Corruption and Good Governance: An Analysis of ASEAN’s E-Governance Experience
Based on:
Journal Article (2019)
The relationship of corruption and governance (traditional and e-governance) from an ASEAN context is assesse. There is a greater focus on e-governance which can improve the potential for good governance, socio economic agents could take advantage.
Brief by:
The main concern of this paper is to explain why there is still corruption when we look at the wide array of countries in the world, (developped and developping). We looked at why corruption still isn’t rooted out, and also whether the expectation that e-governance would solve corruption issues is true or not.
Key findings
The main finding is that e-governance in the context of ASEAN does not help solve corruption, or rather, than the presence of technology and e-governance doesn't necessarily mean that there will be good governance.
ASEAN Countries score comparatively lower in the World Governance Indicator - Voice and Accountability.
This includes Singapore who score remarkably high in all other indicators. This is consistent with the noted decrease in press freedom in these countries. The average low score for Voice and Accountability across ASEAN is indicative of the weak, political, civil and human rights practises in the cluster.
Another finding and conclusion is that we cannot look at governance only in its totality.
Proposed action
There need to be good mechanisms on e-platforms to take public feedback into account
One recommendation for ASEAN specifically is that a proper business culture needs to be implemented or facilitated
Penalties against corruption need to be strict and dissuasive
ASEAN Governments have to improve the communication and feedback strategies, remove barriers for the use of media and information technology, collaborate with civil society organisations as well as a "carrot and stick" approach to improve good governance with an aim to develop a trust based relationship and enhance public participation to achieve sustainability
Comments
You must log in to ask a question
Acknowledgements
Thank you to ASEAN
These insights were made available thanks to the support of ASEAN, who are committed to the dissemination of knowledge for all.
Are you a researcher looking to make a real-world impact? Join Acume and transform your research into a practical summary.
Already have an account? Log in
Discover more
Corruption and Good Governance: An Analysis of ASEAN’s E-Governance Experience
Cite this brief: Rubasundram, Geetha. 'Corruption and Good Governance: An Analysis of ASEAN’s E-Governance Experience'. Acume. https://www.acume.org/r/corruption-and-good-governance-an-analysis-of-aseans-e-governance-experience/
Brief created by: Geetha Rubasundram | Year brief made: 2022
Original research:
- Rubasundram, G., ‘Corruption and Good Governance: An Analysis of ASEAN’s E-Governance Experience’ 31 (1) (pp. 57–70) https://www.jstor.org/stable/26664253. – https://www.jstor.org/stable/26664253
Research brief:
The relationship of corruption and governance (traditional and e-governance) from an ASEAN context is assesse. There is a greater focus on e-governance which can improve the potential for good governance, socio economic agents could take advantage.
The main concern of this paper is to explain why there is still corruption when we look at the wide array of countries in the world, (developped and developping). We looked at why corruption still isn’t rooted out, and also whether the expectation that e-governance would solve corruption issues is true or not.
Findings:
The main finding is that e-governance in the context of ASEAN does not help solve corruption, or rather, than the presence of technology and e-governance doesn’t necessarily mean that there will be good governance.
ASEAN Countries score comparatively lower in the World Governance Indicator – Voice and Accountability.
This includes Singapore who score remarkably high in all other indicators. This is consistent with the noted decrease in press freedom in these countries. The average low score for Voice and Accountability across ASEAN is indicative of the weak, political, civil and human rights practises in the cluster.
Another finding and conclusion is that we cannot look at governance only in its totality.
Advice:
There need to be good mechanisms on e-platforms to take public feedback into account
- Accountability is crucial to dealing with corruption.
One recommendation for ASEAN specifically is that a proper business culture needs to be implemented or facilitated
- A culture that strengthens the trust of the people.
Penalties against corruption need to be strict and dissuasive
- A proper incentive/penalty system needs to be created.
ASEAN Governments have to improve the communication and feedback strategies, remove barriers for the use of media and information technology, collaborate with civil society organisations as well as a “carrot and stick” approach to improve good governance with an aim to develop a trust based relationship and enhance public participation to achieve sustainability