By Farihah Zaima
Infrastructure in Bangladesh has made a remarkable transformation in the last two decades, sporting prodigious flyovers, sparkly buildings and a greater sense of the urban hustle and bustle. Yet, it seems at times that despite the progress made, the country continues to rank low in terms of economic development and livability. The question arises – why is it so? Is something playing a pivotal role in hindering the positive impact infrastructure development is supposed to make?
Corruption is the disheartening answer. Till date, corruption lies at the heart of money matters, and where financial dealings are made in developing countries and Bangladesh is no exception. From bribing to win contracts, manipulating designs, false invoicing for inferior materials, or concealing defects – such notorious activities are taken for granted from the nascent stage of the project cycle. The potential impact of such acts are large and therefore diminishes the fruitful impact of an infrastructure project to some extent. Weak governance in policy, legal and regulatory systems along with institutional capacity result in corruption in public infrastructure. In a country where policy choices are driven by personal and political agendas, corruption seems to be constant.
High-value uneconomical projects are given preferences due to kickbacks and political patronage. This also raises a question to the ethical values of the people who are involved in the entire process. If we think logically and with an open mind then the core idea of infrastructure development is to benefit the common man and lead the country towards prosperity. However, the unavoidable nature of corruption when it comes to infrastructure financial mechanism makes it difficult to serve the original purpose. The magnitude of the corruption whether ‘petty’ or ‘grand’ also determines how the project contributes towards infrastructure development. Over time the abuse of power, bribery, extortion, fraud, and embezzlement and money laundering becomes a part of the financial transactions and way things are done during mega projects. During the initial phase of the project especially during project identification, procurement, and preparation, the financial rewards for a one-off corruption is highest. In the urban structure, this is when such grand corruption acts are driven by personal favoritism to a particular firm and kickbacks negotiated for contract awards. The latter phase of the project eventually involves ‘petty’ corruption where payment may be extracted from the user of the service or payments which are made for customs clearance of equipment or materials during the final stage of the project.
Furthermore, various reasons inevitably make infrastructure projects prone to corruption. Some could be mitigated, but the bureaucratic system in place especially in developing countries make most unavoidable. Governments either own infrastructure or regulate its development. The lack of adequate control and due diligence by financing bodies eventually gives rise to more circumstances where bribes are encouraged by all parties including the participants of an infrastructure project. If one looks deeper into it, corruption is a norm taken for granted within organizations who are unwilling to change the status quo since they fear losing out to less scrupulous competitors. The game of winning or losing determines the future of a project rather than the ethical delivery of benefits to the masses.
An infrastructure project primarily is executed to enhance the development process of an economy or country in general, but eventually gets overshadowed by the entrenched interests of companies cemented by bribery. Bribery has become an inevitable part of the financial mechanism of mega projects. Bribery also increases the cost of infrastructure and eventually, the impact has a negative consequence for society in all countries leading to unsuitable, dangerous infrastructure.
Corruption Kills
2001, the Bhuj earthquake in India led to massive damage including the destruction of 461,593 rural houses of rubble masonry construction. Good seismic codes of practice exist in India, but their non-enforcement, combined with poor inspection procedures, led to the failure and heavy damage of 179 high-rises reinforced concrete buildings in Ahmedabad, 230 kilometers away from the epicenter. Statistical evidence from geographical research shows that approximately 83 percent of all casualties from earthquakes in the past three decades have occurred due to corrupt societies with poor construction standards. The earthquakes in Haiti in 2010 and Iran in 2005 are extreme examples of excessive fatalities in nations where perceived levels of corruption are above average.
Looking closely at another Asian country, Indonesia, its infrastructure sector has been dominated by a corporatist structure between contractor associations and state institutions, especially with the military. Since the late 1990s, there has been a series of market-led reforms to break the corporate structures, public procurement legislation to encourage competition and a policy of decentralization to the regions. However, large-scale corruption in infrastructure remains.
Competition in the market place creates collusion and leads to higher prices and significant cost overruns due to false claims. This reduces the funds available to the government for other public services. Long delays are caused by officials who demand payment to certify works and the outcome is expected infrastructure service, or deadline to complete a project is not being realized. The result is that poor quality infrastructure increases maintenance costs and a shorter life expectancy of the physical infrastructure which is vulnerable to natural calamities. The issue then not only remains about the corruption caused in the economy but certain actions and decisions which places the precious human life at stake. Ignorance on the part of the government could also be held largely liable for defective infrastructure.
In Bangladesh, over the last fifteen years, a series of mega-projects were rolled out with the foresight of revolutionizing communications, port and energy sectors and drastically turning the country’s economy. Unfortunately, the lack of ability to execute plans, an alleged indulgence of some in corruption, fund shortages and donors’ conditions affected most of these projects. Although the government made some headway with the mega projects in the power sector, the communication and port sectors have seen disappointing progress. Just the idea that advancement was made in some projects is the lifeline one can hold onto since none of these mega-projects have been completed within the time frame that had been stipulated before laying the first brick.
These mega-projects include: the deep sea port, the Padma bridge, the metro rail project, nuclear power project, Dhaka Elevated Expressway, Capital dredging of 53 river routes, a new international airport named after Bangabandhu, massive projects in power sector that include a lot of coal-fired power plants, building a Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) terminal to import gas, digitizing land management, building new rail lines, equipping the rail sector, and several dual- carriageway highways to increase connectivity. As good as these projects might sound to the ear, these names are still a dream or hope that can take Bangladesh one step ahead in the race of development. For an impoverished nation of some 150 million people where nearly 40 percent earn less than dollar one a day, can corruption be justified? Just because it has been accepted as a norm, shall we not hold anyone accountable for their actions? Opaque budgets and lack of transparency provides a protective shield for corruption. Eventually procured goods such as medicines and infrastructure projects such as bridges or factories are expensive and dangerous. With a quality of output compromised these projects fall short of expectations.
For now, one can draw the conclusion that infrastructure is susceptible to corruption. The manner in which the construction industry operates and infrastructure services are executed creates structural vulnerabilities that are prone to corruption. Yet, it doesn’t harm to be a bit more hopeful. If proper law is established and transparency in financial dealings are maintained, the impact of corruption could be curbed.
