How We Define Corruption : A comparative study of NGOs and government agency’s definition and experience of corruption

Abstract: Objective Over the latest decades, NGOs have grown exponentially both in size and influence; they have come to play a significant role in development and support for civil society and the democratization process in developing countries. With an increased influence and budgets, NGOs have also come to be increasingly associated with corruption – as victims of corruption, as driving forces of corruption, and finally as anti-corruption activists and strategists. However, corruption is a complex and ill-defined concept where definitions and perceptions vary greatly between scholars and practitioners. The aim of the thesis is to describe and compare how western NGOs as well as the Swedish governmental donor agency Sida, operating in Afghanistan, a war-ridden, developing country with a high level of corruption define and approach corruption[1]. Theories The study is based on theories of institutionalism and anthropology to analyze how the chosen organizations define corruption. These theories are most appropriate for this thesis since the focus of the study is on organizations and the individuals working within them. Institutional theories study how institutions affect individuals behavior and how an individual's behavior affects the evolution of institutions. On the other hand, anthropology theories study how people who share a common cultural system organize and shape the physical and social world around them and how they, in turn, are shaped by those ideas, behaviors, and the environment. Analysis and methodology The analysis is based on an institutionalist approach, and organizational theories focus on power-dependency, considering that in terms of social science, the institutionalist approach emphasizes the role of institutions, which is the focus of this thesis. Therefore, this approach was an appropriate choice when conducting this research. The method used in the thesis is a comparative methodology. Each organization's anti-corruption policy, as well as interviews with representatives of two Swedish NGOs and Sida, was compared and analyzed. Results and discussion Similarities are found in organizations' formal definition of corruption, as all organizations share a similar anti-corruption policy, where corruption and corrupt activities are defined from a Western model. However, the differences are found in the experience of corruption, as NGOs, unlike Sida are active in the field, they are more exposed to the complex and challenging environment in which they feel that their formal guidelines and policies are not adapted to. They primarily experience that the level of tolerance of corruption varies in the context in which they are active.  The donor agency, Sida, is believed by the Swedish NGOs to be focusing more on working within the regulations and formal policies of anti-corruption, conducted by their origin country being Sweden, rather than on the complex nature of the context the operate in in this case being Afghanistan. Consequently, this issue is also followed by NGOs feeling pressure to implement projects within the framework of the donor agency's regulation, to avoid risking any loss of donor funds.  On the other hand, Sida states the opposite, emphasizing a more cooperative relationship with their partner NGOs.