Posted: 26 Oct 2010
Date Written: October 20, 2010
Anticorruption peer review mechanisms (PRMs) have become part of the international landscape. This note builds on the premise that PRMs are not perfectly efficient, but they are a relatively productive tool to buttress domestic anticorruption reforms. PRMs’ effectiveness is contingent on their ability to develop sub-state constituencies on an ongoing basis, so that useful international resources become a permanent part of domestic anticorruption governance. This insight sets the stage for a discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of concrete peer review mechanisms. Instead of starting with a model PRM in mind, and assessing the gap between the PRMs realities and ideals, stakeholders would do better to start with fewer assumptions, some questions, and real world data. Why and how peer reviews’ design features affect the willingness and ability of stakeholders to buy-into them and use their outputs in practice? The note builds on more than 300 in-depth interviews, including more than 50 current and former PRM experts, as well as reviews of primary documents and secondary works. It concludes with recommendations for anticorruption PRMs’ future.
Keywords: anticorruption, international standards, peer review mechanisms, GRECO, MESICIC
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Guerzovich, Florencia, Anticorruption Peer Review Mechanisms: What Pays-Off at the National Level (October 20, 2010). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1697872