All eyes on the World Bank's development of its anticorruption strategy
27 July 2006
Keeping abreast of the World Bank's current efforts to develop an “anti-corruption and governance” strategy, here is a collection of thoughts and reactions to the draft document and the preparation process in general. Please feel free to submit your feedback and perspectives on the issue.
World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz has made corruption a defining theme of his first year in office, arguing that the leakage of development funds is “one of the biggest threats to development in many countries”. In addition to halting hundreds of millions of dollars in World Bank lending to projects in Kenya, Congo, India, Yemen, Argentina, and most recently Cambodia, he has taken steps to overhaul the Bank’s own internal unit for addressing corruption – the Department of Institutional Integrity.
While many would agree on the negative impacts of corruption, opinions diverge on how the Bank should address this broadly recognized “development cancer”. Civil society is not alone in criticizing the seemingly subjective approach Wolfowitz has taken to the issue. The Development Committee asked the Bank to develop a clear framework for stamping out corruption at this year’s Spring Meetings in April. The framework will be presented to the Development Committee at the upcoming IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings in September.
Since April, Bank Management has prepared different iterations of this framework for discussion by the Board of Directors, before the strategy is presented in Singapore.
The Bank process so far
The Bank prepared an initial outline of the anti-corruption framework for comment from the Board of Directors in early June. The document remained confidential. Bank management produced a more fleshed-out outline describing the issues that the strategy paper on corruption and governance would cover on July 20. This elaborated outline was originally distributed only to the Board for comment; there was no planned public consultation on the document. After pressure from civil society, the Bank agreed to release the outline to the public, but only for a very short comment period. Read the July 20 draft.The Bank released another new draft on August 17. The draft includes a brief summary of public comments on the strategy received to date. The public may comment on this new draft through August 28. Read the August 17 draft. Management is scheduled to provide the Board with a final document for discussion and approval on August 30th, prior to presenting the strategy paper to the Development Committee at the Annual Meetings in Singapore.“Consultations”
In addition to providing an extremely abbreviated period for public comment on the outline of the strategy paper, the Bank has not allowed adequate time to solicit input from stakeholders around the world. The Bank has proposed the following “regional consultations” on the outline, but it is unclear whether or how they have publicized the scheduled meetings:
- July 31st (10-12 noon DC time) N. American and European NGO discussion (at WB headquarters)
- August 1st (9-11 a.m. DC time) Middle East/Africa regional multi-stakeholder conference call or videoconference with Cameroon, Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda, and Yemen (Ethiopia or South Africa not confirmed). This will be led by Dani Kaufmann. Potential participants should contact their World Bank country director’s office directly. Participants will most likely dial in from the country director’s office.
- August 2nd (9:30-11:30 a.m. DC time) LAC regional private sector/civil society videoconference with Nicaragua, Honduras, Mexico, Guatemala and Bolivia, (Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil not confirmed). This will be led by Dani Kaufmann. Potential participants should contact their World Bank country director’s office directly. Participants will most likely dial in from the country director’s office.
- Aug. 7th (4:00 p.m.-6:00 p.m. DC time) Asia regional multi-stakeholder conference call or videoconference with Bangladesh, Indonesia, Pakistan, Philippines, Vietnam, and Cambodia. Joel Hellman, the Indonesia Governance Advisor and advisor in East Asia Region Poverty Reduction and Economic management network will lead. The participants from Indonesia are senior members from civil society organizations and the media. Opening remaks will be made by Andrew Steer (WB Country Director). Other participants from the World Bank include Mr Steven Burgess, Senior Social development Specialist and advisor to the World Bank Anti-Corruption Commitee for Indonesia. Potential participants should contact their World Bank country director’s office directly. Participants will most likely dial in from the country director’s office.
It is still not clear whether the paper presented in Singapore will be a final document or open to change in the months following. The Bank has indicated a willingness to continue discussions about the strategy post-Singapore, but it is our understanding that these discussions will likely focus on how to operationalize/implement the strategy, rather than re-open debates about the approach.
A few initial questions and concerns
Many groups have questioned the objectives and priorities of Bank interventions in the sensitive arenas of governance and corruption. The emphasis on top-down rather than bottom-up strategies, the extent to which the Bank plans to practice what it preaches and incorporate transparency and anti-corruption measures into its own practices, and the potential that the Bank will infringe upon national sovereignty have been cited as concerns. Following are a few of the process and approach-related questions and concerns that have been raised by various civil society groups to date. This list is not exhaustive, but provides several examples of the concerns that have been raised. A number of CSOs are working on more substantive critiques of the proposed framework. For more information, contact Karen Showalter at BIC ().
Lack of transparency and public consultation
This Bank strategy is being developed through a rapid, largely confidential, internal process, particularly inappropriate considering that the fight against corruption and for government accountability must be driven by the public. Although it eventually agreed to disclose the outline of the paper, the Bank appears to be making little effort to meaningfully solicit input from interested parties around the world. The period for comment is extremely short, with very few public meetings being scheduled on short notice and in a seemingly ad-hoc manner. Furthermore, the full paper is already being drafted before the close of the comment period, suggesting a lack of intent to incorporate feedback received.
Overly broad and immodest strategy
Some have argued that the Bank is trying to address too many issues in this strategy, and that the framework is likely to collapse under its own weight or at least be ineffectual at achieving its stated goals. Furthermore, civil society groups have criticized the Bank’s attempt to make itself into a leader in the global fight against corruption, rather than to be more modest and practical about what the Bank can do and select a more limited set of concrete operational changes that can be made to ensure that the Bank itself does not contribute to or foster corruption, or provide structural opportunities for corruption through its approach to project selection, design and supervision. To many, the Bank lacks credibility to be the leader of the fight against corruption, given its own support (past and present) for corrupt governments and the secrecy that still shrouds much of the Bank’s own operations. A few of the basic steps that some have argued the Bank should take first include:
- increasing the transparency of the Bank’s own operations, from the selection of the projects it pursues to their implementation;
- increasing supervision of its projects (following the money) and publishing audits of its operations (where does the money go?)
- regularly reporting to the public on project impacts throughout implementation
- modifying incentives that currently reward staff on lending volumes, rather than the quality of projects/their development impacts
- improving whisteblower protections for staff within the Bank to flag problems with Bank operations.
Insufficient attention to the role of the public/civil society
Civil society groups have voiced concern that the Bank’s approach doesn’t adequately recognize that anti-corruption and good governance efforts need to be driven by the public in borrowing countries, not by external actors. Instead, it seems to describe how the Bank can expand its activities to take a more active role as the arbiter on governance and corruption issues.
Your thoughts?
The above are just a few of the issues that have been raised in response to the Bank’s latest efforts in the arena of corruption and governance. If interested, please let us know what you think about these developments, about the outline or draft paper, or about the Bank’s role and responsibilities with regard to corruption and governance.
A list-serv has been created to exchange information on the Bank’s anti-corruption and governance work. If you are interested in joining the list, please contact Karen Showalter at or go to http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/WBanticorruption/. For additional information on this issue, see BIC’s website: http://www.bicusa.org/bicusa/issues/world_bank/2882.php
Additional Resources