From Collaboration to Transformation: Building Integrity for Inclusive Growth

From Collaboration to Transformation

Integrity in action

Building Integrity for Inclusive Growth

This insightful session explores how collective action and integrity standards can become powerful levers for sustainable, equitable development. This session unpacks key policy actions aimed at embedding public-private partnerships as strategic tools for promoting integrity and driving inclusive growth. It also delves into how strengthened incentives and support structures can empower organizations to lead and sustain collaborative efforts that benefit broader society.

The Business 20 (B20) serves as the official G20 dialogue forum with the global business community. Established in 2010, the B20 is one of the most influential G20 Engagement Groups, bringing together business leaders from G20 member countries and beyond. Each year, the B20 provides a platform for companies and business organisations to articulate their perspectives on pressing global economic and trade issues, ensuring that the voice of the business community is heard at the highest levels of international economic governance.

In Brief:

Background information

As global challenges intensify, fostering inclusive growth and sustainable development has become a shared responsibility across sectors. Integrity and collective action are increasingly recognized as foundational principles for unlocking transformative outcomes in societies. Public-private partnerships (PPPs), when grounded in trust, transparency, and shared values, hold immense potential to address systemic issues such as inequality, corruption, and institutional inefficiency.

This third event, in collaboration with B20 South Africa, is part of our global dialogue exploring how integrity-driven collaboration can catalyze meaningful change. This session brings together leading voices from business, policy, and civil society to examine policy pathways and incentive structures that strengthen integrity systems.

By showcasing practical strategies and frameworks, the webinar aims to equip stakeholders with the tools to embed integrity into governance, foster equitable partnerships, and scale initiatives that advance inclusive and sustainable growth.

Short Explainer

Frequently Asked Questions

How does corruption undermine inclusive economic growth?

To build effective countermeasures, it is a strategic imperative to first understand how corruption fundamentally damages economic systems and society. Corruption is not a mere cost of doing business; it is a critical barrier to sustainable development that distorts markets, erodes trust, and entrenches inequality.

The following points outline its destructive impact.

Analysis from the B20 Integrity and Compliance Task Force demonstrates that corruption systematically undermines inclusive growth through four primary mechanisms:

Distorts Markets and Competition: Corruption creates an uneven playing field where success is determined by a willingness to pay bribes or leverage illicit connections, rather than by the quality of products or services. This system favors the corrupt over the competent, stifling innovation and market efficiency.
Erodes Trust: When businesses and the public perceive that the system is rigged, their trust in key institutions—including governments and corporations—is severely damaged. This erosion of trust discourages participation, reduces investment, and undermines the legitimacy of the entire market.
Worsens Inequality: Corruption disproportionately harms the most vulnerable segments of society, such as small businesses and marginalized communities. It diverts public funds from essential services like healthcare and education, redirecting them into the hands of a few and widening the gap between the privileged and the underserved.
Reduces Investment and Growth: Rational investors will not commit capital to environments where corruption creates high levels of risk and unpredictability. This directly results in fewer jobs, less innovation, and slower overall economic growth.

The global scale of this problem is stark. The 2024 Corruption Perception Index revealed that two-thirds of the 180 countries surveyed scored below 50 on a 100-point scale, indicating a pervasive and systemic challenge to integrity worldwide.

Recognizing the depth of this problem is the foundation for appreciating the necessity of a coordinated, multi-stakeholder solution.

Why are PPPs and collective action considered essential tools against corruption?

The central strategy recommended by global integrity experts is the expansion of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) and collective action. This approach moves beyond isolated, company-specific compliance programs to create a powerful, multi-stakeholder front against corruption, uniting government, the private sector, and civil society in a common cause.

Corruption is too complex and deeply embedded for any single actor to solve alone. A collaborative approach is not merely beneficial; it is essential for creating lasting, systemic change.

Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration: Bringing together government, business, and civil society helps level the playing field, strengthens the credibility of anti-corruption efforts, and provides crucial support for more vulnerable market actors, such as small businesses.
Blending Oversight with Initiative: Effective PPPs combine public oversight with private sector efficiency and innovation. This creates flexible, adaptive frameworks that can be tailored to local realities and help shape more effective regulation.
Setting Higher Integrity Standards: When stakeholders work together, they can establish new industry-wide norms for ethical conduct. This objective is powerfully enabled by transparent, unified digital platforms like Saudi Arabia’s Etimad, which standardizes procurement and minimizes opportunities for backroom deals.
Shared Responsibility: Corruption is a two-sided problem, involving both those who demand bribes (often in the public sector) and those who supply them (often in the private sector). Because both sides are integral to the problem, joint action is a necessity, not an option.

How can well-designed PPPs specifically promote integrity and inclusive growth?

When properly structured, PPPs become powerful vehicles for embedding integrity into the economic fabric. Key benefits include the ability to:

Embed robust anti-corruption safeguards, such as open contracting and third-party oversight, directly into procurement processes and major projects.
Deter corruption, reduce the risk of regulatory capture, and build public trust through transparent, verifiable operations.
Ensure that local businesses and Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) have fair access to economic opportunities, thereby broadening the benefits of growth.
Facilitate knowledge transfer and technical assistance that strengthens the capacity of both public institutions and smaller businesses to prevent and address corruption.

This collaborative framework is essential, but its integrity hinges on verification. Therefore, establishing robust measurement is not an administrative task—it is a core strategic imperative.

How can we know if collective action against corruption is actually working?

Measuring the impact of anti-corruption initiatives is critical for maintaining accountability, refining strategies, and sustaining momentum. Without clear metrics, it is impossible to know whether collective actions are merely well-intentioned or genuinely effective at producing systemic change.

A comprehensive framework for measurement requires three key steps to move from ambition to impact:

Define Baselines and Set Targets: Initiatives must begin with a clear, shared vision and establish Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to track progress. A baseline is essential to measure distance traveled. For example, the B20 Task Force set a tangible goal to increase the percentage of G20 companies engaged in collective action from a baseline of 51.52% to 100% by 2030.
Combine Quantitative and Qualitative Data: Measurement must go beyond hard numbers. While quantitative data (e.g., number of corruption cases, financial impact) is vital, it must be paired with qualitative insights from case studies and stakeholder testimonials to provide a complete picture of the impact.
Use Monitoring for Continuous Improvement: The purpose of measurement is not just to report success but to learn and adapt. Monitoring results must feed an ongoing loop of strategy refinement, enabling the scaling of successful approaches and the identification of persistent gaps.

What is the difference between leading and lagging indicators in measuring anti-corruption impact?

A sophisticated approach to measurement distinguishes between the actions being taken (leading indicators) and the results of those actions (lagging indicators). This two-pronged approach reveals the difference between activity and achievement.

Indicator Type	Description & Example
Leading Indicators (Outputs)	Definition: Measures of effort and activity. They show what you are doing. <br><br> Example (South Africa’s eTenders): The platform successfully advertised over 30,000 tenders in a fiscal year, a strong leading indicator of increased transparency and centralized opportunity.
Lagging Indicators (Outcomes)	Definition: Measures of results and impact. They show if what you are doing is working. <br><br> Example (South Africa’s eTenders): The low compliance rate for publishing the final values of awarded contracts (fewer than 800 for the 30,000+ tenders) is a weak lagging indicator, showing the tool’s accountability potential is not being realized.

As the eTenders example proves, “a tool is only as effective as the collective action behind it.” It demonstrates both the promise of technology in creating transparency (a leading indicator) and its limitations without the collective will to enforce full accountability (a lagging indicator). This proves why robust implementation is as critical as the tool itself.

What are some real-world examples of technology being used to fight corruption?

Technology offers transformative potential in the fight against corruption. By creating standardized, digitized, and transparent systems, digital tools can significantly reduce the opportunities for human manipulation, bribery, and fraud that thrive in opaque, paper-based environments.

Several countries have successfully implemented technological solutions to enhance integrity and transparency in public processes. Notable examples include:

Etimad (Saudi Arabia): A comprehensive e-government platform that digitizes and unifies government procurement, budgeting, and payment processes into a single portal, minimizing human interaction and the opportunities for bribery.
CONAPs (Korea): An established national e-procurement system that serves as a global model for centralizing and standardizing public tenders.
ELIS (Brazil): An Artificial Intelligence (AI) system developed by the Comptroller General’s Office that analyzes thousands of public procurement processes to automatically identify red flags and irregularities, directing auditors to the highest-risk areas.
Social Witness Initiative (Mexico): A program that empowers civil society and business representatives to actively monitor the bidding process for major public contracts and provide real-time feedback, serving as a powerful public watchdog.

These examples show how technology can create more transparent and accountable systems, but success also depends on empowering all businesses, especially smaller ones, to participate effectively.

How can Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) with limited resources effectively tackle corruption?

A successful global fight against corruption requires participation from all segments of the economy. While large multinationals have extensive compliance resources, it is crucial to equip Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) with practical strategies. Simultaneously, all organizations must foster robust internal mechanisms, with effective whistleblowing programs being paramount.

SMEs can overcome resource limitations by leveraging the power of collaboration and existing digital infrastructure. Three practical strategies include:

Join Existing Networks: Instead of building a compliance framework from scratch, SMEs can join established collective action initiatives like the Maritime Anti-Corruption Network (MACN). Membership provides immediate access to a powerful network, shared resources, and standardized best practices.
Leverage Digital Platforms: Utilizing government e-procurement platforms (like South Africa’s eTenders) is a powerful defensive tool for SMEs. These portals reduce the need for face-to-face negotiations, where corrupt requests often occur, thereby creating a more level playing field.
Form Industry Alliances: Where a formal network does not exist, SMEs can create their own. By establishing a forum to share common compliance challenges, they build collective strength. A prime example is the cross-industry compliance network formed in South Africa by companies like Shell, IBM, Siemens, GE, Vodacom, and Walmart to address shared challenges.

Why is whistleblowing critical, and what is needed for it to be effective?

Statistically, whistleblowing is the single most common way that fraud and corruption are identified, more effective than external audits, internal audits, and risk assessments combined. However, for a whistleblowing program to succeed, it must be built on a foundation of trust and decisive action.

The key requirements are:

Absolute Protection: Whistleblowers will not speak up unless they feel safe. Organizations must have robust, credible mechanisms to protect them from all forms of retaliation, including job loss, demotion, and physical harm. Without such protection, encouraging reporting is futile.
Thorough Investigation: Every allegation must be taken seriously and investigated robustly to uncover the root cause. A culture of dismissing reports or conducting superficial reviews will quickly silence potential whistleblowers.
Visible Action: To build trust, employees must see that decisive action is taken against perpetrators, regardless of their seniority. A powerful real-world case study demonstrated this principle: after a thorough investigation substantiated a whistleblower’s report, key senior individuals were fired and the CEO was demoted. This sent a clear signal that no one was above the rules and resulted in a “flood of whistleblower reports,” as employees finally trusted that their concerns would be addressed.

The success of these business-level strategies ultimately hinges on the ethical culture forged by an organization’s leadership.

What is the role of leadership in creating a zero-tolerance culture for corruption?

Ultimately, all systems, technologies, and partnerships are only as effective as the ethical culture that underpins them. This culture is not accidental; leaders must deliberately forge it through their values and behaviors. The “tone at the top” is the single most important factor in creating a zero-tolerance environment for corruption.

Leadership’s role is not passive; it requires active, consistent, and visible reinforcement of ethical standards. Key responsibilities include:

Tone at the Top: Leaders must set an unambiguous tone that unethical behavior is never acceptable. A true zero-tolerance policy extends from large-scale fraud to what some consider “acceptable” petty corruption, such as paying a small bribe to a traffic officer to avoid a fine.
Personal Reaction: The way a leader reacts to a reported issue directly shapes the organizational culture. A leader who investigates seriously and transparently builds a culture of trust; one who sweeps issues under the carpet fosters a culture of fear and complicity.
Accountability for All: Leaders must ensure that accountability is applied consistently across the entire organization. When senior figures are held to the same ethical standards as junior employees, it proves that the organization’s values are genuine.
Breaking the Myth: Leaders in the private sector have a responsibility to acknowledge their role in the ecosystem of corruption. They must actively challenge the myth that corruption is solely a public sector problem and recognize that it takes two parties—a briber and a recipient—to complete a corrupt transaction.

Our guests: Integrity and Compliance Task Force

Co-Chair

Chair

Facilitator

This Task Force develops recommendations to combat corruption, enhance transparency, and foster robust compliance systems. The focus will include aligning global regulatory frameworks and encouraging responsible business conduct.

Glossary of Terms

B20: The official business dialogue forum of the G20, representing the global business community. The B20 Integrity and Compliance Task Force is one of its working groups.
Collective Action: Multi-stakeholder collaboration bringing together government, business, and civil society to combat corruption. It is presented as more effective than isolated efforts.
Corruption: Perception Index
An index that measures corruption levels across countries. According to the 2024 index, two-thirds of the 180 countries surveyed scored below 50 on a 100-point scale (where 0 is most corrupt and 100 is least).
eTenders: South Africa’s government procurement platform, which aims to centralize and make tender opportunities transparent.
ELIS Program
An AI system developed by Brazil’s Comptroller General’s Office that analyzes public procurement processes to identify red flags and potential irregularities.
Etimad: An e-government platform in Saudi Arabia that standardizes and digitizes government procurement, budgeting, and payment processes into a single, unified portal to increase transparency.
G20: An intergovernmental forum comprising 19 sovereign countries, the European Union, and the African Union.
Inclusive Growth: Economic growth that benefits all segments of society. The B20 policy paper identifies corruption as a critical barrier to achieving inclusive growth.
Integrity and Compliance Task Force: The B20 task force, led by Ruwayda Redfearn, focused on developing actionable proposals to combat corruption, strengthen compliance systems, expand cross-border cooperation, and harness technology.
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs): Clear, measurable objectives used to track the progress and impact of anti-corruption initiatives. An example is the goal to increase collective action participation among G20 countries to 100% by 2030.
Lagging Indicators: A measurement approach that focuses on the actual outcomes and impacts of actions, such as quantifiable financial savings or canceled fraudulent bids.
Leading Indicators: A measurement approach that focuses on the outputs of actions put into a system, such as the number of tenders advertised on a platform or the volume of payment orders processed.
MACN (Maritime Anti-Corruption Network): A collective action initiative that works to eliminate forms of maritime corruption, such as facilitation payments. It was co-founded by Maersk and now has over 200 members.
Nazaha: The oversight and anti-corruption authority in Saudi Arabia, which relies on collective action from citizens and companies to report corruption.
ProEtica Program: A program in Brazil that publicly recognizes organizations that voluntarily adopt integrity measures and pass an evaluation.
Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs): A tool recommended by the B20 to promote integrity and drive inclusive growth by blending public oversight with private sector initiative. When designed well, they can embed anti-corruption safeguards into projects.
SAMLIT: A South African collective action initiative that brings together the banking sector and government regulators to enhance collaboration in reducing financial crime.
SMEs (Small and Medium Enterprises): Small and medium-sized businesses. The webinar discussed specific strategies for how SMEs can effectively combat corruption despite having limited resources.