While young people tend to be the most active participants in movements for democratic change, their involvement is often confined to staging demonstrations and other similar activist activities. However, in order for democratic reform — or any reform for that matter — to be meaningful and sustainable, youth must not only be involved in demonstrations, but also in the decision making processes that chart the way forward.
When they have a voice in the policymaking process, youth also gain a stake when it comes to implementation. Having contributed their ideas and opinions in a meaningful way, they become staunch advocates when it comes to accountability and will work into adulthood to ensure that the solutions they helped create are realized.
In addition to building youth buy-in, engaging young people in decision-making processes has other benefits. Youth can help drive innovation in policy by injecting new ideas and solutions and also bring new tools to the table as they are typically the first group to adopt new technologies and behaviors.
Though it is vital to ensure youth are engaged in policy advocacy campaigns, taking this from idea to reality can be difficult. Youth is generally thought of as a singular demographic, but in reality, youth can be extremely varied. Young people come from different social and economic backgrounds and age boundaries are not always well defined. Additionally, mobilizing young people can be easy, but policy reform is a long term goal and it can be challenging to maintain youth engagement for the duration of a campaign.
Over the course of its history strengthening democracy through market reform, CIPE has developed and implemented proven advocacy strategies including for youth. To capture and share this knowledge, CIPE recently published its Guide to Youth Advocacy, meant to share experience and best practices for organizing youth and organizations that support youth to engage in successful advocacy initiatives. In addition to outlining strategies and approaches, the resource provides small case studies of CIPE supported projects from around the world that organized youth to advocate for real reforms.
Read the guidebook here.
Frank Stroker is an Assistant Program Officer for Global Programs at CIPE.
Marginal Revolution blogger and George Mason University Professor Tyler Cowen moderates a panel on the future of economic research, featuring Nobel laureate Kenneth Arrow.
Ronald Coase was one of the most influential economists of the 20th century. As important as his theoretical contributions was the simple but profound idea of moving away from “blackboard economics” to look at real-world problems and how institutions actually work. This is an insight that informs our work at CIPE, and which influenced many new ideas and approaches in economics over Coase’s long working life (he published his last book at the age of 101, a year before his death in 2013).
On March 27-28, the Ronald Coase Institute and CIPE honored these contributions with a conference highlighting research and policy in the Coasean tradition, featuring Nobel laureates Kenneth Arrow and Oliver Williamson, distinguished senior scholars and practitioners, and young alumni of the Ronald Coase Institute.
Governments around the world spend trillions on public procurement each year for everything from office supplies to military equipment to infrastructure megaprojects like this $5 billion Panama Canal expansion.
By Kirby Bryan
For over a decade, the World Bank Group’s Doing Business index has served as quintessential tool for determining how well a country’s institutional infrastructure is suited to the promotion of a productive business environment. But something was missing. Businesses and governments interact on levels beyond permitting and regulation: the public sector can also be a client.
Public procurement can provide opportunities for corruption. When seeking lucrative public contracts, companies look for any opportunity they can take advantage of that will improve their ability to secure a successful bid. Unscrupulous government officials can use their influential positions to attain favors and gifts from businesses pursuing public procurement tenders.
In March 2015, the World Bank Group, in conjunction with the George Washington University Law School, held a release event for the first installment of its Benchmarking Public Procurement Index.
Loss of profits and market share, diminishing brand reputation, and costly fines threaten companies that do not meet the international standards of ethics. As evident in the wake of scandals involving top brands such as Apple and Nike for example, today’s consumers are becoming better educated about overseas working conditions and the unfair treatment of workers.
As corporate social responsibility (CSR) has risen as a top priority in operations and supply chains, Software Advice, affiliated with Garner – one of the world’s leading information technology research and advisory companies – investigates “which link in the [supply] chain consumers claim to care about most.” In this report examining how corporate social responsibility impacts purchasing behavior, Software Advice assessed consumers’ willingness to pay more for ethical products. Three separate phases of surveys polled a nationally representative dataset of approximately 385 respondents.
In one survey, Software Advice asked three different groups of consumers how much more they were willing to pay for a product, normally priced at $100 that was produced more ethically with respect to a particular link in the supply chain: raw materials, manufacturing, and distribution. Respondents indicated that they would pay an average of $18.50 more if the raw materials were ethically sourced and as much as $27.60 more for a product that was made in good working conditions.
The author, Kim Bettcher, with Jehan Ara, President of the Pakistan Software Houses Association (P@SHA) in Milan.
What I love best about the Global Entrepreneurship Congress, most recently the GEC 2015 in Milan, is the diversity of approaches, organizations, and countries that I encounter under the big tent. At this carnival of entrepreneurship, one meets founders and policymakers, leaders from innovation economies and emerging markets, people who have already made it and others who are shaping the future.
Out of this medley, I try to stitch together, what do we actually know about advancing entrepreneurship? And where might promising new directions lie? For me, the theme of this year’s congress was moving the frontiers of entrepreneurship. We are currently pushing against several big frontiers, which include geographic, demographic, and policy frontiers.
Emerging markets are the first frontier. While commonly described as factor-driven or efficiency-driven economies, emerging markets contain pockets of innovation and entrepreneurial ambition. For instance, entrepreneur stories from the Middle East captured in Christopher Schroeder’s Startup Rising have created considerable excitement, as has the Cinderella story of Medellín, Colombia, the site of GEC 2016. In Milan, I was honored to have on my panel Jehan Ara, President of the Pakistan Software Houses Association (P@SHA), who recently founded the Nest i/o incubator. Ara described a growing entrepreneurial community in Karachi and a feeling among entrepreneurs of “wanting to give back” (not unlike the community spirit described by Brad Feld in Boulder). I was ecstatic to see our friends from Nepal, the Samriddhi Foundation, take the limelight as winners of the Rookie of the Year award.
What are the drivers of and institutional responses to corruption? Are current anti-corruption instruments used domestically and internationally effective? These were the key questions of a fascinating day-long event organized last week in Washington, DC by the George Washington School of Law and the International Bar Association, among others.
The event gathered a distinguished group of speakers from the government, academia, international organizations, law firms, and non-profits, as well as an engaged audience of anti-corruption scholars and practitioners.
While the discussion touched upon a multitude of corruption-related topics, the following aspects of corruption raised at event were the most valuable insights for me:
- Corruption as a violation of public trust. Janine Wedel, a Berkeley-trained anthropologist and a professor at George Mason University, emphasized that corruption is more than just simple quid pro quo. Instead, it is a sophisticated network rooted in informal power, influence elites, and often aided by the post-Cold War global economic openness as the revolution of the digital age.
- Corruption as a governance problem. Nikos Passas, professor at the Northeastern University, pointed out the roots of corruption in discrepancies between legitimacy and legality (lawful but awful conduct by government officials or businesses) and in unlawful but useful behavior (e.g., bribing a doctor to treat a patient in a failing healthcare system). International norms such as the United Nations Convention Against Corruption help by creating agreed-upon legal standards, but improving on-the-ground governance in countries around the world still has a long way to go. Read a Q&A with Nikos Passas here.
- Private sector as a force for anti-corruption. Baker & McKenzie’s Tom Firestone stressed that a broad-based business community in a given country can be an effective force in anti-corruption efforts. He recounted his experience in Russia where local businesses resisted corrupt encroachments of the state. Local firms, after all, have a strong interest in the rule of law and a level playing field in the business environment. But they can’t do it alone.
- Inter-governmental cooperation makes a difference. Kathryn Nickerson, Senior Counsel at the Department of Commerce highlighted the importance of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Working Group on Bribery in International Business Transactions responsible for monitoring and implementation of the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention.
- Corruption as an attack on human dignity. Sarah Chayes, the conference’s keynote speaker, talked about her recently published book, Thieves of State: Why Corruption Threatens Global Security. She pointed out that there is a moral dimension to corruption – it leads to widespread moral decay and individual humiliation that goes beyond money. In extreme cases of corruption-ridden countries, it is not the weakness of the state that leads to corruption. Rather, the institutions of the state have evolved to make them a conduit for corruption that permeates entire societies.
Anna Nadgrodkiewicz is Director for Multiregional Programs at CIPE.
Fostering a strong competitive market requires the private and public sectors to understand each other’s needs. In any country, entrepreneurs look for ways to make their businesses successful while the federal and local governments deliberate how they can boost the economy by providing loans for businesses or building up infrastructure. Developing solutions to such questions involve facilitating effective public private dialogues (PPD).
At the 8th PPD Global Workshop in Copenhagen, Denmark – which was co-organized by the World Bank Group, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Confederation of Danish Industry – over 300 participants from civil society organizations, companies, governments and development partners from 54 countries came together to share their experiences with PPDs. CIPE and several current and past partner organizations from Ethiopia, Jordan, Kenya, Moldova, Serbia, and Nigeria participated in this four day event.
Betty Maina, CEO of CIPE partner Kenya Association of Manufacturers, was a featured speaker and highlighted the importance of PPD for the enabling business environment. Director for Multiregional Programs Anna Nadgrodkiewicz also presented CIPE’s joint initiative with the World Bank, an interactive knowledge hub website for the global PPD community of practice (www.publicprivatedialogue.org).
The workshop focused both on successes and challenges faced by PPD practitioners when developing, implementing, and evaluating constructive dialogues in different environments. The breakout sessions were divided by range of themes such as fragile and conflict-affected states (e.g. Palestine and Guinea), politically and socially transitioning environments (e.g. Tunisia and Slovakia) and city-level versus regional-level PPDs.