable and inclusive and follows the rule of law. It assures that corruption is minimized, the

Page 9 of 27
views of minorities are taken into account and that the voices of the most vulnerable in society are heard in
decision making. It is also responsive to the present and future needs of society. Much has been written about
the characteristics of efficient government, successful businesses and effective civil society organizations, but
the characteristics of good governance defined in societal terms remain elusive.

Interrelated, these core characteristics are mutually reinforcing and cannot stand alone. For example,
accessible information means more transparency, broader participation and more effective decision-making.
Broad participation contributes both to the exchange of information needed for effective decision-making and
for the legitimacy of those decisions. Legitimacy, in turn, means effective implementation and encourages
further participation. And responsive institutions must be transparent and function according to the rule of law if
they are to be equitable.

These core characteristics represent the ideal - and no society has them all. Even so, UNDP believes that
societies should aim, through broad-based consensus-building, to define which of the core features are most
important to them, what the best balance.

Participation

Participation by both men and women is a key cornerstone of good governance All men and women should have a
voice in decision-making, either directly or through legitimate intermediate institutions that represent their interests. Such
broad participation is built on freedom of association and speech, as well as capacities to participate constructively.
Participation could be either direct or through legitimate intermediate institutions or representatives. It is important to
point out that representative democracy does not necessarily mean that the concerns of the most vulnerable in society
would be taken into consideration in decision making. Participation needs to be informed and organized. This means
freedom of association and expression on the one hand and an organized civil society on the other hand.

Rule of law

Legal frameworks should be fair and enforced impartially, particularly the laws on human rights.

Good governance requires fair legal frameworks that are enforced impartially. It also requires full protection of
human rights, particularly those of minorities. Impartial enforcement of laws requires an independent judiciary and an
impartial and incorruptible police force.

Transparency

Transparency is built on the free flow of information. Processes, institutions and information are directly accessible to
those concerned with them, and enough information is provided to understand and monitor them.

Transparency means that decisions taken and their enforcement are done in a manner that follows rules and
regulations. It also means that information is freely available and directly accessible to those who will be affected by such
decisions and their enforcement. It also means that enough information is provided and that it is provided in easily
understandable forms and media.

Responsiveness

Institutions and processes try to serve all stakeholders. Good governance requires that institutions and processes
try to serve all stakeholders within a reasonable timeframe.

Consensus oriented

Good governance mediates differing interests to reach a broad consensus on what is in the best interests of the group
and, where possible, on policies and procedures.

There are several actors and as many view points in a given society. Good governance requires mediation of the
different interests in society to reach a broad consensus in society on what is in the best interest of the whole community
and how this can be achieved. It also requires a broad and long-term perspective on what is needed for sustainable human
development and how to achieve the goals of such development. This can only result from an understanding of the
historical, cultural and social contexts of a given society or community.

Equity and inclusiveness

Page 10 of 27
All men and women have opportunities to improve or maintain their well-being.

A society’s well being depends on ensuring that all its members feel that they have a stake in it and do not feel excluded
from the mainstream of society. This requires all groups, but particularly the most vulnerable, have opportunities to
improve or maintain their well being.

YOUR DISCOVERY
1.) What is your understanding of the concept of governance? And what is your own concept of governance.
Explain.

2.) Explain the shift of government to governance.

3.) How these eight characteristics of Good Governance affect the Youth?

Activities:

1. Written Report: “The Importance of Governance & Development and its interrelationship” (individual
output)

Note: The report is typewritten and not to exceed one page

“Personal Challenges help become

a better person, Recognize these
challenges would help one become
better prepared life
MY TREASURE
My journey through this lesson enabled me to
learn______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________-

It made me realize__________________________________________________________________

I, therefore, commit to

___________________________________________________________________________________

Lesson Two

Government Transparency and How Youth Connected

Specific Objectives

At the end of the lesson, the learners should be able to:

1. Explain the significance of the shift in how people and nations perceive government transparency and
transparency;

2. Critically define the meaning government transparency and transparency;

3. The participant must understand the connection of government transparency in youth

4. Comment and criticize the connection of government transparency in youth.

YOUR INITIAL TASKS

Page 11 of 27
 Analyze Me

The participant’s will be asked to come up with the generic ideas

on opinions on Government Transparency. (Your answer will be
based on the picture below)

YOUR TEXT
Introduction

There is no commonly agreed definition of transparency, but there is a general consensus that it relates to the right
to know and public access to information.

In a broad sense, transparency is about: how much access to internally-held information citizens are entitled to;
the scope, accuracy and timeliness of this information; and what citizens and youths (as "outsiders") can do if "insiders"
are not sufficiently forthcoming in providing such access.

Excessive secrecy can undermine the quality of public decision-making and prevent citizens and youth from
checking the abuses of public power. This can have a corrosive effect on virtually all aspects of society and governance.
Transparency -- in terms of both information disclosure and dissemination and access to decision-making -- is therefore
very important as it better enables civil society to:

• Hold Government and/or Key Decision-Makers to Account;

• Promote Good Governance;

• Improve Public Policy and Efficiency;

• Combat Corruption

Transparency is built on the free flow of information. Processes, institutions and information are directly
accessible to those concerned with them, and enough information is provided to understand and monitor them.
Transparency means that decisions taken and their enforcement are done in a manner that follows rules and
regulations. It also means that information is freely available and directly accessible to those who will be
affected by such decisions and their enforcement. It also means that enough information is provided and that it
is provided in easily understandable forms and media.
Government transparency

Openness, accountability, and honesty

define government transparency. In a free
society, transparency is government's obligation
to share information with citizens. It is at the
heart of how citizens hold their public officials
accountable.

Governments exist to serve the people.

Information on how officials conduct the public
business and spend taxpayers’ money must be
readily available and easily understood. This
transparency allows good and just governance

Government transparency is
traditionally broken into three different types:
proactive disclosure, requesting public records,
and campaign finance disclosure.

The Benefits of Transparency

1. Democracy, accountability and participation

Page 12 of 27
  Absence of, or inaccessibility to, information often creates a sense of disempowerment, mistrust and frustration.
 Information by itself is not power, but it is an essential first step in the exercise of political and economic power.
The public is only able to truly participate in the democratic process when they have information about the
activities and policies of government, and when people can see what benefits and services they are entitled to and
whether they are receiving what should be expected. Knowledge of what the state and other institutions do is
fundamental to the power of people to hold them to account and improve the way in which they work. Absence
of, or inaccessibility to, information often creates a sense of disempowerment, mistrust and frustration. On the
other hand, access to relevant, up-to-date information can create a basis for natural exchange, allowing both
official and the public to better access decisions taken and policies implemented.

2. Good Governance

Transparency is also inextricably linked to governance, one definition of which is "a way of implementing
policies through cooperation whereby representatives of the government, market and civil society participate in mixed
public and private networks" (Bodegom et al.2008).

Transparency is an important principle of good governance since a degree of clarity and openness about how
decisions are taken can help to build the capacity of the poor and/or marginalised to play a role in policy formulation and
implementation; to influence these decisions that affect their lives; and to encourage decision- and policy-makers to
exercise their power for the greater good.

3. Increased efficiency and effectiveness

 Greater transparency can also bring benefits to government themselves, directly or indirectly. Therefore,
transparency is also considered to be a key component of public policy and efficiency.
 Studies have shown that in countries where information flows freely in both directions:
 The knowledge that decisions and processes are open to public scrutiny can make government bodies
work better, by imposing on them a constant discipline;
 Government effectiveness is improved: even the most competent and honest decision-makers need
feedback on how policies are working in practice;
 Efficiency in the allocation of resources can also be improved: By ensuring that the benefits of growth are
redistributed and not captured by the elite, transparency reforms can result in substantial net savers of
public resources and improved socioeconomic and human development indicators.

4. A weapon against corruption

 As noted in Transparency International's Global Corruption Report 2003, "information is perhaps the
most important weapon against corruption."
 Having access to information plays a key role in efforts to curb corruption and control its impact, since:
 Free and guaranteed access to information enables citizens, the media and law enforcement agencies to
use official records as a means to uncover cases of corruption and maladministration;
 Increasing transparency increases the risk of detection of corrupt practices and this can act as a deterrent
to future corruption.

Government Transparency in Youth

In this topic we are going read and understand this example of project that has connection to the Government
Transparency in Youth and answer the guide questions.

Project Title: 'Youth for democracy – transparency and good governance in allocating and managing public funds
for youth activities, at local authorities’ level',

Description

The project 'Youth for democracy – transparency and good governance in allocating and managing public funds for youth
activities, at local authorities’ level', implemented by CPE, in partnership with SAR and CTR, addresses the issue of
public authorities inefficiency in allocating and managing public resources for youth, as well as the lack of capacity of
NGOs to be involved in these processes. The project is needed due to incoherent legislation and the lack of objective and
transparent methodologies for managing public funds for youth. Therefore, the project aims at raising the level of
transparency regarding the management of youth resources at local level, and the capacity of youth NGOs to access these
funds and get involved in decision making processes. The targeted group are the members of youth NGOs, as well as
young people, as indirect beneficiaries). A diagnosis report of the current situation in relation to disbursing public
resources for youth at local level, a monitoring report, a set of recommendations for improvement, a consultation report, a
watchdog network and 100 trained young people are among the project's main results.

Page 13 of 27
Summary of project results

The project focused on the lack of transparency in the use of financial resources for youth. The need for the project was
generated by the public authorities’ lack of interest in supporting youth activities, by the unclear legislation, or by the lack
of objective and transparent evaluation criteria of the youth projects, funded through public grants. The project’s
objectives were to increase the transparency level in managing public funding for youth projects at a county and local
level and to increase young people’s ability and youth NGOs’ capacity to access funds and become involved in decision
making processes concerning these funds. As a direct result of the project, a watchdog network was developed with the
intent to monitor the way in which the resources for youth have been managed, at the local level. Consequently, a
diagnosis report was issued, in order to portrait the status quo of the public resources for youth management, available at
the national level. The major impact of these actions consisted in involving and mobilising over 100 youth NGOs in
obtaining public funding for youth at a local level, and also in increasing the amount of public funding with over 500,000
Euro at the local level and almost 250,000 Euro at county level, practically doubling the existing amount available
through the Ministry of Youth and Sports. Another important result is the good practice guide concerning the involvement
of NGOs in the good governance of youth funding at the local level, which was sent to the county and local councils - a
tool for public workers to responsibly deal with the management of youth funding. In the same time, the guide is also
addressed to youth NGOs, with the purpose of contributing to an increase in the level of involvement in decision making
processes, and of encouraging a proactive behaviour, as far as decision making processes and public policy making is
concerned. Also, a diagnosis was undertaken concerning the way public authorities allocated and managed funds for
youth projects. The project also managed to increase the capacity of over 100 youth NGOs to access public funds and
become involved in decision making processes, by training around 200 young people. The online platform developed in
the project - http://tineripentrudemocratie.cpedu.ro - is another useful tool for those who want to get involved in the
domain.

Guide Question

1. Why does the project experiencing of lack of transparency and how as youth advocate help them to have good
transparency?
2. Aside from the project objective that they said what can you add on their projective as a youth advocate.
3. If you were become the President of the Philippines, What Policy or Executive Order that can be helpful to the
youth in terms of Government Transparency?

YOUR DISCOVERY

Questions

1. In a simple way what can you suggest to the president to have a good transparency and also and good
governance?
2. Why Government Transparency does is a key for Good governance?
3. Among the 4 benefits of transparency which is the most important?

Note: The report is typewritten and not to exceed one page.

“Personal Challenges help become

a better person, Recognize these
challenges would help one become
better prepared life
MY TREASURE
My journey through this lesson enabled me to
learn______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________-

It made me realize__________________________________________________________________

I, therefore, commit to

___________________________________________________________________________________

Page 14 of 27
 LESSON 3

Government Accountability and How the Youth is Connected

Specific Objectives

At the end of the lesson, the participants should be able to:

1. Explain the significance of the a Good Accountability in The Youth

2. Critically define the meaning government accountability;

3. The participant must understand the connection of government accountability in youth

4. Comment and criticize the connection of government accountability in youth.

5. Analyze how the Social Accountability affects Government Accountability.

7. How Procurement connected to the Government Accountability

YOUR INITIAL TASKS

Semantic Mapping

The participant’s will be asked to come up with a on the generic concepts Government Accountability in Youth.

Answer the Following Questions with your understanding

1. What is social accountability/ government accountability?

2. What is dialogue with government like in the context of seeking social accountability?

Introduction

CITIZENS around the world are discovering the power of social accountability to influence governance – and,
consequently, shape the life of their communities.

Webster's English Dictionary defines the term "accountability" in two ways. First, it is "the quality or state of
being accountable." Second—and this is particularly relevant to public officials like you—the term could also refer to "the
obligation or willingness to accept responsibility or to account for one's actions." Many of you are Spanish-speaking, and I
think you would share my view that we do not have a concept equivalent to "accountability" as just described. Now, if
language reflects culture, does this then indicate that the concept of accountability is only significant in some cultures but
not others? I would certainly think not. On the contrary, language and culture should evolve to embrace elements that are
essential for governments to perform effectively in modern societies. Accountability is a perfect example of such an
element.

Government are concerned that corruption poses serious problems and threats to democratic society.
Government consider corruption as no longer a local matter but a transnational phenomenon

Accountability’s is a Responsibility to someone or for some activity. The obligation of a subordinate to

answer to his superior for the exercise of authority in line with his delegated responsibility, for the performance
of duties assigned to him. In a democracy, those who work in the public sector are guided by and subordinated
to political authority (those elected by the people to govern)
Page 15 of 27
 YOUR TEXT
Social Accountability/Government Accountability

Social accountability is an approach towards building a transparent and responsive government that is
willing to create the space for collaboration with civil society for improved governance, increased development
effectiveness through better service delivery, and empowerment. Social accountability is a key component of
the governance equation.

The World Bank (2005) defines social accountability as a process of demanding accountability from the
government through civic engagement. It emphasizes the role of citizens in promoting good and effective
governance. It is placed in the demand-side of governance, which assumes an informed, responsible and
engaged citizenry, complementing the role and function of government. Some examples of social accountability
initiatives are participatory budgeting, public expenditure tracking, and citizen report cards.”

The emergence of social accountability is part of the

realization that governance cannot be left to the government alone.
Governance does not only pertain to the task of running the
government, nor only to organizational effectiveness neither in
policy formulation and implementation, nor only to power,
authority or influence in public matters. Viewed from the greater
sphere of social development, governance requires the inclusion of
more stakeholders, especially the ordinary citizens, as participants
in decision-making. Their various positions and views must be
taken into consideration in coming up with relevant and equitable
social reforms, which result presumably in good and effective
governance. It is important to see the ethical challenge of
managing and responding to the plurality of beliefs and interests in
the sphere of governance. Criteria and principles for ethical reasoning should guide each of the contributors of
action and decision.

This is a healthy antidote to the unfortunate compromises of politics and a key ingredient of a
responsible and meaningful participation. It should not be considered a constraint to, but a propeller of correct
and long-lasting reforms.

PROCUREMENT AND FUND TRACKING

Introduction

This course showcases civil society initiatives that had been used to track the expenditures of different
national agencies in the Philippines. It will feature experiences in tool development, collaboration with
government, networking and mobilization of citizen

YOUR TEXT
Procurement is an area of intervention for
social accountability while consensus building is
introduced as a fundamental skill in practicing it.

Government Procurement

Acquisition of goods services and works in a

timely manner those results in best value to the
government and to the people.

Objectives of Public/Government Procurement

Economy/Efficiency

Page 16 of 27
  Acquiring goods and services of defined specifications on a timely basis and at the lowest
evaluated cost based on the principle of value for mone

Foster competition

  Equality of opportunity for qualified suppliers to compete for public contracts

Predictability

  Consistent and fair application of principles and regulations at each stage of the procurement
process

Accountability

  Oversight to secure the confidence of the contractors in the process and the trust of citizens in
the proper use of public funds.

Transparency

  Equality of access to information for all bidders before, during and after the bidding.

Protect the interest of citizens and youth

  Process and result of procurement assure quality goods and services reach the citizens and
youth in a timely manner
  carefully monitor contract execution, give credible information to citizen sand youth about
the actual providers of goods and services and opening avenues of complaint and recourse
mechanisms in case of contractor failure.

Three Crucial Forms of Accountability

Three crucial forms of accountability: 1) vertical (elections); 2) horizontal (i.e. within government – such as
supreme audit institutions); and 3) societal (e.g. non-governmental organizations (NGOs) with watchdog
functions; control exercised by a free press). In addition, the literature on public administration emphasizes 4)
managerial accountability – that is, accountability of lower levels of public administration to higher levels.

While all four of these forms of accountability are desirable, they may not all be present at once. For instance,
managerial accountability, which is essential to maintain a well-functioning bureaucracy, can thrive both in
democratic systems where vertical accountability tends to be stronger (e.g. OECD democracies) and in more
authoritarian ones (e.g. China). On the other hand, these different forms of accountability can become more
effective when they are interlinked. For example, societal accountability will have greater weight if it is not
only supported by vertical accountability (e.g. free and fair elections) but also complemented by a parliament
and judiciary that can hold the executive to account. However, it is also important to keep in mind this may be a
very high standard to achieve, especially in contexts where governance institutions are weak, as in much of the
developing world.

There are also external dimensions to accountability. For instance, signatories to UNCAC or the OECD Anti-
Bribery Convention have made commitments at the international level to reduce corruption (more on this in
Chapter 5). For countries that are particularly dependent on aid, accountability to donors also matters – as can
be seen in the larger role donors are playing through budget support, for example.

Government Accountability/Social Accountability in Youth

In this module the participants will read and understand a certain project that can be related to this
government accountability/social accountability that which the youth will understand what really the connection
or what must they does of this accountability. After that the participant read this there are set of question to
answer regarding of the project they read.

Page 17 of 27
 The development objective of the Youth Inclusion and Social Accountability Project for
Georgia is to increase the participation of youth in demand-side governance, social
accountability, and civic engagement at the municipal level, leading to greater youth inclusion.
Some of the negative impacts and mitigation measures include: (1) notifying the local
construction and environment inspectorates and communities of upcoming activities; (2)
ensuring that the demolition debris is kept in controlled area and sprayed with water mist to
reduce debris dust; (3) ensuring that during operations the engine covers of generators, air
compressors, and other powered mechanical equipment are kept closed, and equipment is placed
as far away from residential areas as possible; (4) identifying waste collection and disposal
pathways and sites for all major waste types expected from demolition and construction
activities; (5) implementing the approved land acquisition plan and framework (if required by the
project); and (6) ensuring safe and continuous access to office facilities, shops, and residences
during renovation activities, if the buildings stay open for the public.

Citation

Georgia - Youth Inclusion and Social Accountability Project : environmental and

social management framework (English). . Washington, D.C. : World Bank Group.
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/174981468031147062/Georgia-Youth-
Inclusion-and-Social-Accountability-Project-environmental-and-social-management-
framework

Question: Write your insight or opinion on this project and what is really the effects or reason why
government accountability important on the youth to increase participation of the youth. (Based your
answer to this project)

YOUR DOSCOVERY TASKS

Write a reaction paper regarding on the Government accountability and Government procurement on
the Philippines.
Your reaction will be graded according to this rubric

Content------30%

Organize------20%

Grammar---- “Personal Challenges help become a

better person, Recognize these
challenges would help one become
MY TREASURE better prepared life

My journey through this lesson enabled me to

learn______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________-

It made me realize__________________________________________________________________

I, therefore, commit to

___________________________________________________________________________________

Page 18 of 27
 LESSON 4

CORRUPTION AS AN ISSUE OF GOVERNEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY AND GOVERNMENT

TRANSPARENCY

Specific Objectives

At the end of the lesson, the learners should be able to:

1. Explain the significance of the understanding a corruption as an issue

2. Critically define the meaning corruption;

3. Establish a common understanding of corruption

4. Explain the different forms and types of corruption

5. Explain why politicians doing corruptions.

PEDAGOGICAL ACVITITIES:

Picture Analysis

Page 19 of 27
The participant will analyze the picture and give their insights or opinion regarding the picture.

Introduction
The term “corruption” refers to the misuse of resources or power for private gain. Transparency
International defines corruption as “the abuse of entrusted power for private gain” (Kolstad et al., 2008 [S;
OR]).1 The UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) does not prescribe a single definition.

WHAT TO KNOW

Academic definitions…

“[b]ehaviour which deviates from the formal duties of a public role because of private-regarding
(personal, close family, private clique) pecuniary or status gains; or violates rules against the exercise of certain
types of private-regarding influence” (Nye: 1967)

“The violation of public duties by private interests when rules or norms objectively define those two
realms” (Chabal & Daloz: 1999).

Practitioner definitions…

Abuse of public power for private benefit (World Bank)

• Abuse of entrusted power for private benefits (gain)

(Transparency International) – Abuse: Behavior that deviates from formal or informal rules established by
the one that delegated the activity

– Delegated Power: Appointive (bureaucrats, managers), elective (politicians), or by tradition – includes

private sector

Page 20 of 27
 – Private Benefits: Cash, goods, power, benefits to relatives/kin, religious, ethnic or political groups, today or
in the future for both bribe taker and bribe maker

– Undue influence: (through corrupt practices or threats) on the rules of the game (laws, regulations etc.)

Forms of corruption: grand vs. petty

 Grand or high-level corruption – Usually takes place at policy formulation end of politics – “Grand”
or “high” due to level at which takes place, not amount of money  “political corruption” – Can involve
appointments, inside information, policy influence, political party financing, public official misuse of
power.
 Petty or bureaucratic corruption – Exchange of small amounts of money or favors between the public
and the low-level civil servants/bureaucrats who are supposed to serve them – Everyday corruption
where public official meets private citizen

The commonly used distinction between political corruption and bureaucratic corruption is also helpful.
Political corruption takes place at the highest levels of political authority (Andvig and Fjeldstad, 2001 [S; OR]).
It involves politicians, government ministers, senior civil servants and other elected, nominated or appointed
senior public office holders.

Political corruption is the abuse of office by those who decide on laws and regulations and the basic
allocation of resources in a society (i.e. those who make the “rules of the game”). Political corruption may
include tailoring laws and regulations to the advantage of private sector agents in exchange for bribes, granting
large public contracts to specific firms or embezzling funds from the treasury. The term “grand corruption” is
often used to describe such acts, reflecting the scale of corruption and the considerable sums of money
involved.

Bureaucratic corruption occurs during the implementation of public policies. It involves appointed
bureaucrats and public administration staff at the central or local level. It entails corrupt acts among those who
implement the rules designed or introduced by top officials. Corruption may include transactions between
bureaucrats and with private agents (e.g. contracted service providers). Such agents may demand extra payment
for the provision of government services; make speed money payments to expedite bureaucratic procedures; or
pay bribes to allow actions that violate rules and regulations. Corruption also includes interactions within the
public bureaucracy, such as the payment or taking of bribes or kickbacks to obtain posts or secure promotion, or
the mutual exchange of favours. This type of corruption is often referred to as “petty corruption”, reflecting the
small payments often involved – although in aggregate the sums may be large.

Political corruption and bureaucratic corruption are related. There is evidence that corruption at the top
of a bureaucracy increases corruption at lower levels (Chand and Moene, 1999 [P; OBS, case study]). However,
as Chapters 5 and 6 discuss, combating these types of types of corruption requires different approaches, even if
donor efforts have not emphasised this (Kolstad et al., 2008 [S; OR]).

Corruption is closely linked to the generation of economic rents and rent-seeking. This refers to actors
securing above-normal returns from an asset – not by adding value to it through investment but rather through
manipulating the social and political environment. The establishment of a monopoly is a classic example of this.
The asset then becomes inherently more valuable. Rent-seeking involves corruption whereby the payment of
bribes is necessary to manipulate the environment so as to benefit a particular actor.2

There are particular challenges related to the measurement of corruption. This owes to the clandestine
nature of corruption and the reliance of corruption measures on perception-based data, which themselves are
determined by understandings of corruption that vary across countries and societies. Chapter 4 discusses this in
further detail.

Table 1: Categories of corruption

Categories of corruption Description

Bribery The act of dishonestly persuading someone to act in
one’s favors by a payment or other inducement.
Inducements can take the form of gifts, loans, fees,
rewards or other advantages (taxes, services,
Page 21 of 27
 donations, etc.). The use of bribes can lead to collusion
(e.g. inspector’s under-reporting offences in exchange
for bribes) and/or extortion (e.g. bribes extracted
against the threat of over-reporting).
Embezzlement

To steal, misdirect or misappropriate funds or assets

placed in one’s trust or under one’s control. From a
legal point of view, embezzlement need not
necessarily be or involve corruption.
Facilitation payment A small payment, also called a “speed” or “grease”
payment, made to secure or expedite the performance
of a routine or necessary action to which the payer has
legal or other entitlement
Fraud The act of intentionally and dishonestly deceiving
someone in order to gain an unfair or illegal advantage
(financial, political or otherwise).
Collusion An arrangement between two or more parties designed
to achieve an improper purpose, including influencing
improperly the actions of another party.
Extortion The act of impairing or harming, or threatening to
impair or harm, directly or indirectly, any party or the
property of the party to influence improperly the
actions of a party.
Patronage, clientelism and nepotism Patronage at its core means the support given by a
patron. In government, it refers to the practice of
appointing people directly Sources

Factors that facilitate corruption

Corruption is a phenomenon with many faces. It is characterised by a range of economic, political,

administrative, social and cultural factors, both domestic and international in nature. Corruption is not an innate
form of behaviour, but rather a symptom of wider dynamics. It results from interactions, opportunities, strengths
and weaknesses in socio-political systems. It opens up and closes down spaces for individuals, groups,
organizations and institutions that populate civil society, the state, the public sector and the private sector. It is,
above all, the result of dynamic relationships between multiple actors.

2.1 Conceptualizing corruption: Principal-Agent and Collective Action Approaches

Principal-agent

A principal-agent problem exists when one party to a relationship (the principal) requires a service of
another party (the agent) but the principal lacks the necessary information to monitor the agent’s performance in
an effective way. The “information asymmetry” that arises because the agent has more or better information
than the principal creates a power imbalance between the two and makes it difficult for the principal to ensure
the agent’s compliance (Booth, 2012 [P; OBS, various qualitative]).

This theoretical perspective has been widely used to understand corruption across geographies and
sectors (e.g. the police, customs, procurement, service delivery) (Klitgaard, 1988 [TC and P; OBS, case
studies]; Rose-Ackerman, 1978 [TC and P; OBS, quantitative and qualitative historical analysis]). In an analysis
of how corruption has been conceptualised in a variety of disciplines, for example, Marquette and Peiffer (2014
[TC and S; OR]) note all of the 115 studies looking at corruption’s impact on economic growth in Ugur and
Dasgupta’s meta-analysis (2011 [S; SR]) “adhered to an explicitlystated principal-agent approach to corruption,
or their account was closely related to that approach”. Moreover, Persson et al.’s (2013 [P; OBS, case studies])
empirical analysis of anti-corruption efforts finds the designs of most anti-corruption programmes reflect a
principal-agent understanding of corruption rather than any other alternative view.

According to this theory, conflict exists between principals on the one hand (who are typically assumed
to embody the public interest) and agents on the other (who are assumed to have a preference for corrupt
transactions insofar as the benefits of such transactions outweigh the costs). Corruption thus occurs when a

Page 22 of 27
principal is unable to monitor an agent effectively and the agent betrays the principal’s interest in the pursuit of
his or her own self-interest (Persson et al., 2013 [P; OBS, case studies]).

So, for instance, public servants or elected officials (who in this case would both be the agents) may be
able to abuse their public office to secure private rents in exchange for public services because members of the
public (the “principals” in this case) cannot hold them to account. Or, elected officials as the principals may
have difficulty ensuring adequate oversight over the behavior and actions of civil servants (the agents), who
may engage in acts of corruption that the principals (i.e. the elected officials) cannot control (Marquette and
Peiffer, 2014 [TC and S; OR]).

Thus, principal-agent theory sees corruption exclusively as an agent problem, with the principal unable
to play an effective monitoring or oversight role, mostly as a result of a lack of information (Andvig and
Fjeldstad, 2001 [S; OR]; MungiuPippidi, 2006 [TC and P; OBS, qualitative analysis]). As Chapter 6 on anti-
corruption efforts discusses, based on this understanding of corruption, donor thinking and practice have
focused largely on efforts to reduce the discretion of agents and to alter their individual incentives and
motivations (Olken and Pande, 2013 [S; OR]). A crucial assumption embedded in this kind of thinking is that
“principals are principled” (Klitgaard, 1988 [TC and P; OBS, case studies]). That is to say, they (be they elected
officials or ordinary citizens) are by their very nature interested in holding agents to account and in controlling
corruption, and they would be able to do so effectively if only they had sufficient information at hand.
However, as a number of analysts have noted, this cannot always be taken for granted. Drawing on qualitative
fieldwork from Kenya and Uganda, for example, Persson et al. (2013 [P; OBS, case studies]) argue anti-
corruption programmers based on the principal-agent model do not take into account that in highly corrupt
environments there may be a lack of “principled principals”. This is also one of the key analytical insights and
empirical findings emerging from Booth and Cammack’s (2013 [P; OBS, case studies]) comparative research
across different countries in Africa. This kind of evidence suggests that, in cases where corruption is systemic,
and where there are low levels of social and political trust, it may be more useful to think of corruption in terms
of a collective action problem rather than as a principal-agent one (Booth, 2012 [P; OBS, various qualitative]).

Collective action

Collective action approaches to corruption are still an emerging body of work, in both conceptual and
empirical terms. From a collective action perspective, all stakeholders – including rulers, bureaucrats and
citizens alike – are self-maximisers, and the way they behave to maximise their interests is highly dependent on
shared expectations about the behavior of others (Ostrom, 1998 [TC and P; OBS, review of empirical evidence
and theory]). As Persson et al. (2013 [P; OBS, case studies]) argue in their study analysing incentives for
corruption in Kenya and Uganda, the rewards and costs of corruption depend on how many other individuals in
the same society are expected to be corrupt. If corruption is the expected behavior, individuals will opt to
behave in corrupt ways because the costs of acting in a more principled manner far outweigh the benefits, at
least at the individual level. The evidence suggests this holds true even assuming there is perfect information,
and even if everyone condemns corruption and realizes a less corrupt outcome would be more beneficial for
society at large (ibid.). In short, from a collective action perspective, the key calculation about the costs and
benefits of corruption derives from the cost of being the first to opt out of corruption in a given setting or
context. The problem of corruption is thus rooted in the fact that, where corruption is pervasive, principals are
also corrupt and they do not necessarily act in the interest of society as a whole but rather pursue particularistic
interests (Mungiu-Pippidi, 2011 [P; OBS, cross-sectional data analysis and case study]; Persson et al. 2013 [P;
OBS, case studies]).

Again, though, the choice should not be for one

conceptualization of corruption over the other. Rather, an
emerging message from the literature is that what is
needed is a better understanding of the complementarities
between these two approaches, and the conditions under
which each can contribute to a better understanding of
corruption dynamics and incentives.

Page 23 of 27
 Corruption in the Public Sector

Bureaucratic incentives

A body of work looking at corruption in the public sector focuses on the incentives individual
bureaucrats have to engage in corruption, and the consequences of such behaviour (Olken and Pande, 2013 [S;
OR]). One crucial incentive this literature explores relates to compensation and wage levels in the public sector.
The evidence on this remains mixed. Van Rijckeghem and Weder (2001 [P; OBS, cross-country regression
analysis]), for example, find an association between wage levels and corruption. Other studies, however, have
cast doubt on the strength of this relationship and the direction of causality (e.g. corruption could be a factor
leading to reduced salaries rather than the other way around because, in corrupt countries, civil servants may be
assumed to earn sufficient income from corruption and as a result salaries are kept low) (Rose-Ackerman and
Søreide, 2012 [S, SR]) (see also Chapter 5.5).

In addition, there are measurement indicator issues with observing corruption and a clear need for
innovation on how to monitor and evaluate anti-corruption interventions. This issue is reflected in a World
Bank strategy on governance and anti-corruption (World Bank, 2007 [P; OBS, case studies]), which concluded
that, “Low pay can contribute to corruption within a public administration, particularly when total remuneration
fails to pay a living wage, as is often the case in many African countries. […] [However] Changes in
compensation levels can only work if they are part of a package to reform public servants’ behaviour. Other
elements are essential to reducing corrupt practices.” An important message emerging from the literature is the
crucial need for greater use of comprehensive reforms to combat corruption (more on this in Chapter 5).

Other bureaucratic incentives and structures include methods of selection of civil servants, relevance of
civil service jobs to the tasks at hand and internal monitoring and discipline mechanisms, including punishment
for the corrupt and incentives for better performance (Khan, 2001 [S; OR]). Investigating the impact of merit-
based recruitment on corruption in 35 countries across the developing world, Evans and Rauch (2000 [P; OBS,
survey, regression analysis]), for instance, find higher values on the merit-based recruitment index are
associated with lower levels of corruption. However, whether reform improves actual performance remains
uncertain.

Simplified regulations (e.g. to obtain a permit or other legal document from the state, such as a driver’s
licence) are said to lead to decreased opportunities for corruption, which can result in increased numbers of new
businesses and wage employment. Setting up structures to encourage competition between bureaucrats is also
theorised to drive down corruption levels. For example, if bureaucrats have to compete with one another for
bribe revenue derived from the issuing of permits and other legal documents, those on the other side of this
exchange will in principle search for the cheapest bribe associated with obtaining a required service (Kiselev,
2012 [TC]). However, there is still little rigorous evidence testing these ideas, and further research is needed to
offer a greater steer on the role bureaucratic incentives and structures can play in reducing corruption.

States and markets

From a macroeconomic perspective, an important argument advanced in the literature is that economic
systems where the state is heavily interventionist are also more prone to corruption. The logic is that large
involvement of the state in the economy, especially where checks and balances and wider accountability
mechanisms are lacking, allows individual politicians and bureaucrats to manipulate markets as a means of
generating profits through non-competitive mechanisms. They use such mechanisms not only to enrich
themselves but also to build a basis of patronage and political support. Countries across Africa and Latin
America through the early 1990s provided numerous examples of this form of corruption (Bates, 1981 [P; OBS,
qualitative analysis, comparative]; Evans, 1995 [TC and P; OBS, case studies]).

Incomplete or ongoing processes of economic liberalization have also provided new opportunities for
the appropriation of public resources and accumulation of wealth. Van de Walle (2006 [TC and P; OBS,
historical analysis]) describes this as a “partial reform syndrome” in Africa: economic crisis has forced elites to
accept the inevitability of structural reform, but its implementation has been uneven at best and manipulated by

Page 24 of 27
leaders who have understood that it “would provide them with new kinds of rents, as well as with discretion
over the evolution of rents within the economy”. The privatisations throughout Eastern Europe and the former
Soviet Union, and later Africa and Latin America, which often degenerated into “piratisation”, are also a good
example of this dynamic (Fritz and Rocha Menocal, 2007 [TC and S; OR]; Kaufmann and Siegelbaum, 1996
[TC and P; OBS, qualitative and quantitative analysis]; Tangri and Mwenda, 2001 [P; OBS, case study]).

However, it is also essential to keep in mind that state intervention as such has not always resulted in
types of corruption that are detrimental to development. The experiences in Asia, including of the so-called
“East Asian tigers” (including South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore), and more recently China and Vietnam,
stand in stark contrast with those of African and Latin American countries pursuing state-led development
(Evans, 1995 [TC and P; OBS, case studies]; Fritz and Rocha Menocal, 2007 [TC and S; OR]; Haggard, 1990
[TC and P; OBS, qualitative historical analysis, comparative]). As Mushtaq Khan (2006 [TC and P; OBS,
descriptive statistics and regression analysis, review of existing theory and evidence]; 2009 [P; OBS,
quantitative – descriptive statistics and regression analysis]) has also argued, in some instances corruption can
be “market-enhancing” and enable social transformation in developing countries – so understanding its different
types is essential. Chapter 4.2 explores in further detail this discussion, highlighting some more positive by-
products of corruption, especially in terms of economic development.

In addition, countries that have similar types of formal regulations may experience markedly different
levels of corruption depending on the wider context, including, for instance, the way regulations operate in
practice and the kind of discretionary power bureaucrats enjoy in their actual implementation (Duvanova, 2011
[P; OBS, quantitative analysis]). In settings where formal institutions are weak, formal regulation remains
uneven or partial in its application, and this in turn breeds corruption. However, in many Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, where the quality of institutions is high, extensive
and complex regulation has not necessarily been associated with increased corruption (see below for more on
the linkages between corruption and governance/institutions) (Kolstad et al., 2008 [S; OR]). In short, formal
regulations underpinned by strong institutions need not facilitate corruption, and may help reduce it. Formal
regulations underpinned by weak institutions may simply exacerbate corruption.

Weak institutions

Weak governance is one of the fundamental causes of corruption. The political and economic
opportunities available in different political systems, as well as the strength and effectiveness of state, social and
economic institutions (Johnston, 2005 [P; OBS, quantitative analysis, case studies]), shape the conditions in
which corruption can thrive. In particular, the centralisation of power in the executive and in accountability
mechanisms that are deficient gives actors (especially elites) too much discretion (see Box 3). This is one of the
key distinctions Acemoglu and Robinson (20011 [TC and P; OBS, regression analysis]) identify between
“extractive” and “inclusive” institutions in their historical analysis of why some states succeed in promoting
development over time and others do not.

Corruption as embedded in social relations

Ethnographic approaches to corruption focus on the importance of sociocultural norms and practices for
understanding corrupt behaviour, stressing that culture is a dynamic social construct that interacts with the
broader political and economic environment. Three main findings emerge from this kind of ethnographic
research on the functioning public administrations, especially in Africa (Anders, 2005 [P; OBS; case study];
Blundo and Olivier de Sardan 2006 [TC and P; OBS, literature review, ethnographic research]).

First, there is evidence that the public sector in some Sub-Saharan African countries is undergoing a
process of “informal privatisation”. Rather than signifying an absence of rules, this process is characterised by
an excess of complex de facto norms that are at odds with formal rules and blur the boundaries between licit and
illicit practices.

Second, the boundaries between corrupt practices and other behavior or actions are often difficult to
define because corruption is situated within wider everyday practices that are not corrupt but often facilitate and
legitimize corruption. Interactive and dynamic networks are a pervasive feature of the social landscape in Africa
and are an essential element of the everyday strategies those working in and using public administrations and
services adopt. This point to the normative importance of social ties, or the moral imperative to help one’s kin

Page 25 of 27
(Anders, 2005 [P; OBS; case study]; Olivier de Sardan, 1999 [TC]). Personalization of relationships with public
officials is therefore a preventive strategy, one that necessitates continual investment.

Corruption in the Philippines context

• Low ranking on TI’s Corruption Perceptions Index

– Considered to be a corrupt country, though improved

– Ranks 85 out of 175 on the CPI, score of 38 out of 100 in 2014

– Score of 36 out of 100 in 2013; 34 out of 100 in 2012

• Long history of government corruption

– Ferdinand Marcos and family stole billions of US dollars

• Corruption reportedly high among civil servants, in court system, and in customs

– And also in private sector

• Legislative framework against corruption exists

• President Aquino’s commitment to fighting corruption

Accountability and Transparency as a Powerful Force in Nation-Building

Transparency and accountability are critical for the efficient functioning of a modern economy and for fostering
social well-being. In most societies, many powers are delegated to public authorities. Some assurance must then be
provided to the delegators—that is, society at large—that this transfer of power is not only effective, but also not abused.
Transparency ensures that information is available that can be used to measure the authorities' performance and to guard
against any possible misuse of powers. In that sense, transparency serves to achieve accountability, which means that
authorities can be held responsible for their actions. Without transparency and accountability, trust will be lacking
between a government and those whom it governs. The result would be social instability and an environment that is less
than conducive to economic growth.

In the case of oil-producing countries, these concepts take on even greater importance. Oil wealth creates major
opportunities, especially in developing countries. The government—including parliamentarians—plays an important role
in managing these opportunities. At what pace should the oil be extracted? How should the proceeds be used? Which
investments will best address the country's development needs? The decisions made on such issues can have a long-
lasting impact, and can affect the well-being of today's as well as future generations in a society.

Yet, at the same time, the experiences of some developing countries in the management of oil wealth offer
dramatic illustration of the problems that could be posed by resource riches. Typically, the exploitation of oil generates
very large and sudden revenue inflows. This change alone creates significant challenges for developing countries, not
least because their administrative systems are often not well-equipped to handle such flows. Throw in the uncertainty
associated with volatile oil prices, and you have an added layer of complexity that further strains an already over-
burdened system. At best, these circumstances challenge the most able policymaker on how to handle the new-found
wealth. At worst, they present prime opportunities for outright corruption

Adequate transparency and accountability are therefore critical for ensuring that resource wealth is managed for
the benefit of the whole population. Transparency in oil sector operations allows democratic debate on how oil wealth
should be handled. In that regard, while the economic implications of poor oil resource management are clear, we must
never overlook the likely social consequences of such failure.

“Personal Challenges help become

a better person, Recognize these
challenges would help one become
better prepared life.
MY TREASURE

Page 26 of 27
 My journey through this lesson enabled me to
learn______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________-

It made me realize__________________________________________________________________

I, therefore, commit to

___________________________________________________________________________________

Page 27 of 27