[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":546},["ShallowReactive",2],{"publication-sustainability-reporting-and-anticorruption-provisions-unlocking-potential-impact":3,"related-sustainability-reporting-and-anticorruption-provisions-unlocking-potential-impact":70},[4],{"id":5,"status":6,"sort":7,"date_created":8,"date_updated":9,"nid":10,"slug":11,"title":12,"body":13,"citation":14,"language":15,"year":16,"publisher":17,"date_published":18,"external":19,"topic":20,"link_internal":22,"link_external":23,"featured":24,"topics":25,"languages":27,"type":28,"area":7,"programme":7,"websites":30,"summary":7,"pdf_text":7,"main_points":7,"short_version":7,"subtitle":7,"image":31,"countries":42,"tags":43,"pdf":44,"authors":69},2392,"published",null,"2025-02-26T17:05:24.000Z","2026-05-29T22:22:56.000Z",2772,"sustainability-reporting-and-anticorruption-provisions-unlocking-potential-impact","Sustainability reporting and anticorruption provisions: unlocking the potential for impact","This research from the U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre highlights that integrating anti-corruption measures within sustainability reporting frameworks can enhance corporate transparency and contribute to reducing corruption risks. However, inconsistent global sustainability standards and enforcement challenges limit the effectiveness of these measures.\n\nThe research presents evidence and practice from the development cooperation sector to support practitioners in navigating governance and accountability frameworks in the private sector.","","English",2025,"U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre","2025-01-15",true,[21],"Collective Action",[],[],false,[21,26],"Corruption Prevention and Public Governance",[15],[29],"Guidelines",[21],{"id":32,"storage":33,"filename_disk":34,"filename_download":35,"title":36,"type":37,"created_on":8,"modified_on":8,"charset":7,"filesize":38,"width":39,"height":40,"duration":7,"embed":7,"description":7,"location":7,"tags":7,"metadata":41,"focal_point_x":7,"focal_point_y":7,"tus_id":7,"tus_data":7,"uploaded_on":8},"adba8327-c85b-45ab-ae7a-b7342fbe8537","local","adba8327-c85b-45ab-ae7a-b7342fbe8537.png?itok=fzm04da7","Screenshot-2025-02-26-at-14.28.37.png?itok=fzm04da7","Sustainability reporting and anticorruption provisions: unlocking the potential for impact.png","image\u002Fpng",333445,500,708,{},[],[],[45],{"id":46,"publications_id":47,"directus_files_id":61},2433,{"id":5,"status":6,"sort":7,"user_created":48,"date_created":8,"user_updated":49,"date_updated":9,"nid":10,"slug":11,"image":32,"title":12,"body":13,"citation":14,"language":15,"year":16,"publisher":17,"date_published":18,"external":19,"topic":50,"link_internal":51,"link_external":52,"featured":24,"topics":53,"languages":54,"type":55,"area":7,"programme":7,"websites":56,"summary":7,"pdf_text":7,"main_points":7,"short_version":7,"subtitle":7,"countries":57,"tags":58,"pdf":59,"authors":60},"03bebfd8-0b40-4a2a-820d-b9d9c13b9de6","3d9ff205-1640-4f34-b5b6-86977f51bbd6",[21],[],[],[21,26],[15],[29],[21],[],[],[46],[],{"id":62,"storage":33,"filename_disk":63,"filename_download":64,"title":64,"type":65,"folder":66,"uploaded_by":48,"created_on":8,"modified_by":7,"modified_on":8,"charset":7,"filesize":67,"width":7,"height":7,"duration":7,"embed":7,"description":68,"location":7,"tags":7,"metadata":7,"focal_point_x":7,"focal_point_y":7,"tus_id":7,"tus_data":7,"uploaded_on":8},"a54aaa8c-bc8b-43b5-a560-65063c5d612b","a54aaa8c-bc8b-43b5-a560-65063c5d612b.pdf","Sustainability-reporting-and-anticorruption-provisions--unlocking-the-potential-for-impact.pdf","application\u002Fpdf","67f22e04-d26f-4baa-b91f-acc5f89d87f5",437093,"See PDF",[],[71,174,201,238,265,296,324,378,427,457],{"id":72,"slug":73,"title":74,"status":6,"nid":75,"year":76,"body":77,"external":24,"topic":78,"language":15,"type":81,"date_published":83,"image":84,"citation":14,"publisher":85,"link_internal":86,"link_external":87,"authors":91,"countries":100,"tags":166,"pdf":167,"topics":169,"featured":24,"languages":170,"summary":7,"programme":7,"area":7,"websites":7,"pdf_text":7,"sort":7,"user_created":48,"date_created":171,"user_updated":49,"date_updated":172,"main_points":7,"short_version":7,"subtitle":7,"link":173},2280,"engaging-private-sector-collective-action-against-corruption-practical-guide-anti","Engaging the private sector in Collective Action against corruption: A practical guide for anti-corruption agencies in Africa",2443,2024,"This guidance seeks to capture and explore the innovative approaches that African governments have developed to address the demand and supply sides of corruption more effectively and sustainably. It is designed to help government institutions, in particular national anti-corruption agencies, engage with the private sector more effectively to prevent corruption.\n\nThe document highlights good practices identified through interviews, desk research and a 2021 Southern African Development Community (SADC) training on “Emerging anti-corruption issues and private-sector engagement for SADC anti-corruption agencies”.\n\nAfrica offers many examples of innovative, unique and context-sensitive approaches to engage the private sector in anti-corruption efforts. Ghana’s National Anti-Corruption Action Plan, for instance, offers an award scheme and is looking into providing tax benefits to companies that enforce anti-corruption measures and demonstrate leadership in the fight against corruption. Other agencies and governments in the region, such as Morocco, are currently discussing implementing a reward system for compliant companies that can be considered when companies bid for public tenders.\n\nThese examples demonstrate how African governments proactively seek to tackle corruption and collaborate with the private sector.\n\nFrom the initiatives captured, three common strategic approaches can be identified to underpin effective and impactful engagement:\n\n\n- **Raising awareness,** guiding and working with the private sector to more effectively address corruption risks.\n- **Identifying and providing incentives** to companies investing in their compliance programmes.\n- **Demonstrating leadership** by actively participating in Collective Action and public-private partnerships.\n\n\nThis document is a follow-up of a \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fcollective-action.com\u002Fexplore\u002Fpublications\u002F2199\">practical global guide\u003C\u002Fa> published in July 2022 and was produced with the support of the Siemens Integrity Initiative.\n\nIt is freely shareable under a Creative Commons \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fcreativecommons.org\u002Flicenses\u002Fby-nc-nd\u002F4.0\u002F\">CC BY-NC-ND 4.0\u003C\u002Fa> licence. Please credit the Basel Institute on Governance.",[21,79,80],"HLRM","Integrity Pacts",[29,82],"Report","2024-11-06","https:\u002F\u002Fjam.baselgovernance.org\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002F4e5c3e4d-e346-47c7-ae6c-6516f36c0abd?width=600&height=840","Basel Institute on Governance",[],[88],{"url":89,"caption":90},"https:\u002F\u002Fcollective-action.com\u002F"," Learn more about Collective Action",[92,96],{"authors_id":93},{"id":94,"name":95},293,"Scarlet Wannenwetsch",{"authors_id":97},{"id":98,"name":99},514,"Liza Young",[101,105,109,113,117,121,125,129,133,137,141,145,146,150,154,158,162],{"countries_id":102},{"id":103,"name":104},135,"Morocco",{"countries_id":106},{"id":107,"name":108},79,"Ghana",{"countries_id":110},{"id":111,"name":112},244,"Zambia",{"countries_id":114},{"id":115,"name":116},153,"Malawi",{"countries_id":118},{"id":119,"name":120},73,"Gabon",{"countries_id":122},{"id":123,"name":124},151,"Mauritius",{"countries_id":126},{"id":127,"name":128},156,"Mozambique",{"countries_id":130},{"id":131,"name":132},243,"South Africa",{"countries_id":134},{"id":135,"name":136},113,"Kenya",{"countries_id":138},{"id":139,"name":140},45,"Cameroon",{"countries_id":142},{"id":143,"name":144},157,"Namibia",{"countries_id":7},{"countries_id":147},{"id":148,"name":149},161,"Nigeria",{"countries_id":151},{"id":152,"name":153},189,"Rwanda",{"countries_id":155},{"id":156,"name":157},192,"Seychelles",{"countries_id":159},{"id":160,"name":161},38,"Democratic Republic of Congo",{"countries_id":163},{"id":164,"name":165},130,"Lesotho",[],[168],2409,[21,79,80],[15],"2023-05-22T10:04:31.000Z","2026-06-01T22:47:36.000Z","\u002Fresources\u002Fpublications\u002Fengaging-private-sector-collective-action-against-corruption-practical-guide-anti",{"id":175,"slug":176,"title":177,"status":6,"nid":178,"year":76,"body":179,"external":24,"topic":180,"language":15,"type":182,"date_published":183,"image":184,"citation":14,"publisher":85,"link_internal":185,"link_external":186,"authors":187,"countries":192,"tags":193,"pdf":194,"topics":196,"featured":24,"languages":197,"summary":7,"programme":7,"area":7,"websites":7,"pdf_text":7,"sort":7,"user_created":48,"date_created":198,"user_updated":49,"date_updated":199,"main_points":7,"short_version":7,"subtitle":7,"link":200},2332,"good-practices-facilitators-anti-corruption-collective-action","Good practices for facilitators of anti-corruption Collective Action",2566,"This document summarises insights from a peer learning workshop in Basel, Switzerland in December 2023. The workshop explored best practices in anti-corruption Collective Action initiatives. The report covers:\n\n\n- The role of the facilitator in Collective Action initiatives. \n- The different roles that representatives from the private sector, public sector, civil society and academia play.\n- The process of establishing a Collective Action initiative and securing funding for it.\n- Ways to monitor progress and evaluate impact.\n\n\nIt ends by emphasising the importance of continuing to learn from one another and to share information, including by contributing to the \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fcollective-action.com\u002F\">B20 Collective Action Hub\u003C\u002Fa>.\n\nThe peer-learning workshop and the preparation of this short report were funded by the Siemens Integrity Initiative.",[21,181],"Private Sector",[29,82],"2024-01-08","https:\u002F\u002Fjam.baselgovernance.org\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002F0d73b60b-a72f-498f-8881-1bb36edca1e1?width=600&height=840",[],[],[188],{"authors_id":189},{"id":190,"name":191},515,"Lucie Binder",[],[],[195],2368,[21,181],[15],"2024-01-08T17:04:46.000Z","2026-05-23T20:04:23.000Z","\u002Fresources\u002Fpublications\u002Fgood-practices-facilitators-anti-corruption-collective-action",{"id":202,"slug":203,"title":204,"status":6,"nid":205,"year":206,"body":207,"external":24,"topic":208,"language":15,"type":211,"date_published":212,"image":213,"citation":14,"publisher":214,"link_internal":215,"link_external":216,"authors":220,"countries":229,"tags":230,"pdf":231,"topics":233,"featured":24,"languages":234,"summary":7,"programme":7,"area":7,"websites":7,"pdf_text":7,"sort":7,"user_created":48,"date_created":235,"user_updated":49,"date_updated":236,"main_points":7,"short_version":7,"subtitle":7,"link":237},2319,"translating-political-economy-insights-conservation-practice-six-step-guide","Translating political economy insights into conservation practice: a six-step guide",2540,2023,"This guide suggests six steps for bringing political economy analysis findings into a theory of change for a project or programme.\n\nIt aims to provide a practical means for conservationists to navigate political economy in contexts where they work. While a theory of change explains the logic of a project, a political economy analysis, which looks at the influence of power, helps get to the heart of what needs to change for a project to work. But practitioners often find it challenging to use political economy analysis in practice. \n\nThe aim of conservation is to safeguard people and nature. Theories of change articulate what needs to change to deliver on that aim, along with the kinds of things that need to happen to get to that change – *what needs to be different.*\n\nUnderstanding more about who has power – to make change, to impede change – and how they get and use that power helps to clarify the conditions that need to change in order to achieve results.\n\n### About the TNRC project\n\nThe \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.worldwildlife.org\u002Fpages\u002Ftnrc-about-the-project\">TNRC project\u003C\u002Fa> seeks to improve biodiversity conservation outcomes by helping practitioners to address the threats posed by corruption to wildlife, fisheries and forests. TNRC harnesses existing knowledge, generates new evidence, and supports innovative policy and practice for more effective anti-corruption programming on the ground.\n\nA USAID-funded project, TNRC is implemented by a consortium of leading organisations in anti-corruption, natural resource management, and conservation: World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre at the Chr. Michelsen Institute, TRAFFIC, and the Terrorism, Transnational Crime and Corruption Center (TraCCC) at George Mason University.\n\nThis publication is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents are the responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID, the United States Government, or individual TNRC consortium members.",[209,210],"Green Corruption","Public Governance",[29],"2023-11-22","https:\u002F\u002Fjam.baselgovernance.org\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002Fdd7c3fec-b214-4620-b4d7-e2ead8e0c17a?width=600&height=840","Targeting Natural Resource Corruption (TNRC) project",[],[217],{"url":218,"caption":219},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.worldwildlife.org\u002Fpages\u002Ftnrc-guide-translating-political-economy-insights-into-conservation-practice-a-six-step-guide-to-using-peas-to-design-and-test-theories-of-change-for-interventions-to-protect-and-defend-nature?p=2c9219&v=1&hours=1000","View on TNRC website",[221,225],{"authors_id":222},{"id":223,"name":224},530,"Micol Martini",{"authors_id":226},{"id":227,"name":228},303,"Saba Kassa",[],[],[232],2358,[209,26],[15],"2023-11-22T11:04:41.000Z","2026-05-29T22:22:43.000Z","\u002Fresources\u002Fpublications\u002Ftranslating-political-economy-insights-conservation-practice-six-step-guide",{"id":239,"slug":240,"title":241,"status":6,"nid":242,"year":206,"body":243,"external":24,"topic":244,"language":245,"type":246,"date_published":247,"image":248,"citation":14,"publisher":85,"link_internal":249,"link_external":251,"authors":255,"countries":256,"tags":257,"pdf":258,"topics":260,"featured":24,"languages":261,"summary":7,"programme":7,"area":7,"websites":7,"pdf_text":7,"sort":7,"user_created":48,"date_created":262,"user_updated":49,"date_updated":263,"main_points":7,"short_version":7,"subtitle":7,"link":264},2303,"action-collective-cooperer-avec-le-secteur-prive-guide-pratique-pour-les-agences","Action Collective - Coopérer avec le Secteur Privé: Guide Pratique pour les Agences Nationales de Lutte Contre la Corruption",2484,"Ce guide a pour but de mettre en valeur et d’explorer les approches innovantes que les gouvernements africains ont développées pour s’attaquer à la corruption de manière plus efficace et durable. Ce guide a été conçu afin d’aider les institutions gouvernementales, en particulier les agences nationales de lutte contre la corruption, à coopérer plus efficacement avec le secteur privé pour prévenir la corruption. ",[21,181],"French",[29],"2023-07-11","https:\u002F\u002Fjam.baselgovernance.org\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002F15e186d1-e84a-425e-8f14-13b68981e8dc?width=600&height=840",[250],{},[252],{"url":253,"caption":254},"https:\u002F\u002Fcollective-action.com\u002Fexplore\u002Fpublications\u002F2280"," Version anglaise",[],[],[],[259],2379,[21,181],[245],"2023-07-11T07:47:13.000Z","2026-05-23T20:09:02.000Z","\u002Fresources\u002Fpublications\u002Faction-collective-cooperer-avec-le-secteur-prive-guide-pratique-pour-les-agences",{"id":266,"slug":267,"title":268,"status":6,"nid":269,"year":270,"body":271,"external":24,"topic":272,"language":15,"type":273,"date_published":274,"image":275,"citation":14,"publisher":14,"link_internal":276,"link_external":277,"authors":278,"countries":283,"tags":288,"pdf":289,"topics":291,"featured":24,"languages":292,"summary":7,"programme":7,"area":7,"websites":7,"pdf_text":7,"sort":7,"user_created":48,"date_created":293,"user_updated":49,"date_updated":294,"main_points":7,"short_version":7,"subtitle":7,"link":295},2243,"b20-indonesia-2022-integrity-and-compliance-task-force-policy-paper","B20 Indonesia 2022 Integrity and Compliance Task Force: Policy Paper",2312,2022,"This Policy Paper was prepared by the B20 Indonesia Integrity and Compliance Task Force, in which the Basel Institute on Governance served as Network Partner and Co-Chair in 2022.\n\nIn this document, B20 members call for stronger actions from the G20 in four key areas: (1) promote sustainable governance in business to support ESG initiatives; (2) foster Collective Action to alleviate integrity risks; (3) foster agility in counteracting measures to combat money laundering\u002Fterrorist financing risks; (4) strengthen governance to mitigate exacerbated cybercrime risks.",[21],[29],"2022-11-17","https:\u002F\u002Fjam.baselgovernance.org\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002Fb6843c97-1836-496b-8c68-8960b8c460ec?width=600&height=840",[],[],[279],{"authors_id":280},{"id":281,"name":282},464,"B20 Anti-Corruption Working Group",[284],{"countries_id":285},{"id":286,"name":287},99,"Indonesia",[],[290],2285,[21],[15],"2022-11-17T17:04:00.000Z","2026-05-23T20:08:38.000Z","\u002Fresources\u002Fpublications\u002Fb20-indonesia-2022-integrity-and-compliance-task-force-policy-paper",{"id":297,"slug":298,"title":299,"status":6,"nid":300,"year":270,"body":301,"external":24,"topic":302,"language":15,"type":303,"date_published":304,"image":305,"citation":14,"publisher":85,"link_internal":306,"link_external":307,"authors":308,"countries":311,"tags":312,"pdf":317,"topics":319,"featured":24,"languages":320,"summary":7,"programme":7,"area":7,"websites":7,"pdf_text":7,"sort":7,"user_created":48,"date_created":321,"user_updated":49,"date_updated":322,"main_points":7,"short_version":7,"subtitle":7,"link":323},2199,"engaging-private-sector-collective-action-against-corruption","Engaging the private sector in Collective Action against corruption",2236,"This practical guide is designed to help governments, and in particular National Anti-Corruption Agencies, engage with the private sector more effectively to prevent corruption.\n\nIt explains how governments can engage with the private sector to prevent corruption in three ways:\n\n\n- **Collaborate and consult on corruption prevention activities in the private sector** - by setting up events and platforms, providing advisory support and engaging the private sector in developing National Anti-Corruption Strategies.\n- **Support and incentivise the private sector to engage in corruption prevention activities and initiatives** - by creating tangible business benefits for companies investing in compliance, incentivising companies to externalise their compliance programmes, and supporting compliance certification.\n- **Demonstrate leadership by becoming an active participant in Collective Action** - by establishing Collective Action as the go-to approach for engaging with the private sector, by implementing integrity tools in public procurement, and by fostering compliance in state-owned enterprises.\n\n\nEach point is supported with examples of such actions around the world. Many of the examples were provided by a core group of members from the \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.coe.int\u002Fen\u002Fweb\u002Fcorruption\u002Fncpa-network\">Network of Corruption Prevention Authorities (NCPA)\u003C\u002Fa>, who worked together with the Basel Institute on Governance to develop this guidance. The Basel Institute’s participation in developing these guidelines is funded by the \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fsiemens.com\u002Fintegrity-initiative\">Siemens Integrity Initiative\u003C\u002Fa>.\n\nThe guidance will be updated on a regular basis to continue the discussion around government and private-sector engagement on issues of corruption. \n\nThis document is freely shareable under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (\u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fcreativecommons.org\u002Flicenses\u002Fby-nc-nd\u002F4.0\u002F\">CC BY-NC-ND 4.0\u003C\u002Fa>). Please credit the Basel Institute on Governance and Network of Corruption Prevention Authorities (NCPA).",[21,79,80],[29],"2022-06-16","https:\u002F\u002Fjam.baselgovernance.org\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002Fd1e59a3d-4f55-44c0-8202-0de5ff67f5ec?width=600&height=840",[],[],[309],{"authors_id":310},{"id":94,"name":95},[],[313],{"tags_id":314},{"id":315,"name":316},1373,"Corruption prevention",[318],2380,[21,79,80],[15],"2022-06-16T13:29:18.000Z","2026-06-01T22:47:37.000Z","\u002Fresources\u002Fpublications\u002Fengaging-private-sector-collective-action-against-corruption",{"id":325,"slug":326,"title":327,"status":6,"nid":328,"year":16,"body":329,"external":24,"topic":330,"language":15,"type":333,"date_published":335,"image":336,"citation":337,"publisher":85,"link_internal":338,"link_external":342,"authors":343,"countries":352,"tags":353,"pdf":369,"topics":372,"featured":24,"languages":7,"summary":7,"programme":7,"area":7,"websites":7,"pdf_text":7,"sort":7,"user_created":48,"date_created":374,"user_updated":49,"date_updated":375,"main_points":7,"short_version":376,"subtitle":7,"link":377},2425,"wp-60","Working Paper 60: Understanding the enemy: Insights from corrupt networks to improve anti-corruption Collective Action initiatives",2867,"Corruption is not simply about individual misconduct. It is a networked phenomenon that arises from entrenched social, economic and political interactions. It is orchestrated through coordination between groups and clusters of individuals.\n\nThis Working Paper explores the networked nature of corruption and the opportunities this presents for anti-corruption efforts. The aim is to understand how shifting the unit of analysis from individuals to networks helps to understand the persistence and resilience of corruption, while opening up new anti-corruption perspectives.\n\nA meta-analysis of findings from more than 15 years of research on informal networks and corruption underpins the conceptualisation of corrupt networks. The paper argues that a focus on networks helps to shed light on the functionality of corruption – from petty bribery to large-scale public procurement fraud – and the underlying social norms that enable it.\n\nUnderstanding the structures, functions and modus operandi of the informal networks associated with corruption and applying the network logic to anti-corruption strategies can help to achieve better outcomes. The paper specifically looks at anti-corruption Collective Action initiatives, suggesting that these should emulate positive aspects of informal networks.\n\n### About this Working Paper\n\nThis paper is published as part of the Basel Institute on Governance Working Paper series, ISSN: 2624-9650. You may share or republish it under a Creative Commons \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fcreativecommons.org\u002Flicenses\u002Fby-nc-nd\u002F4.0\u002Fdeed.en\">BY-NC-ND 4.0\u003C\u002Fa> International Licence.\n\nThe contents are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the Basel Institute on Governance, its donors and partners, or the University of Basel.\n\n",[21,331,332],"Prevention","Research and Innovation",[334],"Working Paper","2025-11-04","https:\u002F\u002Fjam.baselgovernance.org\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002F3fc6640b-79d3-481c-a74c-fc1979923c1b?width=600&height=840","Baez Camargo, Claudia, and Jacopo Costa. 2025. 'Understanding the enemy: Insights from corrupt networks to improve anticorruption Collective Action initiatives.'Working Paper 60, Basel Institute on Governance. Available at: \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fpublications\u002Fwp-60\">baselgovernance.org\u002Fpublications\u002Fwp-60\u003C\u002Fa>.",[339],{"url":340,"caption":341},"\u002Fresources\u002Fpublications?type=Working%20Paper"," View all Working Papers",[],[344,348],{"authors_id":345},{"id":346,"name":347},572,"Dr Claudia Baez Camargo",{"authors_id":349},{"id":350,"name":351},550,"Dr Jacopo Costa",[],[354,357,361,365],{"tags_id":355},{"id":356,"name":21},909,{"tags_id":358},{"id":359,"name":360},982,"Anti-corruption",{"tags_id":362},{"id":363,"name":364},1309,"Informality",{"tags_id":366},{"id":367,"name":368},967,"Organised crime",[370,371],2480,2481,[21,373],"Prevention Research and Innovation","2025-11-04T17:05:36.000Z","2026-06-02T14:08:56.000Z","This Working Paper reflects on the networked nature of corruption and the\nlessons that can be learned from studying it. Particularly, it provides insights into\nthe opportunities and challenges of designing and implementing anti-corruption\nCollective Action initiatives.\n\nThe authors consider corruption not as a series of isolated acts by individuals,\nbut as the outcome of complex, resilient informal networks embedded within\nsocio-political, economic and cultural structures. Within this framework, they\ninvestigate how shifting the unit of analysis from individuals to networks can\nimprove our understanding of the persistence of corruption and create new\nperspectives to promote better anti-corruption outcomes and impacts.\n\nDrawing on over 15 years of empirical research across diverse countries and\nregions, the authors argue that corruption must be viewed through a network\nlens. This approach reveals how informal connections facilitate rule subversion,\nproblem-solving and goal achievement where formal institutions are weak or\nineffective.\n\nThe paper contends that a focus on networks sheds light on the functionality\nof corruption and the underlying social norms enabling corrupt exchanges.\nUnderstanding the structures, functions and modus operandi of the informal\nnetworks associated with corruption can help design better anti-corruption\ninitiatives.\n\nThe Working Paper contributes to the existing literature on corruption strategies\nand anti-corruption activities.\n\n**First**, the authors explore how **informal networks rooted in trust, reciprocity\nand social norms can serve practical functions**, including accessing public\nservices, boosting business profitability and winning elections. The strength\nof informal networks lies in their adaptability, internal organisation and\nembeddedness in local cultures.\n\nThe authors identify **six core roles in informal networks** that pursue corrupt\nobjectives: seekers, doers, brokers, facilitators, intermediaries and instigators.\nThe coordination and division of tasks among these six roles make such informal\nnetworks effective in achieving their goals.\n\nIn addition, the authors unpack **the most important strategies these corrupt\ninformal networks rely on** for their functioning. These strategies are:\n\n- co-optation (recruitment and trust building);\n- control (discipline and compliance);\n- camouflage (concealment and legitimacy); and\n- coordination (task orchestration and adaptability).\n\n**Second**, the authors set out **concrete implications for anti-corruption\nactivities** based on insights on how informal networks operate. They state that\ntraditional top-down, normative approaches often fail due to the functionality\nof corruption (i.e., corruption is always a means to an end) and the social\nembeddedness of corrupt networks.\n\nThe authors propose to apply the network logic to anti-corruption strategies. This\npaper particularly focuses on **Collective Action initiatives** and suggests that\nthese should emulate positive aspects of informal networks. Collective Action\nrefers to collaborative efforts – typically involving businesses, civil society and\u002For\npublic institutions – to tackle corruption risks and shared integrity challenges that\nno single actor can resolve alone.\n\nThis means that, to be effective, these Collective Action initiatives must be\nbased on:\n\n- **Functional goals:** Set short-term, tangible goals aligned with participants’ interests.\n- **Strategic co-optation:** Recruit key stakeholders strategically, including those who are prone to corruption risks, by using trust-building mechanisms that can supply an added value to the stakeholders.\n- **Transparency and accountability:** Leverage mechanisms of peer pressure and reputation management that can ensure sustained commitment and engagement among participants and deter free-riding strategies.\n\nIn conclusion, to foster integrity in today’s fragmented and conflict-prone world,\nanti-corruption initiatives generally must shift from targeting individuals to\ntargeting the networks that sustain corruption. Sustainable change requires\nlocally rooted, trust-based collective efforts that provide functional, credible and\ncoordinated alternatives to illicit networks.\n\nIn this sense, Collective Action initiatives built on conceptualising corruption\nas a networked problem can be an effective solution for achieving\nanti-corruption goals","\u002Fresources\u002Fpublications\u002Fwp-60",{"id":379,"slug":380,"title":381,"status":6,"nid":382,"year":16,"body":383,"external":24,"topic":384,"language":15,"type":385,"date_published":386,"image":387,"citation":388,"publisher":85,"link_internal":389,"link_external":393,"authors":394,"countries":401,"tags":406,"pdf":417,"topics":419,"featured":24,"languages":7,"summary":420,"programme":7,"area":7,"websites":7,"pdf_text":421,"sort":7,"user_created":48,"date_created":422,"user_updated":49,"date_updated":423,"main_points":14,"short_version":424,"subtitle":425,"link":426},2419,"wp-58","Working Paper 58: Corruption as a facilitator of drug trafficking in the port of Rotterdam",2847,"This Working Paper explores the drivers and strategies of corruption as a facilitator of drug trafficking in the port of Rotterdam, with a specific focus on cocaine trafficking. Through in-depth interviews with stakeholders, a review of judicial cases and desk research, it aims to:\n\n\n- deepen understanding of the systems and mechanisms of corruption that enable drug trafficking;\n- show how trafficking and corruption strategies are changing in response to increased enforcement pressure; and\n- provide practical insights on how to further strengthen port resilience.\n\n\nIt contributes to the growing body of work that looks at corruption from a systemic viewpoint, analysing the relationships and adaptive capabilities that allow organised crime to thrive. This research supports efforts to develop more robust and foresight-focused approaches to combat corruption and drug trafficking.\n\n### About this Working Paper\n\nThis paper is published as part of the Basel Institute on Governance Working Paper series, ISSN: 2624-9650. You may share or republish it under a Creative Commons \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fcreativecommons.org\u002Flicenses\u002Fby-nc-nd\u002F4.0\u002Fdeed.en\">BY-NC-ND 4.0\u003C\u002Fa> International Licence.\n\nThis Working Paper was written as part of the FALCON (Fight Against Largescale Corruption and Organised Crime Networks) project. FALCON is funded under the European Union’s Horizon Europe Framework Program Grant Agreement ID 101121281. The Basel Institute on Governance, as an associated partner without the right to receive funds directly from the European Research Executive Agency, has received funding from the Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI).\n\nThe contents of this document are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union, the European Research Executive Agency or SERI.\n",[331,332],[334],"2025-09-11","https:\u002F\u002Fjam.baselgovernance.org\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002Ff2bc171a-166b-4939-9829-788720a33c29?width=600&height=840","Kassa, Saba and Jacopo Costa. 2025. ‘Corruption as a facilitator of drug trafficking in the port of Rotterdam: Drivers, strategies and implications.’ Working Paper 58, Basel Institute on Governance. Available at: https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fpublications\u002Fwp-58.",[390],{"url":391,"caption":392},"https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fnode\u002F2844"," View related workshop \"Red flags at the frontier\"",[],[395,399],{"authors_id":396},{"id":397,"name":398},559,"Dr Saba Kassa",{"authors_id":400},{"id":350,"name":351},[402],{"countries_id":403},{"id":404,"name":405},163,"Netherlands",[407,409,413],{"tags_id":408},{"id":367,"name":368},{"tags_id":410},{"id":411,"name":412},859,"Corruption risks",{"tags_id":414},{"id":415,"name":416},1374,"Law enforcement",[418],2476,[373,26],"This Working Paper explores the drivers and strategies of corruption as a facilitator of drug trafficking in the port of Rotterdam, with a specific focus on cocaine trafficking. Through in-depth interviews with stakeholders, a review of judicial cases and desk research, it aims to","\u003C!-- image -->\n\n## Corruption as a facilitator of drug trafficking in the port of Rotterdam\n\n## Drivers, strategies and implications\n\n\u003C!-- image -->\n\n\u003C!-- image -->\n\n## About this Working Paper\n\nThis Working Paper explores the drivers and strategies of corruption as a facilitator of drug trafficking in the port of Rotterdam, with a specific focus on cocaine trafficking. Through in-depth interviews with stakeholders, a review of judicial cases and desk research, it aims to:\n\n- · deepen understanding of the systems and mechanisms of corruption that enable drug trafficking;\n- · show how trafficking and corruption strategies are changing in response to increased enforcement pressure; and\n- · provide practical insights on how to further strengthen port resilience.\n\nIt contributes to the growing body of work that looks at corruption from a systemic viewpoint, analysing the relationships and adaptive capabilities that allow organised crime to thrive. This research supports efforts to develop more robust and foresight-focused approaches to combat corruption and drug trafficking.\n\nThis paper is published as part of the Basel Institute on Governance Working Paper series, ISSN: 2624-9650. You may share or republish it under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 International Licence.\n\nThe contents are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the Basel Institute on Governance, its donors and partners, or the University of Basel.\n\nSuggested citation: Kassa, Saba and Jacopo Costa. 2025. 'Corruption as a facilitator of drug trafficking in the port of Rotterdam: Drivers, strategies and implications.' Working Paper 58, Basel Institute on Governance. Available at: baselgovernance.org\u002Fpublications\u002Fwp-58.\n\n## About the authors\n\n\u003C!-- image -->\n\n## Saba Kassa\n\nSenior Specialist and Deputy Director, Prevention, Research and Innovation.\n\nDr Saba Kassa is a public governance expert with over 10 years of experience in promoting democratic governance. She leads the implementation of the research, technical assistance and capacity-building activities of the Basel Institute's Prevention, Research and Innovation team.\n\nSaba holds a PhD in International Development Studies from the International Institute of Social Studies in The Hague, a Master's in International Development Studies from the University of Amsterdam, as well as a Master's in Public Administration from Erasmus University Rotterdam.\n\nEmail: saba.kassa@baselgovernance.org\n\n\u003C!-- image -->\n\n## Jacopo Costa\n\nSenior Specialist Prevention, Research and Innovation\n\nDr Jacopo Costa is Senior Specialist, Prevention, Research and Innovation at the Basel Institute on Governance.\n\nHis research has been published in renowned academic journals in the field of criminology and political science. Topics include for example the nature of informal networks, the corrupt exchange in the public works and football industry, illegal wildlife trade between East Africa and Southeast Asia, and the nexus between corruption and money laundering.\n\nHe holds a PhD in Sociology and Political Studies from the University of Turin, a Master's from the University of Florence and a Bachelor's in Culture and Human Rights from the University of Bologna.\n\nEmail: jacopo.costa@baselgovernance.org\n\n## Acknowledgements and funding\n\nThis Working Paper was written as part of the FALCON (Fight Against Largescale Corruption and Organised Crime Networks) project. FALCON is funded under the European Union's Horizon Europe Framework Program Grant Agreement ID 101121281. The Basel Institute on Governance, as an associated partner without the right to receive funds directly from the European Research Executive Agency, has received funding from the Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI).\n\nThe contents of this document are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union, the European Research Executive Agency or SERI.\n\n\u003C!-- image -->\n\n\u003C!-- image -->\n\n## Project funded by\n\n\u003C!-- image -->\n\nSchweizerische Eidgenossenschaft Confédération suisse Confederazione Svizzera Confederaziun svizra\n\nSwiss Confederation\n\nFederal Department of Economic Affairs. Education and Research EAER State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation SERI\n\n## Executive summary\n\nThis Working Paper examines how corruption facilitates drug trafficking (specifically cocaine) through the port of Rotterdam, looking at the underlying drivers and strategies involved. Legal trade routes and commercial ports are especially attractive because of the high volumes of cargo, which make it possible to conceal illicit cargo under licit cargo. The spatial complexity of the port of Rotterdam also makes it difficult to fully secure it against criminal activity.\n\nDigging deeper into the facilitating factors of trafficking, the paper finds that, paradoxically, a main driver of rising border corruption is the increased political attention on and resources dedicated to fighting trafficking. Desk research and stakeholder interviews highlight that as authorities deploy new technology to improve detection, traffickers face more obstacles to operating effectively. Having someone on the inside then becomes increasingly important (Staring et al., 2019). So, an unintended but important consequence of the strengthened fight against drug trafficking is that corruption becomes even more essential for the operational success of organised crime networks.\n\nThis study focuses specifically on the role of customs. Tasked with monitoring the import and export of goods, customs officers are important actors in the fight against drug trafficking. However, their role also makes them vulnerable: they have crucial knowledge on processes and procedures, access to systems and discretionary power that can be exploited by criminals (KPMG, 2021).\n\nThe desk research shows that corruption is used strategically to circumvent two important bottlenecks: the container screening and security as cargo enters the port, and the exit of drugs from the port (Staring et al., 2019). Traffickers may seek to obtain key information or direct assistance from customs officers.\n\nThese corrupt relationships and the emerging networks between members of crime groups and the customs officials are diverse. Some relationships can be characterised by collusion, where customs officials offer their services or are persuaded to cooperate. This collusion may be opportunistic or targeted. Other relationships can be characterised by coercion. Customs officials may be lured by financial reward, but this is accompanied by intimidation or the threat of violence to ensure that the officer cooperates and continues to cooperate. Our research highlights that the boundary between collusion and coercion is often blurred.\n\nBeyond collusion and coercion, we also see infiltration, which crosses the boundaries between the criminal, public and private. What emerges is less a matter of individual corruption and more akin to regulatory capture, where the public office position is held by a member of the criminal network.\n\nThe review of the judicial cases shows that bribes involved in these schemes can amount to millions. To hide and use the illicit gains, traffickers rely on money laundering, disguising its source as legitimate. They often enlist the help of family and friends, a trusted inner circle or professional specialists. They may also hide cash at home or invest it in assets and businesses in the Netherlands or abroad.\n\nA key finding of our research is that the criminal and corruption strategies used to facilitate drug trafficking are highly adaptive. The underlying driver of this adaptability is the unchanging demand for drugs and high profitability of the crime. This pushes traffickers to adopt new strategies to overcome hurdles in supplying the demand.\n\nCorruption strategies adapt in response to new enforcement measures. When control systems are changed and\u002For strengthened, corruption strategies evolve alongside them. This research identifies some key patterns:\n\n- · Stronger detection efforts increase the incentives for corruption.\n- · Evolving systems encourage a similar shift in corruption strategies.\n- · Anti-corruption and anti-trafficking measures may change the profile of those most vulnerable to being co-opted.\n- · The characteristics of corruption can also evolve, from collusion to coercion, to full infiltration of institutions and systems - with blurred lines in between.\n\nTrafficking strategies are similarly adaptive. There have been increased efforts by the port to combat trafficking through enhanced detection and technology. This was initially reflected by increased drug seizures. But since 2024, drugs seizures have declined. The research findings provide an explanation for this: As detection strengthens, more drug seizures are made. But what may happen, too, is a response to these new measures. As the risk of detection increases, criminals may adapt their trafficking strategies to overcome the additional hurdles, including:\n\n- · changing concealment strategies; and\n- · changing modes of transport and trafficking routes, including to ports outside of the Netherlands.\n\nThese developments highlight the complexity in understanding the impact of stronger anti-trafficking measures on both corruption and trafficking strategies. Trafficking and corruption are typically measured by detection, for example, by changes in the volume of drug seizures or the number of public officials caught engaging in corruption. But the elephant in the room is that increasingly sophisticated criminal strategies can hide what is really happening. This underscores the need to continuously strengthen our ability to recognise 'red flags' of corruption and trafficking. Data-driven tools and refined risk indicators are critical for understanding how crime and corruption strategies are changing.\n\nThe evolving nature of criminal strategies is often likened to a game of chess: enforcement makes a move, and criminal networks adapt. But what now seems to be emerging is more troubling. When barriers to drug trafficking increase while demand remains unchanged, crime and corruption strategies adapt in ways that can deepen their impact on society, leading for example to the hardening of crime and associated violence.\n\nThis makes anticipating how crime may adapt to changing anti-corruption and anti-trafficking strategies critical. Improved foresight and scenario-building capacities will be vital in order to develop more robust enforcement efforts against drug trafficking and mitigate the negative impact on society.\n\nA holistic approach is essential. Addressing corruption as a facilitator of drug trafficking requires a broad view of crime that focuses on understanding vulnerabilities, leveraging data and harnessing collaboration. The risk of trafficking routes changing are high, therefore, we must use every tool at our disposal to ensure effective and sustainable enforcement efforts.\n\nTable of contents\n\n| 1 | Introduction ......................................................................................................... 8 | Introduction ......................................................................................................... 8 |\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 Facilitating factors of drug trafficking and drivers of border corruption ............................................................................................... 9 | 2 Facilitating factors of drug trafficking and drivers of border corruption ............................................................................................... 9 | |\n| 2.1 | Facilitating factors of trafficking through the port of Rotterdam | 9 |\n| 2.2 | Drivers of border corruption | 10 |\n| 2.3 | More obstacles create greater need for corruption | 10 |\n| Strategies of border corruption ......................................................................12 | Strategies of border corruption ......................................................................12 | |\n| 3.1 | Involvement of organised crime networks | 12 |\n| 3.2 | Crime networks and evolving corruption practices | 13 |\n| Corruption networks: collusion, coercion and infiltration ........................17 | Corruption networks: collusion, coercion and infiltration ........................17 | Corruption networks: collusion, coercion and infiltration ........................17 |\n| 4.1 | Building corruption networks | 17 |\n| 4.2 | Collusion | 17 |\n| 4.3 | Coercion | 18 |\n| 4.4 | Infiltration | 19 |\n| Bribery and money laundering .......................................................................21 | Bribery and money laundering .......................................................................21 | Bribery and money laundering .......................................................................21 |\n| 5.1 | Bribe payments in line with the high profits of drug trafficking | 21 |\n| 5.2 | Social and financial strategies for money laundering | 22 |\n| 6 Adaptive criminal and corruption strategies to facilitate drug trafficking .................................................................................................. 25 | 6 Adaptive criminal and corruption strategies to facilitate drug trafficking .................................................................................................. 25 | |\n| 6.1 | Trafficking and corruption strategies follow the path of least resistance | 25 |\n| 6.2 | Corruption strategies are adaptive | 25 |\n| 6.3 | Trafficking strategies are equally adaptive | 28 |\n| 6.4 | The problem with understanding hidden and complex | |\n| 6.5 | corruption and crime strategies Practitioner insights on how to deal with the adaptive nature of crime | 30 32 |\n| Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 34 | Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 34 | |\n| Bibliography ............................................................................................................ 35 | Bibliography ............................................................................................................ 35 | |\n| Annex ........................................................................................................................ 43 | Annex ........................................................................................................................ 43 | |\n\n## 1 Introduction\n\nRotterdam is the largest port in Europe. While efficiency and safety are top priorities for the port, as an important logistical hub it becomes inadvertently attractive for drug trafficking, especially of cocaine (Staring et al., 2019). The head of the Seaport Police Rotterdam laments that 'the biggest battle against traffickers is their ability to corrupt ports with money and intimidation' (May and Holcova, 2023). This corruption at the border comprises an illegal exchange of resources between border officials (the bribe takers) and private actors (the bribe givers) (Jancsics, 2019, 2020, 2021).\n\nFighting border corruption as a facilitator of drug trafficking has become an important priority for the Dutch government, with increased attention and resources devoted to it (Staring et al., 2019; Zürcher et al., 2024; Government of the Netherlands, 2021). This is because the illicit drug trade and the corruption that facilitates it come at a high cost to society and the rule of law, impacting health, security and governance (Nistotskaya et al., 2024).\n\nThe problem faced by the port of Rotterdam is not unique. Organised crime networks use corruption to facilitate trafficking into, through and out of ports across Europe. Ports in France (Marseille), Germany (Hamburg), Belgium (Antwerp), Italy (Gioia Tauro) and Spain (Valencia) face similar risks. It is an important problem that the Horizon Europe project FALCON (Fight Against Large-scale Corruption and Organised Crime Networks) aims to address. Law enforcement practitioners, social scientists and data analysis experts join forces in this project to innovate the fight against corruption by leveraging digital tools. This Working Paper is based on research that is part of and contributes towards the FALCON project.\n\nThe scale of the problem is significant. Half of Europe's criminal networks are involved in drug trafficking, either alone or as part of other criminal activities. Crucially, over 70 percent of criminal networks use corruption to facilitate their illegal activities (Europol, 2024). A close examination of this phenomenon in the port of Rotterdam can provide some critical insights into:\n\n- · the drivers and aims of border corruption, giving attention to characterising the manner in which corruption deals are carried out and the goals that are pursued by engaging in them; and\n- · the adaptive nature of corruption in response to innovations aimed at enhancing efficiency and security at the borders.\n\nThis paper highlights the drivers and strategies of corruption (with a focus on public officials and specifically customs officials) as a facilitator of drug trafficking (with a focus on cocaine) in the Port of Rotterdam. It further considers the key challenges, opportunities and risks in efforts to address drug trafficking and border corruption. The analysis is based on a desk review, a review of drug-related corruption court cases and five interviews with key experts from academia and law enforcement (see Annex).\n\n## 2 Facilitating factors of drug trafficking and drivers of border corruption\n\n## 2.1 Facilitating factors of trafficking through the port of Rotterdam\n\n## 2.1.1 Modern infrastructure and high cargo volumes at ports\n\nThe Port of Rotterdam is the largest port in Europe. It aims to become the world's safest, most efficient and most sustainable port (Port of Rotterdam Authority, n.d.-a). This is reflected in a modern logistical and digital infrastructure, allowing fast processing of cargo containers (Staring et al., 2019; Zürcher et al., 2024).\n\nAn important point is that trafficking takes place on the back of legal trade routes (Staring et al., 2019; Zürcher et al., 2024; Staring et al., 2023). Commercial ports are especially attractive because of the high cargo volumes they process and the possibility to conceal illicit cargo under licit cargo. It is more difficult to detect trafficking in the case of high transport volumes (Zaitch, 2002 as referenced in Eski and Buijt, 2017), and Rotterdam has deep water channels that allow large ships with many containers to dock (Zürcher et al., 2024).\n\n## 2.1.2 Spatial and operational complexity of ports\n\nThe spatial and operational complexity of ports makes security a challenge.\n\nThe large physical size of the port of Rotterdam (over 12,500 ha), volume of goods (the cargo throughput is approximately 436 million tonnes of freight a year) and number of people working on its premises (approximately 1,400 employees work for the Port Authority alone) contribute to its vulnerability (Zürcher et al., 2024; Port of Rotterdam Authority, n.d.-b). The sheer size of the Rotterdam harbour means that it will never be totally secure (Staring et al., 2019).\n\nThis is further complicated by the fact that tensions may arise between security objectives and economic objectives in port operations - acting on suspicions of illicit activity may undermine efficiency (Costa et al., 2024). It is important to find a balance between these goals, which at times can be contradictory (Eski, 2019; Staring et al., 2019). This is especially the case in a port environment with many stakeholders and where promoting security is a shared responsibility (Staring et al., 2019). In this context, good partnerships, information sharing and robust investigation and enforcement capacity are critical but at the same time challenging (Government of the Netherlands, 2024; Spapens et al., 2021).\n\n9\n\n## 2.2 Drivers of border corruption\n\nThe Port's enforcement efforts have been bolstered by more political attention and resources, prompting criminal networks to increasingly target public officials in order to override more stringent detection measures.\n\nSince the mid-1990s, the fight against organised crime and drug production\u002F trafficking has been an important political topic in the Netherlands. More recently, there has been an important shift, as the hardening of crime is seen as having an increasingly negative impact on the rule of law and the democratic state (Government of the Netherlands, 2021). This is linked to an increased perception of the negative impact of drug-related crime (Spapens et al., 2021).\n\nIn 2021, the then government (Cabinet Rutte III) announced an extra EUR 524 million for tackling subversive crime (Government of the Netherlands, 2021). In 2024, the new government (Cabinet Schoof I) emphasised that security remains an important issue and that it would step up the fight against subversive crime by strengthening laws, detection, punishment, information exchange, the police and intelligence services, and tackling international criminal activity and related corruption (Government of the Netherlands, n.d.-a).\n\nStronger political prioritisation and resources have resulted in the ability of the port of Rotterdam to strengthen its efforts to prevent and curb trafficking. A focus has been on improving technology, digitisation and automation of processes (including the robotisation of container transport). Security is promoted through the use of modern technologies, such as 'port keys' , 'digital safety passports' and 'cargocards' , which store biometric data of key players in the logistics chain, information on commercial vessels, containers and the companies that are behind the delivery and logistics (Oosting, 2016 as referenced in Staring et al., 2019).\n\nEnforcement has been similarly strengthened. A key initiative is the Hit and Run Cargo (HARC) team, a partnership between Dutch Customs, the Public Prosecution Service, the Seaport Police and the Fiscal Information and Investigation Service (FIOD). The HARC team specialises in investigating and prosecuting drug smuggling and criminal networks and their activities in and around the port of Rotterdam. It was set up over 25 years ago specifically to combat drug trafficking in Rotterdam through joint intelligence gathering (Customs Administration of the Netherlands, n.d.-a; Netherlands Public Prosecution Service, n.d.). The HARC team is responsible for most of the drug seizures in the port (Staring et al., 2019).\n\n## 2.3 More obstacles create greater need for corruption\n\nAs increased obstacles make trafficking more difficult, an increased need for corruption emerges.\n\nWhereas previously the likelihood of drugs being detected was perceived as relatively low (Staring et al., 2019), this seems to have changed. The ability\n\nto detect drugs has been strengthened through increased risk analysis and surveillance (Nelen and Kolthoff, 2017). For instance, in 1994, 0.1 percent of cargo was checked. By 2019, this had increased to 0.5 percent (Staring et al., 2019). This approach is paying off. In an interview in 2021, the head of the Seaport Police noted that intensified efforts were leading to more drug seizures (Port of Rotterdam Authority, 2021). Mid-2023 saw the largest drug seizure ever made (Netherlands Public Prosecution Service, 2023).\n\nNow, the combined force of political prioritisation and strengthened detection and automation has increased the potential to disrupt drug trafficking. An unintended consequence is that from the perspective of the drug traffickers, having accomplices embedded inside the port operations has become increasingly important, if not indispensable. This has been recognised by the Dutch Public Prosecution Service and other sources (Roks et al., 2021; Sergi, 2020; KPMG, 2021; Staring et al., 2019, 2023; Netherlands Public Prosecution Service, 2025).\n\n'If everything works as it should, it is impossible to traffic drugs through the port. To do this, you need some inside help. There is always a corrupt insider who facilitates trafficking.'\n\nInterview with a law enforcement stakeholder, 16 July 2024\n\nFacilitating factors of trafficking\n\n- · Illegal trade latches onto legal trade\n- · Complexity of port makes security challenging\n\nDrivers of border corruption\n\n- · Fighting drug trafficking as a political priority\n- · Strengthening detection and automatisation to prevent crime\n\nFigure 1: Intensified efforts to fight drug trafficking can lead to a rise in corruption risks.\n\nCollusion\n\nCoercion\n\nInfiltration\n\nIncreased potential for disruption of drug trafficking\n\nIncreased need for insider help: corruption increases\u002Fadapts\n\n## 3 Strategies of border corruption\n\n## 3.1 Involvement of organised crime networks\n\nOrganised crime networks are involved in the illicit drug trade. A key modus operandi is that cocaine is trafficked by sea from Latin America (i.e. Ecuador, Peru, Venezuela, Colombia and Bolivia) to Europe via the port of Rotterdam. The Netherlands is predominantly a transit country. A common strategy is that the drugs latch onto fruit transports, which require swift processing (Staring et al., 2019; Trimbos Instituut, 2025).\n\nThe crime networks are ethnically heterogeneous and have 'a small core and informal, flexible structures' (Staring et al., 2019). They have been likened to logistics companies in that they are organised as professional organisations which focus on security, transport and development. For specialised tasks, they can call on specific people or involve people with specific skills, such as money laundering (Staring et al., 2019, 2023).\n\nBuilding trust and ensuring loyalty is important, so social ties such as family and friends can be a way of bringing people into the network. Robust and solid social connections can also form through shared social spaces, as well as through professional ties such as working together in the port (Staring et al., 2019, 2023). One example of this dynamic is that social ties between groups in the Netherlands and Latin America may help organised crime groups to connect across large geographical areas (Burt, 1992 as referenced in Madarie and Kruisbergen, 2019).\n\nA researcher interviewed for this study suggests that there is no overarching criminal organisation that facilitates access to the port. Instead, different criminal networks have to find their way into and through the port by cultivating relevant relationships through bribery (interview of 5 April 2024). Research shows that several transnational criminal groups - including Italian, British, Albanian and Dutch groups - have cocaine distribution lines through the Netherlands to various countries (Dirksen et al., 2021). Even if their interests and goals differ, criminal networks cooperate (Costa, 2022).\n\nThe multidimensionality and fluidity of the cocaine trafficking networks make efforts at eliminating them inherently difficult, as illustrated by the case discussed in the box below.\n\n## The case of Ridouan Taghi\n\nRidouan Taghi, the leader of the largest drug cartel in the Netherlands, is a key figure in what is arguably the biggest drug trafficking operation in Europe. He was sentenced to life imprisonment in the Netherlands'\n\nMarengo trial, which was the country's most prominent mass trial involving his criminal organisation.\n\nAt his peak, Taghi imported an estimated third of all the cocaine entering the Netherlands through Rotterdam's port. He worked with some of Europe's largest trafficking networks, including the Italian Camorra mafia and the Irish Kinahan crime group, and each group benefitted from the others' contacts. Taghi's deputy lived in Colombia and organised the export of cocaine to Europe, allegedly by buying it from the Gaitanistas (Autodefensas Gaitanistas de Colombia).\n\nSeveral other members of Taghi's network were arrested in Latin America, the Caribbean and in Suriname. Despite the arrest of the leader and others, the network and infrastructure established continued to allow the importation of cocaine. A former associate of Taghi, Leijdekkers, is said to have taken over the network and was found guilty in absentia of international cocaine trafficking and ordering an assassination.\n\n(Sources: Held, 2024; Holligan, 2024; Booty and Bamford, 2025; NL Times, 2024a)\n\n## 3.2 Crime networks and evolving corruption practices\n\nCriminals use a variety of methods to move drugs into and through the port with the aim of ensuring that they will not be detected or confiscated. There are two major bottlenecks in the transit of drugs: getting the drugs into and out of the port. It is at these two points that trafficking most heavily relies on corruption to evade detection and monitoring (Staring, 2021; Madarie and Kruisbergen, 2019).\n\n## 3.2.1 Aim of corruption: evading monitoring and surveillance\n\nFor organised crime networks to overcome bottlenecks in drug trafficking, to pass surveillance and get drugs out of the container and out of the port, they need information on logistical processes in the port.\n\nWhile several public agencies are involved in fighting crime, 1 the role of customs stands out as they are tasked with monitoring the import and export of goods, making them crucial stakeholders in the fight against drug trafficking (Staring et al., 2019). The customs authority carries out a wide range of monitoring,\n\nsignalling and investigative tasks (Port of Rotterdam Authority, 2022). Of the 7.5 million containers that pass through the port each year, 40,000 are scanned and 6,500 are opened, with checks based on risk profiles (Staring et al., 2019).\n\nAs detection activities are strengthened, the need for inside help increases, as do the risks for corrupt engagement of customs officers (KPMG, 2021). Customs officers become vulnerable to corruption because, by virtue of their position, they have important knowledge about processes and procedures, access to systems and discretionary power. Customs officers in strategic positions become a particular focus of attention: personnel with knowledge and authorisation to perform risk analyses, and those carrying out checks, such as scan analysts and sniffer dog handlers. As automation means that information is increasingly stored in databases, customs officers with access to these equally become key (KPMG, 2021).\n\n## 3.2.2 Corruption to get drugs into the port\n\nTo ensure drug shipments can get into the port and pass locations of surveillance, criminal actors use corruption to circumvent or avoid control. They bribe staff for knowledge about the logistics and monitoring process. This includes information about pre-arrival risk analyses, scheduled container checks and container locations, and confidential customs information regarding modus operandi of screenings and general weaknesses in the monitoring system. Bribery is similarly used to co-opt public officials who can help evade controls completely, for example by transferring drugs into safe containers that have already been checked or concealing discoveries (Staring et al., 2019).\n\nThe most infamous and illustrative corruption case involving drug trafficking through the port of Rotterdam involves a customs officer working as a selector in the pre-arrival section of customs. The official decided which containers would be checked and how. In return for bribes amounting to millions of euros, he would provide criminal groups involved in drug trafficking with information on the location and status of particular containers, and would ensure that certain containers were not checked. One way he did this was by marking a container as cleared, stating that the bill of lading had been requested and checked. The officer also provided information on risk profiles used in the selection process. In 2017, the official was sentenced to 14 years in prison (Roks et al., 2021; Staring et al., 2019; Sonnemans, 2017).\n\nIn another example, a customs official was bribed to provide information regarding confidential customs information, including modus operandi regarding the import and the screening of the sending and receiving companies (Judicial case 2019:1103).\n\nOther examples of past corrupt acts by customs officers to evade monitoring and surveillance (see KPMG, 2021) include:\n\n- · falsely clearing containers for import without inspection;\n- · facilitating drugs to be moved to a container that has already been inspected;\n- · failing to (fully) inspect containers marked as high risk;\n- · designating many containers for inspection, thereby ensuring that there is not enough capacity to inspect a container containing drugs.\n\n## 3.2.3 Corruption to get drugs out of the port\n\nCorruption also facilitates the exit of drugs from the port. Officers can be bribed to provide information on container location, allow access to the port or the premises where the container is located, move containers to a place where drugs can be more easily extracted, or extract the drugs from the container themselves (Staring et al., 2019; KPMG, 2021).\n\nThis relates to two specific methods to remove drugs from containers:\n\n- · the 'rip-off method' , where the drugs are removed from the container and out of the port before an inspection; and\n- · the 'switch method' where the drugs are switched out to a container that has already passed inspection or is not planned for inspection.\n\nAs an example, in one case a customs official was accused of accepting a bribe to divert the physical shipment of a consignment outside the customs territory to the warehouse of the forwarding company involved in the shipment. In this case, 26 kilos of drugs were later found in the container (Judicial case 2019:1103).\n\n## 3.2.4 Typology of corruption aims at border spaces\n\nAcross the above examples and cases, a typology of corruption aims at border spaces emerges. Corruption, and bribery in particular, permits criminal actors to obtain key information or direct assistance needed to pass through the two main bottlenecks in the port, the container screening and security as cargo enters the port, and the extraction of drugs from the port.\n\nThe key difference between information and direct assistance is the degree of active involvement of the customs official:\n\n- · Providing information - e.g. about the logistics and monitoring process - is a more indirect, passive involvement. It can help criminal networks prepare and conceal illicit cargo so it's not detected.\n\n- · Direct help in avoiding detection or moving goods - e.g. clearing a container as compliant without inspection or opening the gate to provide access to port premises containing containers with hidden drugs requires a more active collaboration.\n\nFigure 2: Typology of corruption aims at border spaces.\n\n| | Getting drugs into the port and past screenings and security | Getting drugs safely out of the port |\n|-------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| Obtaining information | Corruption to obtain information from customs officials, e.g. on the criteria and red flags used by customs for cargo screening, and on how to hide drugs in containers to avoid detection. | Corruption to obtain information from customs officials, e.g. about the location of containers marked for full inspection to ensure that drugs can be removed beforehand. |\n| Obtaining direct assistance | Corruption to get direct help from customs officials to avoid detection of the drugs. E.g. Official ensures a specific container | Corruption to get customs officials to facilitate the extraction of the drugs. E.g. Official provides illegal access to port premises so criminals can secure |\n\n## 4 Corruption networks: collusion, coercion and infiltration\n\n## 4.1 Building corruption networks\n\nA key theme in this research is the networked nature of crime. Criminal networks often exploit social networks - i.e. networks within the informal and social spheres - to cut across the public and private divide. These social networks are primarily strategic - they are built to facilitate trafficking. Trust and loyalty are crucial, so criminal networks may turn to family and friends where possible. But even without such pre-existing personal ties, officials can be co-opted, and sociality then built up, for example through the reciprocal and repeated exchange of bribes. The ultimate goal is to build a relationship that includes the social elements of expectation of reciprocity, obligation to the group and loyalty (Basel Institute on Governance, 2024; Jancsics and Costa, 2024; Baez-Camargo et al., 2023; Costa, 2022).\n\nOn the basis of the conceptual model by David Jancsics, we can broadly characterise the corrupt relationships that emerge between officials and criminal organisations as either collusive or coercive. In collusive relationships, the engagement between the public official and the criminal organisation is framed as mutually beneficial (offering\u002Fselling information or providing direct help). In contrast, coercive relationships involve pressure or threats, where the public official is forced to cooperate and provide information or help (Jancsics, 2019; Abdou et al., 2024).\n\n## 4.2 Collusion\n\nCustoms officials may offer their services or be lured into collusion by criminals. Motivations are complex. Customs officials in financial difficulty are more likely to become involved with organised crime groups, but corrupt behaviour may also be driven by a desire for a more adventurous or luxurious lifestyle (KPMG, 2021; Nelen and Kolthoff, 2017).\n\nCollusion can be opportunistic or targeted. Because trust is so important in an illicit arrangement, a key modus operandi is to enlist accomplices opportunistically from existing social networks, for example via family connections, involvement in sports clubs or having attended the same schools. A more targeted approach may involve identifying customs officials, establishing contact with them outside the work environment and attempting to to co-opt them into the criminal network through bribery (KPMG, 2021).\n\nBecause criminals employ and proactively build their social networks, it is common for criminals and customs officials to know each other. Strong bonds within family and friendship networks and norms of solidarity may in turn exert\n\ninformal pressure on the official to help and remain loyal, thus reinforcing incentives for the abuse of power (KPMG, 2021; Nelen and Kolthoff, 2017).\n\nIn relation to the port of Rotterdam, Staring et al. (2023) highlight that family and friendship ties are important factors that facilitate co-optation, but the most important factor is access to and knowledge of the port and control systems. The mixing of professional embeddedness and social networks, and opportunistic and targeted co-optation is highlighted in some recent corruption cases involving customs officials and drug trafficking:\n\nIn one case, a customs officer was approached by two men involved in large-scale drug smuggling through his wife's brother. During a meeting at a petrol station on the motorway, the two men told the customs official that they wanted to work together (van Gestel, 2019). Another case involved a trafficker approaching the son of a customs official to provide information on containers, who in turn sought the information from his mother (Netherlands Public Prosecution Service, 2024a). This shows that vulnerability to corruption can extend beyond the public official to their family and friends.\n\nIt is expected that the use of social networks of family and friends or online platforms such as social media to establish connection with officials will increase. Criminal networks analyse publicly available information on officials' work and private lives to assess potential targets. In response, a key measure of the Rotterdam port's anti-corruption approach is to advise officials not to post work-related photos on social media, as this can make them a target for criminal organisations (Rotterdamse Haven Veilige Haven, n.d.).\n\nAnother tactic is to target and develop ties with multiple officers simultaneously, in order to spread opportunities and risks. A case involving a customs official illustrates this strategic targeting: the official provided a criminal organisation with a list of the names and contact details of fellow customs officials working on scanning containers (Judicial case 2020:12597).\n\n## 4.3 Coercion\n\nCustoms officials can also be coerced into corrupt activity. They may be initially lured with a financial reward but intimidation and the threat of violence can ensure continued cooperation (KPMG, 2021; Sergi, 2020; Europol, 2023). In this regard, Rotterdam's head of the Seaport Police discussed the threat of violence and intimidation to provide information to criminal networks, saying: 'If you don't say yes the first time, when you're in the shop doing your shopping, they'll throw it into your cart again and maybe try a third time to offer you the money.\n\nThere are [also] cases, of course, [where] then they tell people, 'We know where your kids are going to school.'' (May and Holcova, 2023).\n\nCoercion is a dynamic issue. On the one hand, Staring et al. (2023) highlight in their analysis of 10 drug-related cases in the port that excessive violence is 'less emphatically and naturally present' . On the other, research also shows that organised crime has hardened over the years, increasingly using violence and intimidating public officials (Nelen and Kolthoff, 2017).\n\nIntimidation is achieved through blackmail, threat of violence against the officer or their family or creating financial pressures by offering attractive loans (KPMG, 2021). For example, in one case, an official working for the tax agency provided sensitive personal information to members of a crime group involved in drug trafficking who could then use this information to put the targeted person under pressure to comply (Judicial case 2020:1295).\n\nIt is important to recognise that the actual boundaries between collusion and coercion are blurred. Rather than seeing collusion and coercion as separate phenomena, it is better to see them on a continuum, with at one extreme the public official offering and selling information and at the other extreme the criminal actor extorting cooperation through the use of force. Within this continuum, there are various degrees of collusion and coercion. What remains constant is the power imbalance, the exchange of resources for assistance and the relationship's longevity.\n\n## 4.4 Infiltration\n\nInfiltration takes the dynamics of collusion and coercion a step further by completely erasing the boundary between public and private power. It occurs when an individual closely associated with or directly involved in illicit activities proactively acquires the formal position of a public official. Criminals may attempt to infiltrate public and private offices in the port area and embed themselves into the community of personnel through formal employment processes. This provides an opportunity to obtain and share relevant information, establish links with others in the port and, if promoted to a higher position, ensure that other members of the criminal network join the organisation.\n\nThere are documented examples of people associated with criminal groups being sent to police or customs training programmes with the specific aim of making a career in these organisations (KPMG, 2021; Europol, 2023). Through long-term strategies such as these, criminal networks can enlarge and conceal their reach into public office by leveraging social capital (Costa, 2017).\n\nIn one interview, a researcher suggested that infiltration is the most worrying form of corruption because it is more structural and invisible, and it reduces\n\nthe risk of being caught. It transgresses the boundaries between the criminal, public and private. In the long term and in its more extreme and structural forms, infiltration may look less like corruption and more like regulatory capture, where the public office position is held by a member of the criminal network. This means that a system is created or manipulated to work every single time, without the need of bribery or other forms of influence, but through the legal channels (interview of 5 April 2024).\n\nAnother researcher noted that infiltration is still poorly understood because it is mistakenly assumed that it occurs only in settings with weak governance. It is essential to gain a deeper understanding of this kind of long-term and strategic investment - which differs greatly from one-off and opportunistic engagement if efforts to understand and curb border corruption are to succeed (interview of 12 April 2024).\n\nIncreased potential\n\nfor disruption of drug\n\ntrafficking\n\nA court case (Judicial case 2020:12597) involving an intercepted conversation between a customs official and a member of a criminal organisation illustrates how infiltration can unfold. The customs officer had previously worked in the pre-arrival department, which is responsible for organising maritime inspections of incoming cargo traffic, but no longer held that function. The member of the criminal network explained that he had organised every aspect of a drug import, except how to bypass the container scan. He suggested that the customs officer should try to resume work in this department, find a relevant connection there, or even apply for other positions relevant to container scanning. If she succeeded, he said, she would have 'gold' in her hands, promising EUR 1 million for each successful job. It was found that the customs official did potentially try to assist, as a printed list of the names of officials working in the scanning section was found at her home. Drivers of border corruption · Fighting drug trafficking as a political priority · Strengthening detection and automatisation to prevent crime Facilitating factors of trafficking · Illegal trade latches onto legal trade · Complexity of port makes security challenging\n\nThis example shows how collusion, coercion and infiltration cutting across the public-private divide can blend together in practice. The criminal entices the official with the promise of money, while at the same time pressuring her to explore ways to rejoin the scanning team. In doing this, he attempts to strategically position her to help the criminal network to avoid inspections, or to provide information on who might be involved in the container scanning position. The lure of financial gain is key, but other forms of pressure are not excluded. The overarching observation is that networked corruption is multifaceted and adaptive. Moreover, once cooperation is established, the corrupt relationships are long-lasting.\n\nFigure 3: The lines between collusion, coercion and infiltration are often blurred.\n\n\u003C!-- image -->\n\nIncreased\n\nfor insider\n\ncorrupti\n\nincreases\u002Fa\n\n## 5 Bribery and money laundering\n\nThis section focuses on understanding the private gains associated with border corruption. The guiding question was simple: how do public officials receive a bribe and how do they launder the proceeds? To gain clarity on this question, an analysis was conducted of judicial cases (published online at rechtspraak.nl, the website of the courts, appeal courts and special courts in the Netherlands). The focus was on ongoing or completed cases involving bribery of public officials working in the port, including both acquittals and sanctions. The following search terms were used to identify relevant cases:\n\n- · An all-fields search with the keywords 'corruption Rotterdam harbour' and 'customs' combined with a content indication search for 'money laundering' resulted in 13 cases. 2\n- · A search with the keywords 'corruption' and 'customs' in the content indication field alone resulted in two additional cases. 3\n\nThe analysis aimed to provide insights into the dynamics of bribery and the money laundering strategies involved, with a focus on bribes made to the public officials, and how that money is hidden and used. Often, the flows and strategies overlap (Abdou et al., 2024). Research shows that, in contexts where criminal networks are pervasive, earning a good salary is not sufficient to discourage corrupt behaviour (Baryal, Patang and Sharaf, 2022; Chalendard et al., 2023; Chêne, 2018; McLinden and Durrani, 2013).\n\n## 5.1 Bribe payments in line with the high profits of drug trafficking\n\nThe large profit involved in drug trafficking means that bribes can be very high, too. A report from Europol (2023) shows that bribes are often hundreds of thousands of euros, with the highest amounts paid to those in critical roles either in kind with a part of the cargo load or as a percentage of the drug value.\n\nIn the port of Rotterdam, similar patterns are observed. In fact, the bribes may be even higher, reaching into the millions. Public officials are promised or given a financial gift (private gain) with the understanding that they will abuse their power, by providing information, doing something or failing to act. Bribes are given in various forms, one of which is money.\n\nFor example, in one case a customs official working as a selector in the pre-arrival department of customs allegedly supported a criminal network to traffic drugs through the port. The official is accused of accepting gifts ranging from half a million to almost a million euro, promises of future gifts amounting to EUR 3 million, or a sum equal to 7.5 percent of the value of cocaine in containers (Judicial case 2017:5125).\n\nIn another case involving a member of a criminal network trafficking drugs through the port, the defendant stated that the payments amount to 'two million for the strepen [custom officials] and half a million for the business, logistics and 'the guys who unload the stuff, the stashes'' (Judicial case 2020:1295). Bribes can also be paid in different forms, such as in drugs or assets (Judicial case 2023:15351).\n\n## 5.2 Social and financial strategies for money laundering\n\nRegardless of the form a bribe is paid in, the proceeds must be integrated into the financial system without attracting attention. This is where money laundering strategies become essential. Cash is king and a necessity. Criminal money is linked to cash, not only because bribes are commonly paid in cash, but because using cash helps to avoid detection in a context of increasing banking surveillance. In the Netherlands, giro accounts are closely monitored. There was even an initiative - ultimately rejected - to monitor all transactions of over EUR 100 (Bolsius, 2022). This surveillance pushes corrupt actors to adapt by prioritising physical cash or employing elaborate strategies to launder their proceeds.\n\nMoney laundering is about obscuring the illicit origin of money with intent. For example, in one case, a customs official in Rotterdam was accused of habitual money laundering of various sums totalling almost EUR 700,000 (Judicial case 2019:1103).\n\nThe cases reviewed illustrate three important strategies in money laundering:\n\n- 1. The illicit origin of the money is disguised by making it appear to come from a licit source.\n- 2. The money is hidden with the help of family and friends or the inner circle, and\u002For by enlisting the help of professional specialists.\n- 3. The money is hidden at home in cash or invested in assets and businesses in the Netherlands or abroad.\n\nThe first strategy is to make it seem as if the bribe money has a legal origin . The cases reviewed show that, when money laundering suspects are found with unexplained funds, they are asked to explain the money's source - regardless of whether the exact amount of the bribe is known. There are two main responses:\n\neither suspects refuse to answer or they provide explanation for all or part of the money, which can lead to other charges such as tax evasion.\n\nFor example, in a case involving a corrupt customs agent working at the port of Rotterdam, the accused claimed that the excess money came from various sources: his mother, online second-hand sales, casino or lottery winnings (in the order of a few thousand euros), and regular gifts from his father - a one-off donation, and cash money that was spent on domestic help and food payments (Judicial case 2019:1103).\n\nIn another case the accused explained the money's origin as having come from: winning the lottery, business activities (cafes or thrift shops) and paid work (Judical case 2022:5588).\n\nThe second strategy is to hide bribe money with the help of trusted networks and\u002For professional specialists . Both cash and bank-based funds can be hidden with family members, friends or those who are part of the criminal network. These individuals 'keep' the money for the public official (Judicial case 2020:1295).\n\nMore elaborate concealment may involve enlisting the support of professional enablers to move money out of the Netherlands. Lawyers or financial specialists can play an important role in facilitating money laundering.\n\nFor example, a recent case reported by Dutch media shows how an underworld banker used 'encrypted communications to manage a courier network in the Netherlands, moving nearly a quarter of a billion euros in cash for criminals between June 2020 and March 2021' (NL Times, 2024b).\n\nInterviews with stakeholders confirm that money is moved out of the Netherlands using networks of underground banking and\u002For money mules (interviews of 4 April 2024, 5 April 2024, 12 April 2024 and 16 July 2024).\n\nThe third strategy is to hide cash or convert cash into assets . Cash may be hidden at home or in safes, exchanged for other currencies or invested in assets and businesses (Judicial case 2020:918).\n\n## Examples include:\n\n- · Buying luxury items such as expensive watches. In 2023 the Hit and Run Cargo (HARC) team seized more value in luxury designer clothes and accessories than cash (Netherlands Public Prosecution Service, 2024b).\n- · Investing in high-value assets such as (vacation) houses, cars and boats, in the Netherlands or abroad. In 2024, HARC confiscated over half a million euros in cars and boats (as well as over EUR 400,000 in cash) (Netherlands Public Prosecution Service, 2025).\n- · Investing in businesses in the Netherlands or abroad, which may involve complex financial structures, or purchasing cryptocurrencies. Financial advisers may assist in establishing business structures that allow money from illegal and legal sources to be mixed (Unger et al., 2018; Pol, 2016).\n\nCash purchases are restricted in the Netherlands. For example, one cannot buy a house with cash, and transactions above EUR 10,000 should trigger a client investigation (Government of the Netherlands, n.d.-b). To tigthen the rules even further, a new law is in the making to lower the maximum allowed cash payment to EUR 3,000 (Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal, 2022). Nevertheless, Unger et al. (2018) find that high-value goods can still be acquired with cash by paying an additional 10-20 percent of the value to avoid the purchase being reported.\n\nCriminals find ways to creatively avoid the rules. This not only undermines the intent of the legislation but also enables a steady stream of illicit money to infiltrate the Dutch economy. The impact is significant: of EUR 13 billion in laundered money generated in the Netherlands in 2014, 53 percent, or EUR 6.9 billion, remains in the Netherlands. These funds are then laundered into the formal economy, frequently with the assistance of financial advisors (Unger, et al. 2018). Beyond the economic impact, the key point of concern is that crime money can be used to finance further crime and, by extension, undermines the rule of law and the democratic state.\n\n## 6 Adaptive criminal and corruption strategies to facilitate drug trafficking\n\n## 6.1 Trafficking and corruption strategies follow the path of least resistance\n\nTrafficking and corruption strategies are not static. An important insight from this study is that criminal and corrupt strategies used to facilitate drug trafficking are highly adaptive, multifaceted and change quickly in response to increased enforcement efforts (Interview of 5 April 2024). Critically, criminal activity will follow the path of least resistance (Costa et al., 2023). This means that when met with obstacles, illicit and corrupt activities will:\n\n- · move to different spaces and use different routes (Augustova and Suber 2023);\n- · become more creative and more difficult to detect (Ortiz 2021); and\u002For\n- · involve new actors and functions via corruption and bribes (Europol, 2023).\n\nThe underlying driver of this adaptability is the unchanging demand for drugs and the high profitability of the crime. This incentivises traffickers to adopt new strategies to overcome hurdles in supplying the demand. In one interview, a law enforcement stakeholder noted that both drug production and demand are rising, and with them, the profits to be made (interview of 16 July 2024). The falling price of cocaine is another signal of its ready availability (NL Times, 2025).\n\n## 6.2 Corruption strategies are adaptive\n\nAt the port of Rotterdam, increased political attention and resources to combat trafficking have led to enhanced detection systems and technology. These efforts have raised the risk of detection for traffickers, making the co-optation of public officials to override the stricter controls more appealing.\n\n## 6.2.1 Stronger detection systems increase the incentives for and risk of corruption\n\nThe unintended consequence of strengthened controls is that criminals become more reliant on inside help to facilitate trafficking (Staring et al., 2019). This is complex to measure. A study testing whether more effective detection and enforcement actors are more susceptible to corruption was unable to robustly confirm the hypothesis (Rovers and Moors, 2019). In addition, comparing the number of cases of corruption that facilitated drug trafficking over time can be misleading as not all cases are detected. Moreover, in an interview, one\n\nresearcher also highlighted that our knowledge of corruption comes from criminal investigation reports. Consequently, corruption that goes undetected remains a blind spot (interview of 12 April 2024).\n\nThe prevailing consensus nevertheless is that corruption risks in relation to drug trafficking are increasing. On the one hand, as the desk research highlights, this is because strengthened enforcement makes having an accomplice on the inside necessary. On the other hand, as one of stakeholder interview suggests, if everything works as it should, it is impossible to traffic drugs through the port. Conversely, when seizures are made, it indicates that corruption has played a part somewhere in the process. In line with this, Zürcher et al. (2024) identify bribery of law enforcement officers as the most significant drug-related corruption risk at the port. The FALCON project's examination of 19 border-corruption cases further highlights that corrupt actors are primarily motivated by the desire to secure illicit advantage or to conceal illegal activity (Paternoster et al., 2024).\n\n## 6.2.2 Corruption adapts to the adoption of new systems and processes\n\nWhile corruption may increase, it can also change: when systems become more efficient or digitised, criminal actors are also incentivised to change their corruption strategies. According to one law enforcement stakeholder, corruption has not increased, rather we are only now seeing the true extent of the problem, with corruption changing (interview of 4 April 2024). The person explained that border corruption used to mean bribing a single guard at a border crossing. Today, increasing efficiency, automation and digitalisation make that one person at the barrier irrelevant. In a port like Rotterdam, where everything is automated, corruption must evolve to target other officials, such as those with access to systems or information. 'If you make the process more complex, corruption changes' , and generates new vulnerabilities.\n\n## 6.2.3 Corruption risks profiles adapt to new control measures and shift among public officials\n\nTo overcome the bottlenecks in the port and facilitate the movement of drugs, criminal actors depend on insider knowledge of the logistical processes in the port. As controls are strengthened, including through automation, the corruption risk profiles of border staff also change. Criminal networks adapt by targeting officials with strategic knowledge and access. Customs officials are particularly important, as they monitor the import and export of goods and are key players in the fight against drug trafficking. As enforcement efforts increase, these officials become more vulnerable to corruption.\n\nIncreased awareness of this risk, partly due to reports of corruption cases, has prompted more efforts to protect customs officials from the influence of criminal organisations. For example, in 2013, a programme called Integere Haven brought the municipality, public prosecutor, police, customs, Deltalinqs\n\n(the port entrepreneurs' association) and the port authority together to promote integrity and professional behaviour in the port, amongst other things (Staring et al., 2019).\n\nAuthorities have developed stronger anti-corruption measures and reduced the discretionary power of those in high-risk positions, such as customs officials. As a result, bribing and co-opting people in these positions becomes less attractive to criminal networks (KPMG, 2021). But when barriers increase in one area, corruption risks may once again shift to a new group.\n\n## 6.2.4 Corruption morphs, blurring the lines between collusion, coercion and infiltration\n\nCorruption is functional and strategic - it helps criminal actors to solve problems and get things done. The nature of these corrupt engagements can take various forms, such as collusion, coercion and\u002For infiltration. Our research has found that as increased enforcement efforts raise incentives for corruption to facilitate trafficking, and given the relative power of criminal networks, the line between collusion and coercion can become blurred. If the promise of riches is ineffective in luring public officials, then threats and coercion can be used to increase pressure.\n\nCoercion puts officials in a lose-lose situation. If they refuse to cooperate, they may face threats from criminal networks; and if they comply with the criminal demands, they could be punished by the legal system for engaging in corruption. At the same time, officials can plausibly claim coercion even if they colluded willingly, which can complicate enforcement.\n\nThe issue is further complicated by infiltration, which collapses the boundary between public office and the criminal network. Collusion and coercion can result in public officials being co-opted. Infiltration takes this to a next level by planting members of the criminal network into public office positions.\n\nFigure 4: Corruption adapts in the face of changing enforcement.\n\n\u003C!-- image -->\n\n## 6.3 Trafficking strategies are equally adaptive\n\n## 6.3.1 Strengthened detection has impacted the number of drug seizures\n\nEfforts to combat drug trafficking at the port of Rotterdam have been intensified through enhanced detection and advanced technology. Now, for example, all shipping containers from Latin America are checked. Initially, stronger measures to counter drug trafficking led to more drug seizures (Port of Rotterdam Authority, 2021). However, in 2024 and 2025 the number of seizures dropped. Authorities equally attribute the decline to strengthened enforcement measures against drug trafficking. Similar patterns are emerging in the larger north-west European seaports (Customs Administration of the Netherlands, 2024; Appleby, 2024; European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction and Europol, 2024; Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime, 2024).\n\nAt first glace, one might think that the strengthened enforcement measures were successful in reducing drug trafficking. This could potentially be the case, but it may also be a premature conclusion. With consistently high demand for drugs on the market, drug trafficking is unlikely to decrease.\n\nAnother explanation may be that, as the risk of detection increased, criminal networks have adapted their trafficking strategies in response to the increased hurdles, resulting in fewer numbers of seizures with time.\n\nThere are two broad ways in which criminals may have adapted their strategies:\n\n- · Changing concealment strategies\n- · Changing modes of transport and switching trafficking routes altogether\n\n'The criminals always find the weakest spot.'\n\nInterview with a law enforcement stakeholder , 16 July 2024\n\n## 6.3.2 Changing concealment strategies\n\n## Evolving concealment methods\n\nConcealment strategies are becoming increasingly sophisticated. Recent drug seizures have seen cocaine uncovered in places more original than fruit shipments, for example, in shipments of scrap metal, wooden beams, engines, furniture, batches of spirits or timber. More intricate strategies have also been seen, including hiding drugs in the flaps of boxes of bananas, or embedding kilos of cocaine in thousands of individual boxes in a telescopic crane from South America (Netherlands Public Prosecution Service, 2025; Rotterdamse Haven Veilige Haven 2024).\n\nOne interviewer also spoke about cocaine being washed into clothes or mixed with coal or oil (interview of 16 July 2024). In a recent online interview, the head of the Seaport Police explains that liquid cocaine is especially difficult to detect:\n\nit cannot be identified by x-ray scanners or sniffer dogs, and confirming its presence can take up to two weeks in a lab (Dalby, 2024).\n\n## Spreading the risks with smaller but more shipments\n\nAlthough the total amount of cocaine seized has decreased at the port of Rotterdam, interestingly, the number of shipments intercepted has actually increased slightly. A possible explanation hints at another change in concealment strategies: trafficking networks are spreading the risk by smuggling smaller quantities in more shipments, in a strategy known as 'shrinkage' (Netherlands Public Prosecution Service, 2025; Minchin, 2025).\n\n## 6.3.3 Changing modes of transport and trafficking routes\n\n## Shifting modes of transport to avoid detection\n\nA new initiative at the port of Rotterdam seeks to make it more difficult for criminal networks to obtain the container reference codes needed to pick up containers (Europol, 2023). This initiative called the 'Chain of Trust' was developed by both government and industry actors to improve digital security of port logistics and reduce opportunities for fraud, particularly for truck-based transport (Vertrouwensketen, n.d.). 4 The aim is to ensure that the process of picking up import containers and transferring them onto trucks will be more closely monitored, so that only the authorised person is picking up the container.\n\nHowever pick-up via truck is not the only way that containers are collected and transported out of the port. One stakeholder suggested that, as truck transport is more closely monitored, traffickers potentially shift to trains. This is supported by an increase in the number of broken seals found around railway tracks (interview of 4 April 2024).\n\n## Rerouting trafficking to other Dutch ports\n\nAn increase in drug seizures at smaller ports in the Netherlands suggests the possibility that trafficking is being rerouted. It is unclear whether this links directly to increased enforcement measures in Rotterdam or is a separate phenomenon (Netherlands Public Prosecution Service, 2025; Van der Wiele, 2024).\n\n## International displacement of trafficking routes\n\nThe most significant adaptive strategy appears to be diverting drug trafficking to ports and transit points in other countries. As barriers increase in the northern ports of Antwerp, Rotterdam and Hamburg making these ports less attractive, trafficking routes are shifting towards southern points in France, Spain and Portugal, where drug seizures are increasing (Cavalari et al., 2025; Fernández, 2024).\n\ncoercion and\n\ninfiltration)\n\nCorruption\n\naims and\n\ntargets shift\n\nSimilarly, transit routes are shifting, with drugs destined for Europe being transported from Latin America through transit ports in North and West Africa (Cavalari et al., 2025).\n\nThis adaptation strategy underscores the importance of international cooperation on security and fighting crime (Staring et al., 2023).\n\nFigure 5: Strengthened enforcement also changes trafficking strategies.\n\n\u003C!-- image -->\n\n## 6.4 The problem with understanding hidden and complex corruption and crime strategies\n\nThe research highlights that drug trafficking is driven by supply and demand. As long as demand is not addressed, supply remains highly profitable. The consequences are significant. Increased barriers to drug trafficking in the port of Rotterdam have increased the need for inside help to facilitate trafficking (Staring et al., 2019). The dynamics of this corruption are complex: corruption risks rise, corruption goals and targets may change, and corruption practices may morph from collusion to coercion to infiltration. Meanwhile, traffickers adapt their strategies in terms of concealment methods and trafficking routes.\n\nThere are two overarching considerations. First, understanding the impact of stronger anti-trafficking measures on corruption and crime strategies is very complex . A discussion with a law enforcement stakeholder highlights the challenge of interpreting what it means when drug seizures are down: it could be a temporary drop, it could mean that fewer drugs are being shipped through the port of Rotterdam or that concealment methods have changed (interview of 16 July 2024). Fluctuations in the drug seizure figure alone are not an indicator of the scale of the drug trafficking problem, nor of the success of stronger enforcement efforts, as there may be many explanations at play (Staring et al., 2023). The same challenge applies when measuring corruption: the number of reported corruption cases does not accurately reflect the actual prevalence of corruption.\n\nStronger\n\nanti-corruption\n\nmeasures are\n\ndeveloped\n\nBoth drug trafficking and corruption are measured by detection, for instance, through changes in the number of drug seizures or public officials caught engaging in corruption. But the elephant in the room is that increasingly sophisticated criminal strategies can hide the real picture.\n\nIs a drop in seizure figures an indicator that trafficking has been rerouted? Or is the same volume still passing through the port with more sophisticated concealment and corruption strategies? Are adaptive strategies mutually exclusive or layered? Are they used in parallel, or is one activated only when the other has not proven feasible? Are trafficking routes really this elastic?\n\nThese questions underscore the need to continuously strengthen our ability to detect the 'red flags' of corruption and trafficking. Data-driven tools to characterise risk indicators are critical to understanding how crime and corruption strategies may be adapting (Abdou et al., 2024; Cascone et al., n.d.).\n\nThe second consideration is that both trafficking and corruption strategies are constantly evolving . This is often likened to a chess game: enforcement makes a move, the criminal networks adapt. But what seems to be emerging is more troubling. The unintended consequence of increasing barriers to drug trafficking - in a context where demand remains unchanged - is that it fuels increasingly sophisticated crime and corruption strategies that may have a greater negative impact on society. This is reflected in several key developments:\n\n- 1. The recent fall in the price of cocaine, attributed to a flooding of European markets. Seizures are increasingly considered as a cost of doing business - as pre-calculated loss (O'Keeffe, 2023).\n- 2. The hardening of crime and increasing violence associated with drug trafficking (Halsema, 2024).\n- 3. A shift in corruption practices, where the need to secure inside help can now incentivise coercion or deeper infiltration.\n- 4. The growing role of legitimate businesses and services in helping criminals evade detection and launder the proceeds of crime (Government of the Netherlands, n.d.-a).\n\nThese developments underscore the need for strategic foresight. Anticipating how crime may adapt in unexpected ways to changing anticorruption and anti-trafficking strategies is critical to the development of more robust enforcement efforts and the mitigation of negative impacts on society.\n\n## 6.5 Practitioner insights on how to deal with the adaptive nature of crime\n\nA key topic of discussion in stakeholder interviews was how best to respond to the adaptive nature of crime. These were the main ideas, complemented by further insights from desk research:\n\n- · The need for a holistic view of crime. As crime and corruption adapt, it is important to have a broad understanding of the problem. This includes recognising how smuggling can shift to other ports, utilise other modes of transport, or involve different actors. It also means a broader perception and understanding of corruption (interview of 26 March 2024).\n- · A focus on vulnerabilities. It is important to understand present and future vulnerabilities in logistics processes and strategic positions to increase port resilience rather than reacting to specific incidents. This can also improve efficiency and security (interviews of 4 April and 16 July 2024).\n- · Using data smartly. Understanding the flow of goods and profiling it in a way that can highlight anomalies is critical (interviews of 4 April, 5 April and 12 April 2024). At the same time, a focus on big data should not come at the expense of intuition, practical experience and evaluating past successes and failures (interview of 12 April 2024).\n- · Building partnerships. Cooperation, collaboration and information sharing among all public and private stakeholders and enforcement actors is crucial. Strengthening resilience to crime must be a shared goal. The complexity of the port means that security can only be achieved with multi-stakeholder partnerships, characterised by trust, communication and shared commitment to pursuing port-centric efforts (interviews of 4 April, 12 April and 16 July 2024).\n- · Strengthening strategic foresight. Technology is a double-edged sword - by the time it is adopted, it may already be outdated (interview of 5 April 2024). It is also important to look ahead and see that as one area of operations becomes more secure through enhanced processes, criminals may shift the target for corruption (interview of 4 April 2024).\n\n- · The need for robust IT security\u002Fcybersecurity. An additional issue to keep in mind is that technology and automation create new vulnerabilities, for example, through cybercrime (Staring et al., 2023). A recent case highlights the challenge. Drug traffickers hired a hacker to infiltrate the port IT network in Rotterdam and Antwerp to identify the optimal shipping containers for hiding contraband and their exact location (May and Holcova, 2023).\n\n## 7 Conclusion\n\nThis report examines the drivers and strategies of corruption as a facilitator of drug trafficking (with a focus on cocaine) in the port of Rotterdam. It shows that in the context of stronger anti-trafficking measures and unchanged demand for drugs, crime and corruption strategies follow the path of least resistance.\n\nCorruption is both strategic and functional. Social networks are built and nurtured strategically to facilitate corrupt exchanges. These networks are instrumental because trust and loyalty are important in hiding illegal behaviour. Corruption is diverse and complex, ranging from bribery and coercion to infiltration. Once established, corrupt relationships are long-lasting.\n\nA network view of corruption is critical to understanding the evolution of corrupt practices and strategies adopted to bribe public officials and launder the proceeds of crime. The money involved in these drug trafficking schemes is in the millions, so the strategies for laundering the proceeds are sophisticated. Strengthening financial investigations in drug trafficking investigations is therefore critical, as is the introduction of innovative measures such as nonconviction-based confiscation (Zürcher et al., 2024).\n\nOur research shows that both corruption and trafficking strategies are not static but rather adaptive. Increasing the barriers to drug trafficking can intensify corruption risks, change the aims and targets of corruption, and cause the characteristics of corruption to morph from collusion, to coercion or infiltration. Similarly, trafficking strategies adapt, from changing concealment strategies to changing modes of transport and using alternative trafficking routes. These in turn can increase corruption risks in other ports.\n\nConsequently, continuously strengthening a system of red flags with refined data to better characterise risk indicators is critical to enhancing efforts to curb drug trafficking. So too is leveraging anticipatory governance through strategic foresight and scenario building. Thinking about future risks helps us to implement more robust countermeasures today.\n\nThis is vital, as understanding how trafficking and corruption strategies adapt in response to increased enforcement efforts is complex, and the effects of adaptive crime strategies place ever-increasing costs to society.\n\n## Bibliography\n\nAbdou, Aly, Eszter Katona, Daniel Kofran, Viktoriia Poltoratskaya, Bence Toth, Dorina Vajda, Jacopo Costa, et al. 2024. 'Comprehensive List and Definitions of Corruption Risk Indicators.' FALCON. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.falcon-horizon. eu\u002Fwp-content\u002Fuploads\u002Fsites\u002F6\u002F2025\u002F06\u002FFALCON\\_D2.2\\_Comprehensive-listand-definitions-of-corruption-risk-indicators\\_public.pdf.\n\nAppleby, Peter. 2024. 'What's Behind Falling Cocaine Seizures in the Netherlands and Belgium?' InSight Crime (blog). 17 July 2024. https:\u002F\u002F insightcrime.org\u002Fnews\u002Fcocaine-seizures-europe-netherlands-belgium\u002F.\n\nAugustova, Karolina, and David Leone Suber. 2023. 'The Kurdish kaçakçı on the Iran-Turkey border: corruption and survival as EU sponsored countersmuggling effects.' Trends in Organized Crime 26 (1): 48-63. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi. org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs12117-023-09484-3.\n\nBaez-Camargo, Claudia, Jacopo Costa and Lucy Koechlin. 2023. 'Informal networks as investment: A qualitative analysis from Uganda and Tanzania.' Governance 36 (4): 1165-84. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1111\u002Fgove.12726.\n\nBaryal, Baryalai, Ghazi Patang and Sharafdin Sharaf. 2022. 'Preventing Corruption in the Customs of Afghanistan.' Integrated Journal for Research in Arts and Humanities 2 (6): 52-58. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.55544\u002Fijrah.2.6.6.\n\nBasel Institute on Governance. 2024. 'Informal Networks and Anti- Corruption' . Quick Guide 23. Basel Institute on Governance. Originally published in 2022 and updated in 2024. https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fpublications\u002Fquick-guide23-informal-networks-and-anti-corruption.\n\nBolsius, Roel. 2022. 'Kabinet wil betalingsverkeer beter laten monitoren, Kamer heeft vragen.' NOS news. 12 December 2022. https:\u002F\u002Fnos.nl\u002Fartikel\u002F2456142kabinet-wil-betalingsverkeer-beter-laten-monitoren-kamer-heeft-vragen.\n\nBooty, Natasha, and David Bamford. 2025. 'Jos Leijdekkers: Wanted Dutch drug-smuggler 'is in Sierra Leone' .' BBC News, 25 January 2025. https:\u002F\u002Fwww. bbc.com\u002Fnews\u002Farticles\u002Fcn4z79eedvpo.\n\nCascone, Georgia, Caterina Paternoster, Michele Riccardi, Bence Tóth, Claudia Baez-Camargo and Jacopo Costa. n.d. 'High-Level Corruption: an Analysis of Schemes, Costs and of Policy Recommendations. Policy Brief of Project FALCON.' Milan: Transcrime - Joint Research Centre on Innovation and Crime. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.falcon-horizon.eu\u002Fwp-content\u002Fuploads\u002F sites\u002F6\u002F2025\u002F03\u002F2025\\_03\\_10-FALCON-Policy-Brief\\_final.pdf.\n\nCavalari, Marina, Alicia Florez, Juliana Manjarrés and Christopher Newton. 2025. 'InSight Crime's 2024 Cocaine Seizure Round-Up.' InSight Crime (blog). 7 May 2025. http:\u002F\u002Finsightcrime.org\u002Fnews\u002Finsight-crimes-2024-cocaine-seizureround-up\u002F.\n\nChalendard, Cyril, Ana M Fernandes, Gael Raballand, and Bob Rijkers. 2023. 'Corruption in Customs.' The Quarterly Journal of Economics 138 (1): 575-636. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1093\u002Fqje\u002Fqjac032.\n\nChêne, Marie. 2018. 'Corruption at Borders.' Anti-Corruption Helpdesk Brief. Knowledge Hub. https:\u002F\u002Fknowledgehub.transparency.org\u002Fassets\u002Fuploads\u002F helpdesk\u002FCorruption-at-borders-2018.pdf.\n\nCosta, Jacopo. 2017. 'Networks and illicit associations in corrupt exchanges: representing a gelatinous system in Italy.' Global Crime 18 (4): 353-74. https:\u002F\u002F doi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F17440572.2017.1332594.\n\n--- . 2022. 'Structures, functions and flows of IWT: deconstructing a criminal network between East Africa and Southeast Asia.' Crime, Law and Social Change 77 (5): 577-601. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs10611-021-10009-8.\n\nCosta, Jacopo, Claudia Baez-Camargo, Saba Kassa and Robert Lugolobi. 2023. 'The role of informal networks in promoting illegal wildlife trade: a qualitative analysis from Uganda.' Trends in Organized Crime 26 (4): 397-419. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs12117-021-09433-y.\n\nCosta, Jacopo, Noémi Jäger and Claudia Baez Camargo. 2024. 'AntiCorruption Legislative Measures and International Policy Landscape.' FALCON. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.falcon-horizon.eu\u002Fwp-content\u002Fuploads\u002Fsites\u002F6\u002F2025\u002F06\u002F FALCON\\_D2.5\\_Anti-corruption-legislative-measures-and-international-policy-landscape\\_public.pdf.\n\nCustoms Administration of the Netherlands. 2024. 'Barrières in de havens helpen: Douane onderschept minder drugs in eerste halfjaar 2024 Nieuwsbericht - Over de Douane.' Nieuwsbericht. Ministerie van Financiën. 9 July 2024. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.overdedouane.nl\u002Factueel\u002Fnieuws\u002F2024\u002F07\u002F halfjaarcijfers-2024\u002Fhalfjaarcijfers-2024.\n\n--- . n.d.-a. 'Samenwerking in HARC - Verdovende middelen - Over de Douane.' Onderwerp. Ministerie van Financiën. Accessed 17 June 2025. https:\u002F\u002F www.overdedouane.nl\u002Fonderwerpen\u002Fverdovende-middelen\u002Fsamenwerken-bijaanpak\u002Fsamenwerking-in-harc.\n\n--- . n.d.-b. 'Programma Weerbare Haven Terminals in strijd tegen ondermijning - Werk van de Douane - Over de Douane.' Webpagina. Ministerie van Financiën. Accessed 17 June 2025. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.overdedouane.nl\u002Fwerkdouane\u002Fsamenwerkingspartners\u002Fsamenwerkingsverbanden\u002Fweerbare-havenspps.\n\nDalby, Chris. 2024. 'Liquid Cocaine and Liquid Meth - The New Winning Strategy for Drug Traffickers.' Seasons of Crime (blog). 21 May 2024. https:\u002F\u002F www.seasonsofcrime.com\u002Fp\u002Fliquid-cocaine-and-liquid-meth-the.\n\nDirksen, Vanessa, Wouter van der Leest and Irma Vermeulen. 2021. 'Netwerken van netwerken in transit: De doorvoer van cocaine via Nederland.'\n\nTijdschrift voor Criminologie 63 (2): 129-45.\n\nEski, Y. 2019. 'Tussen wal en schip: Etnografische inzichten in lokale havenbeveiliging.' In Criminaliteit en veiligheid in mainports, 45:52-68. 2019. WODC. https:\u002F\u002Frepository.wodc.nl\u002Fhandle\u002F20.500.12832\u002F814.\n\nEski, Yarin, and Romano Buijt. 2017. 'Dockers in Drugs: Policing the Illegal Drug Trade and Port Employee Corruption in the Port of Rotterdam.' Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice 11 (4): 371-86. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1093\u002Fpolice\u002F paw044.\n\nEuropean Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction and Europol. 2024. 'EU Drug Markets Analysis 2024: Key insights for policy and practice.' https:\u002F\u002Fwww.emcdda.europa.eu\u002Fpublications\u002Feu-drug-markets\u002Fanalysis-keyinsights-policy-and-practice\\_en.\n\nEuropol. 2023. 'Criminal networks in EU ports. Risks and challenges for law enforcement.' Joint Report of Europol and the Security Steering Committee of the Ports of Antwerp, Hamburg\u002FBremerhaven and Rotterdam. https:\u002F\u002Fwww. europol.europa.eu\u002Fcms\u002Fsites\u002Fdefault\u002Ffiles\u002Fdocuments\u002FEuropol\\_Joint-report\\_ Criminal%20networks%20in%20EU%20ports\\_Public\\_version.pdf.\n\n--- . 2024. 'Decoding the EU's Most Threatening Criminal Networks.' Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Accessed 17 June 2025. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.europol.europa.eu\u002Fcms\u002Fsites\u002Fdefault\u002Ffiles\u002Fdocuments\u002F Europol%20report%20on%20Decoding%20the%20EU-s%20most%20 threatening%20criminal%20networks.pdf.\n\nFernández, Beatriz Vicent. 2024. 'Spain Reclaims Position as Cocaine Gateway to Europe.' InSight Crime (blog). 30 October 2024. http:\u002F\u002Finsightcrime. org\u002Fnews\u002Fspain-reclaims-position-as-cocaine-gateway-to-europe\u002F.\n\nGlobal Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime. 2024. 'European Drug Trends Monitor' . Issue No. 1. https:\u002F\u002Fglobalinitiative.net\u002Fwp-content\u002F uploads\u002F2024\u002F12\u002FObservatory-of-Organized-Crime-in-Europe-European-DrugTrends-Monitor-Issue-1-GI-TOC-December-2024.v4.pdf.\n\nGovernment of the Netherlands. 2021. 'Prinsjesdag 2021: investeren in stabiliteit van de rechtsstaat.' Nieuwsbericht. Ministerie van Algemene Zaken. 21 September 2021. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.rijksoverheid.nl\u002Factueel\u002Fnieuws\u002F2021\u002F09\u002F21\u002F prinsjesdag-2021-investeren-in-stabiliteit-van-de-rechtsstaat.\n\n--- . 2024. 'Douane moet gegevens kunnen delen in strijd tegen ondermijnende criminaliteit - Nieuwsbericht - Rijksoverheid.nl.' Nieuwsbericht. Ministerie van Algemene Zaken. 28 March 2024. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.rijksoverheid.nl\u002F actueel\u002Fnieuws\u002F2024\u002F03\u002F28\u002Fdouane-moet-gegevens-kunnen-delen-in-strijdtegen-ondermijnende-criminaliteit.\n\n--- . n.d.-a. 'Ondermijnende criminaliteit - Ondermijning - Rijksoverheid.nl' . Onderwerp. Ministerie van Algemene Zaken. Accessed 17 June 2025. https:\u002F\u002F www.rijksoverheid.nl\u002Fonderwerpen\u002Fondermijning\u002Fondermijnende-criminaliteit.\n\n- --- . n.d.-b. 'Welk bedrag mag ik maximaal contant betalen? - Rijksoverheid. nl. ' Onderwerp. Ministerie van Algemene Zaken. Accessed 18 June 2025. https:\u002F\u002F www.rijksoverheid.nl\u002Fonderwerpen\u002Fbetalingsverkeer\u002Fvraag-en-antwoord\u002F grote-aankopen-met-contant-geld.\n\nHalsema, Femke. 2024. 'As the mayor of Amsterdam, I can see the Netherlands risks becoming a narco-state.' The Guardian, 5 January 2024, sec. Opinion. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.theguardian.com\u002Fcommentisfree\u002F2024\u002Fjan\u002F05\u002Famsterdamnetherlands-drugs-policy-trade.\n\nHeld, Douwe den. 2024. 'Pioneering Dutch Cocaine Trafficker Sentenced to Life in Prison.' InSight Crime (blog). 6 March 2024. http:\u002F\u002Finsightcrime.org\u002Fnews\u002F pioneering-dutch-cocaine-trafficker-sentenced-to-life-in-prison\u002F.\n\nHolligan, Anna. 2024. 'Dutch mega-trial exposes brutal gangland underworld.' BBC News, 27 February 2024. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.bbc.com\u002Fnews\u002Fworldeurope-68416287.\n\nJancsics, David. 2019. 'Border Corruption.' Public Integrity 21 (4): 406-19. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F10999922.2019.1581043.\n\n--- . 2020. 'Corruption in border administration.' In Handbook on Corruption, Ethics and Integrity in Public Administration, 215-25. Edward Elgar Publishing. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.elgaronline.com\u002Fedcollchap\u002F edcoll\u002F9781789900903\u002F9781789900903.00023.xml.\n\n--- . 2021. 'Law enforcement corruption along the U.S. borders.' Security Journal 34 (1): 26-46. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1057\u002Fs41284-019-00203-8.\n\nJancsics, David, and Jacopo Costa. 2024. 'Organizational forms of corruption networks: the Odebrecht-Toledo case.' International Public Management Journal 27 (4): 559-82. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F10967494.2023.2260368.\n\nKPMG. 2021. 'De beheersing van corruptierisico's door de Douane in de Rotterdamse haven.' Amstelveen: KPMG. https:\u002F\u002Fopen.overheid.nl\u002Fdocumenten\u002F ronl-aa4c30d2-7240-44ca-b4b5-c0417ff80b09\u002Fpdf.\n\nMadarie, Renushka, and Edwin Kruisbergen. 2019. 'Transitcriminaliteit en logistieke knooppunten in Nederland.' In Criminaliteit En Veiligheid in Mainports , 45:29-51. 2019. Boom Juridisch. https:\u002F\u002Frepository.wodc.nl\u002F handle\u002F20.500.12832\u002F814.\n\nMay, Paul, and Pavla Holcova. 2023. 'Inside Job: How a Hacker Helped Cocaine Traffickers Infiltrate Europe's Biggest Ports.' OCCRP (blog). 7 November 2023. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.occrp.org\u002Fen\u002Fproject\u002Fnarcofiles-the-new-criminal-order\u002F inside-job-how-a-hacker-helped-cocaine-traffickers-infiltrate-europes-biggestports.\n\nMcLinden, Gerard, and Amer Zafar Durrani. 2013. 'Corruption in Customs.' World Customs Journal 7 (2): 3-10. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.55596\u002F001c.92957.\n\nMinchin, Joshua. 2025. 'Volume of cocaine seized in Belgium and Netherlands plummets.' Lloyd's List, 24 January 2025, sec. Containers. https:\u002F\u002Fwww. lloydslist.com\u002FLL1152340\u002FVolume-of-cocaine-seized-in-Belgium-andNetherlands-plummets.\n\nNelen, Hans, and Emile Kolthoff. 2017. 'Georganiseerde Criminaliteit En Integriteit van Rechtshandhavingsorganisaties.' WODC, Ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie. https:\u002F\u002Frepository.wodc.nl\u002Fbitstream\u002F handle\u002F20.500.12832\u002F2307\u002F2748\\_Volledige\\_Tekst\\_tcm28-280189. pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y.\n\nNetherlands Public Prosecution Service. 2023. 'Grootste cocaïnevangst ooit in Nederland - Nieuwsbericht - Openbaar Ministerie.' Nieuwsbericht. Ministerie van Justitie en Veiligheid. 10 August 2023. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.om.nl\u002Factueel\u002F nieuws\u002F2023\u002F08\u002F10\u002Fgrootste-vangst-ooit-in-rotterdamse-haven-8000-kilo-terwaarde-van-600-miljoen-euro.\n\n---. 2024a. 'Gevangenisstraffen geëist voor cocaïnesmokkel met behulp van informatie Douane - Nieuwsbericht - Openbaar Ministerie.' Nieuwsbericht. Ministerie van Justitie en Veiligheid. 14 May 2024. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.om.nl\u002Factueel\u002F nieuws\u002F2024\u002F05\u002F14\u002Fgevangenisstraffen-geeist-voor-cocainesmokkel-metbehulp-van-informatie-douane.\n\n---. 2024b. '2023: HARC-team onderschept ruim 45.000 kilo cocaine.' Nieuwsbericht. Ministerie van Justitie en Veiligheid. 17 January 2024. https:\u002F\u002F www.om.nl\u002Factueel\u002Fnieuws\u002F2024\u002F01\u002F15\u002F2023-harc-team-onderschept-ruim45.000-kilo-cocaine.\n\n---. 2025. '2024: Minder drugs onderschept in haven Rotterdam, aantal aangetroffen kilo's in havens Zeeland-West-Brabant nam iets toe.' Nieuwsbericht. Ministerie van Justitie en Veiligheid. 23 January 2025. https:\u002F\u002F www.om.nl\u002Factueel\u002Fnieuws\u002F2025\u002F01\u002F21\u002F2024-minder-drugs-onderschept-inhaven-rotterdam-aantal-aangetroffen-kilos-in-havens-zeeland-west-brabantnam-iets-toe.\n\n---. n.d. 'HARC-team.' Onderwerp. Ministerie van Justitie en Veiligheid. Accessed 17 June 2025. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.om.nl\u002Fonderwerpen\u002Fharc-team.\n\nNistotskaya, Marina, Emanuel Wittberg, Sławomir Śnieżko, Daniel Kofran, Viktoriia Poltoratskaya, Bence Toth and Jacopo Costa. 2024.\n\n'Comprehensive report on the cost of corruption in the EU' . FALCON. https:\u002F\u002F www.falcon-horizon.eu\u002Fwp-content\u002Fuploads\u002Fsites\u002F6\u002F2025\u002F06\u002FFALCON\\_D2.3\\_ Comprehensive-report-on-the-cost-of-corruption-in-the-EU\\_public.pdf.\n\nNL Times. 2024a. 'Wanted criminal 'Bolle Jos' sentenced to 24 years in prison.' 26 June 2024. https:\u002F\u002Fnltimes.nl\u002F2024\u002F06\u002F26\u002Fwanted-criminal-bolle-jossentenced-24-years-prison.\n\n---. 2024b. 'Greek 'underworld banker' faces 10 years in prison for organised crime allegations | NL Times.' 22 August 2024. https:\u002F\u002Fnltimes.nl\u002F2024\u002F08\u002F22\u002F greek-underworld-banker-faces-10-years-prison-organized-crime-allegations.\n\n---. 2025. 'Cocaine smuggling in Netherlands soars as new tactics bypass detection systems.' 29 March 2025. https:\u002F\u002Fnltimes.nl\u002F2025\u002F03\u002F29\u002Fcocainesmuggling-netherlands-soars-new-tactics-bypass-detection-systems.\n\nO'Keeffe, Cormac. 2023. 'Drug cartels' model is to 'flood Europe' with tonnes of cocaine.' Irish Examiner , 20 December 2023, sec. IE-Main\u002FNEWS. https:\u002F\u002F www.irishexaminer.com\u002Fnews\u002Farid-41294608.html.\n\nOrtiz, Turenna Ramirez. 2021. 'Bribery and Corruption at the Border: Mexico: An Outstanding Challenge to Be Overcome by the Mexican Government.' Global Trade and Customs Journal 16 (9). https:\u002F\u002Fkluwerlawonline.com\u002Fapi\u002FProduct\u002F CitationPDFURL?file=Journals\\GTCJ\\GTCJ2021048.pdf.\n\nPaternoster, Caterina, Michele Riccardi, Georgia Cascone, Matteo Anastasio, Giovanni Nicolazzo, Francesco Venturini, Jacopo Costa, Viktoriia Poltoratskaya and Bence Toth. 2024. 'Facilitators, Schemes, Interlinks and Modi Operandi of Corruption.' FALCON.\n\nPol, Wim van de. 2016. 'Wie is wie in het Douane-dossier?' Crimesite (blog). 10 December 2016. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.crimesite.nl\u002Fis-douane-dossier\u002F.\n\nPort of Rotterdam Authority. 2021. 'Annual Report 2021.' https:\u002F\u002Freporting. portofrotterdam.com\u002Fdownloads.\n\n---. 2022. 'Wie doet wat voor een veilige haven?' 22 March 2022. https:\u002F\u002F www.portofrotterdam.com\u002Fnl\u002Fonline-beleven\u002Fhavenkrant\u002Foverzicht\u002Fwie-doetwat-voor-een-veilige-haven.\n\n---. n.d.-a. 'Purpose, mission, vision and strategy' . Accessed 17 June 2025. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.portofrotterdam.com\u002Fen\u002Fabout-port-authority\u002Fpurpose-missionvision-and-strategy.\n\n---. n.d.-b. 'Facts and figures: The port of Rotterdam in numbers' . Accessed 17 June 2025. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.portofrotterdam.com\u002Fen\u002Fexperience-online\u002Ffacts-andfigures.\n\nRoks, Robby, Lieselot Bisschop and Richard Staring. 2021. 'Getting a foot in the door. Spaces of cocaine trafficking in the Port of Rotterdam.' Trends in Organized Crime 24 (2): 171-88. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs12117-020-09394-8.\n\nRotterdamse Haven Veilige Haven. 2024. 'Let extra op reefers en onlogische goederen.' Veilige Haven (blog). 22 October 2024. https:\u002F\u002Fwww. rotterdamsehavenveiligehaven.nl\u002Fpost\u002Flet-extra-op-reefers-en-onlogischegoederen.\n\n---. n.d. 'Voorkom - Dat je zélf betrokken raakt.' Accessed 17 June 2025. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.rotterdamsehavenveiligehaven.nl\u002Fvoorkomen.\n\nRovers, G, and J.A. Moors. 2019. 'Onderzoeksproject: Als de Prooi de Jager Pakt. Toelichting Op Het Besluit van de Onderzoekers Om Geen Onderzoeksrapport Te Publiceren.' Experts in Media en Maatschappij (EMMA), Bureau voor Toegepast Veiligheidsonderzoek (BTVO). https:\u002F\u002F www.eerstekamer.nl\u002Foverig\u002F20200611\u002Fals\\_de\\_prooi\\_de\\_jager\\_pakt\\_bijlage\u002F document.\n\nSergi, Anna. 2020. The Port-Crime Interface A Report on Organised Crime and Corruption in Seaports . University of Essex. https:\u002F\u002Frepository.essex. ac.uk\u002F30303\u002F.\n\nSonnemans, Sander. 2017. 'Corrupte douanier Gerrit G. voor 14 jaar de cel in.' AD.nl , 4 July 2017, sec. Binnenland. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.ad.nl\u002Fbinnenland\u002Fcorruptedouanier-gerrit-g-voor-14-jaar-de-cel-in~a8f5c063\u002F.\n\nSpapens, Antonius, Manja Abraham, Bram van Dijk and Daniel Hofstra. 2021. '25 Years of Tackling Large-Scale Drug Crime in the Netherlands.' CIROC Newsletter , 2021.\n\nStaring, Richard. 2021. 'Antwerp and Rotterdam: A Comparative Analysis of the Import and Distribution of Cocaine in Two European Port Cities' . CIROC Newsletter , October 2021 (3): 1-2.\n\nStaring, Richard, Lieselot Bisschop, Robby Roks, Elisabeth Brein and Henk van de Bunt. 2019. 'Drugscriminaliteit in de Rotterdamse haven: aard en aanpak van het fenomeen.' May. https:\u002F\u002Frepub.eur.nl\u002Fpub\u002F116670.\n\n---. 2023. 'Drug Crime and the Port of Rotterdam: About the Phenomenon and Its Approach.' In Organized Crime in the 21st Century , edited by Hans Nelen and Dina Siegel, 43-61. Springer International Publishing AG. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi. org\u002F10.1007\u002F978-3-031-21576-6.\n\nTrimbos Instituut. 2025. 'Nationale Drug Monitor 2025: 16.3 Handel, inbeslagnames en ontmanteling.' https:\u002F\u002Fwww.nationaledrugmonitor.nl\u002Fillegalehandel-bezit-en-productie-smokkel-routes-en-samenwerkingsverbanden\u002F.\n\nTweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal. 2022. Wetsvoorstel: Wet plan van aanpak witwassen (Draft Bill: Money Laundering Action Plan Act). Bill no. 36228, 1928. Submitted by S.A.M. Kaag, Minister of Finance. October 21, 2022. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.tweedekamer.nl\u002Fkamerstukken\u002Fwetsvoorstellen\u002F detail?cfg=wetsvoorsteldetails&qry=wetsvoorstel%3A36228.\n\nUnger, Brigitte, Joras Ferwerda, Bojken Gjoleka, Alexander van Saase, Brigitte Slot and Linette de Swart. 2018. 'Aard en omvang van criminele bestedingen: Eindrapportage.' WODC. https:\u002F\u002Fbrigitteunger.nl\u002Fwp-content\u002F uploads\u002F2019\u002F06\u002FAard-en-omvang-van-criminele-bestedingen.pdf.\n\nVan der Wiele, Door. 2024. ''Zo ziet het eruit, zo ruikt het en zo is het verstopt' .' entrum voor Criminaliteitspreventie (blog). 11 December 2024. https:\u002F\u002Fccvsecondant.nl\u002Fplatform\u002Farticle\u002Fzo-ziet-het-eruit-zo-ruikt-het-en-zo-is-hetverstopt.\n\nVan Gestel, Barbra. 2019. 'Boekrecensie: Drugssmokkelaars en de deur in de haven.' In Criminaliteit En Veiligheid in Mainports , 45:91-97. 2019. WODC. https:\u002F\u002F repository.wodc.nl\u002Fhandle\u002F20.500.12832\u002F814.\n\nVertrouwensketen. n.d. 'Samen maken we onze logistiek veiliger.' Accessed 17 June 2025. https:\u002F\u002Fvertrouwensketen.nl\u002F.\n\nZürcher, Emma, Mafalda Pardal, Iris Leussink and Stijn Hoorens. 2024. 'Drugsgerelateerde corruptive op Schiphol en in de Rotterdamse haven [Drugrelated corruption at Schiphol Airport and the Port of Rotterdam].' RAND Europe. https:\u002F\u002Fwww.rand.org\u002Fpubs\u002Fresearch\\_reports\u002FRRA2870-1.html.\n\n## Judicial cases\n\n| | Judgment of the Rotterdam District Court in Case number ROT 10\u002F750163-14, 4 July 2017. |\n|------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2017:5125 | Summary: A customs officer in the port of Rotterdam is accused of accepting bribes that facilitated the import of large quantities of cocaine, as well as laundering the money earned from this. https:\u002F\u002Fuitspraken.rechtspraak.nl\u002Fdetails?id=ECLI:NL:RBROT:2017:5125&showbut- |\n| 2019:1103 | 2019. Summary: A customs official is accused of accepting bribes to facilitate drugs traffick- ing and associated money laundering and was sentenced to two years in prison. https:\u002F\u002Fuitspraken.rechtspraak.nl\u002Fdetails?id=ECLI:NL:RBROT:2019:1103&showbut- |\n| 2020:918 | Summary: The defendant was convicted of, among other things, bribing a customs official, conspiracy to import narcotics and preparatory acts in that regard, as well as laundering large sums of money, and was sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment. https:\u002F\u002Fuitspraken.rechtspraak.nl\u002Fdetails?id=ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2020:918&showbut- ton=true&keyword=corruptie%2Brotterdam%2Bhaven,douane,witwassen&idx=10 |\n| 2020:12597 | Summary: Customs official convicted of accepting bribes, breaching official secrecy and money laundering in connection with drug trafficking. https:\u002F\u002Fuitspraken.rechtspraak.nl\u002Fdetails?id=ECLI:NL:RBROT:2020:12597&showbut- ton=true&keyword=corruptie%2Brotterdam%2Bhaven,douane,witwassen&idx=9 |\n| 2020:1295 | Summary: The defendant (working for the tax office) was convicted for participating in a criminal organisation that was involved in importing cocaine via the port of Rotter- dam and related offences such as extortion, money laundering and bribery, and was sentenced to nine years' imprisonment. https:\u002F\u002Fuitspraken.rechtspraak.nl\u002Fdetails?id=ECLI:NL:RBROT:2020:1295&showbut- |\n| | Judgment of the Rotterdam District Court in Case number 10\u002F750306-18, 21 June 2022. Summary: Customs official is convicted of money laundering. https:\u002F\u002Fuitspraken.rechtspraak.nl\u002Fdetails?id=ECLI:NL:RBROT:2022:5588&showbut- |\n| 2022:5588 | ton=true&keyword=corruptie%2Brotterdam%2Bhaven,douane,witwassen&idx=8 |\n\n## Annex: Overview of stakeholder interviews\n\n| # | Type of stakeholder | Date |\n|-----|-----------------------|---------------|\n| 1 | Academia\u002Fresearcher | 26 March 2024 |\n| 2 | Law enforcement | 4 April 2024 |\n| 3 | Academia\u002Fresearcher | 5 April 2024 |\n| 4 | Academia\u002Fresearcher | 12 April 2024 |\n| 5 | Law enforcement | 12 July 2024 |","2025-09-11T10:05:18.000Z","2026-06-02T14:16:22.000Z","This Working Paper examines how corruption facilitates drug trafficking\n(specifically cocaine) through the port of Rotterdam, looking at the underlying\ndrivers and strategies involved. Legal trade routes and commercial ports are\nespecially attractive because of the high volumes of cargo, which make it\npossible to conceal illicit cargo under licit cargo. The spatial complexity of the\nport of Rotterdam also makes it difficult to fully secure it against criminal activity.\n\nDigging deeper into the facilitating factors of trafficking, the paper finds that,\nparadoxically, a main driver of rising border corruption is the increased political\nattention on and resources dedicated to fighting trafficking. Desk research and\nstakeholder interviews highlight that as authorities deploy new technology\nto improve detection, traffickers face more obstacles to operating effectively.\nHaving someone on the inside then becomes increasingly important (Staring\net al., 2019). So, an unintended but important consequence of the strengthened\nfight against drug trafficking is that corruption becomes even more essential for\nthe operational success of organised crime networks.\n\nThis study focuses specifically on the role of customs. Tasked with monitoring\nthe import and export of goods, customs officers are important actors in the\nfight against drug trafficking. However, their role also makes them vulnerable:\nthey have crucial knowledge on processes and procedures, access to systems\nand discretionary power that can be exploited by criminals (KPMG, 2021).\n\nThe desk research shows that corruption is used strategically to circumvent two\nimportant bottlenecks: the container screening and security as cargo enters the\nport, and the exit of drugs from the port (Staring et al., 2019). Traffickers may\nseek to obtain key information or direct assistance from customs officers.\n\nThese corrupt relationships and the emerging networks between members of\ncrime groups and the customs officials are diverse. Some relationships can be\ncharacterised by collusion, where customs officials offer their services or are\npersuaded to cooperate. This collusion may be opportunistic or targeted. Other\nrelationships can be characterised by coercion. Customs officials may be lured\nby financial reward, but this is accompanied by intimidation or the threat of\nviolence to ensure that the officer cooperates and continues to cooperate.\nOur research highlights that the boundary between collusion and coercion is\noften blurred.\n\nBeyond collusion and coercion, we also see infiltration, which crosses the\nboundaries between the criminal, public and private. What emerges is less a\nmatter of individual corruption and more akin to regulatory capture, where the\npublic office position is held by a member of the criminal network.\n\nThe review of the judicial cases shows that bribes involved in these schemes\ncan amount to millions. To hide and use the illicit gains, traffickers rely on money\nlaundering, disguising its source as legitimate. They often enlist the help of family\nand friends, a trusted inner circle or professional specialists. They may also hide\ncash at home or invest it in assets and businesses in the Netherlands or abroad.\n\nA key finding of our research is that the criminal and corruption strategies used\nto facilitate drug trafficking are highly adaptive. The underlying driver of this\nadaptability is the unchanging demand for drugs and high profitability of the\ncrime. This pushes traffickers to adopt new strategies to overcome hurdles in\nsupplying the demand.\n\nCorruption strategies adapt in response to new enforcement measures. When\ncontrol systems are changed and\u002For strengthened, corruption strategies evolve\nalongside them. This research identifies some key patterns:\n\n- Stronger detection efforts increase the incentives for corruption.\n- Evolving systems encourage a similar shift in corruption strategies.\n- Anti-corruption and anti-trafficking measures may change the profile of those most vulnerable to being co-opted.\n- The characteristics of corruption can also evolve, from collusion to coercion, to full infiltration of institutions and systems – with blurred lines in between.\n\nTrafficking strategies are similarly adaptive. There have been increased efforts\nby the port to combat trafficking through enhanced detection and technology.\nThis was initially reflected by increased drug seizures. But since 2024, drugs\nseizures have declined. The research findings provide an explanation for this:\nAs detection strengthens, more drug seizures are made. But what may happen,\ntoo, is a response to these new measures. As the risk of detection increases,\ncriminals may adapt their trafficking strategies to overcome the additional\nhurdles, including:\n\n- changing concealment strategies; and\n- changing modes of transport and trafficking routes, including to ports outside of the Netherlands.\n\nThese developments highlight the complexity in understanding the impact of\nstronger anti-trafficking measures on both corruption and trafficking strategies.\nTrafficking and corruption are typically measured by detection, for example,\nby changes in the volume of drug seizures or the number of public officials\ncaught engaging in corruption. But the elephant in the room is that increasingly\nsophisticated criminal strategies can hide what is really happening. This\nunderscores the need to continuously strengthen our ability to recognise “red\nflags” of corruption and trafficking. Data-driven tools and refined risk indicators\nare critical for understanding how crime and corruption strategies are changing.\n\nThe evolving nature of criminal strategies is often likened to a game of chess:\nenforcement makes a move, and criminal networks adapt. But what now seems\nto be emerging is more troubling. When barriers to drug trafficking increase\nwhile demand remains unchanged, crime and corruption strategies adapt\nin ways that can deepen their impact on society, leading for example to the\nhardening of crime and associated violence.\n\nThis makes anticipating how crime may adapt to changing anti-corruption and\nanti-trafficking strategies critical. Improved foresight and scenario-building\ncapacities will be vital in order to develop more robust enforcement efforts\nagainst drug trafficking and mitigate the negative impact on society.\n\nA holistic approach is essential. Addressing corruption as a facilitator of drug\ntrafficking requires a broad view of crime that focuses on understanding\nvulnerabilities, leveraging data and harnessing collaboration. The risk of\ntrafficking routes changing are high, therefore, we must use every tool at our\ndisposal to ensure effective and sustainable enforcement efforts.","Drivers, strategies and implications","\u002Fresources\u002Fpublications\u002Fwp-58",{"id":428,"slug":429,"title":430,"status":6,"nid":431,"year":16,"body":432,"external":24,"topic":433,"language":15,"type":434,"date_published":435,"image":436,"citation":14,"publisher":85,"link_internal":437,"link_external":438,"authors":442,"countries":445,"tags":446,"pdf":451,"topics":453,"featured":24,"languages":7,"summary":7,"programme":7,"area":7,"websites":7,"pdf_text":7,"sort":7,"user_created":48,"date_created":454,"user_updated":49,"date_updated":455,"main_points":7,"short_version":7,"subtitle":7,"link":456},2418,"anti-corruption-collective-action-g20b20-process-charting-progress-2020-2024","Anti-corruption Collective Action in the G20\u002FB20 process: Charting progress 2020–2024",2845,"This report analyses the approaches of the previous five B20 presidencies to addressing anti-corruption Collective Action. It captures lessons learned and provides recommendations for future B20\u002FG20 cycles. It is primarily intended for upcoming B20\u002FG20 presidencies, B20 Integrity & Compliance Task Force members and organisations engaging with the B20\u002FG20.\n\n### About this report\n\nYou may share or republish this report under a Creative Commons \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fcreativecommons.org\u002Flicenses\u002Fby-nc-nd\u002F4.0\u002Fdeed.en\">CC BY-NC-ND 4.0\u003C\u002Fa> licence.\n\nSuggested citation: Scarlet Wannenwetsch. 2025. 'Anti-corruption Collective Action in the G20\u002FB20 process: Charting progress 2020–2024.' Basel Institute on Governance.\n\nThe report was funded by the Siemens Integrity Initiative, which supports organisations in the fight against corruption and fraud through Collective Action, education and training. The views and opinions expressed in this report are those of the author and do not reflect the position of Siemens or the Siemens Integrity Initiative.",[21,181],[82],"2025-08-29","https:\u002F\u002Fjam.baselgovernance.org\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002F7f5abe00-7eca-48f7-a600-067f05b7871a?width=600&height=840",[],[439],{"url":440,"caption":441},"https:\u002F\u002Fcollective-action.com\u002Fexplore\u002Fpublications\u002F1820"," Read related baseline report",[443],{"authors_id":444},{"id":94,"name":95},[],[447,449],{"tags_id":448},{"id":359,"name":360},{"tags_id":450},{"id":356,"name":21},[452],2475,[21,181],"2025-09-08T21:17:14.000Z","2026-05-23T20:08:11.000Z","\u002Fresources\u002Fpublications\u002Fanti-corruption-collective-action-g20b20-process-charting-progress-2020-2024",{"id":458,"slug":459,"title":460,"status":6,"nid":461,"year":16,"body":462,"external":24,"topic":463,"language":15,"type":464,"date_published":466,"image":467,"citation":14,"publisher":85,"link_internal":468,"link_external":469,"authors":505,"countries":514,"tags":515,"pdf":524,"topics":534,"featured":24,"languages":535,"summary":536,"programme":537,"area":538,"websites":540,"pdf_text":7,"sort":7,"user_created":48,"date_created":542,"user_updated":49,"date_updated":543,"main_points":7,"short_version":7,"subtitle":544,"link":545},2407,"collective-action-practice-game-changer-business-integrity","Collective Action in practice: a game-changer for business integrity",2824,"At its core, Collective Action is a simple yet powerful concept: tackling corruption challenges together, rather than alone. Over the past two decades, anti-corruption Collective Action has grown from a niche idea to a recognised approach embedded in international standards, national strategies and corporate practices.\n\nThis book offers a comprehensive reflection on that journey and explores the growing impact of multi-stakeholder collaboration on promoting business integrity around the world. It aims to capture the living ecosystem of Collective Action as it exists today, its foundations, its progress and the possibilities it continues to offer for the future.\n\nDrawing on real-life examples, policy milestones and practical experiences from the Basel Institute on Governance and its partners, *Collective Action in practice: a game-changer for business integrity *presents how diverse actors have been working together to tackle corruption in complex environments.\n\n\n- **Part 1: Advancing the knowledge base** – presents the analytical tools and conceptual models that help us make sense of Collective Action in practice.\n- **Part 2: Mainstreaming Collective Action as a norm** – illustrates the growing recognition of Collective Action in international standards and policy frameworks. It also showcases the Institute’s International Collective Action Conference series and the Collective Action Awards.\n- **Part 3: Providing hands-on support** – focuses on the Basel Institute’s direct support to Collective Action practitioners and highlights the importance of peer learning.\n\n\n\n\n\n*Collective Action in practice: a game-changer for business integrity *was developed and published by the Basel Institute on Governance, with support from the Siemens Integrity Initiative.\n\n### About this publication\n\nThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Licence (\u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fcreativecommons.org\u002Flicenses\u002Fby-nc-nd\u002F4.0\u002F\">CC BY-NC-ND 4.0\u003C\u002Fa>). Please credit the Basel Institute on Governance and link to: collective-action.com\n\nSuggested citation: Hocq, Nicolas, and Vanessa Hans. 2025. *Collective Action in practice: a game-changer for business integrity. Stories, evidence and inspiration from the Basel Institute on Governance*. Basel: Basel Institute on Governance.\n\nISBNs are as follows:\n\n\n- PDF: 978-3-9526182-0-2\n- Paperback (forthcoming): 978-3-9526182-1-9\n\n### Download or view online\nScroll down for links to download the book or specific chapters, or flick through online below:",[21],[465],"Book","2025-06-30","https:\u002F\u002Fjam.baselgovernance.org\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002F0dd71cde-39e7-4161-a90f-c7b90ebc2415?width=600&height=840",[],[470,473,475,478,481,484,487,490,493,496,499,502],{"url":471,"caption":472},"https:\u002F\u002Flearn.baselgovernance.org\u002Fenrol\u002Findex.php?id=168"," eLearning course: Collective Action Against Corruption",{"url":89,"caption":474}," Visit the B20 Collective Action Hub",{"url":476,"caption":477},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.amazon.co.uk\u002Fdp\u002F3952618217","Amazon.co.uk",{"url":479,"caption":480},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.amazon.com\u002Fdp\u002F3952618217","Amazon.com",{"url":482,"caption":483},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.amazon.ca\u002Fdp\u002F3952618217","Amazon.ca",{"url":485,"caption":486},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.amazon.de\u002Fdp\u002F3952618217","Amazon.de",{"url":488,"caption":489},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.amazon.fr\u002Fdp\u002F3952618217","Amazon.fr",{"url":491,"caption":492},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.amazon.es\u002Fdp\u002F3952618217","Amazon.es",{"url":494,"caption":495},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.amazon.it\u002Fdp\u002F3952618217","Amazon.it",{"url":497,"caption":498},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.amazon.nl\u002Fdp\u002F3952618217","Amazon.nl",{"url":500,"caption":501},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.amazon.pl\u002Fdp\u002F3952618217","Amazon.pl",{"url":503,"caption":504},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.amazon.se\u002Fdp\u002F3952618217","Amazon.se",[506,510],{"authors_id":507},{"id":508,"name":509},298,"Vanessa Hans",{"authors_id":511},{"id":512,"name":513},565,"Nicolas Hocq",[],[516,518,522],{"tags_id":517},{"id":359,"name":360},{"tags_id":519},{"id":520,"name":521},1236,"Compliance",{"tags_id":523},{"id":356,"name":21},[525,526,527,528,529,530,531,532,533],2458,2459,2460,2461,2462,2463,2464,2465,2466,[21],[15],"This book offers a comprehensive reflection on that journey and explores the growing impact of multi-stakeholder collaboration on promoting business integrity around the world. It aims to capture the living ecosystem of Collective Action as it exists today, its foundations, its progress and the possibilities it continues to offer for the future.",[181],[539],"Business Integrity & Governance",[21,541],"Main page","2025-07-03T09:59:40.000Z","2026-06-02T14:16:21.000Z","Stories, evidence and inspiration from the Basel Institute on Governance","\u002Fresources\u002Fpublications\u002Fcollective-action-practice-game-changer-business-integrity",1780676553898]