U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre

This Anti-Corruption Helpdesk brief was produced in response to a query from a U4 Partner Agency. The U4 Helpdesk is operated by Transparency International in collaboration with the U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre based at the Chr. Michelsen Institute.


Please provide an overview of existing evidence around anti-corruption programming, transparency and accountability in the MENA region, including evidence on what type of intervention has had the most impact. If possible, please include specific evidence on the Occupied Palestinian Territories


Despite increased interest in the effectiveness of anti-corruption interventions, relatively little is known about the issue. This is largely due to a lack of existing data and impact evaluations. The literature on successful anti-corruption programmes in MENA is particularly sparse. The general lack of research on this topic is compounded by political instability in the region. Institutional weaknesses, limited spaces for civil society participation and corruption in public service delivery are some of the pressing governance challenges affecting the region. This Helpdesk Answer considers the cases of Morocco, Jordan, Tunisia and Palestine to derive lessons learned from anti-corruption interventions.

Main points

  • Impact indicators and monitoring approaches need to be integrated into anti-corruption programming to measure effectiveness.
  • The current political crises in the MENA region often obstruct effective implementation of anti-corruption measures and their evaluation.
  • Some countries in the region (such as Jordan, Tunisia, Morocco and Palestine) have embarked on reform processes, but results so far have been mixed.
  • Interventions must be embedded into a context- and sector-specific framework to increase the likelihood of success.


  1. Introduction
  2. Forms of corruption in the MENA region
  3. Evidence of the effectiveness of anti-corruption programming
  4. Interventions across the MENA region
  5. Success factors and impact evaluation in anti-corruption programming
  6. Conclusion
  7. References


Jennifer Schöberlein


Matthew Jenkins, Transparency International and David Jackson U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre




Close search

Responsive versions of the site in progress.