Legal Aspects of Combating Corruption: The Case of Zambia
Powered By Xquantum

Legal Aspects of Combating Corruption: The Case of Zambia By Ken ...

Chapter 1:  Introduction
Read
image Next

Kaufmann adds that it is a myth to argue that it takes generations for governance to improve.35 According to Kaufmann, while it is true that institutions often change only gradually, in some countries there has been a sharp improvement in the short term, and that this evidence defies the view that while governance may deteriorate quickly, improvements are always slow and incremental.36 For instance, there has been a significant improvement since 1996 in the ‘voice and accountability’ indicator in countries ranging from Bosnia, Croatia and Ghana, to Indonesia, Serbia and Sierra Leone.37 And Kaufmann notes that the improvements exhibited by some African countries in a short period of time challenge the ‘Afro-pessimists.’38 Even so, ‘it is sobering that, on average, there has not been a worldwide improvement in overall governance during this period—and in a number of countries, including the Ivory Coast, Nepal, and Zimbabwe, there has been a sharp deterioration.’39

Myth #6: Donors can ‘ringfence’ projects in highly corrupt countries and sectors. With the possible exception of some humanitarian aid projects, the notion that the aid community can insulate projects from an overall corrupt environment in a country is not borne out by the evidence. The data suggest that when a systemic approach to governance, civil liberties, rule of law, and control of corruption is absent, the likelihood of an aid-funded project being successful is greatly reduced.40

Kaufmann lists down the remaining myths about corruption and governance as follows:

Myth #7: Fight corruption by fighting corruption. A fallacy promoted by some in the field of anticorruption, and at times also by the international community, is that one ‘fights corruption by fighting corruption’—through yet another anticorruption campaign, the creation of more ‘commissions’ and ethics agencies, and the incessant drafting of new laws, decrees, and codes of conduct. Overall, such initiatives appear to have little impact, and are often politically expedient ways of reacting to pressures to do something about corruption, substituting for the need for fundamental and systemic governance reforms.