Preventing another haor tragedy

Poorer countries tend to be measurably more corrupt than richer countries. But the debate about this is still open. Is corruption the single most important reason why many sensible reforms essential for economic development fail in developing economies, or does economic development raise demands for fighting corruption?

At a given level of development, what are the costs of corruption and the most promising means of removing corruption from the construction business, especially water-related construction work? Does encouraging whistle-blowing produce desired outcomes? How can an effective citizen's engagement mechanism be provided for engineers and contractors of embankment repair or construction work, especially when it relates to under deep water construction? How can citizens make complaints when they assume that corruption is taking place in a work under or above water level? What would be the role of contractors or engineers in encouraging citizen's complaints?

Complain management when it comes to construction work related to water cannot be the same as that relating to work on ground. If some corrupt practices happen relating to construction on ground, it can be challenged or audited by taking measurement. But that is not easy when complain come with construction or repair work under water or above water.

Therefore, it is important to engage citizens, stakeholders, users and beneficiaries before starting or during the construction work relating to water-bodies. Their trust and confidence have to be incorporated in a way, so that after completion of the work, nobody will raise any questions of corrupt practices.

A holistic approach to fighting corruption requires not only criminal sanctions but other elements such as citizens' engagement. The most effective elements of a concrete citizen or beneficiary engagement will have to be tailored. No prior dictation or prescription will work.

Again, after completion of the projects relating to water, a project management team comprising of local dedicated volunteers is needed to be constituted to supervise the project continuously. Otherwise a person may damage the embankment for his selfish interest. Because the implementation of these kinds of projects may not ensure the benefit of all, a few people may be affected by these projects. Their interest may be hampered. A public counterpart can act as a catalyst in this situation.

In the recent complaints regarding the haor embankments in Sunamganj, some people relating to implementation of the project claimed that the regions have been submerged due to heavy rains, and not due to damaged dams. Some claimed that local farmers damaged the dams at different points to create paths for ferrying paddy to serve their narrow shor-term interests. In this situation, some people underscored the need for tackling heavy rains for protecting crops in the haor areas by increasing navigability of the narrow rivers through dredging for a natural solution to flooding. Some claimed a number of embankments were damaged amid huge flow of water triggered by torrential rainfall and onrush of water from the upstream. Others claimed that rats, that damaged embankment by making holes in the dams, were the real culprits. The general people, however, blamed it on the corrupt practices of vested groups and poor monitoring or absence of monitoring mechanisms after the construction work. Now, the regular livelihood of tens of thousands of people is at stake.

To get rid of these kinds of unjustifiable excuses and to earn the confidence of people during implementing the Ziga dam in West Africa, the authorities engaged local people as much as possible at different stages of the work. The Ziga dam is now regarded as an example of good practice in construction work relating to water bodies of this scale in West Africa.

The Anti-corruption experts of the world prescribe that the key principles of effective engagement for embankment projects are to provide meaningful information in their local language that is readily understandable and tailored to the needs of the targeted stakeholders groups, and providing the information in advance of construction activities.

It is imperative to say that information needs to be provided in ways that make it easy for stakeholders to access it. People engaged in the project need to be respectful of the local people's voice, their languages, their comments and their complaints. Before starting the project, dialogue needs to be ensured to give both sides the opportunity to exchange views and information, to listen, and to have these issues heard and addressed.

We need to understand without any delay that clear mechanisms for responding to people's concerns, suggestions and grievances and incorporating their views where appropriate and feasible, feedback into project design, reporting back to stakeholders, and finally a good monitoring mechanism after construction work of this kind, are cornerstones of an embankment project.

Locals need to know the costs of construction, time of implementation and the monitoring mechanism after the construction. This engagement during construction would create a dynamic of public debate which can lead to less corruption in water related projects.

The writer is Director General, Anti-Corruption Commission.