The promises and perils of accountability mechanisms and monitoring technologies

Accountability initiatives can hinder the development of state capacity

Accountability rules are intended to reduce corruption, but do they help build a state’s capacity to provide services?  A recent paper in Brazil shows that the mechanisms designed to combat corruption can limit bureaucratic capacity when they impose heavy compliance costs that interfere with bureaucracies fulfilling core functions.  Public officials who face a trade-off between complying with accountability rules and building high-capacity bureaucracies often escape accountability rules by outsourcing bureaucratic functions to nonstate organizations that are not subject to government regulations.  However, bureaucratic outsourcing may limit state capacity in the long run, even if it maximizes effectiveness in the short run.  This paper joins a growing body of research calling attention to potential drawbacks of anti-corruption initiatives for building high-quality bureaucracies.

Satellite data can identify illegal mines, but cannot make municipalities shut them down

A recent paper in Colombia used a machine-learning algorithm to detect mines from satellite data and then provided the location of legal and illegal mines to the municipal government, the national government, both, or neither.  Illegal mining dropped 7% in municipalities where any level of government was informed of the mining locations.  However, municipal governments were less likely to confirm the existence of illegal mines than legal mines, suggesting collusion between municipal officials and illegal miners.  This paper shows the usefulness of remote monitoring technologies for assisting municipal law enforcement, but also demonstrates that the effect of these monitoring technologies depends on bureaucrats making use of the information.

Do you have a study we should share for a future Facty Friday? Send an email to drg.el@usaid.gov!”