Neoliberal reform, governance and corruption in Central America: Exploring the Nicaraguan case

Water Governance in the Face of Global Change

“…These findings support claims that water governance reform with the aim of decentralization does not address systemic governance problems (Brown andCloke 2004, 2005;Soliman and Cable 2011). It proved to be more important than economic development.…”

“…Experience has been quite varied with some striking failures-notably in developing countries (Bakker 2010). Furthermore, such reform does not solve a systemic governance problem (Brown andCloke 2004, 2005; Soliman and Cable 2011)-high levels of corruption and the dominance of informal institutions with goals that are often in conflict with sustainable resource management. Furthermore, such reform does not solve a systemic governance problem (Brown andCloke 2004, 2005; Soliman and Cable 2011)-high levels of corruption and the dominance of informal institutions with goals that are often in conflict with sustainable resource management.…”

Corrupting Peace? Peacebuilding and Post-conflict Corruption

“…47 Critics have pointed out, however, that whereas these measures may have limited cases of narrowly defined corruption ('abuse of public office for private gain'), US assistance failed to challenge this narrow definition, thus perpetuating high levels of inequality and undermining the public interest. 48 Corruption also facilitates criminality and violence in post-conflict societies by compromising the conduct and independence of the police and judiciary and by recycling former combatants into the private militias of corrupt politicians or organized crime. In extreme cases, corruption can help turn post-conflict countries into criminal hubs, as in Cambodia, Liberia or some of the Caucasus states in the 1990s.…”

The Good Cause: Theoretical Perspectives on Corruption

“…In the case of Zimbabwe, for example, Bracking (2009: 35) argues that 'only through a critical poststructuralist analysis, which examines how 'corrupt' subjects are fixed discursively, can one find a consistent position on when concessionary state redistribution becomes constitutive of patrimonial state practice. ' Brown and Cloke (2005) explore the limitations of the dominant neoliberal perspective on governance, showing how international financial institutions have been promoting a specific discourse on corruption in Nicaragua that separates it from its historicity and the specific political economy within which it developed. Within this discourse, governance and institutional reform are seen as ways to combat corruption and are within the limits of what can be said in corruption discourse, whereas possible solutions that look at the historical roots of the Nicaraguan culture, like closer private sector/government relations, are not.…”