Michaelene Cox
capabilities. Integrated service delivery of ethics training among government agencies and states is particularly difficult, even with a shift toward outsourcing because of political— not economic or technological— reasons. Preliminary correlation analyses serve to encourage further testing and case study research on the relationship between G2E ethics training and public malfeasance. Intra‐ and international explorations on the frontier of government service delivery remain critical; the implication for public policy in all countries is quite clear. For instance, a questionnaire administered to participating members by the Organization of American States( OAS) Committee of Experts indicated considerable legislation now being proposed to standardize mechanisms within countries and the region for overseeing government employee training regarding conflict‐of‐interest and ethical responsibilities( Raile 2004). G2E service delivery would appear to hold much promise as a method of consolidating such training, but of course rests on e‐readiness. As noted earlier, measures of e‐Government capability can be drawn from a variety of sources such as the UN Public Administration Programme and the Economist Intelligence Unit, and while scoring varies, the same countries generally rank about the same from source to source. Measures of e‐Government readiness for OAS states reveal that the U. S. and Canada are well‐poised to implement online ethics training at all levels of government, while other OAS members such as Brazil and Argentina will struggle first with establishing and expanding reliable and basic e‐Government services such as network administrative support, desktop / portable PC configuration, and application / software development, and with making political as well as economic decisions as to contract or not to contract out various e‐Government services. Like most other well‐developed economies, however, South Korea and The Netherlands maintain top rankings in e‐Government readiness. As a federal republic with a highly decentralized government, South Korea and its fairly autonomous provinces and self‐governing cities face challenges similar to the U. S. in coordinating or consolidating G2E services. The level of political corruption in South Korea remains persistently high, and so perhaps U. S. state‐level experience of online ethics training can provide a model for policymakers to consider in that case. Implementation of policy in The Netherlands is likewise decentralized, although responsibility for public administration integrity policy rests with the Minister of the Interior and Kingdom Relations( Kolthoff 2007). Recent anti‐corruption legislation in The Netherlands suggests that this consolidation could lend itself to creating viable e‐ethics training programs among its dozen provinces, although it should be noted that the country already fares quite well on corruption indices. There is no study yet examining the existence of subnational online ethics programs in either South Korea or The Netherlands, and for that matter, in any other country of the world.
In short, bivariate correlation coefficients reported in this U. S. case imply that e‐Government capability and online ethics training for government employees is statistically linked to corruption risk and to conviction rates for political corruption. We are mindful that reform initiatives are often based on a particular viewpoint about the nature and causes of corruption. Cultural perspectives suggest that attitudinal changes be made such as fostering zero‐tolerance for public servants, and institutional perspectives propose that controls be established such as ethics commissions and mandatory ethics training. Reforms must give government workers adequate incentives to forego illicit activity in their self‐interest for that of the public. A relatively large body of literature thus uses the principal‐agent model as a framework for explaining the contractual relation between government and the public when officials( agents) of the state are elected, appointed, or hired to serve the collective( principal) interest and subsequently violate that public trust. Rational choice theory can therefore provide a framework to understanding how principals and agents make decisions in terms of economic gains and tradeoffs. Prevention and enforcement measures are critical, but greater understanding of the phenomena and suggestions for appropriate anticorruption strategies require analyses built upon data over time that complements in‐depth case investigations at the state and sub‐state levels. This case study suggests that conversations about anti‐corruption policies and strategies consequently take place in light of any country’ s progress towards G2E capability.
References
Andersen, T. B.( 2009)“ E‐Government as an Anti‐Corruption Strategy”, Information Economics and Policy, Vol. 21, pp 201‐ 210.
Center for Public Integrity( 2012)“ Grading the Nation: How Accountable is Your State?” [ online ], http:// www. publicintegrity. org / 2012 / 03 / 19 / 8423 / grading‐nation‐how‐accountable‐your‐state
Clinton, H. R.( 2010)“ International Anti‐Corruption Day,” U. S. Department of State, [ online ], Washington D. C., http:// www. state. gov / secretary / rm / 2010 / 12 / 152579. htm
Fisman, R. and Gatti, R.( 2002)“ Decentralization and Corruption: Evidence from U. S. Federal Transfer Program”, Public Choice, Vol. 113, pp 25‐35.
150