| Summary: | The critiques surrounding corruption is often brimming with copious disagreements. Central
to the significant ambiguities on corruption rests on the various risks government should consider before
launching systems to palliate corruption in the civil service.Corruption in the government or civil
service has been a lethal canker creating deadweight loss to the economies of various countries. The
appropriate structures designed by government to curb corruption is often determined to appeal to
notions of fairness, equity and efficiency. The elasticity by which governments achieve notions of
fairness, equity and efficiency depends on the willingness of governments to take the necessary risk
incentives. More often, the dearth of willingness to undertake essential risk incentives to combat
corruption has dysfunctionally ravaged effective policy outcomes in particular on allocative efficiency,
distributional equity and macroeconomic stability. Also, various researches postulate the common sense
argument that for services to be effectively and efficiently provided, corruption agencies and structures
need clear mandate, adequate resources and sufficient flexibility to make decisions. Even with this
common sense argument, corruption is still rampant across various institutions of the world which
raises, pertinent questions on willingness of governments to take risks to expunge corruption.This paper
therefore seeks to outline the risks that should be incorporated and the conditions that need to be met
by government in an attempt to launch a programme to combat corruption in the civil service.
|
|---|
