Although it differs in sophistication, forms, and intensity from state to state, corruption is a global problem rooted in societies. Recently, impunity has drawn massive attention, especially in third world countries. Any reasonable government, at all levels, must handle corruption as a problem to achieve actual development mainly because of its adverse consequences on political, human and economic development. To recapitulate, recent research has increasingly explored the topic of corruption.
Corruption is a serious challenge for numerous public administration agencies across the world. Public administration is a general term used to refer to government as either an activity or entity. Structurally, they can be authorities, departments, public offices, agencies and commissions that deliver government programs and policies. Corruption is considered as any anti-ethical practices or purposes of the public administration. The vice is often depicted as the failure of the entity of the civil service as well as a betrayal of the fundamental vocational ethic of the administrator in service to the public as “honestly and disinterestedly as trustees of the public interest (Whitton, 1994). However, since historical times, the institutional norm of public administration has been an approach of curbing corruption. The prevention attempts within the control of public administration are usually designed to promote the integrity of public administrators.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
For example in Africa, Nigeria, current analyses, media reports, social networks and public commentaries substantially insinuate that corruption is the largest sector with numerous practitioners. This, therefore, results in negative implications especially in regards to the general development of the country. It is not alarming that Adegbite (2009) stated that in the event of no accountability, development is bound to be stunted. In most developing countries, corruption is highest among influential public administrators who have and still regard themselves as beyond reproach, and have seen anti-graft campaign initiatives with utter disdain. Corruption, therefore, must not only be viewed as a menace but also a stumbling block to the consolidation of democratic governance in developing nations.
The costs of corruption are evident in the economy, usually manifested in the slow development, impaired trade, poverty and mismanagement of resources (Mauro, 1998). The consequence of corruption in public administration can be undoubtedly pernicious. When fraud is conceived as the way of operation in the public sector, damage surpasses loss of mismanaged resources while administration risks sabotaging both its capacity to be reliable and the trust of citizens in the equal application of public authority and resources (Thompson 1992). In a public entity, it is challenging to ensure compliance with federal policies or compliance with the rule of law. A precise wrecking institutional consequence for the administration is that honest and competent persons can be hindered from working for state all further limiting its potential for effectiveness and integrity (Quah, 2007).
Background of the Issue
Citizens all over the world depend on the public sector to deliver reliable utility services such as infrastructure, electricity, security, medical and education services. The public sector is responsible for providing utilities, management of state resources, regulation of private industries, distribution of pensions and collection of taxes. However, efficient delivery of services and proper resource management is dependent on organizations that comply with principles of transparency, accountability, and integrity. For most countries, corruption is a significant challenge, especially in the public sector. Corruption reflects itself at multiple levels of society, from small enterprises to multinational corporations. Corruption is a social concept intrinsic to individuals, organizations, governments, and countries in both developing and developed countries. Regardless of the continued efforts of international agencies and states to curb the norm, corruption as a legal and ethical issue is still prominent. This paper aims at evaluating corruption as a phenomenon and accountability not just theoretically, but with efforts to construct possible solutions to eradicate bribery and boost responsibility of public administration, especially in developing countries.
Importance of the Issue
Although lightly perceived, corrupt figures in the public sector present a huge problem for developing countries. The consequences of corruption are extensive, and they damage both communities and individuals. Corruption has become extremely rampant to the degree of weakening public trust and decreasing confidence in the government generally. Therefore, there is a need to establish approaches to initiate the journey towards the eradication of the culture of corruption in public institutions.
Literature Review
Corruption is referred to as the inappropriate use of public mandate or office for private advantage (The World Bank Group, 2012). Impunity occurs in various forms such as extortion, bribery, graft, embezzlement, pilferage, nepotism, campaign contributions, speed money, and forgery of documents (Klitgaard, 1993). While impunity is often associated with the public sector, it also occurs in various other aspects of administration such as NGOs and political alliances. Any personal motivations for making favorable decisions are regarded as corruption.
There are risk factors that motivate corrupt behavior and cause corrupt events in the public sector. The nature of work performed is a critical factor in optimizing the occurrence of the fraudulent activity. This means that issues such as the discretion exercised by a position, the service related to delays and an individual’s status in an entity are vital factors that can optimize corruption in public administration. Secondly, working conditions can maximize the incidence of corruption in the public sectors. Operating conditions such as job dissatisfaction, lack of job benefits, and the wage and its association to need are some of the factors that motivate corruption in public administration. Individual dependencies and experiences are crucial issues to consider when evaluating the factors optimizing corruption. In addition, dependencies on drugs and gambling as well as past ethical decision patterns are vital issues to consider. Generally, an incentive of low salaries for public servants along with corruption opportunities availed by inadequate public systems and the negligible risks of apprehension and punishment motivate occurrences of corruption in public administration (Quah, 2007).
In regards to the above, corruption in developing countries can be blamed on greed, poverty and the insatiable desire of individuals to amass wealth. Indeed, greed is a significant factor in optimizing the menace of corruption. Inadequate salaries for public servants are not the only motivation for a public official to act, and the people factors surpass the opportunity of financial reward. A well paid public sector manager will encounter multiple personal pressures than a politician and might still be prone to corruption. Corruption offers unfair advantages to those willing to breach the law. Any public servant, their friends, and relatives willing to give bribes in exchange for any public service or federal contracts is corrupt. Even more disturbing is the fact that networks of corruption can tolerate illicit conduct as well as offer the involved mutual protection. In 2002, a report emphasized the importance of organizational atmosphere over wage level and depicted that the cooperation of civil servants sustains public corruption.
Corruption generally means any inappropriate use, squander and misdirection of public resources for personal gain by a public administrator at the expense of the general public development or interests. Drawing from a political science point of view, Heidenheimer et al., (1989) and Lambsdorff, (2007) suggest that impunity is commonly conceived as the effect of dysfunctional overlap between the public and private sectors. From this perspective, the task is to depict the institutional and organizational structures that pave the way for corrupt conduct. Ekiyor (2005) describes that corruption is the illegal use of public mandate or influence by a public administrator to benefit and advance oneself or any other person at the disadvantage of the public, contrary to legislation or oath of office. Worse still, it is unfortunate that the menace of corruption knows no period or era. In agreement Gould & Koulb (1964) contend that impunity is not an aspect of a single era in the political history of any nation; it is endemic in authoritarian and other levels of government. Scott (1972) emphasized that corruption must be perceived as a constant, recurrent and an integral aspect of the operation of the majority of political systems.
Also, it would be negligible to limit impunity to involve money alone. Corruption occurs in various forms, as stated earlier. It can either happen through influence, peddling for future advantage or gift giving. This depicts that the gap between non-corrupt and corrupt action is extremely narrow. Arguably, while gift-giving to public servants to demonstrate appreciation for excellent service is legally and ethically condoned in some societies, such practices are condemned in other cultures. Such practices are sometimes tolerated in developed countries such as Nigeria due to the absence of law enforcement concrete policies against such practices. Some of the nations with active and clear laws in regards to such practices include China, Singapore, and the Philippines.
Discussion of Possible Solutions
The ideal approach to solving the menace of impunity is evaluating the risk factors and establishing measures to eradicate those factors. Some of the factors that optimize corrupt conduct in public administration include poverty, unemployment, job satisfaction, individual dependencies, among others. To this end, some of the possible solutions to solve the menace of impunity involve paying civil servants a living wage, create employment, surveillance, establishing anti-corruption agencies and controlling drug intake.
Public administrators along with the government and politicians should unite efforts towards massive job creation to solve problems such as unemployment, drug abuse, and poverty; which eventually optimize corrupt behavior. Developing countries sometimes encounter inadequacy regarding technology infrastructure. However, with the help of the private companies and developed nations, they should advance their technological structures. Consequently, the technology infrastructure optimizes innovation which subsequently leads to entrepreneurship and ultimately job creation. More so, anti-corruption agencies should promote training programs and career seminars.
Additionally, mentorship schemes in the government and public companies can enhance skill acquisition in younger generations. Surveillance, through developed technology infrastructure, can help monitor and curb corrupt behavior in public administration. Surveillance computer software and electronic monitors, among other inventions, can assess fraudulent conduct in federal agencies and companies. However, such an approach will yield no positive results if the operation is breached in the sense that they are tampered with, or perpetrators are alerted of the surveillance. Increasing the number of employees can help curb corruption in the mind that officials can no longer solicit monetary benefits from others for speedy completion.
Paying public servants a reasonable wage that provides a proper standard of living as per the living wage can reduce the occurrence of corruption in developing countries. Low salaries are one fundamental cause of the corrupt behavior. In most developing countries, where the massive consequences of impunity are apparent, most employees are paid below the minimum living wage. Even decent jobs such as clerical and office jobs pay a meager salary. As a result, they anticipate making extra money through bribery. If bureaucrats at the bottom levels along with other public servants such as the police made enough money, perhaps they would not get tempted to receive and even solicit for bribes. To curb this kind of motivation for corrupt behavior salaries should be revised periodically and adjusted based on economic factors. Nonetheless, public employees ought to be subjected to anti-corruption education and training, focusing on the adverse consequences of impunity.
Individual factors such as drug intake are other additional aspects that lead to corrupt occurrences. Curbing the impunity revolving around drug business demands the contribution of the public and the government. The demand for hard substances is the backbone of the drug trade. Therefore, governments should launch awareness campaigns against drug abuse. In learning institutions, there should be informative and educative courses related to drug use integrated into the curriculum. Additionally, some bureaucratic individuals may be drawn to corruption to fund their addictions. The creation of such awareness programs will curb drug trade-related impunity.
Recommendations
From this research, it is apparent that power and corruption are intertwined. The main problem in developing countries is beyond corruption, as leaders conduct the most corrupt practices in those countries. It is evident that there are minimal chances of substantial development considering the extreme degree of corruption in developing countries. The absence of reliable, accountable leaders with high moral values, integrity, and vision continues to derail developing countries, unless otherwise. Nonetheless, the eradication of corruption as a social problem is an absolute requirement for better public life. In regards to this conclusion, this research paper recommends that:
Occupants of developing countries, especially leaders should step up their moral values.
There should be a recharge towards the fight against impunity by rejuvenating all anti-corruption bodies as well as equally initiating educative campaigns and awareness programs of ethical behavior.
Governments must adopt not only a political willingness but also a culture that emphasizes the constitutional position of curbing corruption in developing countries. This is mainly in most developing countries, where corrupt individuals are mutually protected from reproach in exchange for benefits.
Legislators must establish new policies that ensure accountability
Channels should be created to give the public relevant tools to participate actively and engage in their respective governments. The general public should be involved to identify problems and brainstorm solutions.
The legal system ought to dismiss any public servant as soon as they are proven guilty of indulging in corrupt practices.
References
Adegbite, E. O. (2009) “Accounting, Accountability and National Development” in
Compass (December 16), 33-34.
Gould, J and Kolb, W. L, (1964): A Dictionary of Social Science, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York.
Heidenheimer, A. J., Johnston, M., & Le Vine, V. T. (Eds.). (1989). Political corruption: A handbook . New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Klitgaard, R. (1988). Controlling corruption . Univ of California Press.
Lambsdorff, J. G. (2007). The institutional economics of corruption and reform: Theory, evidence and policy . Cambridge University Press.
Mauro, P. (1998). Corruption: causes, consequences, and agenda for further research. Finance and development , 35 , 11-14.
Quah, J. S. (2007). Combating corruption Singapore-style: Lessons for other Asian countries. Md. Ser. Contemp. Asian Stud. , 1.
The World Bank 2012 Global Monitoring Report 2012: Food Prices, Nutrition, and the Millennium Development Goals. The World Bank Washington DC.
Thompson, D. F. (1992). Paradoxes of government ethics. Public Administration Review , 254-259.
Whitton, H. (1994). The rediscovery of professional ethics for public officials: an Australian review. Ethics: Education and Training. Federation Press: Leichhardt , 39-59.
