Limited Partnership: Business, Government, Civil Society (NGOs) and the Public in the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI)
This article examines the context and impact of the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI). I hyppothesize that EITI is not as effective as it could be because the governments, firms, and NGOs involved in EITI have very different visions of EITI. In EITI, firms are supposed to publish what they pay to extract resources, governments publish what they earn, and a multistakeholder group monitors and attempts to see if these figures can be reconciled. The group is supposed to push for the government to find this balance. Some governments have not allowed civil society to fully participate in the EITI process. In that regard it is a limited partnership. Civil society,as representatives of the public, can not act as an anticorruption counterweight.
|Date of creation:||Oct 2009|
|Publication status:||Forthcoming in Public Administration and Development|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.gwu.edu/~iiep/|
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Jeffrey D. Sachs & Andrew M. Warner, 1995.
"Natural Resource Abundance and Economic Growth,"
NBER Working Papers
5398, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Brunetti, Aymo & Weder, Beatrice, 2003. "A free press is bad news for corruption," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(7-8), pages 1801-1824, August.
- Sandholtz, Wayne & Gray, Mark M., 2003. "International Integration and National Corruption," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(04), pages 761-800, September.
- Reinikka, Ritva & Svensson, Jakob, 2004. "The power of information : evidence from a newspaper campaign to reduce capture," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3239, The World Bank.
- Keohane, Robert O, 2002. "Rational Choice Theory and International Law: Insights and Limitations," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 307-319, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gwi:wpaper:2010-28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Kyle Renner)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.