Civil Engineering

Volume 165 Issue CE2

Construction Sector Transparency Initiative:
making construction more accountable
Hawkins and McKittrick

proceedings

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers

Civil Engineering 165 May 2012 Issue CE2
Pages 8288 http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/cien.2012.165.2.82
Paper 1100042
Received 25/08/2011 Accepted 28/11/2011
Keywords: corporate responsibility / developing countries /
municipal & public service engineering
ICE Publishing: All rights reserved

Construction Sector Transparency Initiative:

making construction more accountable
John Hawkins MSc
Programme manager for Engineers Against Poverty and the international
secretariat of the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative, London, UK

Bob McKittrick BSc, CEng, FICE, FIStructE

Chairman of the UK Construction Sector Transparency Initiative multistakeholder group, chairman of the Framework Housing Association and
former chief executive of Scott Wilson Europe, UK

The international Construction Sector Transparency Initiative brings government, the private sector and civil society
together with the aim of promoting transparency and accountability in the global construction sector. The UK was
one of seven pilot countries along with Ethiopia, Malawi, the Philippines, Tanzania, Vietnam and Zambia, later
joined by Guatemala. This paper explains why the initiative is of importance to not only the public, who fund the
procurement of public sector construction projects through rates and taxes, but also to construction professionals
and the organisations they work for worldwide. It explains the concepts of the multi-stakeholder approach and
disclosure, and highlights the findings and lessons from the pilots.

1. Introduction
The Construction Sector Transparency Initiative is an international
multi-stakeholder initiative designed to increase transparency and
accountability in the global construction sector. It is supported by the
World Bank and the UK Department for International Development
(DFID) and has been successfully piloted over a 2-year period in
seven countries: Ethiopia, Malawi, the Philippines, Tanzania, the UK,
Vietnam and Zambia. Guatemala subsequently joined the initiative as
an associate country.
From April 2008 to June 2011, the Institution of Civil Engineers
(ICE) was a member of the Construction Sector Transparency
Initiatives international secretariat along with accountancy firm Price

Waterhouse Coopers, trade association British Expertise, engineering

and international development charity Engineers Against Poverty and
equitable and sustainable development charity Tiri.
ICEs role on the secretariat was to provide technical and policy
advice on design and implementation of the Construction Sector
Transparency Initiatives international programme and to provide
direct support to the pilot schemes. More recently the institution has
helped with analysis of data collated from the pilots.
ICE also managed and coordinated the UK pilot by establishing and
managing a multi-stakeholder group. The pilot proved highly successful,
with information disclosed from eight projects from four participating
clients: Broadland Housing Association (Figure1), Durham Country
Council, the Environment Agency and the Highways Agency.

2. The case for transparency and accountability

Figure 1. Members of the UK Construction Sector Transparency

Initiative assurance team visiting a site owned by Broadland Housing
Association, one of the four clients which took part in the UK pilot

82

Construction underpins socio-economic development. It is the

delivery vehicle for crucial physical infrastructure such as roads,
railways, ports, water supply, sewage treatment, hospitals, schools
and the like. Without reliable and effective infrastructure, economic
and human development is hampered. In monetary terms, global
construction output is expected to grow to US$12 700 billion a year
by 2020 (Betts et al., 2011).
Between 2003 and 2006, studies by anti-corruption organisation
Transparency International, the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development and the American Society of Civil
Engineers highlighted construction as one of the sectors most prone to
corruption. They estimated that 1030% of investment in a publicly
funded construction project is lost through mismanagement and
corruption, or close to US$3000 billion of investment per annum over
the next decade (Construction Sector Transparency Initiative, 2011a).
Corruption and mismanagement can lead to unsuitable, defective and
dangerous infrastructure buildings that collapse and roads that break up
which not only raises the costs of maintenance, repair and replacement

Civil Engineering
Volume 165 Issue CE2 May 2012

Construction Sector Transparency Initiative:

making construction more accountable
Hawkins and McKittrick

but can also result in civil and criminal liability for damages.
For example, the 2001 Bhuj earthquake in India led to the collapse
of over 460 000 rural houses of rubble masonry construction. The
non-enforcement of seismic codes, combined with poor inspection
procedures, led to the failure and heavy damage of about 180 highrise reinforced concrete buildings in Ahmedabad, 230 km away from
the epicentre (ProVention Consortium, 2007).
Recent statistical evidence shows that about 83% of all deaths
from earthquakes in the past three decades have occurred in corrupt
societies, usually with poor construction standards (Ambraseys and
Bilham, 2011).
In addition, members of the public fund procurement of public
sector construction projects through their rates and taxes, and they
deserve to know how their money is being spent.
The case for transparency and accountability in the construction
sector is thus compelling.

his report (Fraser, 2004) into the management of the project, there
has been a series of systemic failures and an unwillingness of those
involved in the project to call a halt and demand a re-appraisal. The
few that tried were quickly shown the door.
Construction of facilities for the 2010 Commonwealth Games in
Delhi saw accusations of graft, construction delays and cost over-runs
as the games budget ballooned to US$46 billion compared with
the US$412 million initial estimate. It culminated in the collapse of
the arena footbridge. Following enquiries by Indias Central Bureau
of Investigation, the chief organiser Suresh Kalmadi and two more
officials were held in custody in April 2011 for conspiring to influence
the award of a contract for the events timing and results system to a
Switzerland-based company (NDTV, 2011).
If the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative had been in
place, the issues highlighted by Lord Fraser and the Central Bureau
of Investigation would have been disclosed to the public on an
ongoing basis. This may then have stimulated a debate on the future
of both projects.

3. Providing transparency
It is widely believed that transparency leads not only to
accountability but can be a catalyst for reducing mismanagement
and corruption. The Construction Sector Transparency Initiative
pilots attempted to provide transparency by trialling, a new multistakeholder approach to the public sector procurement of construction
projects which increases transparency and accountability.
The Construction Sector Transparency Initiative concept and its
application is not complicated. Along with the Extractive Industries
Transparency Initiative and the Medicines Transparency Alliance,
the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative is part of a family
of multi-stakeholders initiatives, each of which has been designed to
face a unique set of challenges.
The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative supports
improved governance in resource-rich countries through the
verification and full publication of company payments and
government revenues from oil, gas and mining. In short, all
companies operating in the relevant sectors in countries that are
implementing the initiative have to disclose material payments
made to the government.
The Medicines Transparency Alliance is a pilot multi-stakeholder
alliance working to improve access and affordability of medicines
for the one-third of the worlds population unable to access essential
medicines due to high cost or local unavailability.
The Construction Sector Transparency Initiative achieves
transparency when the procuring entities, or clients, publish at
regular intervals material project information at all stages of the
project cycle, from the initial identification of the need for a project,
through project selection, planning, preliminary and final design
and construction. Material in this context is intended to indicate
that there is sufficient information disclosed to enable the public to
make informed judgements about the cost and quality of the project
concerned. The general public can thus study the information and ask
pertinent questions of officials and politicians.
There are numerous examples where if the Construction Sector
Transparency Initiative had been applied it may well have led to
very different outcomes. For instance, during the construction of the
Scottish Parliament, the price escalated from an early estimate of
50 million at the time when the architect was appointed in 1998, to
a construction cost estimate of 108 million in 2000, to a final sum
of 414 million agreed in 2006. Lord Fraser of Carmyllie stated in

4. Importance to ICE members and employers

The Construction Sector Transparency Initiative is also highly
important to ICE members and the organisations they work for.
Private-sector supporters of the initiative include the European
International Contractors Association, Balfour Beatty, Halcrow,
Strabag and Skanska. Ian Tyler, chief executive of Balfour Beatty
summed up his companys support for the Construction Sector
Transparency Initiative when he said, As an ethical company, Balfour
Beatty supports the [Construction Sector Transparency Initiative]
pilot programme because increased transparency in construction
can only reduce the cost and raise the quality of infrastructure in
developing countries (http://www.constructiontransparency.org).
For ICE members working only in the UK, the Construction Sector
Transparency Initiative provides basic transparent data that allow
them to identify a pipeline of future projects, thus allowing their
employers to plan much further ahead, and feed back on tenders
including frameworks and information on costs for benchmarking. By
embracing the principles of the initiative, members will be following
the ethical principles required of a chartered engineer.
For those involved in projects outside the UK, the Bribery Act 2010
(2010) has a new strict liability offence for corporations and partnerships
of failing to prevent bribery occurring within the organisation (Amaee,
2011). The only defence is if adequate procedures have been put in
place. It is fair to assume that any organisation that implements the
Construction Sector Transparency Initiative principles will be able
to use that as part of its adequate procedures (Department of Justice,
2011: p. 6).
Transparency through the implementation of the Construction
Sector Transparency Initiative is likely to lead to a transparent market
place or level playing field for companies tendering for work.

5. Multi-stakeholder approach
The multi-stakeholder approach is one of the core features of the
Construction Sector Transparency Initiative. In essence, it is a mode
of governance which brings together representatives on a voluntary
basis into a decision-making forum to agree the rules of the game
for a particular issue (Calland, 2010: p.2). In this case the issue is the
disclosure of information from publicly funded construction projects.
83

Civil Engineering
Volume 165 Issue CE2 May 2012

Construction Sector Transparency Initiative:

making construction more accountable
Hawkins and McKittrick

but can also result in civil and criminal liability for damages.
For example, the 2001 Bhuj earthquake in India led to the collapse
of over 460 000 rural houses of rubble masonry construction. The
non-enforcement of seismic codes, combined with poor inspection
procedures, led to the failure and heavy damage of about 180 highrise reinforced concrete buildings in Ahmedabad, 230 km away from
the epicentre (ProVention Consortium, 2007).
Recent statistical evidence shows that about 83% of all deaths
from earthquakes in the past three decades have occurred in corrupt
societies, usually with poor construction standards (Ambraseys and
Bilham, 2011).
In addition, members of the public fund procurement of public
sector construction projects through their rates and taxes, and they
deserve to know how their money is being spent.
The case for transparency and accountability in the construction
sector is thus compelling.

his report (Fraser, 2004) into the management of the project, there
has been a series of systemic failures and an unwillingness of those
involved in the project to call a halt and demand a re-appraisal. The
few that tried were quickly shown the door.
Construction of facilities for the 2010 Commonwealth Games in
Delhi saw accusations of graft, construction delays and cost over-runs
as the games budget ballooned to US$46 billion compared with
the US$412 million initial estimate. It culminated in the collapse of
the arena footbridge. Following enquiries by Indias Central Bureau
of Investigation, the chief organiser Suresh Kalmadi and two more
officials were held in custody in April 2011 for conspiring to influence
the award of a contract for the events timing and results system to a
Switzerland-based company (NDTV, 2011).
If the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative had been in
place, the issues highlighted by Lord Fraser and the Central Bureau
of Investigation would have been disclosed to the public on an
ongoing basis. This may then have stimulated a debate on the future
of both projects.

3. Providing transparency
It is widely believed that transparency leads not only to
accountability but can be a catalyst for reducing mismanagement
and corruption. The Construction Sector Transparency Initiative
pilots attempted to provide transparency by trialling, a new multistakeholder approach to the public sector procurement of construction
projects which increases transparency and accountability.
The Construction Sector Transparency Initiative concept and its
application is not complicated. Along with the Extractive Industries
Transparency Initiative and the Medicines Transparency Alliance,
the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative is part of a family
of multi-stakeholders initiatives, each of which has been designed to
face a unique set of challenges.
The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative supports
improved governance in resource-rich countries through the
verification and full publication of company payments and
government revenues from oil, gas and mining. In short, all
companies operating in the relevant sectors in countries that are
implementing the initiative have to disclose material payments
made to the government.
The Medicines Transparency Alliance is a pilot multi-stakeholder
alliance working to improve access and affordability of medicines
for the one-third of the worlds population unable to access essential
medicines due to high cost or local unavailability.
The Construction Sector Transparency Initiative achieves
transparency when the procuring entities, or clients, publish at
regular intervals material project information at all stages of the
project cycle, from the initial identification of the need for a project,
through project selection, planning, preliminary and final design
and construction. Material in this context is intended to indicate
that there is sufficient information disclosed to enable the public to
make informed judgements about the cost and quality of the project
concerned. The general public can thus study the information and ask
pertinent questions of officials and politicians.
There are numerous examples where if the Construction Sector
Transparency Initiative had been applied it may well have led to
very different outcomes. For instance, during the construction of the
Scottish Parliament, the price escalated from an early estimate of
50 million at the time when the architect was appointed in 1998, to
a construction cost estimate of 108 million in 2000, to a final sum
of 414 million agreed in 2006. Lord Fraser of Carmyllie stated in

4. Importance to ICE members and employers

The Construction Sector Transparency Initiative is also highly
important to ICE members and the organisations they work for.
Private-sector supporters of the initiative include the European
International Contractors Association, Balfour Beatty, Halcrow,
Strabag and Skanska. Ian Tyler, chief executive of Balfour Beatty
summed up his companys support for the Construction Sector
Transparency Initiative when he said, As an ethical company, Balfour
Beatty supports the [Construction Sector Transparency Initiative]
pilot programme because increased transparency in construction
can only reduce the cost and raise the quality of infrastructure in
developing countries (http://www.constructiontransparency.org).
For ICE members working only in the UK, the Construction Sector
Transparency Initiative provides basic transparent data that allow
them to identify a pipeline of future projects, thus allowing their
employers to plan much further ahead, and feed back on tenders
including frameworks and information on costs for benchmarking. By
embracing the principles of the initiative, members will be following
the ethical principles required of a chartered engineer.
For those involved in projects outside the UK, the Bribery Act 2010
(2010) has a new strict liability offence for corporations and partnerships
of failing to prevent bribery occurring within the organisation (Amaee,
2011). The only defence is if adequate procedures have been put in
place. It is fair to assume that any organisation that implements the
Construction Sector Transparency Initiative principles will be able
to use that as part of its adequate procedures (Department of Justice,
2011: p. 6).
Transparency through the implementation of the Construction
Sector Transparency Initiative is likely to lead to a transparent market
place or level playing field for companies tendering for work.

5. Multi-stakeholder approach
The multi-stakeholder approach is one of the core features of the
Construction Sector Transparency Initiative. In essence, it is a mode
of governance which brings together representatives on a voluntary
basis into a decision-making forum to agree the rules of the game
for a particular issue (Calland, 2010: p.2). In this case the issue is the
disclosure of information from publicly funded construction projects.
83

Civil Engineering
Volume 165 Issue CE2 May 2012

Figure 2. Members of the Philippines and Vietnamese Construction

Sector Transparency Initiative multi-stakeholder groups on a site visit
15% of the pilot group members worldwide feared physical threats

Construction Sector Transparency Initiative:

making construction more accountable
Hawkins and McKittrick

At a national level, the initiative is led by a multi-stakeholder

group with members drawn from government (commonly oversight
agencies and procuring entities), the private sector (usually trade
bodies representing contractors and consultants) and civil society.
At an international level, a multi-stakeholder international advisory
group has been formed consisting of representatives from each pilot
country, the World Bank and the UK Department for International
Development and number of other experts to guide the pilot countries
and provide international oversight.
The Philippines multi-stakeholder group is a small appointed
group that has provided government agencies such as the Philippines
Government Electronic Procurement System with a body of expert
professional opinion to improve the information that is disclosed
to the public (Figure 2). The Construction Sector Transparency
Initiative provided the multi-stakeholder group with a formal space
to exchange views and a legitimacy that had not previously existed in
the pursuit of a common goal.
Ethiopia and Tanzania opted for a different approach, establishing
a large member association from which members were nominated
to an executive multi-stakeholder group. Although the approach was
different, the Ethiopian group successfully influenced the national
public procurement authority to change its regulations to include a
formal disclosure requirement for the majority of items required by
the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (Figure 3).
The multi-stakeholder group members face considerable challenges,
particularly in tackling entrenched interests, and are potentially at
personal risk. A survey of international advisory group members
showed that 20% of them feared disclosure may negatively impact
on future job and contract opportunities and 15% feared physical
threats. Clearly these concerns impact on what each group feels
comfortable disclosing. There is also the risk of elite capture unfair
diversion of funds by individuals or the host organisation, which
creates a challenging situation for multi-stakeholder groups as it risks
damaging their legitimacy. But perhaps the biggest challenge of all is
the time limitations of voluntary input by group members.
Key to overcoming these challenges is a rigorous governance structure
and terms of reference that establish the functions and accountability
of the multi-stakeholder groups and the national secretariats. These
include a process for electing or appointing credible multi-stakeholder
group members with reasonably balanced representation of each
constituent group. This provides a framework for the Construction
Sector Transparency Initiative to operate smoothly and protect multistakeholder group members from vested interests.
In the UK a multi-stakeholder group was established with similar
terms of reference to those of an ICE expert panel with civil
society input being drawn from Transparency International UK
and more latterly the National Consumer Federation. In Ethiopia,
where the space for civil society is highly restricted, the multistakeholder group drew its civil society input from Transparency
Ethiopia, Birhane Tibeb Art, Health and Environmental Association,
and the Ethiopian Association of Engineers (Construction Sector
Transparency Initiative, 2011b).

6. Disclosure
Figure 3. The Ethiopian multi-stakeholder group successfully influenced
the national public procurement authority to change its regulations
to include a formal disclosure requirement for the majority of items
required by the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative

84

Construction projects are highly visible at the local level and directly
impact communities. They thus have the potential to arouse strong
demand for information to hold decision-makers to account. To achieve
transparency, the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative has to

Civil Engineering
Volume 165 Issue CE2 May 2012

Construction Sector Transparency Initiative:

making construction more accountable
Hawkins and McKittrick

disclose information that is understandable, relevant, accessible and

useful to government, the private sector and particularly the public.
The initiatives pilot design document anticipated that the
participating procuring entities would disclose 31 elements of
material project information on an ongoing basis. Current laws in
the pilot countries require the proactive disclosure of information
only from the procurement stage of the project cycle. By contrast,
the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative requires information
to be disclosed throughout the cycle, from project identification to
completion, and it also requires disclosures to be regularly updated
during project implementation.
Baseline studies undertaken for the initiative found that the
procuring entities in the pilot countries rarely met even the legal
requirements for disclosure (Figure 4). Thus the requirement to
disclose 31 items of information on a regular basis presented a huge
challenge (Construction Sector Transparency Initiative, 2011c).
A template for collating the material project information on each
construction project was developed by the Construction Sector
Transparency Initiatives international secretariat and was closely
followed in the pilots in Ethiopia, Malawi, Tanzania and the UK.
The Philippines and Zambia developed their own templates, which
included each item in the international secretariat template with some
additional items. In Vietnam, a number of templates were developed
to disclose more detailed information (including sections of bills of
quantities) at various stages of the project cycle (Construction Sector
Transparency Initiative, 2011c).
In practice, Vietnam was the only country in which procuring
entities disclosed material project information on multiple occasions
directly into the public domain (Figure 5). In that country, there was
a clear directive to disclose from the highest authority, the prime
minister. Staff of the procuring entities received incentive payments
to compensate for the additional task of collating the information for
disclosure, and they received help from the assurance team to collate
the information (Construction Sector Transparency Initiative, 2011c).
In the other pilot countries it was the assurance teams which
assumed the responsibility for collecting and collating the material
project information, and it was the multi-stakeholder groups who
eventually disclosed this information on a single occasion (Figure6).
As the procuring entities participated in the Construction Sector
Transparency Initiative on a voluntary basis, without a formal legal
or political requirement to disclose the information, the multi-

the Construction Sector

Transparency Initiative requires
information to be disclosed
throughout the cycle, from
project identification to
completion, and it also requires
disclosures to be regularly
updated during project
implementation

PE

MPI

MPI

MPI

Vietnam
Tanzania
Malawi
UK
Philippines
Guatemala
Zambia
0

Analysis

Key
PE procuring entity
MPI material project information
AT assurance team
AR assurance report
MSG multi-stakeholder group

MSG

Disclosure

Disclosures
AT

MPI

Figure 5. Material project information collection and disclosure process

in Vietnam it was the only country in which procuring entities
disclosed project information on multiple occasions directly into the
public domain

Analysis

MSG

MPI
AR

AR

Note: the exploding bubbles

represent disclosure of material
project information (MPI) and
assurance reports (AR)

100

Figure 4. Average number of items of public-sector project

procurement information pro-actively disclosed in each of the pilot
countries as a percentage of the number of items legally required to
be disclosed even in the UK the figure was only 50%

PE
AT

20
40
60
80
Items disclosed: items legally required: %

Key
PE procuring entity
MPI material project information
AT assurance team
AR assurance report
MSG multi-stakeholder group

Note: the exploding bubbles

represent disclosure of material
project information (MPI) and
assurance reports (AR)

Figure 6. Material project information collection and disclosure process

in Ethiopia, Malawi, the Philippines, Tanzania, the UK and Zambia
the multi-stakeholder groups and their assurance teams needed to do
all the work

85

Civil Engineering
Volume 165 Issue CE2 May 2012

Construction Sector Transparency Initiative:

making construction more accountable
Hawkins and McKittrick

stakeholder groups had to secure their participation in a way that

would place only minimal disruption and additional burden on them.

n verify the information for accuracy and completeness

n use the information to assess the time, cost and quality of each project
n produce a report on each project identifying any causes for
concern (Construction Sector Transparency Initiative, 2011d).

7. Assurance process

The assurance teams found the additional task of collecting and

collating the material project information from source documents
belonging to the procuring entity challenging. The process was
hindered by poor document management, with source documents
being held in different offices, often scattered across the country, and
sometimes a reluctance of procuring entity staff to co-operate. In some
countries the procuring entities were suspicious of the Construction
Sector Transparency Initiative because they saw it as pushing a donor
agenda, while others doubted the value of information disclosure,
especially when compared with the additional costs it entailed and
the fact that they already were subject to external audits.
Having the material project information collated by the assurance
teams meant that verifying the information was largely redundant beyond
highlighting gaps in information, such as missing feasibility studies in
Ethiopia and budgets in Zambia. The assurance teams highlighted time
and cost over-runs but rarely stated if they were justified or not.
In some cases, further investigation and closer analysis of the
documentation (particularly the bills of quantities) revealed price
increases that were excessive, including instances of double
counting. Detailed analyses of initial contract prices raised similar
concerns. This suggests that to make robust judgements on project
cost requires a thorough investigation similar to an audit.
Making informed judgements on project quality is even more
problematic as this requires a technical audit. The assurance teams
were thus limited to identifying shortcomings in quality assurance
procedures and reporting any identified defects. The assurance teams
in Malawi, Tanzania, the Philippines and Zambia made site visits but
could only make a visual inspection.

The assurance teams had been appointed by the multi-stakeholder

groups to

8. What was disclosed?

The Construction Sector Transparency Initiative pilot has shown
that disclosure of project information into the public domain is
feasible. All the seven pilot countries disclosed material project
information from all of the 87 projects featured (Table 1). In Vietnam,
material project information was disclosed by the procuring entities

Figure 7. Material project information summary and observations for

the 32 million Mandela Expressway in Tanzania

Country

Transport

Water,
sanitation,
flood defence

Schools,
colleges

Housing

Government
buildings

Hospitals,
health centres

Ports, airports

Total

Ethiopia

14

25

Malawi

Philippines

10

Tanzania

UK

Vietnam

12

Zambia

17

Total

41

18

12

87

Note: Guatemala joined the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative later than other pilot countries and the process there was ongoing at the time of writing.

Table 1. The Construction Sector Transparency Initiative pilots resulted

in material information being collected and disclosed on a wide range
of public-sector construction projects

86

Civil Engineering
Volume 165 Issue CE2 May 2012

Quality 9%

Construction Sector Transparency Initiative:

making construction more accountable
Hawkins and McKittrick

Project identification,
design and so on
25%

Time over-run
17%

Cost over-run
14%
Procurement
26%

Contract award 6%

Figure 8. Distribution of causes for concern as identified in the

Construction Sector Transparency Initiative assurance team reports
nearly a third of the pilot projects suffered from poor management of
time or cost

on three separate occasions. In all the other countries, material project

information was disclosed only once.
Assurance team reports were published in Tanzania, Zambia,
Malawi and the UK. In most cases they were published together with
the material project information template. In Malawi and Tanzania
the causes for concern identified in the assurance team reports were
also published alongside the material project information template
(Figure 7 shows an example from Tanzania).
Getting the agreement of the procuring entities to publish reports
that could be critical of their performance was a difficult and highly
sensitive process. The multi-stakeholder groups had to try to retain the
procuring entities co-operation without compromising the credibility
and validity of the information that was to be published. The groups
generally agreed to edit the reports where the procuring entities
comments were factually based and the assurance teams were found
to have made errors. Where agreement could not be reached, the
procuring entities comments were published alongside the reports.
The multi-stakeholder groups in the Philippines and Vietnam
opted not to disclose the assurance team reports due to the
sensitivity of the findings. They chose instead to engage with the
procuring entities informally, to try to improve the management of
the construction projects.
Ethiopia opted for a compromise. Having disclosed the material
project information from 25 projects onto its website, the multistakeholder group decided to present, in a civil society workshop,

five of the 25 assurance team reports, including a report on the

most expensive road in Ethiopian history, to an invited group of
organisations from the media, civil society groups and professional
bodies. This workshop acted as a catalyst for building the demand for
the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative in Ethiopia, leading
to interviews with both government and independent newspapers
and documentary programmes on radio and television (Construction
Sector Transparency Initiative, 2011b).
Although this was not a formal requirement of the Construction Sector
Transparency Initiative, a number of countries (Malawi, Tanzania, the
UK and Zambia) also decided to publish the findings from their baseline
studies. These studies examined a total of 129 projects in the roads,
health, water, education, power and housing sectors.

9. Disclosed data
The disclosure of material project information in the Construction
Sector Transparency Initiative pilots has highlighted causes for
concern throughout the project cycle (Figure 8). It particularly
highlighted the poor management of time and cost (31%). The
baseline studies showed that, of the 145 projects sampled in the eight
countries, at least 55% ran over budget, with 8% being more than
100% over budget (Figure 9).
They also showed that the average contract lasted 9130% longer
than the original contract period. Analysing a sample of 67 projects in
six countries from the assurance process pointed to time over-runs on
40% of projects (Construction Sector Transparency Initiative, 2011d).
The assurance teams also identified causes for concern during project
identification and design (26%) and procurement (28%). Well over half
pertained to contracts with consultants for design or supervision.

10. Impact
The Construction Sector Transparency Initiative has shown how
the public disclosure of information from a small sample of projects
can act as a catalyst for improving the governance of publicly funded
construction projects.
In Ethiopia, for example, the Ethiopian Roads Authority, the
Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Health have all publicly
stated that they have learnt valuable lessons from the pilot process
and are looking to make improvements in document management
for roads projects, complying with the procurement regulations for
education projects and carrying out feasibility studies for all major

UK

Cost over-run
Time over-run

Guatemala
Philippines
Vietnam
Zambia
Malawi
Tanzania
Ethiopia
0

20

40

60
Over-run: %

80

100

120

140

Figure 9. Average project time and cost over-runs in each of the

Construction Sector Transparency Initiative pilot countries were
determined by baseline studies

87

Civil Engineering
Volume 165 Issue CE2 May 2012

Construction Sector Transparency Initiative:

making construction more accountable
Hawkins and McKittrick

health projects.
In Malawi, the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative
assurance process confirmed the concerns of the government regarding
the quality and cost of the construction of buildings (concerns that
were originally raised by the Construction Sector Transparency
Initiative baseline study) and has prompted a re-examination of
the role of the Department of Buildings. The intention is to change
the law to allow government ministries the freedom to use the
private sector on a competitive basis to carry out design, tendering,
supervision and the management of contracts tasks that were
previously done only by the Department of Buildings and to require
the Department to exercise only oversight.

There is also growing interest from countries such as Uganda and

South Africa that wish to join the Construction Sector Transparency
Initiative.
The endorsement by the Group of Twenty (G20) Finance Ministers
and Central Bank Governors at its 2011 summit in Cannes has
given the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative international
legitimacy (G20, 2011: p. 18). A global programme is currently in
development and is expected to be launched in 2012.

11. Conclusion
The Construction Sector Transparency Initiative has proved itself
ready to make a unique and important contribution to improving
investment in infrastructure. It has demonstrated that pro-active
information disclosure is feasible in different political, social and
regulatory environments and can be a catalyst to driving change.
Pro-active disclosure requirement is currently very limited.
However, the information that is currently required to be disclosed
is centred on the tender requirements, with information from the
implementation phase almost never disclosed. Thus, a formal
disclosure requirement that promotes access to information and
the expansion of public information disclosure that complements
existing initiatives, such as procurement reform, is necessary. This
can be in terms of a law, or a simple letter from a senior government
official to the country agencies.
The process of employing assurance teams to collate information
from procuring entities, and then using multi-stakeholder groups
to disclose the material project information used in the pilots, is
unsustainable. The most efficient and sustainable mechanism for
disclosure is by the procuring entities themselves. Disclosure would
then take place at the conclusion of the early stages of the project
cycle (planning, design, tender and so on) and then at regular periods
to be determined by the size and duration of the project during the
construction phase.
Even with a formal disclosure requirement, it is crucial to secure
the engagement of procuring entities to ensure they understand the
requirements and assist in developing the systems and capacity to
enable implementation. Electronic data storage will simplify the
process and lower the costs of disclosure. Strengthening the demand
for the disclosed information through a dissemination programme
is essential to stimulating the public interest and holding procuring
entities and government to account.
The multi-stakeholder approach is effective for leading the initiative
but the multi-stakeholder groups require balanced representation,
management support and potentially independent legal status.

12. Looking forward

All pilot countries including Guatemala are looking to take the
Construction Sector Transparency Initiative forward, with some (the
Philippines and Vietnam) having secured future funding and others
in discussion with donor country offices. In the UK, the Treasurys
Infrastructure UK unit has included working with the Construction
Sector Transparency Initiative as part of its implementation plan
to reduce the costs of UK publicly funded economic infrastructure.
88

Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank Jill Wells of Engineers Against
Poverty and policy advisor to the Construction Sector Transparency
Initiative for the data and charts used in this paper.

References
Amaee R (2011) UKs new wide-ranging Bribery Act comes into force in April
2011. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers Civil Engineering
164(1): 12.
Ambraseys N and Bilham R (2011) Corruption kills. Nature 469(7329):
153155.
Betts M, Robinson G, Blake N, Burton C and Godden D (2011) Global
Construction 2020. A Global Forecast for the Construction Industry over
the Next Decade to 2020. Global Construction Perspectives and Oxford
Economics, London, UK.
Bribery Act 2010 (2010) Elizabeth II. Chapter 23. Her Majestys Stationery
Office, London, UK.
Calland R (2010) Multi-stakeholder Working: Lessons from the Frontline.
Medicines Transparency Alliance, London, UK.
Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (2011a) Transparency and
Accountability in the Construction Sector. Construction Sector Transparency
Initiative, London, UK, Briefing Note 3.
Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (2011b) Ethiopia. Construction
Sector Transparency Initiative, London, UK, Briefing Note 10.
Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (2011c) Disclosure. Construction
Sector Transparency Initiative, London, UK, Briefing Note 4.
Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (2011d) The Assurance Process.
Construction Sector Transparency Initiative, London, UK, Briefing Note 7.
Department of Justice (2011) The Bribery Act 2010: Guidance about
Procedures which Relevant Commercial Organisations Can Put into Place to
Prevent Persons Associated with them from Bribing (Section 9 of the Bribery
Act 2010). Department of Justice, London, UK.
Fraser P (2004) The Holyrood Inquiry. A Report by the Rt Hon Lord Fraser of
Carmyllie QC on his Inquiry into the Holyrood Building Project. Scottish
Parliamentary Corporate Body, Edinburgh, UK. See http://www.scottish.
parliament.uk/SPICeResources/HolyroodInquiry.pdf (accessed 20/01/2012).
G20 (2011) Cannes Summit Final Declaration. Building Our Common Future:
Renewed Collective Action For The Benefit Of All. G20, Paris, France.
NDTV (2011) CWG Scam: Suresh Kalmadi Arrested, Suspended by Congress.
NDTV Convergence, New Delhi, India. See http://www.ndtv.com/article/
india/suresh-kalmadi-arrested-formal-announcement-this-afternoon-101310
(accessed 20/01/2012).
ProVention Consortium (2007) Tools for Mainstreaming Disaster Risk
Reduction: Construction Design, Building Standards and Site Selection.
ProVention Consortium / International Federation of Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies, Geneva, Switzerland, Guidance Note 12.

What do you think?

If you would like to comment on this paper, please email up to 200 words
to the editor at journals@ice.org.uk.
If you would like to write a paper of 2000 to 3500 words about your own
experience in this or any related area of civil engineering, the editor will be
happy to provide any help or advice you need.