Inventor's Response To Stiglitz Article On Corruption; (C)
Top Down Model Of Fighting Corruption
Nobel laureate Joseph E. Stiglitz has presented yet another important message on corruption but this inventor fighting and campaigning against corruption for 30 years has found that motive or reward of corruption is so lucrative or profitable and punishment almost non existent that it is impossible to eradicate it without joint efforts of the international organizations like World Bank, NGO's and affected public.
Like female moth's pheromones attract males several kilometers away, intuition of corruption bring corrupt politicians, businesses and bureaucrats of different ideologies, cultures and regions together for common goal to plunder public money. Quality, Viability and Productivity issues are completely ignored.
The practitioners of corruption are highly motivated and skilled that they roped in President of India in promoting project to take Ganga Basin water 3000 kilometers South to cost over $150b when there is already severe shortage of water in Ganga Basin itself that has very few dams on its rivers or per capita water storage in Ganga Basin is lowest in the world. Ganga basin is most fertile in the world but it was and is planned to take 50 BCM of Ganga waters to south that is much more than actually utilized by Ganga Basin states. So questions I asked were; Is it not better to use 50 Billion tones of Ganga water in Ganga Basin itself to grow food in its fertile plains and transport 30 million tones food to south? How much shall be the food production increase from 2% of water in Indian rivers transferred to south to cost $150b of capital resources?
Corruption like cancer spreads to all organs of government structure if not surgically removed immediately on detection. When nations fail to detect corruption or don't remove cases that are detected, it spreads even faster.
Cancer of corruption has spread deeply in to Indian political system that promoted dishonest businesses practices patronize few businessmen for majority of the new opportunities bypassing the usual norms.
Political corruption promotes slums, property grabbing, theft of services, stealing of project ideas, selection of undeserving, promoting unviable projects, illegal constructions and inducting undeserving kin in to politics. Electoral process itself is a fraud and corrupt practice. Voters don't even know the person they vote and have no time to very the credentials of the candidates and compare them.
Politicians once elected through sham process almost immediately induct their close relatives as their aids and groom them for political career.
I met country Director of World Bank M. Carter and asked him why WB promotes unviable projects- his reply was uninspiring – selection of the projects is the responsibility of host nations. There is definite contribution in corrupting government who cite WB funding approval as certificate good quality of projects.
John Briscoe, WB water specialist was confronted early last year at a JNU conference on river links by this inventor informed that Narmada Basin shall have 30 large dams that will lose 15 maf of water to evaporation when dependable yield of the basin is 27 maf. Water of Narmada could have been inexpensively diverted in to upper catchments of Ganga tributaries and put in fertile plains than building huge dams that produce nominal electricity and water releases in Gujarat contribute to flooding that productive irrigation.
Huge dams erected over five decades produce very little electricity and contributes to very little food production. Incompetent and corrupt governments wasted public money when all it required was few barrages and short and small canals to divert water in to fertile plains of Ganga Basin.
His response was most unexpected, he asked me give him a copy of my report which was broadcast several times of WaterWatch group. This inventor wanted give a ten to fifteen minutes presentation to the water experts (?) but was not allowed. Then request was modified to present it during lunchtime when the projector was idle.
There is only one Joseph E. Stiglitz in the world and also this author, when politicians have motive to promote unviable projects, experts are too incompetent who don't want to listen to us there is little hope in President of the WB to intervene and prescribe anti corruption procedures.
Simple procedure is to introduce "Performance Ratings Of Dams & Irrigation Projects". Ratio of energy production to water spread, per capita water storage in basin and state, ratio of food production in million tones per million acre-feet of canal water release, ratio of water diverted for irrigation to live storage capacity, ratio of water put in fertile farms to water released at canal head and food production in command area.
Such a data will single out non-performing dams and canals. Government around the world shall know the zones of corruption, wastages of water resources and fertile areas deprived of water resource.
Due to the failed water policies and programs of the WB there is widespread hunger and poverty and a situation was developed when Om Prakash Chautal, as Chief Minister of Haryana at Chief Minister's conference chaired by then Prime Minister wanted lions share in all rivers flowing in neighboring states even if 500 km to 800 km from its state boundary when its large central districts are chronically water logged and need very large foreign funded drains but is not prepared to release even 150 cusecs of additional water for Indian capital city.
It is very amusing in India companies have no inclination to develop advanced technologies so the government has "Compromised", company law board require them to state "Technology Absorption" and all companies report technology absorption when actually there is little technology absorption and companies just learn to operate imported plant and machinery. World's largest Reliance Petroleum in refinery business for 15 years required Chinese contractors to lay gas pipeline in India that is a century old technology.
India doesn't protect business secrets and is slow in protecting inventions and most project ideas are stolen.
WB needs genuine experts who can analyze and understand the problems.
From top down it is possible to create a very effective network to eradicate corruption in advocating efficient and productive dams and projects, political reforms tailored to elect honest and competent people and to lead and cooperate with NGOs to fight corruption in an organized and systematic way.
Ravinder Singh October20, 2006
Corrupting fight against corruption
At its recent annual meeting, World Bank officials spoke extensively about corruption. It is an understandable concern: money that the Bank lends to developing countries that ends up in secret bank accounts or finances some contractors' luxurious lifestyle leaves a country more indebted, not more prosperous.
James Wolfensohn, the Bank's previous president, and I are widely credited with putting corruption on the Bank's agenda, against opponents who regarded corruption as a political issue, not an economic one, and thus outside the Bank's mandate. Our research showed systematic relationships between corruption and economic growth, which allowed us to pursue this critical issue.
But the World Bank would do well to keep four things in mind as it takes up the fight. First, corruption takes many forms, so a war on corruption has to be fought on many fronts. You can't fight the diversion of small amounts of money by weak and poor countries while ignoring the massive diversion of public resources into private hands of the sort that marked, say, Russia under Boris Yeltsin.
James Wolfensohn, the Bank's previous president, and I are widely credited with putting corruption on the Bank's agenda, against opponents who regarded corruption as a political issue, not an economic one, and thus outside the Bank's mandate. Our research showed systematic relationships between corruption and economic growth, which allowed us to pursue this critical issue.
But the World Bank would do well to keep four things in mind as it takes up the fight. First, corruption takes many forms, so a war on corruption has to be fought on many fronts. You can't fight the diversion of small amounts of money by weak and poor countries while ignoring the massive diversion of public resources into private hands of the sort that marked, say, Russia under Boris Yeltsin.
In some countries, overt corruption occurs primarily through campaign contributions that oblige politicians to repay major donors with favours. Smaller-scale corruption is bad, but systemic corruption of political processes can have even greater costs.
Campaign contributions and lobbying that lead to rapid privatisations of utilities — before appropriate regulatory frameworks are in place, and in a manner that produces only a few bidders — can impede development, even without direct kickbacks to government officials.
Life is never black and white. Just as there is no "one size fits all" policy for economic development, there is no such policy for fighting corruption. The response to corruption needs to be as complex and variegated as corruption itself.
Second, it's fine for the World Bank to deliver anti-corruption sermons. But policies, procedures, and institutions are what matter. In fact, the Bank's procurement procedures are generally viewed around the world as a model to be admired.
Indeed, some countries with large dollar reserves — hardly in need of World Bank credit — borrowed from the Bank at far higher interest rates than they were getting from the US, believing that these procedures would help ensure high-quality projects free of corruption and become standard in other areas.
But success in fighting corruption entails more than just good procurement procedures (avoiding, for instance, single-source non-competitive bidding). Many other policies and procedures can be enacted that reduce incentives for corruption. For example, some tax systems are more corruption-resistant than others, because they curtail the discretionary authority of tax officials.
But success in fighting corruption entails more than just good procurement procedures (avoiding, for instance, single-source non-competitive bidding). Many other policies and procedures can be enacted that reduce incentives for corruption. For example, some tax systems are more corruption-resistant than others, because they curtail the discretionary authority of tax officials.
Third, the World Bank's primary responsibility is to fight poverty, which means that when it confronts a poor country plagued with corruption, its challenge is to figure out how to ensure that its own money is not tainted and gets to projects and people that need it. In some cases, this may entail delivering assistance through non-governmental organisations. But seldom will it be the case that the best response is simply to walk away.
Finally, while developing countries must take responsibility for rooting out corruption, there is much that the west can do to help. At a minimum, western governments and corporations should not be complicit.
Every bribe that is taken has a payer, and too often the bribe payer is a corporation from an advanced industrial country or someone acting on its behalf. Indeed, one reason for the so called "natural resource curse" — the fact that resource-rich countries do not, on average, do as well as resource-poor countries — is the prevalence of corruption, too often aided and abetted by companies that would like to get the resources they sell at discount prices.
The US under President Jimmy Carter made an important contribution in passing the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which made bribery by American companies anywhere in the world illegal. The OECD's convention on bribery was another step in the right direction. Making all payments to governments transparent would bring further progress, and western governments could encourage this simply by tying this requirement to tax deductibility.
It is equally important to address bank secrecy, which facilitates corruption by providing corrupt dictators with a safe haven for their funds. In August 2001, just before the terrorist attacks on America, the US government vetoed an OECD effort to limit secret bank accounts.
While the government has since reversed its stance on bank secrecy for terrorists, it has not done so for corrupt officials. A strong stand by the World Bank would enhance its credibility in the war on corruption.
Those who criticise the Bank's stance on corruption do not do so because they favour corruption. Some critics worry about corruption in the corruption agenda itself: that the fight will be used as a "cover" for cutting aid to countries that displease the US administration.
Such concerns have found resonance in the seeming incongruity of the Bank's tough talk on corruption and simultaneous plans to expand lending to Iraq. No one is likely to certify that Iraq is corruption-free — or even ranks low on corruption internationally.
Finally, while developing countries must take responsibility for rooting out corruption, there is much that the west can do to help. At a minimum, western governments and corporations should not be complicit.
Every bribe that is taken has a payer, and too often the bribe payer is a corporation from an advanced industrial country or someone acting on its behalf. Indeed, one reason for the so called "natural resource curse" — the fact that resource-rich countries do not, on average, do as well as resource-poor countries — is the prevalence of corruption, too often aided and abetted by companies that would like to get the resources they sell at discount prices.
The US under President Jimmy Carter made an important contribution in passing the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which made bribery by American companies anywhere in the world illegal. The OECD's convention on bribery was another step in the right direction. Making all payments to governments transparent would bring further progress, and western governments could encourage this simply by tying this requirement to tax deductibility.
It is equally important to address bank secrecy, which facilitates corruption by providing corrupt dictators with a safe haven for their funds. In August 2001, just before the terrorist attacks on America, the US government vetoed an OECD effort to limit secret bank accounts.
While the government has since reversed its stance on bank secrecy for terrorists, it has not done so for corrupt officials. A strong stand by the World Bank would enhance its credibility in the war on corruption.
Those who criticise the Bank's stance on corruption do not do so because they favour corruption. Some critics worry about corruption in the corruption agenda itself: that the fight will be used as a "cover" for cutting aid to countries that displease the US administration.
Such concerns have found resonance in the seeming incongruity of the Bank's tough talk on corruption and simultaneous plans to expand lending to Iraq. No one is likely to certify that Iraq is corruption-free — or even ranks low on corruption internationally.
The most strident criticism, however, comes from those who worry that the World Bank is straying from its mandate. Of course, the Bank must do everything that it can to ensure that its money is well spent, which means fighting both corruption and incompetence.
But money itself will not solve all problems, and a single-minded focus on fighting corruption will not bring development. On the contrary, it might merely divert attention from other issues of no less moment for those struggling to lift themselves out of poverty.
(The author, a Nobel laureate in economics, is professor of economics at Columbia University)
(C): Project Syndicate, 2006
But money itself will not solve all problems, and a single-minded focus on fighting corruption will not bring development. On the contrary, it might merely divert attention from other issues of no less moment for those struggling to lift themselves out of poverty.
(The author, a Nobel laureate in economics, is professor of economics at Columbia University)
(C): Project Syndicate, 2006
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min. __._,_.___
***NEW: DESI TALK!! The Shout box in the group home page***
Comments, suggestions or just plain chatting... you can do it right here!
Homepage: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dilsedesigroup
***DIL SE DESI GROUP***
You can join the group by clicking the below link or by copying and pasting it in the browser bar and then pressing 'Enter'.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dilsedesigroup/join
OWNER/MODERATOR : rajeshkainth003@gmail.com; {Rajesh Kainth}
MODERATOR : a.amitkumar13@gmail.com; {Amit Kumar}
MODERATOR : manisha.hatkar@gmail.com; {Manisha Hatkar}
MODERATOR : preeti.hande@gmail.com; {Preeti Hande}
MODERATOR : immortally69@yahoo.com {Rahul Joshi}
MODERATOR : kaustubh.basu@gmail.com {Kaustubhshobhan Basu}
MODERATOR : planetofprince@yahoo.com (Prem)
MODERATOR : abhijeet-bhurke@bridgestone.co.in (Abhijeet)
To modify your list subscription, please send a blank email to:
SUBSCRIBE : dilsedesigroup-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
UNSUBSCRIBE : dilsedesigroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
INDIVIDUAL MAILS : dilsedesigroup-normal@yahoogroups.com
DAILY DIGEST : dilsedesigroup-digest@yahoogroups.com
VACATION HOLD : dilsedesigroup-nomail@yahoogroups.com
FOR POSTING MESSAGES : dilsedesigroup@yahoogroups.com
SPONSORED LINKS
| Desi arnaz | Lucy desi |
Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___