Thursday, March 28, 2024
05:24 PM (GMT +5)

Go Back   CSS Forums > General > News & Articles

News & Articles Here you can share News and Articles that you consider important for the exam

Reply Share Thread: Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook     Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter     Submit Thread to Google+ Google+    
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old Sunday, September 14, 2008
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 56
Thanks: 0
Thanked 21 Times in 17 Posts
lmno250 is on a distinguished road
Post hopless to change the corruption culture in world

by usman karim
Speaking two decades before The Wealth of Nations was published in 1776, Smith said, "Little else is requisite to carry a state to the highest degree of opulence from the lowest barbarism but peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice: all the rest being brought about by the natural course of things."Corruption continues to intensify in two-fifths of the world's nations, nurtured by persistent poverty, political instability and crime.Developing countries, and governments in particular, are all rife with corruption, while corruption is virtually absent in much of the rich industrialized world. Actually, the reality is different. The evidence points to an enormous diversity in the extent of corruption within emerging economies, and among industrialized countries as well. The data suggests that some emerging economies, like Botswana, Chile, and some of the Baltics, for instance, enjoy lower levels of corruption than some countries in southern Europe.And the evidence is increasingly clear that corruption is not a challenge exclusive to the public sector. For starters, by definition it takes two to commit an act of bribery: the briber is a most often private, while the bribed is a public official or politician.Of the 180 countries looked at in its most recent rankings, 132 had index scores below 5, including Greece, India, Mexico, Brazil, saudi arabia and thailand Some 56 countries were rated below 3, a level that indicates rampant corruption, including Argentina, Pakistan and Russia the best-scoring countries were Denmark and Finland, sharing an index ranking of 9.4. At the bottom of the heap, where perceptions of corruption were highest, Somalia and Myanmar are tied with an index ranking of 1.4.Of course it's easy to see the difference between the two ends of the spectrum. New Zealand, Denmark and Finland have wealth and stable economies and governments, and don't stoke a lot of international controversy. Somalia and Myanmar are torn by armed conflict and political oppression.The divide runs along economic realities. Forty percent of the countries rated below 3 are classified by the World Bank as low income. It doesn't help if the governments are weak or engaged in a struggle for power. Countries torn apart by conflict pay a huge toll in their capacity to govern," says Huguette Labelle, chairman of Transparency International. "With public institutions crippled or nonexistent, mercenary individuals help themselves to public resources, and corruption thrives."Myanmar, also known as Burma, probably wins the prize for worst public relations of the year. Last fall, the military-led government cracked down on protesting monks, killing a few in the riots that broke out as the government rounded up protesters. Of course it's easy to see the difference between the two ends of the spectrum. New Zealand, Denmark and Finland have wealth and stable economies and governments, and don't stoke a lot of international controversy. Somalia and Myanmar are torn by armed conflict and political oppression.The divide runs along economic realities. Forty percent of the countries rated below 3 are classified by the World Bank as low income. It doesn't help if the governments are weak or engaged in a struggle for power."Countries torn apart by conflict pay a huge toll in their capacity to govern," says Huguette Labelle, chairman of Transparency International. "With public institutions crippled or nonexistent, mercenary individuals help themselves to public resources, and corruption thrives."Myanmar, also known as Burma, probably wins the prize for worst public relations of the year. Last fall, the military-led government cracked down on protesting monks, killing a few in the riots that broke out as the government rounded up protesters.the best-scoring countries were New Zealand, Denmark and Finland, sharing an index ranking of 9.4. At the bottom of the heap, where perceptions of corruption were highest, Somalia and Myanmar are tied with an index ranking of 1.4.Of course it's easy to see the difference between the two ends of the spectrum. New Zealand, Denmark and Finland have wealth and stable economies and governments, and don't stoke a lot of international controversy. Somalia and Myanmar are torn by armed conflict and political oppression.The divide runs along economic realities. Forty percent of the countries rated below 3 are classified by the World Bank as low income. It doesn't help if the governments are weak or engaged in a struggle for power. "Countries torn apart by conflict pay a huge toll in their capacity to govern," says Huguette Labelle, chairman of Transparency International. "With public institutions crippled or nonexistent, mercenary individuals help themselves to public resources, and corruption thrives."Myanmar, also known as Burma, probably wins the prize for worst public relations of the year. Last fall, the military-led government cracked down on protesting monks, killing a few in the riots that broke out as the government rounded up protesters. Internet access was blocked to prevent news from getting out to the outside world.To top it off, in May the Burmese government hindered international relief efforts after the most damaging cyclone in its history, which killed an estimated 130,000. America's first lady, Laura Bush, has led an active campaign against the military junta, calling on international bodies to pressure it to move toward democracy.Somalia has its own problems, not least of which is persistent and growing piracy in the waters off its shores. There have been more than two dozen piracy attacks reported in the Gulf of Aden since the beginning of this year (see " The double whammy of weak government and abundant natural resources also stokes corruption, particularly where personal greed can run rampant without fear of recrimination. In Equatorial Guinea, 10th on the Transparency International list, 30% of the profits from recently discovered offshore oil fields goes straight into the state officials' pockets. Nearby in the Democratic Republic of Congo, tied for 10th with Guinea, government officials demand payments from mining companies. The country has abundant reserves of some of the most sought-after commodities: copper, gold, uranium and coltan.There is hope, however. Several African countries showed marked improvement in their rankings over one year, including Seychelles (to 57 from 63), South Africa (to 43 from 51) and Swaziland (to 84 from 121). Transparency International said the jumps mean genuine reform efforts can help combat perceptions of corruption.Outside Africa, many countries that improved over the year are in Eastern Europe: Croatia (to 64 from 69), the Czech Republic (to 41 from 46), Macedonia (to 84 from 105) and Romania (to 69 from 84). Italy went to 41 from 45."The concentration of gainers in Southeast and Eastern Europe testifies to the galvanizing effect of the European Union accession process on the fight against corruption," says Transparency International.Through high level corruption, potentate conglomerates in some countries exert undue influence on the adoption of state laws, regulations and policies. They are effectively engaged in what we call ’state capture’. In other countries the private elites may utilize subtler means to influence the state institutions and rules of the game for their own advantage, at the expense of a thriving and competitive private sector. Even where the reality is more nuanced than having outright capture of the state by a couple of oligarchs, the pernicious effect on competitiveness, productivity and growth can be vast. Of course, the evidence is also clear that most industrialized countries enjoy higher levels of governance and better corruption control than most developing countries. It is in many poorer countries where corruption is particularly costly to their citizens, and where progress is most urgently needed. But many multinationals, industrialized countries, and donor and multilateral agencies also need to do their part by addressing corruption in their own midst, and particularly focusing on governance in their economic, financial, and development aid links with developing countries. For instance, corruption in public works procurement for a project in a developing country can take place through the activities of a private multinational headquartered in a rich country. Such multinational may be bribing a high official of the government in the recipient country. The developing country government may be receiving the funding for a roads project through aid from a donor agency or multilateral bank, which may have failed to supervise properly — or worse. That is but one illustration of the global links in corruption. Another one can involve money laundering and international financial centers: take for instance a corrupt country leader who plundered the public treasury or oil revenues of their countries, like the cases of Marcos in the Philippines or Abacha in Nigeria, among many others. They had little trouble in safely placing their looted proceeds in safe havens in rich country financial centers. To this day, the challenge of full collaboration from rich financial centers in recovering looted assets still remains.Corruption is a global challenge. No country or institution is immune, though its extent varies a lot. The challenge requires collective action by all. By the industrialized, emerging and developing countries, by the public, private and NGO sectors, and by citizens around the world.One other point worth noting is the role of some of the developed countries in blocking reform. Attempts by the previous World Bank President, Paul Wolfowitz, to suspend loans to countries violating anti-corruption policies, led to a backlash. It’s understandable why some non-democratic countries might have led this revolt, but when is someone going to explain a certain European country’s role in blocking enforcement of World Bank rules prohibiting corruption, as happened in India, Kenya and elsewhere? And why has at least one European country that publically supports free media and anti-corruption campaigns quietly ended its support for investigative journalism programs around the world? The developed, industrialized world needs to be consistent in the implementation of its anti-corruption policies, if they are to have any hope of success As globalization is increasingly blurring lines between developed and developing countries, the place where any transaction (whether corrupt or not) takes place, is becoming less and less relevant, therefore putting into question national rankings about corruption. For instance, if a local employee working in the African branch of a multinational executes a corrupt transaction at the request of a supervisor based in a developed country, would that transaction affect the corruption rankings of the developed country? or the developing one?Topping the list for 2008: Denmark, which rose three slots from last year, Ireland (up 19 places to No. 2), Finland (up four to third place), the U.S. (down three to fourth) and U.K. (up five to fifth). Big movers like Ireland, Estonia (No. 10, up 24 spots) and Saudi Arabia (No. 47, up 37) have limited bureaucracy standing in the way of entrepreneurs hoping to do business within their borders.Ireland continued to see businesses take advantage of its low levy on corporate profits as pharmaceutical company Shire (nasdaq: became the latest to relocate from the U.K. in April of this year. EBay subsidiary and telecommunications company Skype calls Estonia home, thanks to its emerging profile as a technology center in the Baltics.Saudi Arabia, despite higher inflation from booming oil exports, has tackled inequities in its markets, expanding investor rights as it evolves from an oil state to a center for investment in the Middle East.India (No. 64, down 13) and China (No. 79, down two) fell in this year's ranking as political instability demonstrated resistance to increasing personal freedoms. Higher inflation from food and other commodity costs, as well as increased burdens on entrepreneurs also held the world's most populous nations back as business destinations.In developed nations like Germany (No. 21, down nine) and France (No. 25, down nine), scandals in the banking sector and tougher barriers for entrepreneurs led to declines. Meanwhile, leaders like president Lech Kaczynski and prime minister Mirek Topolanek are succeeding in introducing more business-friendly reforms to Europe's smaller participants in Poland (No. 33, up six) and the Czech Republic (No. 29, unchanged), respectively.One of the biggest declines came from Japan (No. 24, down 21), where a Council on Economic and Fiscal Policy spelled out problems with the world's second-largest economy earlier this year. Among others, the committee's report cites the nation's 40% corporate tax rate as uncompetitive compared with regional rivals like Hong Kong at 17.5% and South Korea at 25%.Antiquated restrictions on foreign investment are also a concern. So-called cross-shareholdings that limit the ability of foreign investors to take controlling stakes in Japanese companies is just one example of why foreign direct investment totaled a paltry 2.5% of GDP in 2006. That compares to 13.5% in the U.S. and 40% in Britain.Expertise, research and published reports from the Heritage Foundation, World Economic Forum, World Bank, Transparency International, Freedom House, Deloitte Tax, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Central Intelligence Agency all contributed vital analyses of various socioeconomic indicators on the countries included.The technology index is designed to show which countries are adopting technology to become more productive (and thus more competitive). A country need not have actually invented these technologies, just made them widely available. The WEF measures invention skills separately in a complementary "innovation" index. That paves the way for Sweden to excel. Though home to few ICT multinationals besides telecom supplier Ericsson (nasdaq:boasts high broadband Internet penetration and a business-friendly environment, says Dr. Irene Mia, a senior economist at the WEF. It's a formula that has kept Sweden at the top of the ranking for two years. Nordic countries in general did well this year, with Iceland finishing second and Denmark fifth. Like Sweden, they benefit from government support of technology and a strong focus on education and innovation. Education is both a precondition and an enabler for leveraging technology, notes Mia. Both countries improved their showing this year--Iceland climbing from No. 4, Denmark from No. 10. Switzerland (No. 3), the Netherlands (No. 4) and Luxembourg (No. 10) rounded out the strong European showing in the top 10. Switzerland stands out, says Mia, for ranking highly despite lackluster government support for ICT initiatives. Its success is driven by the efforts of businesses and individuals, she says. Two Asian countries made the top 10: Hong Kong at No. 6 and South Korea at No. 7. In contrast to Switzerland, the Korean government champions ICT and has heavily subsidized broadband construction, notes the WEF. Hong Kong's rank--its highest ever--reflects its increasingly wired citizenry and government. It got a further boost from its business-friendly policies. Near the bottom: the United States, which scored well in ICT usage, but rated poorly on regulatory issues. After dominating the tech index for years, the U.S. dropped to No. 5 in 2006, No. 8 in 2007 and is currently No. 9. It's still doing better than Australia, Israel, Singapore and the U.K., which fell off the top-10 list this year.The WEF isn't the only group seeking to measure countries' technological savvy. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) publishes an annual report on broadband growth and policies among its member countries. Leonard Waverman, a London Business School professor, heads a "Connectivity Scorecard" study that ranks 25 countries based on methodology similar to the WEF's. In the U.S., the Federal Communications Commission and the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, a nonpartisan think tank, also try to quantify technology use.Mia says the WEF encourages these studies and recently began gathering experts from other organizations to discuss the gathering of ICT statistics.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
English Grammar (Beginner`s Classes) Sureshlasi Grammar-Section 53 Thursday, January 20, 2022 09:10 PM
development of pakistan press since 1947 Janeeta Journalism & Mass Communication 15 Tuesday, May 05, 2020 03:04 AM
The Globalization of World Politics: Revision guide 3eBaylis & Smith: hellowahab International Relations 0 Wednesday, October 17, 2007 03:13 PM
What Is The New World Order?? MUKHTIAR ALI International Relations 1 Monday, January 08, 2007 09:39 PM


CSS Forum on Facebook Follow CSS Forum on Twitter

Disclaimer: All messages made available as part of this discussion group (including any bulletin boards and chat rooms) and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of CSSForum.com.pk (unless CSSForum.com.pk is specifically identified as the author of the message). The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that CSSForum has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to the forum to report any objectionable message in site feedback. This forum is not monitored 24/7.

Sponsors: ArgusVision   vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.