Strengthening local government integrity

Filed under - Politics and government

article image

What’s at stake?

More and more we see powers, responsibilities and budgets devolved from the central government down to the local level. From social welfare to commercial licensing, health and education, local governments are playing a greater role designing policies and delivering key public services.

Although decentralisation processes can help strengthen accountability by bringing government closer to the people, decentralisation can also present corruption risks since corruption is a problem at all levels of government. Local officials may have greater vested interests based on family, friendship and business ties that can influence decision-making. Wages at the local level can be low in comparison to the national level and institutions designed to hold local public officials to account are not always adequate.

Image of sign saying 'danger due to bad mayor'

It is at the local level where citizens and the public sector interact most regularly and directly – be it registering for school, attending a health clinic or applying for social housing. So when corruption occurs locally, the impact on citizens’ lives can be the most damaging, with the poorest being hit the hardest.

When elections are rigged, bribes paid in order to access basic services, and public funds diverted into private hands, the public good comes second; citizens’ interests are harmed and trust in those that govern us is eroded.

At the same time, opportunities for direct civil society engagement and oversight are greatest at the local level, providing an opportunity of strengthening integrity and accountability through civic oversight.

What we’re doing about it

When transparency, accountability and integrity are put at the heart of local governance systems the risks of corruption are reduced. Citizens can participate in and influence policy design and implementation, and hold local officials to account for their decisions. Local government officials act effectively in the public interest and are open about their activities and take responsibility for them.

Transparency International promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in local governance, regardless of size and context, to ensure that corruption cannot take root.

Who’s involved

Transparency International chapters in many countries have worked on aspects of local governance, from city-level transparency projects to tech tools that help citizens report on local problems. Chapters in several countries, from Argentina to Senegal, have also piloted our Local Integrity System tool (see below).

Our approach

We address local-level corruption through a holistic approach, which aims at strengthening Local Integrity Systems. This approach is based on the belief that a functioning Local Integrity System with strong institutions and oversight systems, which ensure high levels of transparency, accountability and integrity in local governance, is the most effective way to prevent and sanction corruption at the local level.

  • By assessing the existence and effectiveness of procedures to promote these principles at the local level, we can identify risks and advocate for reforms.
  • The Local Integrity System assessment allows our chapters and other civil society organisations to develop recommendations and conduct evidence-based advocacy, which seeks to engage key local governance stakeholders in the development of a strategic local integrity plan.
  • Working with our network of national chapters, we develop and implement innovative approaches to enable citizens and civil society to better participate in local decision-making, monitor local officials and advocate for improved laws and practice.

Assessing local level integrity for evidence based advocacy

The Local Integrity System (LIS) Tool assesses the effectiveness of procedures and mechanisms to promote transparency, accountability and integrity in order to fight corruption at the local level, provides recommendations on areas for reform and develops a follow-up action plan for strengthening local integrity in collaboration with key local stakeholders. The LIS supports a process of continuous improvement of local integrity systems through long-term engagement between civil society and other key stakeholders.

The tool has been successfully piloted in five countries: Argentina, Kenya, Palestine, Portugal and Senegal. Other reports coming soon

Municipal Transparency Indices

Indices and rankings have proven to be an effective advocacy tool to foster upward competition between governments (or companies) by fostering a ‘race to the top’. So far, no index exists to assess the transparency or integrity of local governments. Transparency International has developed and is currently piloting a Municipal Transparency Index to assess and rank a selected number of local governments and municipalities within a country. More information on this index and methodology is forthcoming.

More...

Contact us

José María Marín, Head of Public Sector Integrity Programme (Acting)
jmarin@transparency.org

Michel Gary, Senior Programme Coordinator
mgary@transparency.org



Country / Territory - International   
Region - Global   
Language(s) - English   
Topic - Accountability   |   Civil society   |   Governance   |   Law enforcement   |   Politics and government   |   Public services   

Related news

Bua Mzansi: Finding South Africa’s next brave Public Protector

Our chapter in South Africa launched a campaign to ensure the next Public Protector lives up to high standards.

What is Grand Corruption and how can we stop it?

What is grand corruption and how do we stop it? We've developed a legal definition to help corruption fighters across the world.

13
Sep
2016

Former Brazilian Parliament Speaker Eduardo Cunha must be held accountable for his actions

Transparency International is calling for a full investigation of the financial assets of Eduardo Cunha, the former speaker of the the lower house of ...

43 countries, 600 commitments: Was the London Anti-Corruption Summit a success?

43 countries, 600 commitments: Was the London Anti-Corruption Summit a success? We assess the outcomes.

Related publications

Publication cover image

Was it worth it? Assessing Government Promises at the 2016 Anti-Corruption Summit

The Anti-Corruption Summit held in London on 12 May 2016 intended to ’put fighting corruption at the heart of our international institutions’. ...

Report published – Sep 2016

Publication cover image

National Integrity System Assessment Albania 2016

This National Integrity System (NIS) assessment analyses whether Albania’s state architecture is designed to operate with and promote integrity, ...

National Integrity System assessment published – Sep 2016

Related blog posts

Does Ukraine merit a new handout?

Yesterday the International Monetary Fund approved a further bailout of more than US$1 billion for Ukraine, a country ... [read more]

Posted on 15 Sep 2016 by José Ugaz

McDonnell walks. Reforms needed

The Justice Department on September 8 announced that it is dropping its corruption case against former Virginia Governor ... [read more]

Posted on 12 Sep 2016 by Shruti Shah

Playing with numbers won’t cure Egypt’s corruption

“There is corruption in local government,” admitted President Abdel Fattah el Sisi at a presidential youth forum in ... [read more]

Posted on 09 Aug 2016 by Marwa Fatafta

22
Jul
2016

How to steal billions

From 2009 to at least 2013, private individuals were allegedly able to siphon off more than $3.5 billion from the wealth fund ... [read more]

Posted on 22 Jul 2016 by Shruti Shah

Three reasons why attacking Egypt’s top auditor is bad news

Putting Egypt’s top auditor on trial sends a clear message: the Egyptian government is waging a war. Not against corruption ... [read more]

Posted on 10 Jun 2016 by Marwa Fatafta