Why the "Quiet Corruption" Label Hurts the Poor

A silent flood of resources being siphoned from aid agencies and governments — and channeled into the pockets of health workers and teachers.

That's the way a World Bank portrays a new concept they're calling "quiet corruption," in a report released last month. Unlike the stories of bribes and kickbacks among high-level government officials, oft-covered in studies and the media, "quiet corruption" hides away from the public. Still, though, the World Bank says it has a corrosive and disproportionate impact on the poor.

But the World Bank's language here misses the mark.

A label like "corruption" is a heavy burden to lay on allegedly "corrupt" individuals. It requires precise use, particularly when you decide to levy it against entire groups of people. Unfortunately, the World Bank doesn't seem concerned with the fact. As one example of quiet corruption, the World Bank cites the fact that 20% of teachers in western Kenya's primary schools "could not be found during school hours". But are we to assume that this is necessarily corruption? Such a serious claim raises immediate questions. What is the health and salary level of these teachers? What kind of books and materials do they have available to educate their students? What are the class sizes in these primary schools? What kind of training have these teachers received?

Might another way to explan such a statistic be poverty and low morale (the result of poor financing for public education and lack of teacher and school support)? As a major global agency, instead of wantonly using a word like "corruption," the World Bank would be better off marshaling its resources to address the real challenges at hand, rather than slandering teachers (and health workers, among others). Labels like "corruption" have a way of developing powerful narratives — in this case, one feeding a dominant story about of a "culture of corruption" — that are difficult to shake. Talk of corruption, especially this "quiet" sort, can make donors reluctant to reach out to specific countries, a trend that exacerbates the type of outcomes the World Bank describes (with dubious accuracy).

Rather than finding new ways to apply and expand the definition of "corruption," aid agencies, governments and citizens should focus their energies on how to better use funds on behalf of the poor. Part of this means ensuring that workers — teachers, farmers, health workers — can earn a good living wage, and that programs are adequately funded to support the tools and training they need.

The World Bank report shows that funds don't always have their intended impact at the local level. We should, of course, be troubled by this. But before calling it "corruption," let's dig deeper.

Photo Credit: eduardoz