Lifting the veil of silence on corruption and humanitarian aid

Humanitarian relief is worth around US$10 billion annually. Complex logistics of aid delivery provide scope for mismanagement, diversion and corruption at each level of the relief chain. Agencies can submit fraudulent accounts to donors, supplies can disappear and vulnerable recipients of aid may be asked for bribes or sexual favours.

A report from the Overseas DevelopmentInstitute (ODI) urges the humanitarian community to do more to analysecorruption risks, to strengthen mitigation systems and involve recipients inaid delivery and monitoring.

Relief, unlike most development assistance, isoften delivered in areas where governance is poor as a result of conflict ornatural disaster and corruption is deep rooted. Humanitarian agencies haveprocedures for accounting and managing their assets but systems ofaccountability flow upwards, with aid agencies justifying expenditure to donors.Progress on downwards accountability, of aid agencies to the people they aretrying to help, has been far slower.

Aid deliverers may be ableto report that the right amount of food was distributed to the right number ofpeople, but this says little about whether bribes were paid, what proportion ofthe food went to local government officials, whether those on beneficiary listsactually fitted vulnerability criteria or what bribes were demanded by localmilitias.

Purchase, storage and transportoffer widespread opportunities for corruption as transport services, fuel andspare parts are always in demand. Most agencies are familiar with a range offees/bribes/taxes at every level of contact with existing authorities. The point at which anacceptable incentive becomes unacceptable corruption will always be unclear.

However, agencies can stopencouraging corruptionby:

• behaving in responsible ways which do not give rise to allegations of arroganceand inefficiency
• not paying inflated prices for accommodation, vehicles and staff
• resisting pressures from donors, supporters and press officers to rapidlyestablish programmes
• not putting pressure on staff to spend money quickly, regardless ofwhether control systems are in place
• hiring local staff by checking references and providing proper inductionand keeping expatriates on short contracts
• ensuring managers regularly visit distribution centres and  warehouses.

Published literature oncorruption in emergency relief is scarce. Corruption is a sensitive matter asthe relief system is highly competitive and it is very difficult for any oneagency to admit to problems.

It is time to acknowledge corruption.Just as agencies routinely conduct security assessments, and develop anddisseminate security guidelines, so risk assessments for fraud and corruptionshould be a standard part of good management practice.

ODI recommends:

• better assessment of the risks and opportunities for corruption
• trying to find ways toprovide assistance through communities and representative institutions in orderto activate local networks of obligation and accountability
• rejection of the common assumption that international staff are lesslikely to be corrupt
• investing in local staff to encourage loyalty: control systems designed without input from local staff are less likely to befollowed.