Europeanisation, Good Governance and Corruption in the Public Sector

Soyaltın, Diğdem

doi:10.4324/9781315395869

“…Still, the normative approach adopted by the EU in terms of governance transfer distinguished it from other international organisations and regional organisations as a promoter and protector of "good governance" par excellence (van Hüllen and Börzel, 2015, p.227). The EU has been actively engaged in facilitating the fight against corruption and promoting good governance in the third countries (Soyaltin 2017), yet for many years has remained reluctant to harmonize the anticorruption standards of its own member states; indeed, in many cases, anti-corruption measures are not legally binding for member states (Szarek-Mason 2010, p. 143). Hence, there had been no clear strategy among member states for fighting corruption.…”

Section: 3 Good Governance and Corruption In The Eumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…

Good governance principles are increasingly seen as effective tools to fight against corruption.With the end of the Cold War, they started to appear in anti-corruption strategy papers produced by international and regional organisations including the World Bank, the OECD, and the United Nations. In facilitating the fight against corruption in third countries, the European Union (EU) has also incorporated the good governance principles of participation, accountability, transparency, and rule of law into its policy agenda and developed rather comprehensive tools and incentive mechanisms to encourage countries to enact domestic reforms (Börzel et al, 2008;Soyaltin 2017). Yet, in terms of internal governance transfer, the EU has appeared unwilling to define strict anti-corruption standards for its own member states and institutions (van Hüllen and Börzel, 2015).However, as indicated in the EU Corruption Report of 2014, corruption remains a major issue for people inside the EU (European Commission, 2014).

…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gendering womens political representation and good governance in the EU? A feminist approach against informal norms of corruption

2022

Gender Differences in the Prioritization of Corruption as the Most Important Problem in the US, 1939-2015

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Good governance principles are increasingly seen as effective tools to fight against corruption.With the end of the Cold War, they started to appear in anti-corruption strategy papers produced by international and regional organisations including the World Bank, the OECD, and the United Nations. In facilitating the fight against corruption in third countries, the European Union (EU) has also incorporated the good governance principles of participation, accountability, transparency, and rule of law into its policy agenda and developed rather comprehensive tools and incentive mechanisms to encourage countries to enact domestic reforms (Börzel et al., 2008;Soyaltin 2017). Yet, in terms of internal governance transfer, the EU has appeared unwilling to define strict anti-corruption standards for its own member states and institutions (van Hüllen and Börzel, 2015).However, as indicated in the EU Corruption Report of 2014, corruption remains a major issue for people inside the EU (European Commission, 2014). Several EU member states, such as Poland, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, and Italy even sometimes backslide in terms of fighting corruption and are listed as 'severely corrupt' in Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index.The literature highlights the gap between legal institutions and implementation as the main reason for the ongoing corruption and governance-related problems (see Johnson et al., 2013) and underlines the ineffectiveness of traditional anti-corruption interventions (Mungiu-Pippidi 2015) yet to a great extent fails to bring a gender perspective to tackle with the root causes and informal norms of corruption. To address the gap in the literature, this chapter revisits the theoretical discussion regarding the relationship between gender, good governance, and corruption. We argue that the anti-corruption strategies in the EU lack a definition of good governance from a feminist perspective and thus fail to disrupt informal norms and unequal gendered power relations from infusing into political institutions and feeding corrupt and ill practices (Krook and McNay, 2011). This argument is illustrated by focusing on participation, particularly that of women, as the fundamental principle of good governance in the EU. By bringing evidence from its annual reports on equality between women and men in the EU, EU Gender Equality Strategy, and the statistics database of the European Institute of Gender Equality, we show that the EU's approach to

show abstract