Behavioural science

There’s a gap between what laws say and what people do. How is that useful for anti-corruption work?

In episode 37 of the podcast Sophie au pays des possibles, host and anti-corruption expert Sophie Lemaître conversed with Claudia Baez Camargo, Director of Prevention, Research and Innovation at the Basel Institute on Governance. Claudia leads a specialised team of researchers who leverage behavioural science, political economy analysis and field research to design context-sensitive anti-corruption strategies. Among others, they advance approaches based on understanding and targeting social norms. This Q&A is an edited extract of their discussion on why top-down laws often fail against local realities and how practical, bottom-up solutions can empower citizens to drive real change. Sophie Lemaître: What are social norms, and why is it essential to consider them when addressing corruption? Claudia Baez Camargo: Essentially, social norms are what we perceive as typical, expected or socially accepted behaviour in a given context. For example, if a traffic officer stops you in Mexico – where I was born and grew up – most would offer a bribe to get out of the predicament. Or when accessing healthcare services, people might give a “gift” or bribe before receiving care. If they don't, they fear they won't receive the service or the correct medicine. Even if they are personally against corruption and know the law forbids it, the social expectation can push them to do it anyway. Understanding these expectations is key to designing effective anti-corruption interventions. Sophie: I've heard statements like "Corruption is part of the culture of this country." Can we say some cultures or countries are more corrupt than others? Claudia: I've often been told, across Africa, Latin America, the Balkans or Asia, "Oh, Claudia, it's in our culture. What are we going to do?" But these regions have such vastly different cultures that I doubt culture is the defining factor. In my view, the real drivers are structural. - First, there are resource constraints: living in poverty and unmet need drives corruption. - Second, there are weak state institutions. When the state fails to deliver, it generates incentives to bypass the law just to solve problems, make money or access services. Culture simply adapts around these realities, absorbing corrupt practices through local names and jokes. Social norms apply to concrete, narrow situations – they dictate what we're expected to do. Culture is something we all have an emotional stake in, so calling a culture corrupt is self-degrading and ignores how rich cultures are. I prefer to focus on social norms because they provide a concrete entry point where we can actually act and change things. Sophie: Have you noticed people saying that addressing corruption is a Western thing? Claudia: Government and anti-corruption officials across the board have assimilated the language of good governance, largely because their laws follow UN Conventions. At that level, a Westernised view definitely prevails. At the grassroots, it's completely different. In research in Uganda and Tanzania, we used fictional "vignettes" to ask citizens about their perceptions of public officials, presenting two characters: - One who strictly abides by the law and refuses bribes. - Another who uses their authority to extract resources, but distributes them to their family and community. Stealing in order to share, like Robin Hood. Almost without exception, people said the one stealing and sharing was great, loved and respected, while the law-abiding official was called a traitor who ignored his community responsibilities. From this view, the "corrupt" ones are those who fail to use power to look after their network. Ultimately, there is vast room for interpretation regarding what corruption is, depending entirely on social norms, cultural environments and practical needs. Sophie: How can we induce behaviour change to create a culture of integrity when the situation involves so many social norms, informal practices and other drivers? Claudia: A lot of anti-corruption projects and investments are still very prescriptive. Focusing purely on top-down "best practices" and laws creates an "implementation gap": countries with excellent laws on paper but terrible results in practice. To achieve sustainable change, we must go bottom-up. Working at the subnational or municipal level shows a lot of promise, because it allows local governments to engage directly with constituents, jointly identify priorities and co-design solutions. As scholar Yuen Yuen Ang argues in her work on adaptive political economy, you cannot expect context-defying behaviours to emerge just because you pass a law. We need to use what is already there – local practices, social networks and community groups – to solve problems sustainably without corruption. It does not have to be a textbook Western "best practice", as long as it works. Sophie: Do you have a success story or promising initiative you could share? Claudia: On success stories, once I worked on a project on a remote island in the Philippines where the mayor was a true champion for his community. He even gave his personal mobile number to every citizen. It was a very poor community, but because things were decided collectively, their few resources were visibly used in the best interest of everyone. On promising initiatives, I'm currently supporting a Swiss-funded project in Moldova that takes this bottom-up approach seriously: its first year is dedicated purely to building trust among local stakeholders. Without trust, people can't collaborate or identify joint priorities. Investing in trust, then letting the community take the driver's seat, is essential for sustainability. Otherwise, once funding dries up, everything regresses. Sophie: Anti-corruption progress is slow, and we’re experiencing a global backlash. What keeps you motivated? Claudia: What I love about my job is going to different countries and speaking with mayors, citizen groups, civil society organisations and the private sector – the real people on the ground whose lives would be transformed if there were less corruption. That's what motivates me. Corruption remains a devastating barrier to development and poverty reduction. We often hear we need to "raise awareness", but that isn't true; in almost every context, people already know what's corrupt, suffer from it and dislike it. We simply cannot give up. The climate can be demotivating, but if we're passive spectators, we can say goodbye to the institutions we've fought for. With our actions, we can intervene and change the course of events. Sophie: One final question: how can we as individual citizens play a role in fighting corruption? Claudia: First, by understanding our duties. Good governance is fundamentally linked to democracy, and whether you live in an established or fragile democracy, the legal framework almost always gives citizens instruments to engage with their representatives. If we normalise using these tools to question authority and demand accountability, we strengthen the rule of law and put corrupt actors under scrutiny. If enough people do this, a lot can change. Learn more ::: links - Quick Guide: Social norms and corruption - Research Case Study: Harnessing behavioural approaches against corruption - Blog – Bridging the gap: How behavioural science can strengthen anti-corruption and crime prevention - Article – Corruption and Social Norms: A New Arrow in the Quiver - Episode 37 of Sophie au pays des possibles :::

Bridging the gap: How behavioural science can strengthen anti-corruption and crime prevention

This article by Claudia Baez Camargo offers valuable insights into how behavioural science can inform more effective anti-corruption strategies and crime prevention efforts. By shedding light on key behavioural drivers and practical approaches, the piece provides a strong foundation for those seeking to better understand how human behaviour can be positively influenced to promote integrity and reduce crime. It is republished with permission from the 7th Newsletter of the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme Network of Institutes PNI . At the end of the day, it’s not formal policies and regulations that prevent crime or make criminal justice systems work better – it’s people. And people’s behaviour is shaped not just by formal rules but by informal practices and deeply embedded social norms. That’s why understanding what drives behaviour, and how we can shift it, is essential for achieving the goals of crime prevention and criminal justice. Behavioural science offers valuable insights here. It helps us identify practical, people-centred ways to encourage integrity, accountability and participation – both individually and collectively. This article explores how behavioural science-based approaches can contribute to preventing crime and corruption. It reviews relevant international texts and shares early findings from the Basel Institute’s promising work in Tanzania and in relation to environmental crime. While our primary focus at the Basel Institute is on anti-corruption, the insights are relevant across the broader field of crime prevention and criminal justice. Policies often miss the human dimension Too often, policies aimed at preventing corruption and crime look good on paper. They follow international best practices, tick all the boxes and appear technically sound. But in practice, they often fall short of delivering the desired results. This pattern is familiar across all the regions in which we work. One reason is that many such efforts overlook the people expected to put the policies into action. Specifically, not enough attention is paid to the incentives and contextual factors that shape their behaviour. Strong formal anti-corruption or crime prevention systems matter, but they aren’t sufficient on their own. Progress depends on how individuals within these systems behave – whether or not they choose to collaborate, share information report misconduct. And that cooperation is often blocked by low levels of trust or limited experience with collaboration. Another issue is the widespread reliance on awareness-raising campaigns. While well-intentioned, these often assume that more knowledge will lead to better choices. Yet we know from behavioural research and experience that this doesn’t hold up, particularly when it comes to corruption. People usually understand that corruption is wrong. But they may still choose not to report or resist it due to a range of behavioural and social factors: the belief that “everyone does it,” fear of retaliation, risk aversion or personal biases. Add to that bureaucratic "sludge" – unnecessary paperwork and other frictions that make doing the right thing harder – and even the best-designed policies can lose their bite. The upshot? If we want crime prevention and justice reforms to work in the real world, we need to go beyond rules and awareness. We need to understand the behavioural drivers behind corruption and crime. And we need to use that understanding to design smarter, more human-centred interventions that nudge people toward integrity and collaboration. International guidance on behavioural approaches International treaties and standards in areas like anti-corruption, crime prevention and broader development often focus on formal structures and high-level frameworks. That’s understandable: the realm of human behaviour is complex, unpredictable and deeply influenced by varying political, cultural and geographic contexts. As a result, behavioural dimensions are rarely given the attention they deserve. Some guidance documents, however, do take a behavioural lens – though this remains the exception rather than the rule. Notably, the World Bank’s 2015 World Development Report: Mind, Society, and Behavior made a strong case for integrating behavioural insights into development work. While it didn’t focus specifically on crime or corruption, it offered valuable, practical advice on designing interventions that reflect how people actually think and behave, rather than how we assume they should. Since then, behavioural science has gained traction in public policy. Many governments have established specialised teams to apply behavioural insights to policy challenges – from tax compliance to public health. Recognising this shift, the OECD released its Good Practice Principles for Ethical Behavioural Science in Public Policy in 2022, offering guidance on using behavioural tools in an ethical and effective manner. Yet despite these promising developments, behavioural approaches remain underused in anti-corruption and crime prevention efforts. This is a missed opportunity, since behavioural science offers a powerful lens for understanding and addressing the real-world challenges that undermine formal systems and laws. Promising research Two areas in particular – healthcare and environmental protection – illustrate how tailored interventions grounded in behavioural insights can help achieve corruption or crime prevention goals. Both arise from research led by the Basel Institute. Preventing corruption in healthcare One of the few real-world behaviour change interventions in the anti-corruption space took place in a Tanzanian hospital. The aim of the pilot project was to curb bribery in the form of “gift giving” – i.e. small gifts to healthcare workers to generate a relationship of reciprocity and secure better or faster treatment. While framed as gestures of appreciation, such practices can create expectations and reinforce corrupt dynamics over time. The intervention used a mix of behavioural tools: simple environmental cues like posters and desk signs reminded users of expectations around the giving of gifts, while respected staff members acted as “champions,” spreading the messages through their peer networks. In just eight weeks, the pilot recorded a 14–44 percent decrease in patients’ intentions to offer gifts, as well as more negative attitudes toward the practice and reduced beliefs in its acceptability. The accompanying working paper, Developing Anti-corruption Interventions Addressing Social Norms, offers practical guidance for practitioners. It outlines how to identify when a behaviour change approach is appropriate, develop a theory of change and design interventions that are context-sensitive and measurable. This pilot adds to the growing evidence on why some behavioural approaches can be effective in preventing corruption while others fall short see more . To give a taster, some of the strategies include: Using environmental cues tailored to the setting. Providing timely resources that support integrity under pressure. Building trust among stakeholders to foster cooperative social norms. Elevating role models and champions of integrity. Tackling environmental corruption and crime The adaptability of behavioural science also makes it a strong tool in the fight against environmental corruption and crime. These offences often flourish in settings where red tape, weak enforcement and collusive practices are the norm. Behavioural interventions can be tailored to disrupt these patterns. Under the Targeting Natural Resource Corruption TNRC project, led by WWF, we produced a series of practical guides that translate behavioural insights into conservation and anti-corruption strategies. Topics include how to reduce corruption driven by excessive bureaucracy or “sludge”, how to reduce risks of collusion in community-managed forests and how to design interventions that resonate with frontline wildlife defenders such as rangers. Other resources and activities At the Basel Institute, we are deeply committed to advancing the use of behavioural science in anti-corruption and broader crime prevention efforts. Our aim is not just to test promising ideas, but to rigorously examine what works, what doesn’t and – crucially – why. By sharing these insights, we hope to support practitioners around the world in adapting evidence-based behaviour change approaches to their own contexts. In this regard, an additional valuable contribution to the field is our research report synthesising lessons from a range of anti-corruption behaviour change interventions. It explores the reasons behind both successes and failures and extracts practical recommendations. In a nutshell, we believe that effective anti-corruption and crime prevention systems must be rooted not only in solid laws and institutions, but also in the behavioural realities of those expected to implement them. Bridging the gap between formal policy and real-world practice requires a systematic focus on social norms, decision-making dynamics and local incentives. Our Prevention, Research and Innovation team leads this work. We support anti-corruption practitioners, development agencies and other donors across three main areas: Research: Conducting academically grounded studies to understand the behavioural drivers of corruption and identify promising points for interventions. Advisory support: Helping donors and international partners integrate behavioural insights into their anti-corruption and development programming. Practical guidance and mentoring: Working directly with implementers to design, test and refine behaviourally informed strategies that are tailored, measurable and feasible in the context. By embedding behavioural science into anti-corruption and wider crime prevention efforts, we can help ensure that policies are not just well designed on paper, but embraced and enacted in practice – closing the gap between intention and impact. \ \ \ One of the key mandates of the PNI is to disseminate and enhance knowledge on crime prevention and criminal justice. This mission is carried out actively around the world by individual PNIs through various channels, including research, publications, and capacity-building activities. A notable example of such efforts was the creation of the Justice Knowledge Centre by Gary Hill – one of the first web-based platforms dedicated to sharing information and resources on crime prevention and criminal justice. Inspired by the spirit of such legacies and by the continuing efforts of PNIs around the world, the PNI Newsletter carries forward this knowledge-sharing mission by dedicating a section in each issue to a specific topic of relevance. Claudia's contribution is the first in this new series.

A new arrow in the quiver: making anti-corruption reform more effective and sustainable

A new paper published in the Annual Review of Political Science explores how we can improve anti-corruption efforts using a “new arrow in the quiver”: the social norms approach. Claudia Baez Camargo, Head of Prevention, Research and Innovation and a co-author of the paper, explains why the social norms approach is crucial for anti-corruption efforts, and shares some of the paper’s main messages for practitioners and researchers. The full paper, “Corruption and social norms: a new arrow in the quiver” is available at Annual Reviews. We have, by now, understood that it is impossible to legislate corruption away. Most countries in the world have adequate legal and institutional frameworks in place to counter corruption. They have also adopted measures such as tougher penalties for corruption offences and stronger administrative controls, and created dedicated anti-corruption agencies. And yet, corruption persists. Scholars have identified this as an “implementation gap”, highlighting the difficulties in enforcing existing laws and policies to counter corruption. Even targeted anti-corruption interventions are often not effective enough – a significant body of research has shown that many fail to have the expected effect, or produce results that fade soon after the intervention ends. Why does this gap exist, and how can we do better? There are several important considerations: Don’t blame the bad apple Corruption is very rarely the result of individual “bad apples” abusing power. Rather, evidence suggests that corruption is a highly networked phenomenon involving groups whose collective actions enable the emergence of or entrench a corrupt system. Research has shown that people behave differently when they are acting as part of a group than when they are acting individually. This can happen, for example, when peer pressure to conform to group behaviour undermines the effect of any legal provision prohibiting the behaviour in question. And yet, most conventional anti-corruption approaches target the behaviour and incentives of individuals. The illusion of the Homus Economicus Behavioural science research has shown that we are not always the rational decision-makers whose behaviour underpins the assumptions of classical economic theory. Humans do not always or even usually follow a traditional cost-benefit analysis in their decision making. Instead, we often operate according to social norms, with collectively held beliefs and the desire for social belonging producing behaviour that defies rational thinking. This behaviour may therefore contradict anti-corruption incentives or formal legal prescriptions, and can leave practitioners frustrated with lacklustre results. Social-norms tinted glasses In response to these considerations, scholars and practitioners are increasingly seeing the importance of analysing corruption in the social context in which it exists, identifying its drivers the why and enablers the how , and the relationship between these factors. This “social norms approach” can enhance our understanding of corruption and, therefore, the design of anti-corruption reforms by taking into account: the context-specific practices that affect corruption and anti-corruption outcomes in different regions and settings; the informal social networks that bind actors together: the self-reinforcing “glue” of common understandings, mutual expectations and accepted behaviours; the stubbornness of these social practices. Ask better questions, get better answers By asking the right questions, we can produce tangible results to make anti-corruption interventions more effective and sustainable. In the paper we ask and answer the following questions: What are the complexities and gaps in the definition of corruption and the shortcomings of leading theories of corruption? How do social norms influence corrupt behaviour? How can social norms be factored into anti-corruption policy and programming? How can research be incorporated more efficiently and effectively on the ground? Any response to corruption has to reflect its multi-faceted and intrinsically human i.e. messy nature. Applying a social norms lens is not a one-size-fits-all approach, and corruption does not always fit into neat bureaucratic or legal categories. Citizens will often differ in their understanding of what constitutes corruption. An in-depth analysis of the specific social context in which the corruption takes place is always a necessary first step. We should develop practical methodological approaches so that anti-corruption agencies can more easily identify specific social norms driving a corrupt practice. And we need more empirical investigation of the interaction between the various factors, including social norms, historical norms, the political system, the institutional system and individual factors such as gender, age, income and personality traits, that influence an individual’s choice to engage in a corrupt act.

New Working Paper on developing anti-corruption interventions based on a behaviour change approach

The Basel Institute's Public Governance team has published a new Working Paper that provides guidance on developing anti-corruption interventions based on a Social Norms and Behaviour Change SNBC approach. Still a relatively nascent field, SNBC interventions typically address social norms that make corruption acceptable or expected, and attempt to influence behaviours away from corrupt practices. The guidance is based on lessons learned from a largely successful pilot project in Tanzania that targeted social norms fuelling bribery "gift giving" in health facilities and attempted to change the behaviours of both health care providers and users away from exchanging gifts. Survey results showed a 14–44% decrease in gift-giving intentions, attitudes and positive beliefs among hospital users following the pilot intervention. The guidance covers: How to identify when a SNBC approach is suitable Essential background research needed to design anti-corruption SNBC interventions Frameworks to formulate theories of change Specific elements to build into SNBC interventions What practitioners should expect when embarking on an SNBC intervention Ways they can help build evidence and understanding of SNBC approaches in the anti-corruption field. The publication was supported by the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GIZ GmbH on behalf of the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development BMZ . The pilot intervention that serves as the basis for most of the reflections included in this document was funded by the Global Integrity Anti-Corruption Evidence Programme GI-ACE , funded with UK aid from the UK government. View and download Working Paper 40: Developing anti-corruption interventions addressing social norms.

Applying behaviour change approaches to fight corruption and illegal wildlife trade

Can social norm and behaviour change approaches help to reduce corruption related to illegal wildlife trade IWT ? Very possibly. SNBC initiatives have been shown to help combat diverse corruption problems, although for those related to IWT and other areas of conservation and natural resource management, the evidence for doing so is sparse. At a practitioner-focused webinar on 27 June 2022, Claudia Baez Camargo, Head of Public Governance at the Basel Institute on Governance, and Gayle Burgess, Behaviour Change Programme Leader at TRAFFIC, presented the key findings of their recently published Working Paper on the topic, including: what social norm and behaviour change SNBC approaches are; their use in fighting corruption; the framework they jointly developed to assess entry points for behavioural interventions; how practitioners can apply these insights to effectively reduce corruption related to IWT. Sabri Zain, Director of Policy at TRAFFIC, and Robert Lugolobi, Independent Consultant, Uganda, gave their insights into how SNBC approaches can be applied in real life in programmes targeting the corruption that facilitates IWT. Saba Kassa, Senior Public Governance Specialist at the Basel Institute on Governance, moderated the panel. The Working Paper – "Behavioural drivers of corruption facilitating illegal wildlife trade – Problem analysis and state of the field review" – has been produced in association with the Targeting Natural Resource Corruption TNRC project. The TNRC project is working to improve biodiversity 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. Learn more at tnrcproject.org. Learn more Watch the webinar on YouTube Listen to the audio recording mp3 View and download the Working Paper Download the presentations by Gayle Burgess and Claudia Baez Camargo The research and webinar were 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 authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID, the United States Government, or individual TNRC consortium members.

Research Case Study 5: Harnessing behavioural approaches against corruption