Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The limitations of neoliberal logic in the anti-corruption industry: Lessons from Papua New Guinea

  • Published:
Crime, Law and Social Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To acknowledge concerns about the rising power of the private sector, key international anti-corruption organisations have supported initiatives that emphasise the role that businesses play in corruption. Yet the way these initiatives have impacted the practices and perceptions of anti-corruption organisations in developing countries has received scant attention. As businesses can be key perpetrators of corruption, understanding the way anti-corruption organisations respond to the private sector can highlight the efficacy of anti-corruption efforts. Drawing on interviews with anti-corruption policy makers in Papua New Guinea (PNG) conducted between 2008 and 2009, this article shows how two international anti-corruption organisations perceived and worked with the private sector. It finds that there have been some initiatives designed to address, and raise awareness about private sector corruption in the country, reflecting international trends. At the same time the private sector is viewed, often uncritically, as an anti-corruption champion; this has affected the way anti-corruption organisations engage with businesses operating in the country. This article argues that despite a change in international discourse about the private sector’s role in corruption, in developing countries like PNG, neoliberal logic about the nature of the state still guide anti-corruption activity. These findings have implications for the efficacy of international anti-corruption efforts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This article defines neoliberalism as a theory of political economic practices that posits that: ‘human well-being can best be advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills within an institutional framework characterised by strong private property rights, free markets and free trade…[where] state interventions in markets (once created) must be kept to a bare minimum’ [34: 2]. This theory is often achieved through deregulation and privatisation of state owned assets and the downsizing of the state.

  2. The international anti-corruption industry comprises many different organizations, including non-governmental organisations, donors, international financial institutions, governments, activists, and think tanks. While acknowledging the variety of positions taken by actors within this industry, the industry’s discourse is mostly influenced by international donors, IFIs and nongovernmental organisations.

  3. The Control of Corruption ranking is a part of the World Bank’s World Wide Governance Indicators, which are derived from a compilation of a number of enterprise, citizen and expert survey respondents in industrial and developing countries. It aims to capture ‘perceptions of the extent to which public power is exercised for private gain, including both petty and grand forms of corruption, as well as “capture” of the state by elites and private interests’ [82].

  4. All currency conversions in this article were calculated on 9 March 2012 on http://www.xe.com/.

  5. The OECD DAC defines technical assistance (cooperation) as: ‘both (a) grants to nationals of aid recipient countries receiving education or training at home or abroad, and (b) payments to consultants, advisers and similar personnel as well as teachers and administrators serving in recipient countries (including the cost of associated equipment)’ [25]

References

  1. Ali, A., & Isse, H. (2003). Determinants of economic corruption: a cross-country comparison. Cato Journal, 22(3), 449–466.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Asian Development Bank. (2012). Finding balance: Benchmarking the performance of state-owned enterprises in Papua New Guinea. Sydney: Asian Development Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  3. AusAID. (2006). Democratic governance in Papua New Guinea: Draft strategy and program concept design for peer review. Canberra: AusAID.

    Google Scholar 

  4. AusAID. (2007). Tackling corruption for growth and development: A policy for Australian development assistance on anti-corruption. Canberra: AusAID.

    Google Scholar 

  5. AusAID. (2008). Governance annual thematic performance report 2007–08. Canberra: AusAID.

    Google Scholar 

  6. AusAID. (2009). Australian Agency for International Development annual report 08–09. Canberra: AusAID.

    Google Scholar 

  7. AusAID. (2009). Papua New Guinea: Strongim pipol strongim nesen (empower people: Strengthen the nation)–program design document. Canberra: AusAID.

    Google Scholar 

  8. AusAID. (2011). Fraud control at AusAID: Fact sheet. Canberra: AusAID.

    Google Scholar 

  9. AusAID. (2011). Fraud policy statement. Canberra: AusAID.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Australian Conservation Foundation and CELCoR. (2006). Bulldozing progress: Human rights abuses and corruption in Papua New Guinea’s large scale logging industry. Port Moresby and Melbourne: Australian Conservation Foundation and CELCoR.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Australian Government. (2012). Australia’s submission to the Rio+20 compilation document United Nations. http://www.uncsd2012.org/content/documents/692Australian%20National%20Submission%20to%20Rio20%20Compilation%20Draft.pdf. Accessed 16 July 2012.

  12. Australian Government Department of Resources. (2013). EITI pilot and progress: Summary update. http://www.ret.gov.au/resources/resources_programs/eiti/eiti-pilot/Pages/index.aspx. Accessed 2 March 2013.

  13. Barker, P., & Awili, S. (2007). The business and investment conditions in PNG in 2007: A private sector survey. In P. Barker (Ed.), Seminar on private sector and investment (pp. 9–54). Port Moresby: Institute of National Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Barnett, T. E. (1989). Report of the commission of inquiry into aspects of the forest industry. Port Moresby: Government of Papua New Guinea.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Beder, S. (2001). Privatisation in PNG, Engineers Australia. September, (p. 30).

  16. Brown, E., & Cloke, J. (2004). Neoliberal reform, governance and corruption in the south: assessing the international anti-corruption crusade. Antipode, 36(2), 272–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Brown, E., & Cloke, J. (2005). Neoliberal reform, governance and corruption in Central America: exploring the Nicaraguan case. Political Geography, 24(5), 601–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Brown, E., & Cloke, J. (2006). The critical business of corruption. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 2(4), 275–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Brown, E., & Cloke, J. (2011). Critical perspectives on corruption: an overview. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 7(2), 116–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Burton, J. (1999). BHP admits Ok Tedi mine is environmental disaster. Asia Times Online http://www.atimes.com/oceania/AH13Ah01.html Accessed 13 August 2012.

  21. Center for International Private Enterprise. (2010). 2009 annual report. Center for International Private Enterprise.

  22. Curtin, T. (2009). Privatization policy in Papua New Guinea. In R. J. May (Ed.), Policy making and implementation: Studies from Papua New Guinea (pp. 345–368). Canberra: ANU EPress.

    Google Scholar 

  23. de Maria, W. (2005). The new war on African “corruption”: Just another neo-colonial adventure?. 4th International Critical Management Studies Conference, Cambridge: Cambridge University.

  24. de Maria, W. (2008). Cross cultural trespass: assessing African anti-corruption capacity. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 8(3), 317–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Development Co-operation Directorate. (n.d.). DAC glossary of key terms and concepts: Technical cooperation. http://www.oecd.org/document/32/0,3343,en_2649_33721_42632800_1_1_1_1,00.html#TC. Accessed 9 September 2012.

  26. Dinnen, S. (2001). Law and order in a weak state: Crime and politics in Papa New Guinea. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Dix, S., & Gelu, A. (2009). Asia and the Pacific: Papua New Guinea. In Transparency International (Ed.), Global corruption report 2009: Corruption and the private sector (pp. 285–289). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Duncan, R. (2011). Telecommunications in Papua New Guinea. In APEC Policy Support Unit (Ed.), The ompacts and benefits of structural reforms in transport, energy and telecommunications sectors (pp. 433–445). Singapore: Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Secretariat.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Fox, L. (2009). Corruption ‘rife’ in PNG private sector. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-09-24/corruption-rife-in-png-private-sector/1441102. Accessed 29 April 2012.

  30. Glastra, R. (1999). Cut and run: Illegal logging and timber trade in the tropics. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Goel, R., & Nelson, M. (2005). Economic freedom versus political freedom: cross-country influences on corruption. Australian Economic Papers, 44(2), 121–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Gosarevski, S., Hughes, H., & Windybank, S. (2004). Is Papua New Guinea viable? Pacific Economic Bulletin, 19(1), 134–148.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Greenpeace. (2005). The untouchables: Rimbunan Hijau’s world of forest crime and political patronage. Amsterdam: Greenpeace.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Hindess, B. (2005). Review essay: investigating international anti-corruption. Third World Quarterly, 26(8), 1389–1398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Holmes, L. (2006). Networks and linkages: Corruption, organised crime, corporate crime and terrorism. How to weaken the link: International anti-corruption conference 12, 15–18 November: Guatemala City.

  37. Holmes, L. (2006). Rotten states? corruption, post-communism and neoliberalism. Durham and London: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Huffer, E. (2005). Governance, corruption and ethics in the Pacific. The Contemporary Pacific, 17(1), 118–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hughes, H. (2004). Can Papua New Guinea come back from the brink? Sydney: Centre for Independent Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Hutchinson, F. (2005). A review to donor agency approaches to anti-corruption. Asian Pacific School of Economics and Government Discussion Papers. Canberra: Asian Pacific School of Economics and Government, Australian National University.

  41. Independent Review Team. (2010). Review of the PNG-Australia development cooperation treaty (1999). Canberra and Port Moresby: AusAID.

    Google Scholar 

  42. International Monetary Fund. (2012). IMF executive board concludes 2012 article IV consultation with Papua New Guinea. http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/pn/2012/pn1253.htm. Accessed 4 July 2012.

  43. ITS Global Asia Pacific. (2007). Report for Rimbunan Hijau (PNG) group. Melbourne: ITS Global Asia Pacific.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Ives, D., Midire, C., & Heijkoop, P. (2004). Governance in PNG: A cluster evaluation of three public sector reform activities. Canberra: AusAID.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Johnson, P. (2012). Lode shedding: A case study of the economic benefits to the landowners, the provincial government and the state, from the Porgera Gold Mine: Background and financial flows from the mine. Port Moresby: National Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Kaman, J. (2003). Papua New Guinea: Privatisation of water–“Eda Ranu”. Civil society consultation on the 2003 commonwealth finance ministers meeting. Brunei: Commonwealth Foundation.

  47. Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., Mastruzzi, M. (2010). World wide governance indicators: Papua New Guinea. http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/sc_chart.asp#, Accessed 12 October 2012.

  48. Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., Mastruzzi, M. (2010). The worldwide governance indicators methodology and analytical issues. Policy Research Working Paper. Washington: The World Bank Development Research Group Macroeconomics and Growth Team.

  49. Kavanamur, D. (2001). The interplay between politics and business in Papua New Guinea. State, Society and Governance in Melanesia Project Working Paper. Canberra: Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies.

  50. Keane, B. (2010). Who profits from our foreign aid?: The ‘technical assistance’ making business rich. http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/07/12/who-profits-from-our-foreign-aid-the-technical-assistance-making-business-rich/ Accessed 12 July 2012.

  51. Krastev, I. (2004). Shifting obsessions: Three essays on the politics of anticorruption. Budapest: CEU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Larmour, P. (1997). Corruption and governance in the South Pacific. State Society and Governance in Melanesia Working Paper, Canberra: Australian National University.

  53. Larmour, P. (2005). Corruption and accountability in the Pacific islands. Asia Pacific School of Economics and Government Discussion Papers, 05–10, Canberra: Australian National University.

  54. Lattas, A. (2011). Logging, violence and pleasure: neoliberalism, civil society and corporate governance in West New Britain. Oceania, 81(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Laurance, W.F., Kakul, T., Keenan, R.J., Sayer, J., Passingan, S., Clements, G.R., Villegas, F., & Sodhi, N.S. (2011). Predatory corporations, failing governance, and the fate of forests in Papua New Guinea. Conservation Letters, 4(2), 95–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Marshall, I. E. (2001). A survey of corruption issues in the mining and mineral sector. London: Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development Project.

    Google Scholar 

  57. May, R. (2009). Policy making and implementation: Studies from Papua New Guinea. Canberra: ANU EPress.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Murphy, J. (2011). Capitalism and transparency. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 7(2), 125–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Office of Development Effectiveness. (2007). Approaches to anti-corruption through the Australian aid program: Lessons from PNG, Indonesia and the Solomon Islands. Canberra: Australian Government.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Ohnesorge, J.K.M. (1999). Ratcheting up the anti-corruption drive: could a look at recent history cure a case of theory-determinism? Connecticut Journal of International Law, 14(1), 467–473.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Ombudsman Commission of Papua New Guinea. (2001). Investigations practice manual. Port Moresby: Ombudsman Commission of Papua New Guinea.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Pelto, M. (2007). Civil society and the national integrity system in Papua New Guinea. Pacific Economic Bulletin, 22(1), 54–69.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Pitts, M. (2001). Crime and corruption–does Papua New Guinea have the capacity to control it? Pacific Economic Bulletin, 16(2), 127–134.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Pitts, M. (2002). Crime, corruption and capacity in Papua New Guinea. Canberra: Asia Pacific Press.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Post-Courier. (2003). NPF inquiry findings. Post Courier. http://www.postcourier.com.pg/20070626/tuhome.htm Accessed 2 July 2007.

  66. Post-Courier. (2008). T.I. Blasts Govt action (p. 6). Port Moresby: Post-Courier.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Post-Courier. (2009). TI lashes funds misuse (p. 5). Port Moresby: Post Courier.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Post-Courier. (2009). TIPNG queries about Namah (p. 1). Port Moresby: Post-Courier.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Publish What You Pay. (2011). Papua New Guinea: Recent activities. http://www.publishwhatyoupay.org/where/coalitions/papua-new-guinea Accessed 4 July 2012.

  70. Roberts, G. (2006). The rape of PNG’s forests. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/story/0,20867,19565361-30417,00.html. Accessed 24 June 2012.

  71. Rocha, L.J., Brown, E., & Cloke, J. (2011). Of legitimate and illegitimate corruption: bankruptcies in Nicaragua. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 7(2), 159–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Szeftel, M. (1998). Misunderstanding African politics: corruption and the governance agenda. Review of African Political Economy, 25(76), 221–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. The Asia-Pacific Action Group. (1990). The Barnett report: A summary of the report of the commission of inquiry into aspects of the timber industry in Papua New Guinea. Hobart: The Asia-Pacific Action Group.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Theobald, R. (1990). Corruption, development and underdevelopment. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Transparency International. (n.d.). About us. http://www.transparency.org/about_us. Accessed 24 October 2011.

  76. Transparency International Papua New Guinea. (2009). Annual report 2008. Port Moresby: Transparency International Papua New Guinea.

    Google Scholar 

  77. United Nations Development Program. (2009). PNG businesses fight corruption. Port Moresby: United Nations Development Program.

    Google Scholar 

  78. United Nations Development Program. (2009). Tacking corruption, transforming lives: Accelerating human development in Asia and the Pacific. New Delhi: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Williams, R. (1999). New concepts for old? Third World Quarterly, 20(3), 503–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Williams, J., & Beare, M. (1999). The business of bribery: globalization, economic liberalization, and the “problem” of corruption. Crime, Law and Social Change, 32(2), 115–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. World Bank. (2007). Strengthening World Bank Group engagement on governance and anti-corruption. Washington: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  82. World Bank. (2011). World wide governance indicators: Papua New Guinea. http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/sc_chart.asp# Accessed 12 July 2012.

Download references

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to Jon Barnett, Monica Minnegal and Leslie Holmes of the University of Melbourne for their suggestions on early versions of this article. Many thanks to Jennifer Lake and Anna Walton for editing advice. I also thank the people at AusAID and Transparency International Papua New Guinea for participating in my research. I remain responsible for the end result. The author has consulted for Transparency International Papua New Guinea in the past.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Development Policy Centre, Australian National University, Acton, Australia

    Grant W. Walton

  2. Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, J.G. Crawford Building (Bld 132), Canberra, ACT, 0200, Australia

    Grant W. Walton

Authors
  1. Grant W. Walton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Grant W. Walton.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Walton, G.W. The limitations of neoliberal logic in the anti-corruption industry: Lessons from Papua New Guinea. Crime Law Soc Change 60, 147–164 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-013-9450-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-013-9450-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation