Corruption Challenges in Post-Conflict Countries: The Role of Diagnostic Surveys

1. Corruption Challenges in Post-Conflict Countries: The Role of Diagnostic Surveys Presented by: Francesca Recanatini Senior Economist PREM Public Sector Governance World Bank Presented to: Building Integrity Conference Monterey, February 24, 2011

2. A ‘Live’ Test:‘Culture’, Information and Incentives • You are approaching your car in the empty and unattended garage late at night • You see an envelope on the floor, and you pick it up • It contains 20 bills of US $100 each • If no possibility that anyone would know: No cameras, no monitoring, no reporting • What would you do with such envelope full of cash? Source: Dani Kaufmann, World Bank Institute,, February 2006

3. If no possibility that anyone would know:You are alone, there is no monitoring, cameras, or possibility of being reported 33% Report and Return Funds 50% Undecided 17% Keep Source: Dani Kaufmann, World Bank Institute, February 2006 Option Finder Results: Various Audiences

4. 22% Undecided 4% Keep 74% Report and Return Funds If 30% probability that information is shared (e.g. 30% that camera recording info which may be reviewed) Source: Dani Kaufmann, World Bank Institute, February 2006

5. The role of governance assessments Will and Political Leadership for Institutional Reforms On governance Strategy and Action Plan • Governance assessment: • Identification of severe obstacles • Vulnerability of each institution • Identification of priorities Empirical Tools and Data Capacity building and coalition building

6. Governance diagnostic surveys - Approach • A participatory process to identify governance challenges and build local capacity • Key features: • Three surveys: households, firms and public officials • Questions focused on experience, adapted to local realities and tested in the field • Survey instruments and results validated through focus groups • Rigorous technical implementation • Local institutionimplements

7. Unbundle corruption – administrative, state capture, bidding, theft of public resources, purchase of licenses Identify weak and strong institutions Assess the costs of corruption on different stakeholders Identify key determinants of good governance Input to develop concrete policy recommendations Governance and A-C diagnostic surveys The power of diagnostic data and key dimensions for analysis:

8. Country Diagnostic Results Extent of corruption, (Selected Countries ‘03-’05)

9. Corruption imposes barriers to households to access basic services,Sierra Leone 2003 Sierra Leone Roads Transport Authority

10. Mechanisms to participate to the policy process % of households reporting to use the following channel to participate in the policy process (Sierra Leone, 2003)

11. Bribes to win contracts with Government, (as reported by public officials, 1999-2005)

12. Public funds are mismanaged by agency(as reported by Public Officials, Sierra Leone, 2003) % of Public Officials that said irregularities/(misappropriations) are frequent

13. Agency-level Indicators • Using responses from public officials • Public officials are employees of each agency • Public official’s responses are re-scale (from 0 to 100) and then aggregated by agency using factor analysis technique • 0 always meaning the lowest level of quality of governance, corruption, access or service performance

14. Governance and corruption indicators by province

15. Lessons learnt • How do we balance global (ranking) measurement tools with national assessments? Two sides of the same coins, but with different objectives. Important that the two approaches complement each other • Who should be involved in measuring? It depends on the country reality. Our experience: the country as a whole. But donors, INGOs can play a very important role (Sierra Leone, Mozambique, Haiti). NSOs should also be involved to promote sustainability (Peru, Paraguay)

16. Lessons learnt, cont. • What are the advantages and disadvantages of the approach used? Pros: Greater local capacity, consensus and ownership that can ensure sustainability of reform process; south-south knowledge dissemination (Costa Rica, Zambia, Mozambique, Haiti) Cons: Time consuming and costly; challenging to coordinate many different actors, especially international ones; unforeseen political changes • To what extent have measurement tools helped shape public sector reforms? Only when paired with political will, donor coordination and medium term vision

17. Thank you!Q & A

18. Extra slides

19. Confidential Peru and Colombia: extent of "State Capture" by elites (as reported by public officials, 2001) Capture by Vested Interests of: % public officials report bribes to agency influence business climate

20. Confidential Peru: Sources of Undue Private Influence on the State Responses by: Based on governance diagnostic surveys of public officials and enterprises

21. Sector Level Diagnostic Surveys: Key questions (e.g. transport) • Institutional structure of the sectors under study • How does transport work in Mauritania? What needs to happen at the implementation level? • Possible vulnerabilities • Internal to the sector: transporters, officials and regulations. External to the sector: linked to banking sector? International issues? • Mechanisms of poor governance • Is it difficult to get a trucking license? Are bribes required to cross borders with freight? Do civil servants have necessary capacity? Are rules clear? • Costs of poor governance • What price do transporters and customers pay to ‘facilitate’ antiquated or inadequate processes? What is the mark up on contracts due to fraud? How many roads are narrower than they should be because of corruption? • Who are the major players and what are their policy needs? • Potential entry points for reform? Who plays a role in the reform process? Who can be a potential deal breaker? How can we understand the political landscape to ensure policy outcomes are politically viable?

22. Methodological Approach Tools & Info Process Needs Iterative process: 8-12 months Desk Study: history, sector structure, current context Outcomes: 1. Governance Baseline 2. Agency Specific Indicators 3. Public Dissemination & Participatory Policy Process Transparent Process Sector Level Governance Assessment Local Partnership Gov’t + Civil Society In-Depth Interviews Donor Partnership w/Active Donors Cross-Sector Team (PREM, WBI, SDV,PDS, Procurement) Country Ownership Political Economy Assessment 3 Surveys (Experience Based) Partnership w/ Bank Country Team Audit & Project Data Broad Peer Review Team Capacity Needs

23. Innovative features • Sector-specific focus: • Apply methodology and solutions to country and sector realities • Mixed methods: • Focus groups & In-depth Interviews • Surveys (households, businesses & civil servants) • Desk study • Project cost data • Active participation of civil society and government to contribute to policy making process. • Close collaboration with donors’ colleagues. • Active links to on-going sector projects • WB transport and port projects • EU transport ministry aid project