What can be done against public corruption and fraud: Expert views on strategies to protect public integrity

A number of questions dominate the debate about public corruption and fraud. First of all, of course, there is the question of the content of these phenomena. What is corruption, what is fraud and how is it related to power abuse and public waste? Some scholars stress that these questions are unanswerable if ethnocentrism is to be avoided. Others are more positive about the possibility to grasp the central meaning of the concepts. A second type of questions has to do with understanding public corruption and fraud. To define a concept is something; to understand it is something different. Understanding means knowing the causes and consequences. To be able to understand it, corruption should be given a place in the framework of knowledge about public structure, culture and behavior. This is all but a simple endeavor because it will make a difference which theoretical and methodological framework is chosen as a starting point. This article seeks to avoid this obstacle by choosing an approach which could be categorized as pragmatic and eclectic, trying to discover whether there are causes which are seen as important by a variety of experts with different academical and occupational backgrounds: is there a common core present in different approaches? Third, there is the normative debate. What are the positive and negative consequences of corruption and fraud and how can cost and benefits be compared and judged? Nowadays, most scholars and practitioners in the field stress the negative consequences of public corruption and fraud. Such a critical attitude almost automatically leads to a fourth type of debate, about the question “what to do about it?”. Which methods and strategies are thinkable and what works? This subject is the central one in this article.