Symposium: Bribes without Borders: The Challenge of Fighting Corruption in the Global Context: Introduction
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Corruption is one of the world's most pervasive problems, affecting international trade, environmental protection efforts, human rights, national security, access to health care and justice services, economic development, and the legitimacy of governments around the world. Efforts to prevent or reduce corrupt practices have been just as diverse, and have met with varying degrees of success. Legal and policy solutions to the challenge of corruption have proliferated, but relatively recent legal developments such as the United Nations Convention Against Corruption have yet to be tested in practice. In addition, a significant gap continues to exist between laws on paper and implementation of anti-corruption policies in practice.The 2013 American University International Law Review Annual Symposium examined the existing domestic and international frameworks that have been established to fight corruption and explored how these frameworks can be implemented for more effective enforcement. distinguished symposium participants debated the role of the international community in preventing and reducing corruption and discussed strategies for improving public accountability. Legal practitioners explained the challenging experience of prosecuting corruption cases across jurisdictions and with a patchwork of domestic anti-corruption laws. Expert panelists described the current state of stolen asset recovery and other attempts to mitigate the consequences of corruption. Finally, a keynote address entitled The Future of Anti-Corruption was delivered by Robert Leventhal, the Director of the Anticorruption and Governance Initiatives Office in the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement at the U.S. Department of State.This issue of the American University International Law Review contains some of the academic work generated by the discussions at the symposium. In his piece Rethinking the International Anti- Corruption Agenda: Civil Society, Human Rights, and Democracy, John M. Ackerman examines corruption as a symptom of a breakdown in the relationship between society and the state, and considers the implications this conceptualization of corruption should have for anti-corruption programming. Reagan Demas, in his piece Biting the Hands that Feed: Corporate Charity and the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, examines the complexities of corporate donations and corporate social responsibility initiatives in the context of combatting international corruption. Stuart H. Deming provides a critical analysis of Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act as compared to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the UK Bribery Act in Canada's Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act and Secret Commissions Offense. Irma E. Sandoval- Ballesteros, in Rethinking Accountability and Transparency: Breaking the Public Sector Bias, explores the tensions between two growing trends-more transparency and access to information in the public sector, and increased privatization of previously public services-and discusses the consequences for accountability. Finally, Mark V. Vlasic and Peter Atlee explore how the Dodd-Frank Act can serve as a template for developing countries like Myanmar, in their piece Myanmar and the Dodd-Frank Whistleblower 'Bounty': U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and Curbing Grand Corruption Through Innovative Action. Together, these five pieces address critical issues of accountability, responsibility, and the deeply entrenched relationship between corruption, economic growth, and political legitimacy in the world's developed and developing states.PANEL 1 AIDING CORRUPTION: THE ROLE OF INTERNATIONAL DONORS IN PREVENTING AND REDUCING CORRUPTIONOver the last two decades, the World Bank, the IMF, USAID, and many other major donor organizations have conditioned funding on the adoption of anti-corruption policies, or have begun to aggressively implement corruption prevention programs related to their own projects. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».