arbiter
JournalsAccount

International Anti-Corruption Commissions: Explaining Institutional Design and Autonomy

Rachel A. Schwartz

Comparative Politics2026https://doi.org/10.5129/001041526x17686834944182article
ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

Political corruption is a leading governance challenge, yet governments often lack the will to tackle it and may use anti-corruption to undermine democracy. This dilemma has given rise to international anti-corruption commissions (IACCs), which rely on partnerships between international experts and domestic personnel. Why are some IACCs granted independence, while others are politically subordinate? Focusing on northern Central America, this article argues that where coalitions comprised of government insiders and domestic activists maintain a seat at the negotiating table, they use their agenda-setting capacities, expertise, and ability to raise the audience costs of incumbent maneuvers to dilute anti-corruption to ensure greater IACC independence. Additionally, struggles over IACC autonomy are influenced by transnational dynamics, as political leaders learn from one another how to limit anti-corruption enforcement.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5129/001041526x17686834944182

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{rachel2026,
  title        = {{International Anti-Corruption Commissions: Explaining Institutional Design and Autonomy}},
  author       = {Rachel A. Schwartz},
  journal      = {Comparative Politics},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5129/001041526x17686834944182},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

International Anti-Corruption Commissions: Explaining Institutional Design and Autonomy

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.