Conference Agenda

The envisaged presentation in Glasgow (and the envisaged paper) presents empirical findings from a comparative study about the effectiveness of ethics policies for the EU Presidency. The survey was initiated in spring 2024 and launched in october 2024. At the time of writing this (paper) proposal, we find ourselves in a process of data cleaning, data verification and data analysis.

Key research questions of our study deal with the following issues:’

• What is known within the national public administrations about the effectiveness of ethics policies as regards unethical outcomes such as corruption, fraud, conflicts of interest, bullying, (sexual) harassment, and other forms of unethical (workplace) behavior ?

• What is known known about the effectiveness of individual ethics policies such as revolving door, disclosure policies, whistleblowing policies, anti-discrimination policies?

• What is known about the effectiveness of instruments used in the field such as ethical leadership, rules, codes of ethics, training, enforcement, behavioral instruments…?

• What is known about the effectiveness of ethics management and the institutionalization of ethics policies such as centralization/decentralization, self-regulation/management vs. independent management, coordination amongst ethics bodies?

• What is known about the effectiveness of measuring ethics policies (measuring corruption, measuring conflicts of interests, measuring harassment etc)?

• What is known about innovation/change processes of governance and public administration and the impact on ethics and unethical behavior, such as outsourcing, PPP, collaborative forms of governance, artificial intelligence?

Data about the effectiveness of ethics policies were collected in a European wide survey, including seven topical chapters and 61 survey questions to the national governments, until January 2025. 26 countries and all EU Institutions participated in the survey. First study results will be validated and discussed during two meetings during the Polish EU-Presidency in March 2025 and in May 2025 (and, also, under the chair of the Polish EU-Presidency). A final policy report will be presented in June 2025.

Political will has been seen as one of the key factors in the adoption and implementation of anti-corruption policies. Political will can be the driving force behind anti-corruption initiatives, with different actors pushing for specific solutions, mobilizing the support of the electorate, leading the enforcement of anti-corruption legislation, and building administrative and policy capacity. On the other hand, the adoption of anti-corruption policies can be hindered by the lack of political will, while their implementation may become an abused tool in the political power play. The success of anti-corruption efforts does not depend only on the will of one actor, but on the interaction between political and non-political institutions, i.e. how well the policy development and implementation is institutionalised in public administration. This relationship and its role in the longitudinal development of anti-corruption policies is seldom studied.

Based on 18 in-depth interviews with public officials and politicians, we focus on the locus of the political will, especially the interaction of political motives and administrative policy capacity in the development of anti-corruption policies in Estonia. Estonia is a post-communist country that, based on national surveys and international indexes, has been successful in decreasing the level of corruption. Although characteristics such as high level of corruption in the 1990s, fluctuating political interest over the last 30 years, dependence on international policy advice, and efforts to build policy and administrative capacity in non-political institutions are common to Central and Eastern European transformation, Estonia represents an outlier case due to its systematic anti-corruption reforms over the past three decades. It has been argued to represent a creation of a “virtuous circle" in the context of post-communist transformation in the 1990s (Kalnins 2017). We inquire what factors have contributed to this virtuous circle and what conditions are necessary for the interaction of politicians and non-political institutions to lead to the institutionalization of successful anti-corruption policies.

In recent years there is an increased complexity and interdependence of global issues—such as geopolitical tensions, economic crises, and technological advancements, that profoundly impact public administration, particularly in areas tied to ethical aspects, integrity in public office and accountability.

This paper examines critical aspects of integrity management in public institutions, focusing on the declaration of assets, declaration of gifts, assessment of corruption risks, and the evaluation of integrity incidents within local public authorities. These practices serve as vital mechanisms for promoting transparency and maintaining public trust, especially amidst heightened global scrutiny.

Drawing on a case study approach within the context of Bistrița-Năsăud County, România, this research employs a blend of quantitative and qualitative methods, including surveys and interviews with public officials from more than 100 public institutions, including schools and city halls. The findings explore both the effectiveness and challenges of current integrity protocols in managing conflicts of interest and reducing corruption risks.

Taking into account the pressures on public administration systems and in the day-to-day responsibilities of public servants, the study highlights how global crisis influence their interactions and ethical considerations.

By examining how these integrity measures function at a local level, the paper contributes insights into the evolving role of individual accountability in public administration, as well as the need for adaptive strategies to address integrity risks in a rapidly changing global landscape.

POINTS FOR PRACTITIONERS

The results aim to inform both policymakers and practitioners about best practices in corruption prevention and integrity assessment, ultimately supporting the development of more resilient and transparent governance structures.

Nevertheless, it provides a clear frame for continuously review of policies in order to address evolving risks.