Log in
This case study centres on a body of work commissioned by Transparency international UK looking at corruption in the UK. Despite the UK scoring highly on international measures, there was a concern that the extent and impact of corruption may be somewhat hidden. Our research showed that there were several areas that are of much higher risk than previously acknowledged, especially through links to organised crime. These findings have been utilised by national law enforcement agencies to inform their continuing anti-corruption and organised crime strategies. The research has also been debated at the highest political levels in the UK.
Corruption research in the University of Surrey, has focused on analysing the gaps in anti-corruption strategies and suggestions for improvements have impacted in two ways:
(1) a contribution to discussions at the policy-making level of international organisations (the OECD and the UN) resulting in recommendations for changes, and
(2) the transfer of the experience and expertise gained in survey methodology adopted in the Surrey `Corruption in International Business' project to the questionnaire design and content of three projects — Bribery in the UK, National Integrity Survey and Integrity in the Defence Sector — conducted by the UK chapter of Transparency International (TI), the globally influential anti-corruption policy-influencing Civil Society Organisation.
Since surveys play a central role in informing and driving policy making to combat corruption, they need to be founded on a robust methodology.
Heather Marquette's research has influenced aid agencies by encouraging them to recognise corruption as a primarily political issue as opposed to an economic or managerial matter. This shift in understanding has contributed to a change in perception among professionals on anti-corruption and to alterations in programmes and practices among a number of organisations including EuropeAid, AusAid and the World Bank Institute.
Marquette has directly contributed to policy thinking by providing expert technical support to the anti-corruption programmes of a range of international aid agencies and non-governmental organisations. As well as direct guidance, her commissioned advisory activity has included the provision of high-level training for donors and their partners, focussing on the politics of corruption, anti-corruption programming and the role of popular attitudes in supporting or undermining governance reform.
This case study grows out of the research and collaboration between Gould and Asha Parivar, a Third Sector organisation in Lucknow, India. Gould's research between 2005 and 2010 (5), resulting in his 2011 monograph on corruption in India (1), led directly to the development of electronic Public Information Centres since 2010, which allow economically deprived communities in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, India to access information on government projects in a systematic and widespread manner. Centres/booths are run in six locations in two Indian states and assist in the filing of Right to Information (RTI) applications. Around 1,000 applications have been filed so far.
This case study centres on research, which had an impact on a major piece of local government legislation. The research was a comparative study of the Local Integrity Systems (LIS) of England, Scotland and Wales. The research was commissioned by Standards for England as part of its 2010 strategic review, which was used by the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) in the creation of the Localism Act 2011. This Act fundamentally altered the English local integrity framework. The research has subsequently been used by major national research projects in corruption in local government.
Research conducted at UCL by Professor Alena Ledeneva on informal practices and governance networks in Russia led to the development of tools used by senior executives at international corporations working in Russia and elsewhere to evaluate and manage the risk of corruption in their organisations. The research also influenced the rulings and expert testimony provided in British courts affecting the outcomes of major commercial trials such as Cherney -v- Deripaska (2008) and Berezovsky -v- Abramovich (2011) as well as in extradition cases at the Westminster District Court in London.
Open University (OU) researchers were responsible for the development of the National Student Survey (NSS). It is an influential and widely cited source of information about the experience of students in higher education. Around 287,000 students at more than 300 institutions responded to the 2012 NSS. It has been incorporated into the league tables published annually by The Times, Sunday Times, Guardian and the online Complete University Guide. Performance in the survey has led institutions to take actions and initiatives to improve the student experience. The Ramsden report for the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) indicates it has become an important element in quality enhancement.
The impact of Professor Dominik Zaum's research is a model of how to bring novel and imaginative scholarship into the practical world of policymaking. The research, which was conducted within the UoA, examined the role of corruption in the political economy of statebuilding and stabilisation efforts. Its impact has derived from two achievements: it has shown that some forms of corruption can, in some circumstances, have stabilising effects; and it has produced a rigorous assessment of what works — and what does not work — in donor-funded anti-corruption efforts. It has thus influenced and informed the debates of policy-makers in the Department for International Development (DFID) and the inter-departmental Stabilisation Unit (SU: the UK government's centre for expertise and best practice in stabilisation). The impact of Zaum's work has been both recognised and amplified by fellowships with DFID and the SU. This has enabled Zaum himself to accentuate the impact through formal presentations, informal internal discussion, and implementation-oriented publications, thus influencing the perspectives of a policymaking community both inside and beyond these institutions. The impact can be evidenced through such measures as downloads of his policy papers, the use of these papers in training and as resources, and through the testimony of officials.
In 2008-2009 the UK was subject to legal infraction proceedings at the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for allegedly failing to implement the European Union's Urban Waste-water Treatment Directive (UWWTD). Research by the Institute of Estuarine and Coastal Studies, Hull (IECS) for the Environment Agency (EA)/Defra provided evidence to the UK Government for its defence against these allegations. The research consisted of:
- literature/data reviews and collection and analysis of critical evidence from the Humber.
- co-ordinating workshops and convening an expert panel of sufficient authoritative academic opinion to counteract the European Court of Justice allegations.
In December 2009 the European Court of Justice ruled in favour of the UK. Our research therefore helped to save very significant, unnecessary capital investment in nutrient removal technology for sewage treatment nationally and in the Yorkshire and Humber region especially. The UK government thus avoided the possibility of major European Commission fines of up to €703,000 per day, or €256m per annum, for infraction of the Urban Water-water Treatment Directive [1].