Promoting Public Integrity across Ecuadorian Society

Executive summary

Upholding a culture of integrity is a challenge in many countries. It requires both the public and private sector to stand firm and work together. Businesses, civil society organisations, academia and individuals interact with public officials daily and can influence public decisions. They play a role in public policy and their actions and choices can affect public integrity. Actively engaging the private sector, civil society, academia and citizens in promoting public integrity and making them co-responsible for upholding a culture of integrity is key.

This report focuses on the challenge of promoting a culture of public integrity across society in Ecuador. It reviews ongoing government efforts to build a whole-of-society approach to public integrity and provides recommendations to strengthen co-ordination and achieve a greater impact.

Key findings

Ecuador is designing and implementing a range of actions to instigate a whole-of-society approach to public integrity. For example, the National Anti-Corruption Strategy (Estrategia Nacional Anticorrupción) includes two strategic lines to raise awareness of the responsibilities of the private sector and civil society in promoting public integrity. The 2022-25 action plan of the Strategy developed by the Secretariat of Anti-Corruption Public Policy includes the design and implementation of awareness-raising campaigns and training modules for citizens, and the implementation of an incentive programme on anti-corruption practices for companies, among others. In addition, the National Plan for Public Integrity and Fight against Corruption (Plan Nacional de Integridad Pública y Lucha Contra la Corrupción) 2019-23 of the Transparency and Social Control Function includes enhancing citizen participation and co-operation with the private sector in the prevention of corruption.

Efforts to promote an integrity culture across society involve several public sector institutions. These efforts are led by the Secretariat of Anti-Corruption Public Policy in the Executive Function and by the Council for Citizen Participation and Social Control in the Transparency and Social Control Function, with also the Ministry of Education, the Ombudsman’s Office and the Superintendence of Control of Market Power, amongst others, playing relevant roles. Considering this, there are opportunities to strengthen inter-institutional co-ordination between public actors with responsibilities in the public integrity system. Recently, the Secretariat of Anti-Corruption Public Policy started working more closely with relevant public institutions -- for instance, with the Ministry of Education to include key public integrity concepts in the new national curriculum. To achieve a greater outreach and impact, however, this co-operation could be more consistently developed.

Furthermore, while citizens and other relevant stakeholders participate in the development of public integrity policies, there is still room to promote more meaningful dialogue and engagement. While the Government of Ecuador used inputs generated during a public consultation process for the design of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy, it did not provided feedback necessary to create a two-way relationship between government and stakeholders. Better use of alternative participation channels and mechanisms could have further encouraged stakeholder collaboration during all phases of the policy cycle.

Moreover, there are information gaps regarding integrity practices and corruption risks in society, academia and the private sector that make it difficult for the government to identify the main integrity challenges in the society and design appropriate initiatives to address them. Having up-to-date, reliable and regularly collected evidence is essential, not only to develop initiatives that respond to the real challenges and particularities of a country's context, but also to measure their progress and impact and to modify those that are not achieving the expected results.

Key recommendations

To ensure that efforts to promote public integrity in Ecuadorian society are effective, sustainable and coherent, Ecuador could further strengthen the Secretariat for Anti-Corruption Public Policy’s role as the main institution responsible for public integrity in the Executive Function. In addition, the Inter-institutional Co-ordination Body for Corruption Prevention could be reinforced to facilitate its role as the main forum for dialogue and co-ordination among the five functions of the State, the different levels of government, and with civil society, academia and the private sector. These recommendations are also in line with the 2021 OECD report Public Integrity in Ecuador: Towards a National Integrity System.

Ecuador could improve inter-institutional co-ordination among relevant public actors as well as co-operation between the public sector and the private sector, universities and civil society organisations. Such co-ordination and co-operation would involve planning and implementing initiatives aimed at promoting public integrity in the whole of society and fostering the co-responsibility of all relevant stakeholders in the fight against corruption. The Anti-Corruption Public Policy Secretariat could consider strengthening co-operation with the Transparency and Social Control Function, mainly in promoting citizen participation and encouraging the reporting of integrity breaches. Similarly, the Anti-Corruption Public Policy Secretariat and other institutional actors with integrity responsibilities could foster more partnerships with the private sector, universities and civil society organisations, particularly in the area of education on public integrity for children and youth.

The Anti-Corruption Public Policy Secretariat and other institutional actors with integrity responsibilities could further encourage citizens and other stakeholders to participate in the development and implementation of the public integrity policies. To this end, Ecuador could use a broader range of participation mechanisms and channels to incorporate the needs, perceptions and visions of a greater number of stakeholders, including Ecuadorian indigenous peoples and nationalities. In addition, closer co-operation between the Anti-Corruption Public Policy Secretariat and the Transparency and Social Control Function could improve the design and implementation of training and capacity-building activities for citizen participation. Encouraging an effective participation of citizens and other stakeholders can help closing the public trust gap.

Finally, Ecuador could improve its efforts to gather evidence and information on the main challenges in the area of public integrity and anticorruption. This includes collecting regular information on the challenges, experiences and opinions on integrity by Ecuadorian society, but also on business integrity practices and challenges and ongoing investigations in the area of public integrity and anti-corruption. This evidence would be key for informing decision making in Ecuador and promoting a more efficient use of public resources.