Exploitation and Favoritism in Federal Higher Educational Institutions

SUBMITTED BY

Mehreen Abbas

PIDE2017MPHILPP27

SUPERVISOR

Dr. Karim Khan

School of Public policy

PAKISTAN INSTITUTE OF DEVELOPMENT OF ECONOMICS, ISLAMABAD

 ABSTRACT

Corruption in higher education is an emerging topic in the field of education research in

Pakistan. There are some aspects of corruption have been address by Heyneman, Noah &

Eckstein, Adam Smith, Leila shadab, Lambsdorff, Svensson, Hasnain and Ali. But rigorous

systematic research has not done in the education research. This research considers

disintegratory types of corruption in higher education institution in the area of federal city of

Islamabad, following the publication and the International Transparency Pakistan. The types of

corruption. Major findings point out to the following: it addresses difference between the form of

corruption that are pervasive in the universities and also analyzed the SDGs 16 that deals with

institution corruption and it strengthen strategies. The study dynamisms inside and is taking the

perception from the student, faculty and administration about the corruption, does it still

effects/hit in in 2020, and a problem for the economic and growth rate. This research also curious

about other aspect which has been neglected in the historically ‘’Public procurement in the

Higher education institutions’’.

 ABBREVIATIONS

AA Academic Audit
DI Development Index
ESR Education Sector Reform Action
ESRA Education Sector Reform Assistance
GFRS General Financial Rules
HEC Higher Education commission
IIEP The International Institute for Education Planning
IPEMC The Inter-provincial Education Minister Committee
NAB National Accountability Bureau
NEMIS The National Education Management Information System
PAP Papulation Association of Pakistan
PEC Pakistan Engineering Council
PPP Public private partnership
PPRA Public Procurement Regulatory Authority
PWD Pakistan Public Work Department
SDGS Sustainable Development Goals
TI Transparency International
TIP Transparency International Pakistan
WB World Bank

Contents
CHAPTER ONE..............................................................................................................................................5
1.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................................5
1.2 Types of corruption...........................................................................................................................8
1.3 Problem Statement...........................................................................................................................9
1.4 Significance of the Study...................................................................................................................9
1.5 Research Question...........................................................................................................................10
1.6 Objective of the Study.....................................................................................................................11
1.7 Relevance to Public policy...............................................................................................................11
CHAPTER TWO...........................................................................................................................................12
Literature Review......................................................................................................................................12
2.2 Functioning of Public Procurement in Pakistan...............................................................................15
2.3 Public Procurement: At federal level...............................................................................................15
2.4 Degree of access to information/transparency...............................................................................16
2.5 Anti-corruption institution in Pakistan.............................................................................................17
2.6 Conclusion of literature review........................................................................................................17
CHAPTER THREE........................................................................................................................................19
DATA AND METHODOLOGY...................................................................................................................19
3.2 Methodology...................................................................................................................................19
3.3 Study Area.......................................................................................................................................19
3.4 Target Population............................................................................................................................20
3.5 Sampling technique.........................................................................................................................20
3.6 Data Collection Method...................................................................................................................20
3.7 Descriptive Research Design............................................................................................................21
DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSTION...........................................................................................................22
4.1 SECTION: Process of Procurement in Higher Education...................................................................22
4.2 SECTION 2: Bribery System in Higher Education Institute. (For students and Faculty)....................26
4. 3 SECTION 3: Favoritism in the Higher Education Institutes..............................................................29
4.4 SECTION 5: Transport and infrastructure issues of the institutions.................................................34
4.5 Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................37
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................................39
CHAPTER ONE

1.1 Introduction

Corruption in higher education system is very newly notion has been emerging in Asia.

Corruption in higher education some of the work have been done by Eckstein, Hallak & Poisson,

Heyneman, Noah & Eckstein, Segal, and Washburn. However, the work has been done by

following the publish articles, and news reports due to lack of any rigorous systematic research

(Osipian, 2008). The cause of corruption can be in the form of incompetence, inferiority

complex, and asymmetry state of affairs. The form corruption keep changing over the decades in

higher education institutions. Why it happened? The whole game is cause and effect, cause is

incompetence and any form of corruption that on demanding. To investigate the causes, factors

that effective and motive behind the corruption, this study is inclined to investigate all the

perceptions, compatibility and connectivity with this networking (corruption).

Recently, the Transparency International revealed its result taking all the globally on corruption.

They checked all the countries the perceived level of corruption in the public sector. Pakistan’s

CPI corruption perception index slightly improve. Pakistan ranked 117 out of 180 countries on

Corruption Perception Index 2017. While the country’s score in the CPI 2018 has improved by 1

point, however, Pakistan’s ranking of 117 remains same as in 20171. A corrupt act implies the

abusive of the entrusted power of the private gain. It is the common practice of economic

transaction. This study is going to critically exams the motives to corruption the individual while

inclining toward the act of an illegal behavior. Ali talks about that why policy fail? Due to very

ambiguities in the sectoral management, for instance, our Five-year plans (Ali, 2006). The

1
www.transparency.org/research/cpi).
education sector still does not have any stable policy or any stable documents that can strictly be

followed by any authority independently. Despite, there are many types of corruption that exists

in the society (Hasnain, 2008). Corruption is deviant behavior which manifests itself in an abuse

of a function in politics, society, or economy in favor of another person or institution. This abuse

of a function occurs on one’s own or the other’s initiative in order to achieve an advantage for

oneself or a third party. The study is going to scrutinize the complex interplay of motivations,

volitions, emotions, and cognitions represented in our model. As an individual approach to

understand the main motive of the corruption (Hasnain, 2008). The education sector still dost not

have any stable policy or any stable documents that can strictly flowed by the any authority

independently. Despite, there are many types of corruption exists in the society. But study will

counter only with these, Patronage, clientelism, Bribery, and Collusion. (Collusion is the cancel

act between two or more parries to open a competition by adapting the deceiving defraud other

on their legal rights. Another, to obtain an objective forbidden by Law typically by misleading or

gaining an unfair market advantage). With selection these variable disinterestedly. We will

critically understand the correlation of the corruption within motives if the individual that are

appoint with power discretion. Why transparency lack in institutions to resist illegal act against

any misleading act. The study will be conducted as selectively different types of corruption that

commonly exist and practicing at daily basis. The factors and contribution of study is

disintegrated examine the correlation of the corrupt behavior and motive of the corruption within

certain Environment. The stance of the study are on social institutions, adaption of corrupt

behavior, cultural and normalize it by practicing, religion factors, Economic & social factors.

This based on the relationship between devolution, accountability and services delivery in

Pakistan. The main intent of this study is to examine the degree of the accessibility of the local
policy making & the level of the competition in the local elections, and local government

expenditure to measure/ gauge. There are different causes to identify the main root problem.

Such as, competitiveness, political interest, rent seeking behavior, self-actualization and most

important power distance and also power abuse. Many individual (official workers) legitimates

to do this corrupt act, because they suppose they have right of this, regardless position they have.

The corrupt actions are kept secret in mutual, harmonious agreement (Vahlenkamp, Knauß, &

Ahlf, 1995). “Regarding the motives for corrupt action, research in Germany underlined that

only in a few cases financial problems motivated corruption, but rather career ambition, the

desire to exercise power, the excessive demands at the work place, disappointment about missed

career chances, or the prospect of consequence-free aggrandizement”. To understand what and

how many types of the corruption are practicing within the institutions.

Having said that, to know another prospect, the discussion on modernization theory. In the

Weberian perspective of modernization theory that aptitudes for the rationalization of authority,

legal procedure, and equality of outcome, corruption is simply a wicked for developing societies

and will ultimately be applied in the process of bureaucratization and modernization. This

approach was later challenged by several scholars in the 1960s “revisionists” who reevaluated

the potential contributions of corruption to political development. Corruption was regarded as

beneficial and functional in the eyes of the revisionists. According to this line of argument,

corruption acts as a form of insurance against policy disorganization and provides(Chang & Chu,

2006).
1.2 Types of corruption

Bribery The act of dishonestly persuading someone to act in one’s

Educational Corruption
favors by a payment or other inducement. Inducements can take the Pecuniary (dominant)

form of gifts, loans, fees, rewards or other advantages (taxes, Mostly relates to Direction (admin)

 Bribery
services, donations, etc.). The use of bribes can lead to collusion  Embezzlement
 Fraud
(e.g. inspectors’ under-reporting offences in exchange for bribes)  Extortion
 Clientelism
and/or extortion (e.g. bribes extracted against the threat of over-
Non-pecuniary corruption
reporting). Embezzlement To steal, misdirect or misappropriate
 Logrolling
funds or assets placed in one’s trust or under one’s control. From a  Corrupt education
swapping
legal point of view, embezzlement need not necessarily be or  Nepotism
 Favoritism
involve corruption. Facilitation payment A small payment, also  Collusion

called a “speed” or “grease” payment, made to secure or expedite

the performance of a routine or necessary action to which the payer has legal or other

entitlement. Fraud The act of intentionally and dishonestly deceiving someone in order to gain an

unfair or illegal advantage (financial, political or otherwise).

Collusion an arrangement between two or more parties designed to achieve an improper purpose,

including influencing improperly the actions of another party. Or, Collusion is the cancel act

between two or more parries to open a competition by adapting the deceiving defraud other on

their legal rights. Another, to obtain an objective forbidden by Law typically by misleading or

gaining an unfair market advantage. Extortion The act of impairing or harming, or threatening to

impair or harm, directly or indirectly, any party or the property of the party to influence

improperly the actions of a party. Patronage, clientelism and nepotism Patronage at its core
means the support given by a patron. In government, it refers to the practice of appointing people

directly.

1.3 Problem Statement

“Discretion is the key to corruption”,

Its 2020 and Pakistan is a signatory of international document called Sustainable Development

Goals (SDGs). Every institute has a policy & law and order to regulatory body rule to run an

institute. There is an authority to legitimate the syndicate to address the problem. An institution

contains approximately five sections HR, Administration, faculty, Accounts and Audit. All these

authorities have been assigned to their position called ‘’Discretion’’. This study explicitly

investigates that which form of corruption pervasive in mentioned departments. Why are they

still unable to control the corruption or any form of corruption in the federal higher education

institutions. This research is also inclined to investigate and for the procurement corruption in

higher education institutions. PEC and PPRA both are the institution how they work in the

procurement. To understand that problem’s depth the quotation has been mentioned.

Reference of Hades.

“Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) cursed the one who bribes and the one who takes bribe2”.

1.4 Significance of the Study

This study will be investigate disintegrated exam each types on the proposed variables. Like how

is attach to a corrupt act of the individual? While there are some data on personal characteristics

and motives of corrupt actors, the interrelation of motivation, volition emotion, and cognition

2
(Narrated by Abdullah bin Amr (RA) Sunan Abu Dawud-Book 23, Hadith-3573).
leading to corrupt action has only rarely been investigated. This aspect of the study has

significance because of it’s directly link with the corruption, as long as with the cultural

constrains that normalized this performance within the educational environment. Previous

studies did not examine the complex interaction of motivations of the corruption. This is the

psychological act that linked with directly value, morality. There is possibility that due to

socially constructed environment individual are bound to do this act due to common practice of

the illegal actions.

The main part will be influence the study is that how the main councils of the university act

while practicing this act. PISA3 is the OECD4’s programme for the international student

assessment. Globally 80 country and economies is the part of this programme. This is global

practice that can a source of the Comparativeness among the countries, can leads to meet the

global standers. So Pakistan is non- member of this programme.

1.5 Research Question

The center of this study is to exam the main issue that associate to the perception of the

corruption in education institutions. There are some possibilities that can be motivated an

individual inclined to corruption. The center Question of the study around two significantly,

 What are the factors that influence perception about corruption in academia?

 What are motives that can influence favoritism and bribery in institutions?

3
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Every three year it tests 15-year old students, because at
the age of 15 they are equipped for adult life. So, if Pakistan become member of PISA, the motivation of the
institutional progress move towards better.
4
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development   is a unique forum where the governments of 34
democracies with market economies work with each other, as well as with more than 70 non-member economies to
promote economic growth, prosperity, and sustainable development.
1.6 Objective of the Study

What are the factors that influence perception about corruption in academia?

1.7 Relevance to Public policy

Dietz and Hanemaaijer (2012) describes that sustainable development is based three main pillars

of society: a strong economy, social cohesion and effective nature environment. To apprehend

any society welfare for GDP is used as reasonable approximation/indicator for society welfare.

In September 15, the General Assembly adapted the 2030 agenda for sustainable development

that consists on 17 goals. Goal 4 is about quality education, Goals 8 calls for decent work and

economic growth, while goal 16 manifests peace and practice strong institutions. While

education institutions are the backbone for any country that leads to not only economic growth

but also knowledge economy. Pakistan needs to addresss properly globally commitments.
CHAPTER TWO

Literature Review

“There is an element of inducement, which should always be present in cases of

corruption. It has also been witnessed in geo-political circles. Countries have been made

to vote a certain way in the Security Council after promises of this or that financial

inducements (bribery) or removal of this or that aid if they don’t (blackmail). All this

meets the definition of corrupt act” (Mangwana)

State is backbone of the socio-economic and political matters/institutions. Those who are

socially deprived from the society, and not recognized as part of the community, become socially

excluded for any reason, (by doing a corrupt act or low income, due to class difference).

Neoliberalism globally responsible for increasing poverty and promoting inequalities. That cause

the competitiveness among national and international level. Not limited only al both levels but

indigenously prevail and produced or resulted as a weak institutions. Another stakeholder for

making alliance with different institutions that plays multilateral actors in global, but they really

need to reform. Habitually this type of the weak performance also caused when a state did not

clearly defined the penalty against any illegal act, bribe, corruption, collusion, etc. A high power

distance in society accepts inclusively differences in power in organizations. Employees show a

great deal of respect for those in authority.

The notion expand here that corruption dost not effects on institutions but individual wellbeing

is another phenomena. Some other has been contributing the research on the role played by

corruption in the health procurement by use non-parametric techniques to examine whether the

efficient execution of Italian public contracts for healthcare infrastructures is affected by socio-
economic variables in the area where the work is localized and by the institutional features of the

contracting authority (Cavalieri, Guccio, & Rizzo, 2018)

“Pakistan seems to have a moderately high score on the PDI. It ranks 18th among a group of 52

countries according to the PDI used by Hofstede: Austria has the lowest PDI and Panama and

Guatemala score the highest at 95”. Most of the Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian countries are

located toward the Titles, rank and status carry a lot of weight. In countries with large power

distance index (PDI) scores, subordinates feel dependent on their superiors and are afraid to

express disagreement. The notion of concentration of authority suggests that a high PDI country

would prefer centralization in organizational structures and a greater number of hierarchical

levels were end of the continuum.

The corruption phenomena has long history. As Myrdal noted, through corruption was an

important issue in the public issue, the subject of the corruption has been taboo in the research on

development specifically in the south Asian context 5. Theobald (1990) argues that corruption

hinders the development of political parties, because the high premium of controlling offices

resulting from corruption yields political machines that are rent seeking instead of political

parties that are preference integrating and trust enhancing. It has been identify that other

machoism through which corruption violates the public and erodes political legitimacy. Rose-

Ackerman (1999) notes that, while corruption is commonly defined as the misuse of public

power for private gain, this definition implicitly assumes that citizens are aware of a clear

distinction between one’s public and private roles. Many advocates of the Asian corruption

exceptionalism, however, argue that such a distinction does not necessarily exist in many Asian

societies.

5
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/6396468.pdf)
Corruption is a comprehensive description of the data on the perceived level of the corruption

from the cross-session of the countries have been fruitfully introduced into empirical research

lately. He intend to find the co-relation among the perceived level of corruption. It includes the

impact of the corruption on different indicators such as investment, GDP, institutional quality,

government expenditures, poverty and international flows of the capital, policy distortion,

political system as well we examination of the colonialization, gender and other cultural

dimensions (Lambsdorff, 1999). Author want to examine the impacts of the corruption on above

given indicator of many countries. Studies takes different approaches to suggestively point out

that in the absences of the good governance lead the self-interested benefits. Basically he

elaborates that if a mas pays tax to government, they also pay a cost and it is expensive act,

rather they exploit the officials’ entities by illegal means behavior to seeking their rank. Broad

and Wade (1982) found that Indian villagers defined a corrupt act as one where the official

demanded a highly bribe that was higher than the market level of a bribe, that variant with formal

rules that illegal bribes of any size. With the course of time, it has been realize that this has

negative impact not only on economy but also cause the weakness of the state.

To know the other side of the game, based on morality, values and cultural phenomena Gorsira

writes about that how at individual level inclination to a corrupt act, such as businessman,

official workers between anticipated incentive and personal norms, social norms as or perceived

opportunities. The study tell us about weak moral standers regarding moral corruption can

stimulates or motivates a person to engage in corruption. The larger change make corruption-

proneness. (Gorsira, Denkers, & Huisman, 2018)

Leila shadabi6 in the existing history of corruption server researcher has been trying to

investigate the cause of the corruption. This simply can be divided into two groups, one in

econometric groups, and one in econometric and non-econometric groups. According to this

research fortunately, we have at least clear distinction among the type as well. Like religion

taken as a non-economic factor in this. Corruption is a significant variable that is driven from the

socially as well from the cultural practices .this study is emphazing on the religion as, has

religion impact on the corruption or not? So, those country that inclined towards religion like

Christianity and Islam many others are prohibited corruption as a bad effect.

2.2 Functioning of Public Procurement in Pakistan

PPRA Public Procurement Regular Authority is an automatous body endows with the

responsibility of prescribing regulation and procedure of public federal government

organizations that supervision the improvement of the working of transparency, accountability

and quality of work. The work assign to PPRA is to set the benchmark for the stander,

competence level ensue the quality and monitor the other organization of public procures, PPRA

was inaugurated in 15th may, 2002 when the Government of Pakistan promulgated.

2.3 Public Procurement: At federal level

Public Procurement Regular Authority 2002

Public Procurement Rules 2004

Public Procurement Regulation 2008

Consultancy Services Regulation 2010

6
file:///C:/Users/mehre/Downloads/religion%20and%20corruption.pdf%20mrry%20(2).pdf
Practitioner (vendors) would follow General Financial Rules GFRs regarding public bid

opening7. GFRs is a legal document for the regulatory requirement for public procurement

contracts. The data for of public procurement has been save since the Audit Interaction typically

involves providing information to the bidders and responding in writing to requests for

explaining on the request for proposal (RFP) documents. Pre-tendering communication between

bidders and the procuring authority are usually done either through pre-bid conference8.

“PPRA Ordinance 2002 defines misprocurement as 'public procurement in contravention of any

provision of this Ordinance, any rules, regulations, orders or instructions made there under or

any other law in respect of, or relating to, public procurement'. Rule 50 of PPR 2004 states that

any unauthorized breach of these rules shall amount to misprocurement9”

The objective of the PPRA is to make sure the transparency, effectiveness and further

strengthening the clear guanidine. In which the procurement panning, procurement

advertisement, Award of the contract, prequalification, qualification and disqualification, open

competitive bidding, bidding opening and evaluation, control and Audit system and

accountability are the part of the main process.

2.4 Degree of access to information/transparency

SPPRA has provided a wide diversity of appropriate information on its websites. The SPPRA

Act (2009), SPPR (2010) and various types of bidding documents are available on the website.

There is also a complaint recording mechanism and contact information on the website for

7
www.cpdi-pakistan.org
8
https://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-
s/documents/Procuring_Infrastructure_PPPs_2018_EN.pdfpartnership/sites/ppp.worldbank.org/file

9
www.transparency-and-accountability-in-public-procurement-regime
complainants. The other information available regarding procurements level at provincial level

are also available the websites.

2.5 Anti-corruption institution in Pakistan

“Pakistan’s has been fighting against corruption since 1947, after its creation as a State. The first

law passed by the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan was the Prevention of Corruption Act. Since

then the country has passed a number of laws and established agencies to control corruption. The

third Anti-corruption effort was made during 1996 – 1998, when Ehtesab Commission was set

up under this act in year 1996. This commission was supplemented by Ehtesab Bureau in 1997.

The Bureau assumed the function of investigation while the Commission carried on with the

prosecution. The law created special benches comprising the High Court judge which were to

hear these anti-corruption cases. These benches were to decide the cases (NAB Annual report

2017)

2.6 Conclusion of literature review

The over review from the literature represents about the work has done before many writers

nationally and internationally. The study revolves around two phase, first is the forms of

corruption in the higher education sector and second part investigates the public procurement

procedure in the institutions. As study look at different aspects and dimension, from them the

native effects the factors in education very alarming in the felid of education, it causes the

Access, quality and quality are compromised, in the case of corruption in the educational

institution. That results slow the economic growth, the discouraging the economic foreign as

well as domestic investment. The most effective issues has been finding shows that this

developed the behavior of mass the public talent into rank-seek behavior. The lack of

competency and week institutional policy triggers the corrupt behavior into the same ways.
There are many reasons in developing countries like Pakistan, they did not consider it as senior

officials are not take it as a serious estate issue. Another annihilator issue is ‘’stability’’ in the

native harmony among the reformers institution and policy maker. As Hussain and Ali both are

emphasizing on the five-year plan that emanated over and over in a country, that distract the

policy objective cannot meet the outcomes appropriately. This is an enormous gap between the

policy and implementation that are not problem take as the order in the education institutions.

Having said that, the literature also shows that the Administration part in which all process have

been done. Admission’s, procurement, management and Establishment are all the responsibility

of the administration staff. One of the reason is public procurement data entry processed in the

administration offices. Corruption is inevitable admissions, because it occurred in the process so

it is hard to identify it. Likely, some study in political science focused on corruption in public

Policy which is probably connects with Rank-seeking behavior. There are two thing more

highlighted in the review that mostly universities rent-out positive grading by selling it through

using de fecto power. It has been noticing, that those governments have established anti-

corruption institution focused on reforms (Heilbrunn, 2004).

CHAPTER THREE

DATA AND METHODOLOGY

This chapter contains the detailed discussion of the data and the research methodology that has

been adapting to interpretation of the data for this study. This chapter comprises a brief

discussion of the study area, population of the study area, research design, sample techniques,

data collection methods, indicators for data collection, key informant, participating observation

and descriptive research design, will be use as data analysis.

3.2 Methodology

A research methodology is the way of reviewing the procedure of caring out research. The way

in which the researcher are pursuing their work of predicting, explaining, and describing the

phenomena is known as a research methodology (Lambsdorff, 2007).

Lomet and Barga (2013) believe that every component of the research data is not possible to

describe all the aspects of data. These differences in the research ‘’lens”’ and methodology can

be crudely contrasted in the way of risk. In this context you will pay attention on the subject’s

social reality, cultural, economic and environmental conditions. The nature of problem solving

has been changing day to day. So the approach t0 address the problem is more significant

(Kielmann, Cataldo, & Seeley, 2012).

3.3 Study Area

Islamabad, the Capital city of Pakistan is located at the edge of the Pothohar Plateau at the foot of

the Margalla Hills in Islamabad Capital Territory. According to the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics,

the demographics of Islamabad Population is 805235 per persons.

3.4 Target Population

This study is focused on perceptions about corruption in higher education institutions. All the

three units will be the part of the study. In which, those students (under-graduation, graduated

and post –graduation) are being selected. From Faculty (professionals incorporating on

BPS/TSS/OG) and administration.

3.5 Sampling technique

Sampling technology is a fine way to take the data from respondents. In this study convenience

sampling has been used for data collection. Hesse-Biber and Leavy (2011) define convenience

sampling as non-probability sampling technique that identifies respondents based on ease to

access them.

This research was conducted in two leading universities of Islamabad: Quaid-e- Azam University

and National Defense University. The study is based on sample size of 200. Sample of 100 was

collected from each study universities, where 10 respondents were staff members and 90

respondents were students.

3.6 Data Collection Method

The research is based on the survey data. This study will be collected primarily data through

semi-questionnaire. The data for this research will be collected from Federal higher educational

institutions: National Defense University and Quaid e Azam University. The study used

convenience sampling technique for data collection, where data was collected from easily

accessible respondents. A self-administered questionnaire was given to respondents. The

respondents filled questionnaire and returned it to the researcher.

3.7 Descriptive Research Design

A descriptive research approach looks into the situation as it naturally happens. This approach

gives researchers the ability to collect precise data of a phenomenon (Mouton & Marais, 1988)

Using a descriptive research approach, this study records perception of respondents about

corruption in their respective education institutes.

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSTION

In this chapter the primary data collected from the both higher education institutions will be

interpreted and analyzed. As we already have described the methodology in the methodology

chapter. Structure questions (open-ended and closed-ended) were asked from the respondents of

the both federal universities of the area.

There were 10 participants from the administration staff of both universities, higher education

institutions. Only 5 respondents gave the relatable answer to the concern questions. Rest are from

the HR department according to them HR doesn’t deal with procurements.

In this part the only top best respondent’s answers have been addressed.

4.1 SECTION: Process of Procurement in Higher Education

Question 1: What is the process of procurement in higher education?

These were some of the responses provided by the respondents.

Generally, it is observed that procurement is on merit through PPRA rule, and applied for

procurements. Another approach being used for procurements are ads, newspapers and through

tenders. According to some respondents they are stated that PPRA rules but favoritism acts in the

Public Institutions while in procurement procedure. Due to highly ratio of favoritism, the top

bidders are selected to high services. Though the process is now online but these issues are major

problem in the meantime in the higher education institutions.

Question 2: What official are involved in procurement in higher education institutions?

The question is asked, from the administration staff from both universities, all the procurement

staff are including institution heads, department heads, HEC representative, Senate

representative, Directors Etc. And, mostly University administration are being involved.

Other staff (finance, support staff).

Question 3: What are the forms of corruption most associated with infrastructure

procurement in higher education institutions?

As corruption happens in hand in hand and mostly it is observed in ‘’ processes ’’ so it is

indemnify. But as the search engines mostly Favoritism (in which the contract is assigned to/with

the desire party) and in advance payments to favor the vendors happens in the procurement.

Furthermore, Cronyism and favoritism also exists. Some of the respondent claims that in some

cases bribery also comes in the infrastructure procurement in institutions or public officials.

Question4: What do you think that product substitution & sub-stander work services

making contract can cause false billing?

As it is difficult to identify that where problem is been lacking in the administration staff. This

questions explicitly deals with the head of the department and the main departmental

administration staff. Because false-billing is the part of department’s duty to get real information

and the principal-agent problem starts here in the procurement procedures. Most of the

respondent report positive response to this question. One of the reason is it is chanced in daily

work order base.

Question 5: Do you think that corruption is linked to the academic credentials?

Yes, academic credentials can be achieved through bribery or cheating in exam and research. To

some extent, it is observed that sometimes it’s a state monopoly, having said that, for instance,

government announced job to the highly qualified individual so this situation create hyper

production of diplomas/degrees that doesn’t solve the problems. Likewise education system

promoted rote learning and less emphasis on the developing individual capabilities. The aptitude

and behavior of society plays a very significant role to this issue and it depends upon the ethics

and morality to the society.

Other (financial)

Question 6: What do you think that lack of supervision in the Public official leads to false

accounting or misallocation between contracts?

According to the respondents there are lack of supervision check and balance. It is the

accountability process that missing nobody is held accountable.

Question 7: What do you think, work order can cause or manipulates the false billing in the

public official?

As some of the respondent are not agreeing on the statement that false billing cannot caused any

manipulation in the false billing in the project. On the cause reported as it is directly linked in

the Head of the department. So from the very initial stage it assessed by the departmental head.

But some of other stated that to some extent is effects due to lack of information of both side.

Question8: What do you think that bidding in a contract exist in the higher education

institutions?

An act is provide for Public procurement, public procurement Act, and 2003 (ACT 663)

establish, PP Authority, to make administrative and institutional arrangement for procurement.

PPRA (The Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment) rules are applied for the any vendor. Second

for official project the government gives add and other advertisements comes mostly in

newspaper. Most of the respondent, a company or organization (the promoter, client or

employer) demanding to obtain goods or services will first specify its requirements.

Subsequently, it will open the bidding in a process known as tendering. Administration,

account/Finance, HR, Audit and faculty members all procure through this process.

Question 9: What do you think transparency is lacking procurement in higher education

institutions?

Some of the respondents told that yes there is lack of transparency exit weather there are many

institution exist and every institution has their rules and regulation but the implementation gap

between them. As government has it PWD, AGPR, PPRA, NAB, and Transparency International

Pakistan. All these anti-corruption institution are there but the prevalence of the corruption is not

seems to reduce with the institutions. At an institutional level they have the Audit and

administrative assistant to check and balance of the work order before went out in the felid of

precure.
4.2 SECTION 2: Bribery System in Higher Education Institute. (For students and Faculty)

Do you think that in higher education institutions bribery is part of the culture?

Yes: 49.5%, No: 19.5%, to some extent: 21%, don’t know: %

42

19 99

39

yes no don’t know to some extent

As the question was asked to 200 respondents, the finding show high percentage 49.5% from the

total number of the respondents has admitted that bribery is the part of the culture in the higher

education institutions’. This number gives worrying situation as its ration is (0.99). And only

21% respondents said that bribery is the still prevalent within the institutions. Rest 19.5%

assured that bribery isn’t exit in the higher education sectors.

In higher education institutions, have you ever seen someone demanding bribery for a legal

matter?

Yes: 41.5%, No: 43.5%, To some extent: 6.5%, don’t know:

 13
18

83

87

yes no
don’t know to some extent

As the question was asked to 200 respondents, the finding show high percentage 41.5% from the

total number of the respondents has admitted that bribery is asked in the educations institutions

for the legal matters such as (admission, grading, degree etc.), bribery is being demanding in the

higher education institutions’. This number gives worrying situation as its ration is (0.41). And

43.5% respondents said that bribery isn’t the part of the institutions. Rest 9.5% observed as that

bribery is to some extent the part higher education sectors.

Have you ever witnessed bribery in your institution to solve a legal matter?

Yes: 29.5%, No: 42.5 %, don’t know: To some extent: 5%

10
43 59

85

yes no
don’t know to some extent

As the graph show that 29.5% from the total respondents’ only witness of the bribery while it’s
been happing within in the higher education institutions as it is ration (0.29). Where 42.5% are

not the witness of any bribery in the institutions.

Does bribery affect admissions in your institute?

26 Yes: 46.5%, No: 25 %, don’t know: To

some extent: 13%

30
93

50

yes no
don’t know to some extent

It is hard to get figures regarding bribery while admissions in the higher education institutions,

because it is occurs in the ‘process’ but as the graph show 46.5% are respondents are admitting

that this is the occurring in the admissions process. Where 25% are believed it not applicable.
4.3 SECTION 3: Favoritism in the Higher Education Institutes

1. In your opinion, do you think favoritism has been influencing the merit system in higher

education institutions?

Yes: 79.5%, No: 7.5%, don’t know: To some extent: 11.5%

23
4
15

159

yes no
don’t know to some extent

As the question was asked from 200 respondents, 79.5 per cent are admitting that favoritism is

the part of the higher education system. This is huge quantity to be worry as ration is (1.59). 7.5

per cent did not believed that favoritism is being exploits the entities.

2. In your opinion, does favoritism influence quality of higher education?

Yes: 78.5%, No: 9.5%, don’t know: To some extent: 7.5

 15
5
19

yes
no
don’t know
to some extent

157

The question was asked from 200 participants. From them 78.5 per cent respondents are

admitting that favoritism hit the quality of the education in higher education system.

(Weather in grading, asking help in the exams, etc.). Whereas, only 9.5 per cent are not

believed that favoritism hit anything.

3. Does favoritism smash the ‘equity’ than quality in education institutes?

Yes: 68%, No: 48%, don’t know: To some extent: 9%

18
16

28

136

yes no
don’t know to some extent

‘’Equity’ plays an important role in higher education system, if it exists in the higher

education institution than the ratio of the exploitation goes down. But unfortunately as

this graph shows the titanic figure 68 per cent in the higher education institution that

favoritism has been ruined the equity in the different sectors of education. While, 48 per

cent are assumed that there is no favorable environment in the education system.

4. Have you ever observed favoritism in higher education institutes?

 Yes: 68.5%, No: 10.5% don’t know: To some extent: 10%

20
19

21

137

yes no
don’t know to some extent

In the answer of this question that asked from 200 respondents they have been observing

68.5 per cent favoritism in the higher education institution in different ways and places as

per this ration (1.37) it’s highly annihilation situation in the education system.

Nonetheless, only 10.5 per cent are not conceding that the favoritism is a part of the

education system.

5. As far as religion is one of the important aspects of daily practices, do you think

religion helps avoid exploitation in institutes?

Yes: 49%, No: 30.5%, don’t know: To some extent: 8%

16
22

98

61

yes no
don’t know to some extent
 As this question was asked from 200 respondent, the finding show the highest positive

response from the 49 per cent of the respondents. Which is an optimistic attitude toward

being close to religious activities. It shows that if a person has an aptitude and believe to

be an accountable for official hours. Where, 30.5 per cent do not think likewise.

6. Is “Social exclusion” a cause of promotion challenges within the system while

encountering the educational corrupt transaction?

Yes: 38%, No: 21.5%, don’t know: To some extent: 12.5%%

25

76
50

43

yes no
don’t know to some extent

As the question was asked to 200 respondents, the finding show high percentage 30 per cent

from the total number of the respondents has admitted that if a person don’t accept the situa-tion

than he/she has to encounters such situation in the educations institutions for the legal matters

such as (admission, grading, degree issues procurement etc.). Where is 21.5 per cent don’t

believe and do not promote this concept has been really exist in the society. In this situation the

rest shows that number of people have different assessments as observed in this matter the

attitude and behavior of the person plays a huge role to promote the legal and illegal action while

in official hour.
 7. Do you think that hiring and promotion of faculty are based on favoritism?

Yes: 42.5%, No: 15%, don’t know: To some extent: 25%

50

85

27

30

yes no
don’t know to some extent

As the question was asked to 200 respondents, the finding show high percentage 42.5% from the

total number of the respondents has admitted that hiring and promoting of the faculty in the

educations institutions is existing as it is the ratio (0.85). Whereas other respondents do not think

that this is exiting in the meantime.

8. Which types of corruption is frequently observed and prevailing in the higher

education institutions? Bribery, Favoritism, Cronyism (appointment of friends in

faculty), Extortion (blackmail, exaction of payment by force), embezzlement, any

other type.
 Emble
zzlme bribe
Extor nt ry
stion 8% 18%
10%

crony favori
sim
29% tism
35%

bribery favoritism cronysim

Extorstion Emblezzlment

As the graph shows that the highest result from the 200 respondent, that 93 per cent of the

favoritism is prevailing in the higher education system. Regrettably, this is an alarming situation

for the education institutions as the ration is (0.93). Right after favoritism second recorded from

the respondents is cronyism 75 per cent, found in the institutions. 46 per cent pecuniary (bribery,

finance, embezzlement) corruption in the Education sector. 21 per cent embezzlement and 27 per

cent extortion is the occurring in the current higher education institutions.

4.4 SECTION 5: Transport and infrastructure issues of the institutions

1. Do faculty/staff and students use same facility of transportation?

Yes: 40%, No: 45.5%, don’t know: To some extent: 4%

 Chart Title
12 8

80

91

yes no
don’t know to some wctent

The answer is that 40 per cent they use same facility, and 45.5 per cent respondents are

said no they don’t have some transport system. Rest are not sure about the facility about

the transportation because they have no idea about the staff weather they use it or not.

2. Do you think, that without discriminatory, the buses are available for faculty & admin

staff?

Yes: 43 %, No: 35.5%, don’t know: To some extent: 7%

14
20

86

71

yes no
don’t know to some extent
 From the 200 respondent 43 per cent are admiring the buses are available for both. But,

35.5 per cent of the respondents do not think likewise. Rest are given uncorrected the

answer.

3. Do you think that buses are enough for pick and drop of students and staff/faculty?

Yes: 26 %, No: 50%, don’t know: to some extent: 10.5%

21
52
19

100

yes no
don’t know to some extent

As the graph show only 26 per cent respondent are taking that facility, and, unfortunately

the rest 50 per sent which is huge number of the gap shows, and it also describe the

worrying situation about the buses and transportation system in the higher education

institution.

4. In case buses are not enough, do you think funds for transport are embezzled

(stolen, misappropriate)?

Yes: 39%, No: 18%, don’t know: To some extent: 12.5%

 25
78
52

36

yes no
don’t know to some wctent

1. Question number 3 and 4 are interconnect here as this graph shows the reason that why in

not they facility is being enough foe the student or respondent? As the graph shows 39

per cent respondents are admitting that funds for transport are being embezzled (stolen,

misappropriate) as the ratio is (0.78). Whereas only 18 per cent are disagree with the

statement. Meanwhile 12.5 per cent observed that is it being happing to some extent.

4.5 Conclusion

The finding of this study shows that in the fight against corruption has been addressing by

different authorities and Anti-corruption institution, nationally and internationally since the

problem identified. But unfortunately, the finding still shows that 93% favoritism is still

occurring in the higher education institutions as the ration is (0.93). Which is challenging and
thought-provoking situation for all the Educations Institution and higher Authorities.

favoritism 93 per cent

As the result shows 93 per cent corruption is prevailing in hgher education system in which some
repondentes futher reported that not only favritism but also Nepotism and moral corruption also
prevails in the higher eductaion system. in the answer of queation, they reported it on the bases of their
experience and observation while it occurred in the institution.

cronysim 75 per cent

most respondent reported as high amount of the percentage that show appointment of the friends are
the part of sysytem which sameshed the merit system of the higher education.

Bribery 46 per cent

in this case not only berbery effects the but also, Extorstion 27 peercent and Emblzzlemnt 21 per cent
have been reprting by the respondent.
 REFERENCES

Ali, S. (2006). Why does policy fail? understanding the problems of policy implementation in Pakistan-a

neuro-cognitive perspective. International Studies in Educational Administration, 34(1).

Broad, W., & Wade, N. (1982). Betrayers of the Truth.

Cavalieri, M., Guccio, C., & Rizzo, I. (2018). Does corruption and the institutional characteristics of the

contracting authorities affect the execution of healthcare infrastructures? Journal of Public

Procurement.

Chang, E. C., & Chu, Y.-h. (2006). Corruption and trust: exceptionalism in Asian democracies? The Journal

of Politics, 68(2), 259-271.

Dietz, F., & Hanemaaijer, A. (2012). How to select policy-relevant indicators for sustainable

development. Sustainable Development, Evaluation and Policy-Making: Theory, Practise and

Quality Assurance, 21.

Gorsira, M., Denkers, A., & Huisman, W. (2018). Both sides of the coin: Motives for corruption among

public officials and business employees. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(1), 179-194.

Hasnain, Z. (2008). Devolution, accountability, and service delivery: some insights from Pakistan: The

World Bank.

Heilbrunn, J. R. (2004). Anti-corruption commissions: Panacea or real medicine to fight corruption.

World Bank Institute, Washington, DC. The Many Faces of Corruption.

Hesse-Biber, S., & Leavy, P. (2011). The Practice of Qualitative Research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:

SAGE.

Kielmann, K., Cataldo, F., & Seeley, J. (2012). Introduction to qualitative research methodology: a

training manual. United Kingdom: Department for International Development (DfID).

Lambsdorff, J. G. (1999). Corruption in empirical research: A review. Transparency International,

processed, 6.

Lambsdorff, J. G. (2007). The methodology of the corruption perceptions index 2007. Transparency

International.

Lomet, D. B., & Barga, R. S. (2013). Database corruption recovery systems and methods: Google Patents.

Mangwana, N. Is corruption a cultural phenomenon? google scholar.

Mouton, J., & Marais, H. C. (1988). Basic concepts in the methodology of the social sciences: Hsrc Press.

Osipian, A. L. (2008). Corruption in higher education: does it differ across the nations and why? Research

in comparative and international education, 3(4), 345-365.

Rose-Ackerman, S. (1999). Political corruption and democracy. Conn. J. Int'l L., 14, 363.

Theobald, R. (1990). What is Corruption? Corruption, development and underdevelopment (pp. 1-18):

Springer.

Vahlenkamp, W., Knauß, I., & Ahlf, E.-H. (1995). Korruption-ein unscharfes Phänomen als Gegenstand

zielgerichteter Prävention: Ergebnisse eines Forschungsprojektes: Bundeskriminalamt.

Mangwana, N. (n.d.). Is corruption a cultural phenomenon? Retrieved from google scholar.