TY - GEN

T1 - Formation of Аnti-corruption Integrity Standards (on example of the Russian Federation)

AU - Menshikova, Galina

AU - Evstratchik , Svetlan

AU - Pruel, Nikolai

AU - Savin, Sergey

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - The article deals with the problems of creating anti-corruption policy in the Russian Federation,revealing the core of control over the effectiveness of actions which is anti-corruption evaluation standards. It isconcluded that while the country is only guided by world standards, the policy of the government is dominated bythe initial stage of understanding the available opportunities. Civil society, due to the lack of development of theinstitution of accountability, also did not realize the need and the possibility of monitoring the activities of thegovernment in this direction. Accordingly, in relation to the Russian Federation it is more correct to talk about anticorruption measures, not standards. The authors of the publication have four goals. The first is to describe and to compare the fourtechnologies of public administration: regimes, standards, monitoring and measures as ways to assess the quality ofGovernment work (by areas). The second is to determine the structure of standards and then to identify the relativesuccesses and failures of the Russian Federation in comparison with common evaluation system. The third is todescribe the measures taken by the government, showing the slow nature of reforms, but still the presence ofpositive changes in them. Fourth aim is to show and to analyze the perception of corruption (and perception of anticorruption measures) depending on gender, age, income and education of respondents on the basis of sociologicalresearch (surveys for 2017 and 2018).

AB - The article deals with the problems of creating anti-corruption policy in the Russian Federation,revealing the core of control over the effectiveness of actions which is anti-corruption evaluation standards. It isconcluded that while the country is only guided by world standards, the policy of the government is dominated bythe initial stage of understanding the available opportunities. Civil society, due to the lack of development of theinstitution of accountability, also did not realize the need and the possibility of monitoring the activities of thegovernment in this direction. Accordingly, in relation to the Russian Federation it is more correct to talk about anticorruption measures, not standards. The authors of the publication have four goals. The first is to describe and to compare the fourtechnologies of public administration: regimes, standards, monitoring and measures as ways to assess the quality ofGovernment work (by areas). The second is to determine the structure of standards and then to identify the relativesuccesses and failures of the Russian Federation in comparison with common evaluation system. The third is todescribe the measures taken by the government, showing the slow nature of reforms, but still the presence ofpositive changes in them. Fourth aim is to show and to analyze the perception of corruption (and perception of anticorruption measures) depending on gender, age, income and education of respondents on the basis of sociologicalresearch (surveys for 2017 and 2018).

KW - anti-corruption assessment standards

KW - technology of smart governance

KW - low public awareness

KW - a survey of St Petersburg and Leningrad region residents

UR - https://www.nispa.org/files/conferences/2019/e-proceedings/system_files/papers/formation-of-anti-corruption-menschikova.pdf

UR - https://www.nispa.org/files/conferences/2019/e-proceedings/e-proceedings-NISPAcee-Conference-2019.html#

M3 - Conference contribution

SN - 9788089013999

BT - e-Proceedings of the 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference May 24-26, 2019 Prague, Czech Republic

PB - NISPAcee Press

T2 - 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference

Y2 - 24 May 2019 through 26 May 2019

ER -