Skip to main content

Mitigating the Risks of Corruption Through Collective Action

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

Corporate anti-corruption compliance programs are usually modified in response to internal and external developments to meet regulatory requirements and to be seen as being ‘dynamic’, but despite this they have yet to solve some of the more difficult corruption issues that still persist, even after decades of law enforcement. Collective Action provides a means to address the wider context of corruption risks by bringing together competitors as well as other market participants and stakeholders to seek common ground to reduce corruption. Companies should use their anti-corruption risk assessments systematically to identify where multi-stakeholder approaches could be used to tackle corruption risks more comprehensively, because risk assessments involve the business as well as compliance. The outcome would be a shift towards business driven integrity, and away from reactive and imposed anti-corruption compliance programs. Establishing a successful Collective Action takes time, trust and a skilled facilitator to ensure the goals are reached and all stakeholders commit to the agreement and take a long-term view.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    United States Sentencing Commission (2012), Chap. 8, Sentencing of Organizations and United States Department of Justice and United States Securities Exchange Commission (2012).

  2. 2.

    OECD (2010).

  3. 3.

    United Kingdom Ministry of Justice (2011).

  4. 4.

    See, for example, Transparency International, UK Chapter with PWC (2013), or A Guide for Anti-Corruption Risk Assessment, UN Global Compact Anti Corruption Working Group, September 2013.

  5. 5.

    See Transparency International (2012).

  6. 6.

    See US Department of Justice (2013).

  7. 7.

    See Fox (2013).

  8. 8.

    Pieth (2007), pp. 81ff.

  9. 9.

    World Bank Institute (2008).

  10. 10.

    World Bank Institute (2008).

  11. 11.

    Design and Enforcement of Voluntary Anti Corruption Agreements in the Private Sector, a study commissioned by the G20 Anti Corruption Working Group and prepared on behalf of the B20 Task Force, Draft 30 May 2013, p. 5 (on file with the author).

  12. 12.

    The principles set out in the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA) (2012) Code of Practice aims to ensure that the same high standards of ethical behavior apply to the promotion of pharmaceutical products in all countries, regardless of the level of development of their economic and health care systems. The IFPMA Code Practice was first adopted as the foundation of a global approach to self-regulation by the pharmaceutical industry in 1981 and has been updated frequently since then.

  13. 13.

    For more detailed references associated with this initiative see Zindera and Forstnig-Errath (2012), p. 185.

  14. 14.

    The Argentina energy transmission sector collective action initiative was presented at the Second Latin American Conference on Ethics, Transparency and Anti-Corruption Compliance held in Buenos Aires on 1–2 August 2013.

  15. 15.

    See Basel Institute on Governance (2013).

  16. 16.

    World Bank Institute (2008), slide 58.

  17. 17.

    See Mark Pieth’s remarks on the how the original defense integrity initiative was derailed by the BAE scandal; only to re-emerge as the Defense Industry Initiative on Business Ethics and Conduct: Pieth (2012), p. 11 (with further references).

References

Download references

Acknowledgment

My thanks to Radha Ivory for her helpful comments and suggestions on an earlier draft version. Any errors remain the responsibility of the author.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gemma Aiolfi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Aiolfi, G. (2014). Mitigating the Risks of Corruption Through Collective Action. In: Brodowski, D., Espinoza de los Monteros de la Parra, M., Tiedemann, K., Vogel, J. (eds) Regulating Corporate Criminal Liability. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05993-8_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics