Public Perception on Corruption and Bribery in Sidaama National Regional State, Ethiopia

Abstract

Corruption is a noteworthy issue in both developed and developing societies, with developing countries experiencing more severe problems due to a lack of checks and balances between power centers. It hinders socioeconomic development, FDI, job creation, and poverty reduction, making it a major hindrance to overall development. This study aimed to assess public perceptions towards corruption and bribery in the Sidaama Region, providing evidence to design appropriate policies and strategies to combat corruption. The study used a descriptive and explanatory research design with a convergent, parallel, mixed research approach, sampling three legal clusters in the region: Bensa, Hawassa Zuria, and Hawassa city administration. The data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data, with 81.9% of survey participants stating corruption as the most serious issue in the region. Corruption is the root cause of various problems, including unemployment, nepotism, low-quality education, poorly developed infrastructure, and healthcare issues. Petty corruption and bribery occur more intensely at the woreda (district) administration level, and the practice and magnitude of corruption are higher today than 3 years ago in the region.

1. Introduction

Corruption is as old as human history. For so long, individuals have been offering presents to gain the minds and wishes of others in favor of themselves. That is, a person who receives the gift may do something in favor of the sender. The root word “corruption” is from the Latin word “corrupter”, which means “to break something, and during the action of corruption, the law, legal rule, a moral norm, and in worse situations, communities, and human personalities are broken” [1]. The official definition of the term corruption encompasses a wide array of elements, including the abuse of public authority to benefit individuals or groups of people socially, economically, or politically [2]. It involves the act of public officials (both political and bureaucratic) against the set standards of behavior to fulfill personal gains; hence, it implies a breakdown of the ethical and moral values of systems and institutions of governance societal traditions, and personal behaviors [3, 4].

According to [5], corruption is the misuse of delegated power for private gain. It occurs at any time when public officials or employees misuse the trust placed in them as public servants for either monetary or non-monetary gains that accrue to them, their friends and relatives, or for their personal or political objectives [6]. In connection with this, [7] note that in the political domain, corruption undermines democracy and good governance by flouting or even subverting legitimate processes. Corruption in legislative bodies weakens accountability and distorts representation in policymaking; corruption in the court violates the rule of law; and corruption in public administration results in the unequal allocation of services. More generally, corruption erodes the institutional capacity of government when procedures are disregarded, resources are siphoned off, and public offices are bought and sold. At the extreme, unfettered corruption can lead to state fragility and catastrophic conflict and plunge a state into an “unremitting cycle of institutional anarchy and violence”.

In poor countries, corruption is a major factor in a wide variety of domains. It may cause illegal logging in virgin forests, compromised justice, unfair health services that may lead to the death of many people due to corrupt public policy decisions, denied access/opportunity to education, abuse in military procurement, low-quality roads constructed, less access to potable water, telecommunications and power infrastructure that excludes many poor people, corrupt regulatory behavior in the extractive industries, man-made famine, etc. [8].

In Ethiopia, like many other developing countries, corruption has become pervasive and deep-rooted in the society at large. Although the degree fluctuates, corruption is one of the biggest hindrances to socioeconomic growth, domestic or foreign direct investment (FDI), job creation, and poverty and income disparity reduction in many developing nations. Furthermore, there is a prevalent old proverb that supports corrupt behavior, “ 

 ”, which basically means one who does not embezzle public money while appointed would stand to regret when fired [9]. This urges a public official to exploit his/her official position to get as many personal advantages as he/she could. Nowadays, corruption in Ethiopia has become a complicated issue deep-rooted in the routine activity of governmental and private sectors.

Different sorts of corruption exist in Ethiopia, the usual ones being petty corruption, such as providing presents in the shape of livestock or some other agricultural produce to a judge by one who is involved in litigation to ensure that the judge finds in his/her favor. Bribing local bureaucrats in a similar method was also frequent. Grand corruption, “in the form of misappropriation of public monies, misuse of power, and failure of duty for personal gain”, began to seep in during the reign of the Haile-Selassie and worsened throughout the Derg’s administration [9]. Transparency International (TI) categorizes Ethiopia as one of the severely corrupt countries in the world but there has been little improvement over time. The TI’s 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 assessments placed Ethiopia at 116, 120, 113, 111, and 110 out of 176 nations, respectively [10]. In 2016, the country exhibited minimal development and placed 108th out of 176 countries. In this survey, the country scored 34 out of 100, which places it in the category of severely corrupt countries. In 2020, Ethiopia scored 38 out of 100 and ranked 94th among 179 countries [11]. According to the multispectral assessment of the [2], corruption is developing in Ethiopia, even though the country is not among the worst corrupt countries. The survey additionally showed that the construction sector faced tremendous risk of corruption.

The struggle against corruption has a long history in Ethiopia. The first attempt was made in 1942 when administrative restrictions, which forbade the traditionally recognized practice of receiving money (gubo) and other types of corruption by public officials were implemented. A decade later, the dictatorship implemented new legislative frameworks to prosecute acts of corruption. The boldest move against corruption was adopted by EPRDF with the establishment of the Federal Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (FEACC) in 2001. FEACC was founded as an independent government organization with the purpose of eliminating corruption through investigation, prosecution, and prevention [12]. Following such actions by the federal government, practically all regional states implemented the same measures to save the newly constituted Sidaama National Regional State. Despite the efforts taken by the government and other stakeholders, corruption has remained an unresolved issue in the country.

Addressing corruption and its devastating and diverse repercussions requires a coordinated effort by the government and other stakeholders, including the general public. Evidence-based solutions are necessary to prevent the harmful impacts of corruption on society. Evidence on the public perception of corruption and bribery is significant in decision-making and policy actions. In the fight against corruption, 186 of the world governments adopted The United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) in 2003 and entered into force in 2005. The adoption and broad ratification of UNCAC is an indicator of the willingness of member states to tackle corruption [13].

Recently, the UN General Assembly in September 2015 agreed that corruption is a key hindrance to sustainable development and considered the issue of corruption as one of the concern areas of “The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” The adoption of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) would be a breakthrough accomplishment for the international community because it recognizes corruption as a key obstacle to sustainable development, and it is a demonstration of the commitment of member states to tackle corruption. In this context, Target 16.5 of the SDGs expects member states to “Substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms” [14].

Cognizant of this reality, to limit the prevalence of corruption notably in the public sector, many countries formed institutions that take after the issues linked to encouraging ethical behavior and combatting the prevalence of corruption. Understanding corruption as a major challenge to the overall socioeconomic development of the nation, Ethiopia was one of such countries that established its Federal Ethics and Anti-corruption Commission (FEACC) in 2001 by Proclamation No. 235/2001 as an independent federal government commission with the three objectives: to create awareness in Ethiopian society that corruption will not be condoned or tolerated by promoting ethics and anti-corruption education; to prevent corruption offenses and other improprieties; and to strive to create and promote integrity in public services by detecting, investigating, and prosecuting suspected cases of corruption offenses and other improprieties [12].

In 2005, the House of People‘s Representatives through Proclamation No. 433/2005, revised the commission’s establishment, special procedure, and rules of evidence to guarantee that the commission‘s operations are transparent and accountable. The amendment gives the commission the power to detect, investigate, and prosecute corruption and redefined its powers and tasks in conformity with the updated criminal code of the country. The revised FEACC Establishment Proclamation of 2005 resulted in the modification of the commission‘s objectives in such a way as to strive to create awareness in the Ethiopian society that corruption will not be condoned or tolerated through promoting ethics and anti-corruption education; to prevent corruption offenses and other improprieties; and to expose, investigate, and prosecute corruption offenses and improprieties.

However, later through Proclamation No. 883/2015, its power was redefined where some articles and sub-articles of the updated proclamation (No. 433/2005) were substituted by the new ones. According to this proclamation, in addition to the power vested to the commission to investigate and institute charges on corruption offenses involving huge amounts of money committed in highly strategic public offices and public enterprises, the commission has also vested the power to investigate and institute charges on acts of corruption committed by public organizations [12]. Regional Ethics and Anti-corruption Commissions were also established with comparable functions of FEACC at their jurisdiction with the later foundation of FEACC. However, another proclamation came after the reform of the current ruling party in 2018, and the prosecution, and corruption crime investigation powers given to the FEACC were transferred to the Federal Attorney General by Article 22 (2) & (3) of Proclamation No 943/2018 and the same measures were taken by the regional states.

Following the official foundation of the Sidaama National Regional State in July 2020, the Ethics and Anti-corruption Commission of the region, accountable to the Regional Council, was constituted by Proclamation No 10/2012. This proclamation does not integrate the prosecution and corruption crime investigation authorities and from the onset, such powers are given to the regional Attorney General under Article 7 sub-articles (8–12, 15, 16, 18, & 39) of Proclamation No 6/2012.

The new region in its vision has established various objectives such as lowering abject poverty and inequality, boosting job possibilities for the majority of youth and women as well as driving socioeconomic growth. The region also has to ensure the intelligent use of existing finite resources and be able to manage with great care, putting priority on the rural and urban poor. To meet the goals of the newly constituted government, fostering ethical behavior among the officials and employees of both public and private enterprises including the general public is highly vital. In this regard, it is necessary to determine the level of the perception of the stakeholders, prevalence, drivers, and severity of corruption in the region to establish appropriate policies and strategies to combat corruption in the region.

Few research have been undertaken on corruption in Ethiopia. An example is the [2] research “Diagnosing Corruption in Ethiopia: Perceptions, Realities, and the Way Forward for Key Sectors”. Federal Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission in collaboration with [12] examined “Perception of the Level of Corruption by Foreign Investors in Ethiopia”. Other studies have also been conducted by different scholars and consultants on causes and consequences, impact, challenges, and perception of corruption in the country such as [1, 15, 16, 17, 18]. However, since some of the conclusions of the preceding research are older and are not region-specific, they do not adequately reflect the actual realities of the country in general and Sidaama National Regional State in particular. Moreover, none of the research undertaken on corruption so far is in the newly established Sidaama region. Hence, the Ethics and Anti-corruption Commission of Sidaama National Regional State has initiated this research on the perception of corruption and bribery in Sidaama National Regional State to support evidence-based actions in the region.

Therefore, this research was conducted as a comprehensive study on the perception of the public towards corruption and bribery in the efforts of prevention and control of the practices in Sidaama National Regional State (SNRS). In this regard, the general purpose of the study is to investigate the public perception of corruption and bribery in Sidaama National Regional State. The specific objectives include: to examine the perception of the general public, government employees, and officials towards corruption and bribery in the region, and to examine the nature and frequency of corruption and bribery in the studied area.

2. Material and methods

2.1 Description of the study area

Sidaama National Regional State is one of the 13 regional states of Ethiopia. It borders the Oromia region to the south, east, and north; and Wolayta and Locabayalake to the west. Geographically, it is located between 6014′ and 7018′ north latitude and 37,092′ and 39,014′ east longitude with an elevation of 1190 m lowlands to 3500 m high land above sea level. Hawassa is the capital city of the region, which is located 275 KM away from the capital city of the country (Addis Ababa). Most people living in the region are smallholder farmers and based on crop production and rearing of animals. According to the report of 2007 Housing and Census, (CSA, 2007), Sidaama Region had a total population of 3,226,455 of which 2,798,406 (86.73%) are rural dwellers and the rest 168,246 (13.27%) live in urban areas. The administration of the region includes 36 woredas of which 6 are town administrations and Hawassa City administration.

2.2 Research design and methodology

This study employed a descriptive and explanatory research design with a convergent parallel mixed research approach because the purpose of this design was to obtain different but complementary data on the same topic to best understand the research problem and bring together the differing strengths of quantitative and qualitative methods [19].

The target population of this study was government employees, government officials, household heads, representatives of business enterprises, and representatives of different social groups. Multistage cluster probability sampling based on sampling proportional to the size of the population in the clusters was employed. The main justification for using this type of sampling was that the selections were made at different stages of administrations, namely unit of woreda and unit of persons.

2.2.1 Sampling design and sample size determination

The study used the three legal clusters of Sidaama region, namely, Bensa cluster, Hawassa Zuria cluster, and Hawassa city administration cluster, which are in use by the Sidaama Region Supreme Court system for the purpose of providing the justice service. For the purpose of increasing representativeness, all three clusters were included as part of the study clusters.

In order to increase the representativeness of the sample, all three clusters were included in the study in such a way that the first stage of cluster sampling started by selecting a unit of woredas/sub cities from the group of woreda clusters followed by selecting units of elementary units.

Consequently, in the first stage, 6 woredas were sampled from the total of 21 woredas included in the Hawassa Zuria cluster; 5 woredas were sampled from a total of 15 woredas included in the Bensa cluster; and 3 sub-city administrations were sampled from the total of 8 sub-city administrations included in Hawassa city administration. In the second (ultimate) stage, as the target elementary unit that needed to fill the questionnaire was officials and government employees, the required sample size was drawn using a simple random sampling formula given the desired margin of error and confidence level adjusted for survey design effect and response rate. Accordingly, the total sample size selected was proportionally allocated to three clusters and the allocated sample was drawn from different levels of administration, from lower administration level (kebele) to higher administration level (region) in such a way that the respondents of the questionnaire were included from all the sectors.

Besides, 16 ethics officers of woredas and city administrations; 1 ethics and anti-corruption officer from the region; 16 attorneys general and employees from woreda, city, and regional administrations; 16 trade and market officials; 24 business organization representatives of city administrations, and 2 Audit Bureau officials were included during the in-depth interview.

Moreover, the study collected data through focus group discussions from households that represent different groups of organizations such as non-governmental organizations, religious institutions, and other social organizations. In general, 12 FGD groups each with 6 group members were conducted in six woredas. This means that, in addition to the study participants of the interview and questionnaire, 72 households participated in FGD from 12 kebeles of the six woredas.

The size of the sample to be selected for the study was determined using a simple random sampling formula adjusted for variation within the clusters (Cochran, 1977).

$$n=\frac{z^2{}_{\raisebox{1ex}{$\partial $}\!\left/ \!\raisebox{-1ex}{$2$}\right.}p\left(1-p\right)}{{\epsilon }^2}x\frac{DEFF}{r}=\frac{{\left(2.58\right)}^{2}x\left(0.17\right)x\left(0.83\right)}{{\left(0.04\right)}^2}x\frac{1.68}{0.80}=1232.724\approx 1233$$E1

where: $z_{\alpha /2}$ =2.58: value of standard normal deviate at 1% level of significance, 99% CI. P = 0.83: proportion of response variable (perception of corruption) obtained from the previous study, i.e., perception of corruption as measured from household respondents and business enterprises that had been asked whether or not they paid gratification (corruption) in public institutions during the previous 12 months in SNNP region according to the Ethiopia Second Corruption Perception Survey (2012).

$r$ = 0.80: adjustment for 20% assumed no response rate due to nonconstant nature of population.

$DeFF$ = 1.68: Design effect due to multistage cluster sampling.

$\epsilon$_{= 4% = 0.04}: is allowable margin of error (1–10% possible).

The final sample size used for collecting data using the questionnaire was 1233, which was sampled proportionally from the clusters and different levels of administration.

Generally, the study has used 1233 respondents for the questionnaire, 75 key informants for the interview, and 72 households (12 FGD groups) to gather the primary data. Besides, secondary source data on corruption that could be found from SNNP and SNRS were also gathered from different available documents, reports, etc.

2.2.2 Data collection methods

As corruption is a crime and recognized as a socially undesirable issue, those who experienced it are not likely to report their action or underreport it because of fear or shame of admitting their experience. To overcome such peculiar drawbacks of collecting data on bribery, this study used indirect approaches, namely, expert assessments and composite indices.

Questionnaires, interviews, focus group discussions, key informant interviews, personal observations, and document reviews were used to collect the data.

2.2.3 Data analysis methods

To analyze the quantitative data that were collected through a questionnaire, the study used descriptive statistics using percentage, frequency distribution, diagrams, graphs, and mean scores. The data were analyzed using SPSS software version 20. Qualitative data was analyzed using the thematic method.

3. Results and discussions

3.1 Perception of respondents towards corruption in the region

3.1.1 The severity of socioeconomic and sociopolitical problems

The study aimed to assess the severity of corruption in a region by analyzing respondents’ perceptions of the problem. They ranked the most common socioeconomic and sociopolitical issues in their level of seriousness, focusing on the top serious ones that require immediate attention. The respondents were given a list of nine socioeconomic problems: healthcare issues, nepotism, crime and security concerns, unemployment, lowquality education, corruption, infrastructural underdevelopment, rising living costs, and diminishing societal moral values. They ranked these problems in order of severity, labeling each issue as “the first most serious” to “the third most serious.” The main purpose of ranking these issues was to determine the level of salience of corruption among the most pressing public issues that require immediate attention from different groups in the region.

As Figure 1 below reveals, corruption in the Sidaama region is the second most severe problem, second only to “rising living costs.” The majority of respondents (81.9%) believe corruption and its associated practices, such as nepotism, are the most serious problem in the region, followed by unemployment, nepotism, low-quality education, poorly developed infrastructure, and healthcare issues. Key informants and focus group discussants argued that corruption is the root cause of all other problems mentioned above. The lack of effective anti-corruption mechanisms and the increasing diversity and complexity of corruption in the region contribute to its deep-rooted nature.

Figure 1.

Rank order of respondents that rated “the first most serious.” source: Researchers’ primary data, 2021.

3.1.2 Perception of respondents towards the frequency of occurrence of corrupt behavior

The study reveals that corruption in public project administration is prevalent, with 49.1% of respondents stating that hiring relatives is common, while 46.5% say it never happens (Table 1). Interviews show that nepotism or bribery is often used to hire officials, with tribal or family ties, friendship networks, or bribery being used. Political corruption, such as giving political assignments or paying salaries to unemployed relatives, is also common. In the public sector, 33% of respondents believe that these practices are common, while 38.1% believe they could happen but not very frequently. However, 18.7% of respondents do not know or do not decide to provide their opinion due to personal safety concerns. The public is aware of these corrupt practices but is hesitant to openly discuss them due to the potential negative consequences. Amharic words from one informant in Bansa woreda and Yirgalem town also reveal the existence of these practices. “ 

 ”, which literally means we know everything, but we would perish if we speak it out.

Behaviors and practices	% of response
	Never happens	Not very frequent	Undecided	Fairly frequent	Very frequent	Total
Hiring relatives and friends in the public sectors	6.9	39.6	4.2	32.0	17.3	100
Awarding government contracts to friends and relatives	8.9	38.1	18.7	24.4	9.0	100
Awarding government contracts to bribers	10.1	38.9	14.6	24.0	12.5	100
Requesting gifts or money for public services	13.2	43.7	11.0	19.8	12.3	100
Asking for a bribe by law enforcement officers	9.2	38.2	17.7	22.5	12.4	100
Hiring relatives and friends in the private sectors	8.1	31.2	17.1	27.6	15.2	100
Influencing career promotion on basis of patronage instead of merits	10.6	32.4	8.6	25.7	22.6	100
Manipulating government records or public accounts	13.4	39.1	19.4	17.6	10.5	100

Table 1.

Respondents’ perception towards the frequency of occurrence of corrupt behaviors.

Source: Researchers’ primary data, 2021.

The study examined public perceptions of corruption in the government and private sectors. 37% of respondents reported that bribery is a fairly common practice in the government sector, while 40% said it is not very frequent. Public servants, such as civil servants and law enforcement officers, also reported corruption-related behaviors. 32.5% of respondents reported that civil servants request money or gifts for public services, while 57% said these behaviors exist but do not happen frequently. The problem is highly prevalent with law enforcement officers.

Private sector corruption was also examined, with 42.8% reporting that hiring individuals based on friendships and nepotism is a common practice, while nearly 40% said it is rarely practiced. Promoting relatives and friends based on patronage is also a prevalent practice.

Making and forging records of public accounts was also found to be a frequently practiced type of corruption. However, 52.5% of respondents did not believe that forging and manipulating financial documents in the government sector is a serious problem.

Key informant interviews and focus group discussions revealed multidimensional forms of corruption in public institutions during service delivery, including recruitment and transfer of employees in exchange for bribes or friendship, embezzling government budgets, offering project contract agreements, providing fraudulent receipts, receiving inflated per diems, giving illegal receipts by revenue collectors, and receiving money without giving a receipt. Corruption manifests in various ways, including inflation of government contracts in return for kickbacks, fraud and falsification of accounts in public services, examination malpractices in educational institutions, receiving bribes, and distorting justice among the police, judiciary, and other organs responsible for administering justice.

3.1.3 Perception of respondents on the occurrence of corruption at different levels of administration

Corruption is prevalent in all government structures, but its intensity varies. 45.2% of respondents believed corruption is more common at the regional level, while 66.5% reported it is more intense at the woreda administration. 45% agreed that corruption is very common in city administrations, and 42.7% said kebele (lower administration unit) administrations experience corruption more frequently. The majority of respondents believe corruption occurs more frequently in woreda administrations, followed by the regional-level structure (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Perception on the occurrence of corruption at different levels of administration. Source: Researchers’ primary data, 2021.

The interview results revealed that corruption occurs at different tiers of government, with grand corruption being rampant at regional sectors and city and town administration levels. The majority of the budget runs at the regional sector level, and corruption is also rampant in the process of construction and service procurement. At the city or town administration level, corruption is manifested through land administration. Petty corruption is common at lower tiers of government, such as woreda, town administration, and kebele levels. At the woreda level, there is a high degree of embezzlement of public money.

The focus group discussants agreed that corruption is more prevalent at the woreda level, as it is the bridge from kebele to the region and the point of implementation for every decision and action. Some informants showed a divergent view regarding the complexity and diversity of corruption activities, such as giving political assignments to woreda-level leaders by taking a bribe (political corruption) and paying salaries for their unemployed relatives.

The study analyzed public perceptions of corruption trends in the region over the past 3 years. 61.6% of respondents believe corruption practices are higher today than 3 years ago, while 13.1% believe corruption prevalence has decreased, and 25.3% believe it has remained the same. The survey results suggest that corruption has been increasing in the region, with secondary sources from audit reports supporting these findings.

The increase in corruption perception over the last 3 years has led to arguments about an unfair division of government budgets among woreda and regional offices. Most budgets are suspended at regional levels, where appointees and higher officials receive better pay and use public goods and services, while little budget is allocated at woreda and kebele levels. For instance, one of the key informants from the Boricha woreda (district) Attorney General’s Office expressed his view as follows:

“One of the major reasons for the increase in corruption and bribery at the woreda level is that most budgets are left at the regional level; there is almost no budget allocated even for stationery, per diem, transport, maintenance of vehicles, and related issues at the lower level of administration, which significantly contributed to the increase in demand-side corruption, especially at the woreda level”.

A regional auditor general office informant argues that corruption in the region has not decreased in the last 3 years, despite efforts by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission to formulate regulations and control mechanisms. There is an increasing trend in corruption at all levels, including emerging types like paying salaries for unemployed relatives, using forged documents, recruiting experts without competition, and stealing public money. According to the respondents, corruption is increasing due to various factors, including community attitudes, human greed, selfishness, injustice, and ethnocentrism. Government institutions have limited capacity to implement legal provisions and procedures to bring perpetrators to justice, and their commitment to control corruption is limited. Additionally, weak data management systems, a lack of transparency, and a lack of a democratic system contribute to corruption.

3.1.4 Perception towards the prevalence of corruption among sector offices and development agencies

The prevalence and types of corruption vary within government offices and public development agencies. A study examined respondents’ perceptions of differences in corruption occurrences among regional government sectors and government-affiliated development agencies.

The survey reveals that municipalities, finance, trade and market development, road and transport, revenue, and police are among the top five most susceptible sectors to corruption in the region. Secondary sources and interviews support this finding, with respondents identifying four sectors as highly susceptible to corruption. Municipalities, finance, trade and industry, and the revenue sector are highly exposed to corruption due to their service to many customers and scarce resources. Focus group discussants also highlighted the severity of susceptibility of all government sectors, with the top five being municipalities, judiciary offices, revenue offices, finance offices, road and transport, health institutions, and trade and development.

3.1.5 Comparison of frequency of corruption among three bodies of the state

The survey (Figure 3) revealed that corruption is prevalent in the executive body of regional and woreda-level government structures, with 66.7% reporting high frequency. The legislative bodies also experience corruption more frequently than other government bodies. However, 42.5% believe that corruption occurs more frequently in the courts and judiciary of these bodies. This suggests that the executive body of all levels is more involved in corrupt behaviors and acts more frequently than the other two.

Figure 3.

Occurrence of corruption in the three government bodies. Source: Researchers’ primary data, 2021.

4. Findings, conclusions, and the way forward

4.1 Findings and conclusions

This study aimed to assess the perception of the public towards corruption and bribery in the Sidaama National Regional State. The region has recently been established, but no comprehensive empirical study exists on its nature, extent, and cross-sectoral prevalence of corruption and bribery. The Ethics and Anti-corruption Commission was established by the government to combat corruption and promote ethical behavior among officials and employees. Despite the extensive literature on corruption, studies at the sub-national level or comparative cross-regional levels are largely absent in Ethiopia. The Sidaama Ethics and Anti-corruption Commission initiated conducting the study to understand stakeholders’ perceptions towards corruption and bribery in the region.

The study aimed to provide evidence to design policies and strategies to combat corruption in the Sidaama region. A descriptive and explanatory research design with a mixed research approach was employed, using multistage cluster probability sampling based on population size. Three legal clusters of the Sidaama region were used as sample zones, with the total sample size proportionally allocated to three clusters. Data was collected through survey questionnaires, key informant interviews (KIIs), and focus group discussions (FGD). The survey covered 11 woredas, 3 sub-cities of Hawassa City Administration, and selected sectors at the regional level.

The study found that both petty and grand corruption are common practices in the Sidaama region, with grand corruption involving senior officials, major decisions or contacts, and large sums of money. Petty corruption deals with low-level officials, routine services and goods, and small sums of money.

A significant majority (81.9%) of survey participants believe corruption and its associated practices, such as nepotism, are the most serious problems in the Sidaama region. This indicates that corruption is the top urgent public concern and cancer for the region’s development. Qualitative data from interviews also indicated that corruption is almost the root cause of all other problems mentioned in the lists, including unemployment, nepotism, low quality of education, poorly developed infrastructure, and healthcare problems. Embarking public resources by officials and employees is one of the most common corruption mechanisms in the region.

Corruption is prevalent at all levels of government structures, but its intensity and magnitude may vary. In a survey, 66.5% of respondents reported that corruption occurs more intensely at the woreda administration level than in any other tier, while 45.2% said corruption is more commonly practiced at the regional level structure than in any other lower structure. 66.7% reported that corruption occurs at a very high frequency within the executive body of the regional structures.

About 62% of respondents believe that corruption practices in the region have increased in the past 3 years, with a significant difference in the scope and amount of money misappropriated. Bribery is a common practice in the region, with most services supposed to be provided for free being given in exchange for money. Nepotism and favoritism in hiring, transferring, and promotion processes are high, with family members and relatives of officials, and persons with religious, political, and clan affiliation, employed and transferred underground.

4.2 The way forward

The study suggests policy-oriented and practical recommendations to combat corruption in the region. It emphasizes the need for political commitment, strong oversight by parliament, and the implementation of anti-corruption laws and policies in sectors like finance, road and transport, trade and market, and revenue authority. The study also highlights the importance of assigning honest bureau/office heads to lead sensitive sectors, such as municipalities of city/town administrations, finance, road and transport, trade and market, and revenue authority.

To address corruption in these sectors,

1. Strong controlling mechanisms, clear accountability, and punitive measures should be implemented by the regional government.

2. Sectors like municipality, building and construction, public service, and justice sectors should be continuously followed up and evaluated for better quality service by the regional council and president’s office.

3. Political leaders should consider their assignment procedures and principles, and the trend of transferring corrupt individuals to better positions should be changed.

4. Awareness creation campaigns and programs should be conducted to raise citizens’ awareness about the detrimental impacts of corruption on the economy, politics, and society by regional Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission, concerned NGOs, and community-based organizations.

5. Community participation in the fight against corruption can be increased through training for community and religious leaders.

6. To change public attitudes against corruption, strengthening ethics and anti-corruption clubs at various levels of education, using women and youth organizations to teach about corruption, and incorporating corruption into the curriculum from primary to tertiary level is necessary. Hence, regional and federal governments should put due consideration to this endeavor.

7. Regional governments should develop their own anti-corruption strategies and region-specific legal frameworks.

8. Effective use of different media outlets, including citizen journalism, should be given attention to combat corruption and educate the community.

9. It would also be better if sector-specific empirical studies are conducted and if workable strategies are identified and applied by the regional government.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude to Hawassa University and the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission of Sidaama National Regional State for funding this study. The research team is also thankful to those who participated in filling out the questionnaire, participated in focus group discussions, and participated in key informant interview sessions.