To frame the good or shame the corrupt? Africa’s choice.

More Africans feel hopeful they can make a difference in fighting corruption. One reason may be the few countries raising moral norms.

Reuters
Gambians gather for the swearing-in of President Adama Barrow in Bakau, Gambia, Feb. 18, 2017.

One turnaround story to watch in Africa these days is Gambia. Three years ago, the small West African state ousted a corrupt regime. It has since greatly improved its democratic governance. In a new survey by Transparency International, more than half of Gambians say their government is doing a good job in the fight against corruption. By contrast, more than half of all Africans say corruption is getting worse in their country.

“After 22 years of patrimonial rule, where the misuse of state resources was normal, Gambians seem to have placed their trust on their new democratically elected representatives, who have vowed to uphold political integrity and deliver results for ordinary citizens,” concludes Transparency International.

Gambia’s relative success helps break the myth that corruption in Africa is endemic. In fact, the same survey reveals this note of progress: 53% of Africans believe ordinary people can make a difference in the fight against corruption.

The few African countries doing well against corruption, such as Gambia and Mauritius (which has the lowest bribery rate) can serve as role models. Yet other factors, such as new digital watchdog tools and a rising middle class, also account for the new optimism that individuals can bring about honest and accountable leadership.

The most important factor is integrity in the election process. Only 41% of citizens are satisfied with how democracy works in their country. The survey found 15% of Africans have been offered a financial incentive to vote for a particular party or candidate.

Still, says Richard Jurgens, editor of Africa in Fact, Africans’ approval of their leaders has slightly increased over the past 20 years. He cites better economies, internet activism, and urbanization as reasons. These trends compel citizens to ask questions about the motives of officials. They expose “cracks in leadership capabilities, the quality of public administration, inconsistencies in the rule of law and breaches of basic liberties,” he writes.

Africa is home to many of the world’s most corrupt nations. Yet “naming and shaming” countries or their leaders may not be enough. One alternative is to “name and frame” examples of success. Gambia is now one. The speed of its turnaround sends a message of a new moral norm. Just knowing what is both good and possible can motivate Africans to expect better of themselves and their leaders.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.