|Title||Numbers, nuances and moving targets: converging the use of corruption indicators or descriptors in assessing state development|
|Authors||Doig, A., McIvor, S. and Theobald, R.|
This article is concerned with three issues: the convergence of donors over a shared development agenda, on why dealing with corruption is seen as a key aspect of the agenda, and the means to assess corruption within the context of monitoring development progress. The article reviews the genesis of the agenda, and why corruption is often used as an indicator or measure of progress. It distinguishes between two general approachesâ��quantitative indicators and qualitative descriptorsâ��for assessing types and levels of corruption before considering methodological and interpretative issues relating to each approach. It suggests that, while each has a role, cognizance should be made of the awareness of the limitations of either for policy- or reform-related issues, particularly in terms of the exercise of political power or the nature and direction of development. The necessary convergence of the use of the two approaches has not been fully achieved to date and, until such time as a convergence is achieved, an over-reliance on one or other approach may not provide an effective basis for reform and aid initiatives, nor for assessing the progress and impact of both in delivering the development agenda. Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd from Doig, Alan and McIvor, Stephanie and Theobald, Robin (2006), International Review of Administrative Sciences, 72 (2). pp.239-252. © 2006 International Institute of Administrative Sciences. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
|Journal||International Review of Administrative Sciences|
|Journal citation||72 (2), pp. 239-252|
|Digital Object Identifier (DOI)||https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852306064612|