PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSES AND MANAGEMENT

DOES THE ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES IN MEASURING CORRUPTION HAVE IMPACT IN QUALITY GOVERNANCE IN

NIGERIA? By Innocent .K. FASHANU Journal of International and Development Studies, Vol, 1, Issues, 4

1

INTRODUCTION

Corruption became a serious case on the global agenda during the mid-1990s. It became an

international agenda because of the dangerous effects it had on the globalisation and

liberalisation of the global economy. Corruption promote international crime or dysfunctional

behaviour such as prostitution, money laundering and drug trafficking. Due to this adverse

effect one must appreciate why the anti-corruption initiatives and leadership come from the

developed multilateral bodies and non- governmental organisations (Transparency

International, 2012).

Several institutions, laws and decrees, commissions and enforcement agencies were designed

to eradicate corruption yet there is no amelioration in the quality of governance. A clear

evidence has proven in the case of Africa especially Nigeria where we hear of conflict,

political and economic instabilities, issues of poverty, poor infrastructures, insufficient

electrical supply, deteriorating economy etc this are clear evidence of poor governance

(Michael, 2004).

Corruption is not a new phenomenon in the history of Nigeria state. Corruption in Nigeria

started from colonial era at the onset of her Public Administration. There have been

misappropriation and embezzlement of public funds, misuse of financial and economic

resources for selfish or individual enrichment. Transparency International ranked Nigeria as

the 139th most corrupt country in the world out of the 176 countries perception index in 2010

(Idahosa and Akhigbe, 2008)

Corruption has been in existence for so many years and will continue except

government from a global perspective curb it through effective mechanism (Ogbomo and

Orobosa, 2008). Corruption is like a cockroach which has co-habited in human society for so

many years. This is the reason why in African society, receiving of gratification for doing an

official job is not seen as corruption (Zhang, 2000). Therefore, corruption has been seen as a

socio-cultural phenomenon which has assumed political economic dimension (Ogbomo and

Orobosa, 2008).

The constitutional laws, commissions and measures designed to fight corruption in Nigeria

are standard and the best institutions in the world if we go deep into research, but the question

is that, have they been able to ameliorate the quality of governance? If they have why do we

still hear of money laundering or looted funds to foreign countries by Nigerian politicians and

public officers? Why is there still cases of embezzlement and misappropriation of public

funds without proper execution to culprits? Why are there still poor educational

infrastructures?

This study will analyse if the “Alternative Approaches to Measure Corruption had an Impact

on Improving the quality of Governance”. This study will take a case study of Nigeria. The

aim of this study is to verify if the institutions established to curb corruption had “make or



2

mar” quality governance. This study will use the secondary methods which involves the work

of various scholars and Authors. This research because of its dynamic nature will depend

completely on the research carried out by scholars in the field and our sources of information

will depend on Journals, Articles, Textbooks, a credible newspaper sources and information

from global institutions such as World Bank, United Nations or Agencies. Conceptualization

and definition of terms will be defined in our literature.

This study will use the Structural Functionalism as a framework to explain her

research. The frame-work will be explained in brief on the body of our literature. At the end

of this study, we will prove if the alternative approaches to measure corruption had an impact

on the quality of governance.

CONCEPTUALIZATION CLEARIFICATION/ THEORETICAL FRAME WORK

Corruption cannot be comprehended absolutely because it is an internal or native issue in our

contemporary government. It passes beyond geographical boundaries, states, ethnic and tribal

groups. It is significantly synonymous with origins, magnitude, nature and effects on

governance and development depending on the country's state: such as the system of power

distribution, mode of production and the legal and moral norms. Corruption could be in

existence with strong governmental performance while in other countries it may hinder

development and quality governance (Idahosa and Akhigbe, 2008). Corruption is when

public power is used for private profit, preferment of prestige or for the interest of an

individual or group of individuals or class in a way that breach the constitutional laws and

standards of moral or code of conduct in a county (Lawson, 2009 and Agbiboa, 2012).

Corruption can be defined as the unlawful act in the behaviour of public officials either

politicians or public servants, enriching themselves or friends and associates with public

wealth and power (Transparency International, 2003).

World Bank (1992) sees corruption as the extortion or collection of bribe, abuse of public and

private office especially when they circumvent public or organisational policy for their own

selfish advantage.

Another critical issue we will look into here is good governance. What is quality or good

governance? It is the government that embraces democracy and rule of law, open to the

media and the public (transparency and Accountability), allow the freedom of the press,

corrupt free to a large extent and also focus on humanitarian good ( ADB,2010)

The concept of good governance entails effective democratic government that enhance the

promotion of the rule of law and social justice, and also uses the instrument of power and

authority to provide goods and services to the people he signed social contract law with and

also promote good life and social-economic needs for his people (Michael, 2004).

THEORETICAL FRAME-WORK



3

The theoretical frame-work that will be use for the purpose of this study is “STRUCTURAL

FUNCTIONALISM”. This theory is propounded by a sociologist Talcott Persons (1902-

1979). This theory explains how the institutions of government, the laws, the behaviour of

government, norms and believes relate with their social environment. The theory of structural

functionalism explains the political behaviour of actors in respect to why the institutions of

governance work and why it may not work in some social-political environment (McLean

and McMillan, 2009). This frame-work will be use to explain the institutions of governance,

the commissions, the decrees, laws or constitutions and the establishments use to fight against

corruption in Nigeria. This frame-work will evaluate their level of performance and why they

did not work appropriately as expected. This theory will also explain how the political

behaviour of government has affected the public institutions because of the constitutional

frame-work which has helped promote corruption in Nigeria.

GLOBAL MEASURES TO CURB CORRUPTION

International laws, conventions and agreements have been made to enhance quality of

governance and to eradicate corruption among states (Izibili and Aiya, 2007). For instance,

the OECD established "Anti bribery Convention" to fight against bribery by public officials.

This is stated in Article 1 of the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention (ADB, 2010).

The United Nations General Assembly on the 31st October, 2003 established the United

Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) in New York, this aimed at preventing,

detecting and sanctioning corrupt practices among nations (Lin and Zhang, 2009)

Leaders of the International Financial Institutions (IFIs) on the 18th of February, 2006,

established the Joint International Institution Anti-Corruption Task Force in Washington.

This was an instrument aimed to prevent and fight against fraud and corrupt practices in

international business (Olatunde, 2011, and Osoba, 1996)

According to World bank, (1992) stated that, instruments such as Privatization, Liberalism

and Democratic institutions with effective media and press freedom, Independence of the

Judiciary and transparency in government are measures which they advise countries to use in

curbing corruption and enhancing good governance. They said that most countries have been

successful in minimizing corrupt practices and increasing the quality of governance since

they adopted the stated measures in combating corruption.

ALTERNATIVE MEASURES TO CURB CORRUPTION IN NIGERIA: 1960-DATE

From colonial era to independence in 1960, there was no attempt to fight corruption in

Nigeria. This had led military take up of power due to corrupt nature of the civilian

administrators (Adebanwi and Obadare, 2011).

The first ever initiated policy to curb corrupt practises in Nigeria was in late General Murtala

Mohammed led administration in 1975. He initiated the “Assets Investigation panel”



4

established under promulgation 1976 to investigate allegations of graft and misuse of public

funds brought against public servants (Idahosa and Guobadia, 2008). This decree led to the

execution of more than 100,000 public servants on the ground of corruption and abuse of

public office. Although this exercise led to a decline in productivity, but however, this decree

known as the “great Purge” was brought to haut when people discovered that it was only used

to fight against corruption in his predecessor’s administration. But this was the most

effectively reached and shake-up against corruption in Nigeria (Stapenhurst and Langseth,

1997). Corruption assumes constitutional significance in the second republic (1979-1983).

The fight against corruption was established under the fifth schedule, part one sub-section (2)

of the 1979 constitution. The constitution prohibited public officers from allowing their

personal interest to conflict with their official duties and responsibilities. The constitution

forbids public officers from accepting personal gifts or benefits from any person or corporate

bodies who have contract deal with the government (Nigerian Constitution, 1979). Public

servants were also required after taking the oath of office and after there for years in office to

declare the oath the assets and liabilities. In-line with the constitution, Shagari led

administration established the “Code of Conduct Bureau and Code of Conduct Tribunal” but

all were not effective because the number one citizen (himself) was corrupt (Adebisi et al,

2012). Corruption was the basis for the military take up of power and abolishment of the

second republic in Nigeria.

General Buhari in assumption of office, embarked on several anti-corruption programme. The

administration established Decree No.2 of 1989 to recover public property from public

officers and the “War Against Indiscipline”. This anti-corruption measures to a great extent

was more effective compared to the past administration (Dike, 2009). The anti-corruption

measures Buhari administration fall into crucial problems at implementation because the

body formed to carry out this anti-corruption programme were all dishonest and corrupt

(Ogundiya, 2008 and Okogbule, 2006).

General Babangida led administration in 1986 established a different anti-corruption

programmes known as “National Committee on Corruption, Economic crime Practices and

Mass Mobilization, Social and Economic Reconstruction” (MAMSER). In 1990, the

“Corrupt Practices and Economic Crime Decree” was promulgated. All this to no

improvement because the led administrator himself was full of corruption (Okogbule, 2007).

The late General Sani Abacha’s administration (1993-1998) established a legislative draft

called “Indiscipline, Corrupt practices and Economic Crime Prohibition Decree 1994”. This

draft was a nomenclature of the former Babangida’s administration. This draft to fight

corruption was not effective because the late head of state family and their surrogatives were

busy stealing national funds and kept in foreign account. Even the late head of state was

absolutely corrupt (Idahosa and Guobadia,2008).

In enthronement of democratic dispensation in 1999, President Obasanjo civilian

administration established three measures to fight corruption. The first was the “Due Process



5

Act” which states the standards and processes to be followed when executing government

contracts, activities and projects. This enhancement stipulated open competitive tendering

procedure and clearly defined bid criteria’s (Fatile and Adejuwon, 2012). The second is the

“Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission” (ICPC). This is

one of the main bodies established by law with the duties to curb corruption and other related

offences in Nigeria. This was established and empowered by corrupt Practices and Other

Related Act, 2000 and this came into effect September, 2000 (Ogbomo and Orobosa, 2008).

In December 2002 the Act of Parliament established the Economic and Financial Crime

Commission (EFCC). These was empowered by the Act of Parliament, Act 2004 to curb

corruption, preponderance of economic and financial crime like Advanced Free Fraud

(Decree 419 of the Criminal law of Nigeria), money laundering in both private and public

sector and also include individual citizens engaged in such financial crime (Adebisi, et al,

2012, Adebanwi and Obadare, 2011).

HAVE THE ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO MEASURE CORRUPTION HAD

IMPACT ON THE QUALITY OF GOVERNANCE?: ANALYSIS AND

EVALUATION.

From the above discussion, evidence has proven that all the alternative measures to curb

corruption have been fruitless and the institutions and commissions established to fight

corruption between 1970s to 1999 were like toothless bulldog. Now, have all the measures

above leverage the quality of governance? Zimako,(2009), in his research questionnaire,

asked “the methods of fighting corruption in Nigeria have no positive impact on good

governance? 69% of the population sample selected “Strongly Agree” (see Appendix, table

I). In his research findings, he discovered that the measures to curb corruption in Nigeria

have not ameliorated the quality of governance.

Agbiboa, (2012), In his research, he made verification through questionnaire, he

asked “Have the instruments to war against corruption during the second republic help reduce

corrupt practices in Nigeria government?” 64% chose “NO” while 36% chose “YES” (see

Appendix, table II). This proves that the measures to curb corruption during the second

republic have no significant effect on the quality of governance during the second republic of

Nigeria. In his research findings, he discovered that corruption and bad leadership was the

major reasons for military over throne of the second republican government of 1979-1983.

Transparency International,(2003), in their research investigation, find out that the

Federal and State executive council who are at the major helm of affaires for day to day

Administration of government, and the highest authority alongside with politicians are

discovered to be the most corrupt group in Nigeria (see Appendix, table III). In their research

report, they concluded that despite the strong institutions set to manage corruption in Nigeria,

there have been no leverage in the quality of governance in Nigeria.



6

Dike, (2009) in his research paper; find out that all alternative measures to curb corruption in

Nigeria have not made any impact in reinvigorating good and quality governance in Nigeria.

In his conclusion, he stated that the institutions and Agencies established by various

administrative regime are been controlled by the government and they are mainly use for

political purpose and selfish desires. In Obasanjo’s administration for example, he used the

Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC) to fight only his oppositions and those

who criticize him (Idahosa and Akhigbe, 2008).

Zhang .H.(2000), in his research project, taking six (6) countries case studies from Asia,

Africa and part of Europe, he asked “Do you think the institutions established to eradicate

corruption affected the macro-economics of credible and reliable governance?” 380 out of

500 questionnaires chose “NO” (76%), while 170 people (34%) selected “YES”. This has

proven that measures to fight corruption has not enhanced or leverage the quality of

government.

Contrary to the above, Ogbomo and Orobosa, (2008), argued that the Economic and

Financial crime commission in Nigeria (EFCC) have been able to fight corruption. They

argued that fraud among the youths and terrible financial crimes have reduced to a great

extent between 1999 t0 2007. They also argued that alternative measures to curb corruption

have created positive impact on the quality of governance. In support to this argument,

Okobule, (2006), also argued that the anti-corruption Act law and the due process Act have

reduced the level of corruption in Nigerian government. He stated that the Acts of Parliament

above have made most political leaders keep to their electioneering promises and

responsibilities. In relation to this argument, Idahosa and Akhigbe, (2008), stated that the

approaches used to fight corruption have send the former Senator and People's Democratic

Party Chairman, Chief Bode George to two years in prison for embezzling 300 Million Naira

government funds meant for dredging the River Niger. According to Fatile and Adejuwon,

(2012), said that the manifestation of the positive effects to mar against corruption has

reflected in the 2011 general elections. According to them, elections have never been free and

fire in Nigeria until 2011. These according to Olatunde, (2011), are sign of improved

governance. To support Olatunde's, and Fatile and Adejuwon's argument, Transparency

international in 2003, they rated Nigeria 179 most corrupt country in the world in their

corruption index in 2010 they rated Nigeria as 139 in their corruption Index. This has shown

that the commissions and Institutions established to fight corruption has been working

effortlessly to war against corruption. "If we observe the situation of Nigeria presently, we

find out that there is now independence in the judicial system. This has helped remove

politicians who rigged elections into political offices and bring in the right candidates who

won the election. These have made politicians perform well when they get into office. We

observed that Government especially the state governors now perform well so that they can

be voted for in the next election and to bring praise and glory to their political party, but the

issue of godfatherism and inflation of contract money have not been properly addressed in

Nigerian public administration" (Idahosa and Guobadia, 2008). The EFCC and the



7

Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences (ICPC) now arrest those that are

engaged in corrupt practices and financial crimes especially those in political offices. This

has proven in the case of the Police Pension Fund embezzled by the Chairman who was

arrested by the EFCC, Bode George, the governor of Jigawa state, former Bayelsa state

governor and other strong politicians. The only problem now is that, the President (Dr.

Goodluck Jonathan) did not allow the Judiciary to assign proper punishment to all financial

crime culprits (Idahosa and Akhigbe, 2008). These have proven that despite all efforts, by the

constituted bodies to man against corruption, the legal frame-work will not permit the system

to work perfectly. Adebisi et al, (2012), and Ogundiya (2008), has explained this in their

opinions that the alternative measures and approaches to curb corruption in Nigeria have no

positive effects on the quality of governance because the institutional frameworks of

government are not responsive to change. Section 308 of the 1999 constitution of Nigeria

which has given the President, vice president, governors and their deputy special immunity

clause against any arrest and execution within the period of office, has encouraged corrupt

practice in Nigerian present democracy; the 1999 constitution has made the Nigerian

president and Governors too powerful and has given them power to pardon offenders

(prerogative of mercy) (1999 Constitution, Section 212). This has made Dr. Goodluck Ebele

Jonathan to pardon economic and financial culprit who has stolen so much from Nigeria

(Agbiboa, 2012, and Adebisi, et al 2012).

FINDINGS

From our literature review we will find out that corruption varies across international

boundaries of states depending on the stipulated laws, norms and ethics of the society.

Our findings also verified that the instruments used to measure corruption has no positive

effects on the quality of governance, more so, corruption alone cannot measure the quality of

governance in a state. It is also verified that the institutions, laws, and commissions

established to curb corruption in Nigeria are been corrupt by the personnel and influence of

political power. We discovered that there have not been separation between the government

and the established body empowered to fight corruption.

Our investigations also find out that the bodies or commissions established to fight corruption

in Nigeria cannot even fight the culprit in public office in Nigerian society because there is no

rule of law and fundamental principles to protect these bodies. Our study also find out that

the commissions were mostly used to fight against oppositions to the government in power

or fight against who the government consider as an enemy to his will. Our findings hereby

finalise that the institutional bodies established to fight corruption in Nigeria were like

toothless bulldog.

CONCLUSION



8

From the work of Dike (2009), Idahosa and Akhigbe, (2008), Adebisi et al, (2011),

Ogundiya, (2008), have answered the question to our study "have the alternative approaches

to measure corruption had impact on quality governance?" Our answer is "NO" because if till

now there is still corruption in Nigeria, and the President who is the number one citizen of the

country will not allow justice to prevail, that means the alternative approaches to measures

corruption has no impact on the quality of governance. More so, to back my argument, the

research conducted by Zimako (2009), Agbiboa, (2012), Transparency International (2003)

and Dike (2009) has also proven that the alternative approaches to measure corruption has no

positive impact on quality governance in Nigeria.

Finally, we conclude in this research that, the constitutional frame-work and legal institutions

are not designed to war against corrupt practises because an average African leader is usually

power drunk, so therefore, they don’t deserve immunity clause.

REFERENCES

Adebanwi, W. and Obadare, E. (2011), "When corruption fights back: democracy and elite

interest in Nigeria's anti-corruption war", The Journal of Modern African Studies, vol. 49, no.

2, pp. 185-213.

Adebisi P.A.D., Adebisi, O.S. and Arogundade, K.K. (2012), "Academic Corruption And The

Challenge Of Unemployable Graduates In Nigeria: Implications For Entrepreneurship

Development And Economic Growth", The Journal of Commerce, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1.

Agbiboa, D.E. (2012), "Between Corruption and Development: The Political Economy of State

Robbery in Nigeria", Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 108, no. 3, pp. 325-345.

Asia Development Bank (2010),"Governance and Anti-Corruption in Project Design", Asian

Development Bank, Kala Mulqueeny City: Philippians, ISBN:978-971-561-872-4, Published

Stock No: TIM090586

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, (Decree 1979)



9

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, (Decree 1999)

Dike .V. (2009), “Corruption in Nigeria: A New Paradigm for Effective Control”, available

online at: www.docstoc.com/docs/115677364/corruption_in_Nigeria_control

Economic and Financial Crime Commission, Establishment Act, 2004

Fatile J.O and Adejuwon K.D., (2012),"Democracy and Development Under the Shadow of

Corruption in Africa: The Nigerian's Fourth Republic in Perspective, International Journal of

Physical and Social Science, Vol 2, Issue 4, ISSN: 2249-5894

Idahosa .S.A., and Akhigbe .P.O.J., (2008), “ An Appraisal of the Obasanjo Administration’s

Anti-Corruption Crusade” in the Work of Idahosa S.A., and Guobadia .S. (2008), Socio-

Economic Reform in Nigeria, All Nation Press Publication, Benin City, Nigeria.

Idahosa S.A., and Guobadia .S., (2008),“Socio-Economic Reform in Nigeria”, All Nation Press

Publication, Benin City, Nigeria.

Izibili, M.A. and Aiya, F. (2007), "Deregulation and corruption in Nigeria: an ethical

response", Journal of social sciences, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 229-234.

Lawson, L. (2009), "The politics of anti-corruption reform in Africa", The Journal of Modern

African Studies, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 73-100.

Lin, S. and Zhang, W. (2009), "The effect of corruption on capital accumulation", Journal of

Economics, vol. 97, no. 1, pp. 67-93.

McLean .I. and McMillan .A., (2009), “Oxford Dictionary Of Politics”, Oxford University Press,

(3rd ed), USA.

Michael, B. (2004), "Explaining organizational change in international development: the role

of complexity in anti-corruption work", Journal of International Development, vol. 16, no. 8,

pp. 1067-1067.

Ogbomo .F.O., and Orobosa .A.I., (2008), “Anti- Corruption Reforms and the Nigerian

Economy ”, in the Work of Idahosa S.A., and Guobadia .S. (2008), Socio-Economic Reform

in Nigeria, All Nation Press Publication, Benin City, Nigeria.

Ogundiya, I.S. (2008), "Corruption In Nigeria: Theoretical Perspective and some Explanation"

The Anthropologists, Vol. 11 No 4 in Fatile J.O and Adejuwon K.D., (2012),"Democracy and

Development Under the Shadow of Corruption in Africa: The Nigerian's Fourth Republic in

Perspective, International Journal of Physical and Social Science

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/115677364/corruption_in_Nigeria_control



10

Okogbule, N.S., (2006)," An appraisal of the legal and institutional framework for combating corruption in Nigeria"Journal of Financial Crime; Emerald Group Publishing Ltd, Vol. 13, No. 1; ProQuest Business Collection

pg. 92.

Okogbule, N.S. (2007), "Official corruption and the dynamics of money laundering in

Nigeria", Journal of Financial Crime, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 49-63.

Olatunde, J.O. (2011), "Corruption as an obstacle to development in developing countries: a

review of literature", Journal of Money Laundering Control, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 387-422.

Osoba, S.O. (1996), "Corruption in Nigeria: historical perspectives", Review of African

Political Economy, vol. 23, no. 69, pp. 371-386.

Stapenhurst, F. and Langseth, P. (1997), "The role of the public administration in fighting

corruption", The International Journal of Public Sector Management, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 311-

330.

Transparency International (2003), “A survey on Corrupt Political Leaders” available on line

at: www.infoplease.com/ipa/AD92/295.html

Transparency International (2012), “Survey Report on Corruption” available online at:

http://www.adb.org/doc/policies/anticorruption/anticorruption:30

World Bank (1992), “Helping Countries Combat Corruption: The Role of the World Bank”.

Available online at: www.worldbank.org/publicsector/anticorrupt/corruption/coro2.html

Zhang .H. (2000), “Corruption, Economic Growth and Macro-Economic Volatility”, Ph.D

Research Thesis, John Hopkins university, USA

Zimako .O. Zimako (2009), “Corruption Vein in Democracy”, Modern Approach publication,

Thomson press (India) Ltd.

APPENDIX

Questionnaire distributed by Dr. Zimako .O. Zimako (Ph.D)

“The methods of fighting corruption in Nigeria have no positive impact on good

governance?”

TABLE I

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/AD92/295.html

http://www.adb.org/doc/policies/anticorruption/anticorruption:30

http://www.worldbank.org/publicsector/anticorrupt/corruption/coro2.html



11

Options Frequency Sample proportion of

total samples size

Strongly Agree 285 71.25%

Agree 85 21.25%

Strongly Disagree 15 3.75%

Disagree 10 2.5%

Abstention 5 1.25%

Total 400 100% Source: field Survey by Dr. Zimako .O. Zimako (2009)

Questionnaire distributed by Professor Agedah

“Have the instruments to war against corruption during the second republic help reduce

corrupt practices in Nigeria government?”

TABLE II

DESCRIPTIONS FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

(%)

YES 64 64%

NO 36 36%

Total 100 100% Source: Field survey by Agedah 1993

TABLE III

RATING INSTITUTION

1 Federal and State Executive Council

2 Political Parties

3 Nigerian Police

4 Bureaucratic Institutions /Public Institutions

5 Tertiary Institutions

6 Power Holding Company formerly National Electric Power Authority

7 Federal Road Safety Commission and Traffic Police

8 Immigration

9 Public prosecutors Sources: Transparency International, 2003

Research by Zhang .H. (2000), Ph.D. student at the John Hopkins University, USA

“Do you think the institutions established to eradicate corruption affected the macro-

economics of credible and reliable governance?”

TABLE IV

DETAILS PERCENTAGE (%) FREQUENCY

YES 34% 170



12

NO 76% 380

TOTAL 100 500

Source: Zhang .H. (2000)

PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSES AND MANAGEMENT

Documents

Transcript of PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSES AND MANAGEMENT