This chapter recognises that the government and the private sector, civil society and individuals are jointly responsible for promoting a culture of integrity. In order to cultivate this sense of shared responsibility, the chapter contains recommendations for strengthening education for integrity at all levels, promoting a national commitment to integrity, strengthening social participation and oversight, and proactively involving the private sector in building a culture of integrity.
OECD Integrity Review of the Dominican Republic
Implementing a Strategic Vision for Public Integrity and Anti-Corruption
Abstract
Integrity is a shared responsibility between state institutions and the whole-of-society. Every person and every civil society, academic and business organisation has an active role in and a shared responsibility for building a culture of integrity in the Dominican Republic (OECD, 2017[1]) .
Involving the public as key stakeholders is a prerequisite for any strategy aimed at fostering a culture of public integrity. Citizens can monitor compliance with policies and decisions concerning integrity, while also having a direct responsibility to comply with integrity standards in their daily lives. No reform or public intervention will be effective while the population tolerates violations of integrity standards, bribery, tax evasion, receiving benefits through patronage, or any other activity that makes wrongful use of public resources. Civil society organisations, academia and business also have a shared responsibility for fostering public integrity, especially as they interact with public officials on a daily basis, play a key role in setting the public agenda and have the power to influence public decision-making.
The OECD Recommendation on Public Integrity adopts a shared responsibility approach, encouraging countries to cultivate a culture of public integrity by partnering with the private sector, civil society and individuals, in particular (OECD, 2017[1]):
Engaging relevant stakeholders in the development, regular updating and implementation of the public integrity system.
Raising awareness in society of the benefits of public integrity, and reducing tolerance of violations of public integrity standards, and carrying out, where appropriate, campaigns to promote civic education on public integrity, among individuals and particularly in schools.
Involving the private sector and civil society in the complementary benefits to public integrity that arise from upholding integrity in business and in non-profit activities, sharing and building on lessons learned from good practices.
Various recent activities in the Dominican Republic have been aligned with this objective. For example, the addition of the core competency of ethics and citizenship in the curriculum of the education system, the growth of compliance programmes in the private sector, the launch in late 2025 of the “Ciudadanos al 100” programme by the Ministry of Education (Ministerio de Educación, MINERD) whose purpose is to strengthen ethics, civic morality and patriotic values among students, and other advances documented throughout this chapter. Despite these efforts, it is necessary to continue to cultivate a culture of integrity in the whole-of-society. This includes addressing challenges related to a widespread culture of tolerance of corruption and the need to strengthen levels of education on the values of integrity.
The recommendations in this chapter are intended to address the most important integrity challenges in Dominican society by strengthening ongoing actions and building on the current institutional framework.
This chapter is structured in four sections. The first examines the need to strengthen education for integrity at all levels, from early childhood to university, to bring about, in the medium and long term, a change of behaviour, active civic engagement and a greater culture of integrity. The second is aimed at Dominicans, stressing the need to foster a culture of integrity and to combat tolerance towards corruption and patronage, vital conditions for underpinning government’s integrity and anti-corruption efforts. The third area looks at how to foster trust between people, civil society organisations and government institutions by strengthening citizen participation and effectively implementing existing opportunities for engagement. The fourth and final area is aimed at the Dominican private sector and their commitment to implementing, promoting and monitoring integrity measures and preventing the risk of corruption in its dealings with the public sector.
The OECD Recommendation on Public Integrity urges countries to raise awareness in society of the benefits of public integrity, reduce tolerance of violations of public integrity standards and carry out campaigns to promote civic education on public integrity, among individuals and particularly in schools (OECD, 2017[1]).
Building a culture of integrity in society requires the education of young people (OECD, 2018[2]). The knowledge, skills and behaviours they acquire now will shape their country’s future, and will help them uphold public integrity, which is essential for preventing corruption (OECD, 2018[2]). To instil standards of public integrity from an early age and at different stages of education, it is essential to engage the school system (OECD, 2018[2]). Involving the Dominican education sector is, therefore, essential to bring about sustained cultural change over time. Education for integrity is about inspiring ethical behaviour and providing children and young people with the tools and knowledge they need to refuse to engage in corruption and challenge the social norms that allow it to flourish It can help generate new social norms and common knowledge about expected behaviours to prevent corruption, and make citizens aware from an early age of their role and responsibility in promoting integrity (OECD, 2018[2]).
The Dominican Constitution (Article 63, paragraph 13) establishes the importance and duty of education for integrity: “With the aim of educating citizens who are aware of their rights and duties, instruction in social and civic education and the teaching of the Constitution, fundamental rights and guarantees, patriotic values and the principles of peaceful coexistence shall be compulsory in all public and private educational institutions” (Government of the Dominican Republic, 2010[3]).
Nevertheless, there are challenges for implementing education for integrity in practice. In 2009 and 2016, the Dominican Republic took part in an international assessment of learning in Civic and Citizenship Education. In both years, the country obtained the lowest score among the participating countries, with no significant change between the two years. The study concluded that “after eight years schooling, students demonstrated a poor knowledge of civics and citizenship. However, many of their attitudes are encouraging (...) The data show that the higher the socio-economic quintile, the better the outcomes. (...) The majority of students have never participated in an electoral process within the school. The few who participate do so in artistic and ecological activities” (Asociación Internacional para la Evaluación del Rendimiento Académico, 2016[4]).
In 2023, the MINERD carried out its most recent reform of the school curriculum. This included adding a set of core, cross-cutting competencies to the entire Dominican pre-university education system. These competences link across the whole curriculum and are considered essential for the development of a fully rounded individual. One of the core competencies is “Ethics and Citizenship”. For each curricular area (e.g. Spanish language, mathematics, social sciences, etc.) and each grade, specific competencies, content and achievement indicators are developed as means to attain the core competency “Ethics and Citizenship”. For example:
Spanish language, Secondary Level, 2nd grade: Uses a variety of texts to learn about and question the social practices of citizenship with the aim of cultivating universal and humanistic values while raising awareness of health and environmental issues, using technological and other tools.
Social sciences, Primary Level, 6th grade: Promotes democratic relationships in their actions, as well as their own rights and duties and those of others, and the preservation of the Dominican Republic’s and the world’s historical, natural and cultural heritage; with the aim of fostering citizenship that upholds the rule of law, interculturality and a culture of peace in different contexts.
Mathematics, Primary Level, 1st grade: Cultivates norms of coexistence and teamwork, respecting the ideas of classmates in order to reach agreements on the mathematical topics developed (Ministry of Education of the Dominican Republic, 2023[5]).
The MINERD has also produced booklets to work on key aspects of the “Ethics and Citizenship” core competency, with titles such as “Let's talk about living together harmoniously” and “Culture of peace”.
5.2.1. The Ministry of Education could extend the content of the “Ethics and Citizenship” core competency to cover other key aspects of education for integrity
The MINERD's 2023 curriculum review succeeded in partially incorporating public integrity values in the school curriculum by adding age-appropriate learning outcomes on public integrity to existing subjects. It could extend the content of the “Ethics and Citizenship” core competency to cover other key aspects of education for integrity, such as the mechanisms and consequences of corruption, strategies to combat corruption, the purpose and functions of public institutions and legislation on public integrity. To that end, the Dominican Republic could draw inspiration from the OECD's learning outcomes for education for integrity (Table 5.1).
Additionally, the promotion of integrity through the Dominican pre-university education system could include the following key components: i) media and digital literacy for the use with integrity of information and communication technologies (ICTs) and social networks, and ii) digital education for civic engagement. On the one hand, the rapid spread of fake news and misinformation and the increasing use of online platforms by young people as primary sources of news mean countries need to increase their efforts to strengthen media and information literacy and boost the resilience of children and young people to misinformation (OECD, 2024[6]). On the other hand, although one axis of the Dominican Republic's 2030 Digital Agenda does include digital culture and skills, there is no mention of fostering active citizenship through digital education. Education for full and active citizenship in the digital environment could be added to the “Ethics and Citizenship” core competency.
This exercise to strengthen the content of the “Ethics and Citizenship” core competency must be supported by the development of materials for educators and students to help them achieve the new learning outcomes on public integrity within the existing subjects. As such, the MINERD could develop guidelines and materials to complement and expand existing content so that the new concepts of integrity and anti-corruption form an explicit part of the “Ethics and Citizenship” core competency.
These materials should be adapted to the different educational levels and ages of students:
In the early years of formal education (Initial and Primary Levels), integrity lessons should be very practical, teaching by example and through games, plays, other techniques, etc., introducing key concepts such as the common good, truth, corruption, what is good and what is not. For example, Prada (2021[7]) conducted a study in the Dominican Republic on the potential of physical education to encourage ethical values through sport and play activities that teach that the best athletes are those who are disciplined and work hard, not those who cheat or “buy” medals. This means providing training to physical education teachers in the Dominican Republic, so that they do not pass on to students learned values of their own that do not necessarily coincide with the official curriculum design.
Secondary Level could go more deeply into the subject, introducing more clearly the duties and rights of citizenship, responsibilities, and what can and cannot be done. The Dominican Republic can draw on examples from other countries and international good practices, such as the group activities, ethical dilemma training, debates and other methodologies to address issues including transparency, conflict of interest, elections and corruption, described in the OECD report “Education for Integrity” (OECD, 2018[2]).
Furthermore, in order not to deepen existing gaps, and to ensure a coherent vision on public integrity in the country, it is important that both the private and public education sectors commit to education for integrity and have similar access to the materials and content developed as part of the “Ethics and Citizenship” competency. Considering that the core competency “Ethics and Citizenship” is mandatory for both the public and private education sectors, the MINERD could issue a binding instruction (ordinance or resolution) to ensure that private schools also adopt education for integrity in their curricula and follow similar approaches. Such a document should set out the implementation strategy to be followed and be developed in a co-ordinated and formal way through existing channels, ensuring the participation of all relevant educational actors.
5.2.2. The Ministry of Education could strengthen education for integrity through more customised learning and extracurricular activities
Incorporating specific subjects or learning outcomes on public integrity into the curriculum in appropriate modules is one way to strengthen education for integrity. However, there are also other ways of educating for integrity. For example, customised and on-demand training for schools and extracurricular activities promoted and delivered by educational, public integrity and/or civil society organisations.
In the Dominican Republic, the MINERD has developed extracurricular activities to strengthen education for integrity for children and young people. These include the signing of a co-operation agreement between the MINERD and the Ombudsman (Defensor del Pueblo) to promote the teaching of the Animated Constitution and children's rights in the country's educational centres. Under this agreement, talks and workshops on the Dominican Constitution and citizens' rights have been held in schools, and related content has been integrated into the social sciences and integral human and religious education curricula. Supporting materials have also been developed, such as guides on Moral, Civic and Ethical Citizenship Education for primary and secondary levels and an audiovisual series, “The Animated Constitution”.
In addition, the MINERD launched the “Culture, Identity and Citizenship” programme with the aim of strengthening national identity and citizenship skills in students in different levels, modalities and subsystems of the education system. The MINERD also plans to develop citizenship education programmes based on civic respect, tolerance, responsibility, empathy and understanding towards people from different social and cultural backgrounds.
However, renewed efforts are required to strengthen education for integrity. Thus, the MINERD could design and offer a series of customised training and extracurricular activities for children and young people throughout the country, through partnerships between public entities and civil society organisations. Other public and educational entities could also take a lead in efforts to implement education for integrity. For example, the Office of the Comptroller General (Contraloría General de la República, CGR), the Chamber of Accounts of the Dominican Republic (Cámara de Cuentas de la República Dominicana, CCRD), the Judiciary Branch and/or universities could develop extracurricular activities for second-cycle students to participate as volunteers or interns, supporting the activities of these institutions for a specific period of time. Box 5.1 and Box 5.3 give some examples from other countries that could serve as inspiration.
As a source of inspiration for designing extracurricular activities, the experiences of Brazil, Costa Rica and Colombia are highlighted:
Brazil: The programme “One for all and all for one! For Ethics and Citizenship” (Um por todos e todos por um! Pela ética e cidadania, UPT) is an initiative of the Office of the Comptroller General of the Union (Controladoria-Geral da União, CGU), in partnership with the Maurício de Sousa Institute. Its aim is to awaken in students a sense of citizenship, ethics, participation and responsibility, with the school as the main hub for carrying out activities. The experiences provided by the collaborative teaching-learning process take place in the classroom or virtual learning environment, supported by an educator, who is trained in the Programme. The UPT is aimed at pupils in Primary Education and has materials suitable for the 1st to 5th grades. It also provides complementary materials such as videos, comic strips and stories that can be used freely by the educator at any stage.
Colombia: The pedagogical approach of the “Mundo Crystal” Anti-Corruption Citizen School aimed at children and adolescents focuses on civic education and the construction of the common good from an early age, so that they can identify, question and reject corrupt practices. It is implemented through a private partnership between Transparency for Colombia (Transparencia por Colombia) and the Bolivar Foundation of Banco DaVivienda. Crystal, the main character who features in the learning process, facilitates the understanding of complex concepts such as corruption, transparency and the public sphere, and encourages the development of active citizenship. Learning takes place through three pedagogical modules, where values and good practices are strengthened. These activities are accompanied by stories about Crystal and her community, designed to connect participants with the values of their family and social environment, fostering their ability to reject dishonest behaviour and be agents of change. This process also reinforces, the learning of rights, duties and responsibilities, so students can become leaders capable of positively influencing their community.
Costa Rica: The “Probity Award” (Galardón de la Probidad) gives institutional recognition to primary schools that apply the certification methodology for this award. Recognition takes the form of a certificate and a physical banner signalling that the school is proficient in the fulfilment of various training activities for its students and staff. It will be issued for one year and centres can recertify. The aim is to develop awareness and practical experience among primary school students in the national education system through fun exercises for learning, internalising and constructing the principles contained in the Law Against Corruption and Illicit Enrichment (Ley Contra la Corrupción y el Enriquecimiento Ilícito). These are: to act in the public interest, to act within the law, to act with rectitude, understood as acting in good faith and without discriminating against anyone, to make reasoned decisions and to manage public resources efficiently. Students and teaching and administrative staff are encouraged to make them part of their personal experience, leading to intolerance of corruption. This project is carried out in 3 phases: first, contact and training of the administrative and teaching staff involved; second, development of the pilot project; third, presentation of the results.
Source: Brazil: (OECD, 2025[8]); Colombia: https://transparenciacolombia.org.co/mundo-crystal/; Costa Rica: https://sites.google.com/cgr.go.cr/juntos-somos-mas/galard%C3%B3n-de-la-probidad.
5.2.3. Universities could consider including courses on public integrity and anti-corruption in their curricula
In addition to schools, higher-education students and institutions play a key role in education for integrity. As future employees, higher-education students need knowledge and skills to comply with the expected integrity requirements and standards, as well as to be able to deal with integrity challenges they may encounter in their future workplace. For their part, higher-education institutions have a responsibility, as stakeholders in the integrity system, to train future leaders to act based on values and in accordance with the behaviours needed to fight corruption as public officials and/or private employees (OECD, 2024[9]). The higher-education system must therefore reinforce or consolidate education for integrity for future professionals, adapting values and ethics to the specific field of study and its inherent risks.
Accordingly, higher-education institutions in the Dominican Republic could develop courses on public integrity and anti-corruption and integrate them into their undergraduate and graduate programmes in order to strengthen education for public integrity before students start their working life. To strengthen the approach to integrity and anti-corruption issues among higher-education students, the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology (Ministerio de Educación Superior, Ciencia y Tecnología, MESCyT), as the regulatory body of the national higher education system, in co-ordination with the Directorate General of Ethics and Government Integrity (Dirección General de Ética e Integridad Gubernamental, DIGEIG), could issue general guidelines and recommendations to higher-education institutions to help them develop and integrate the aforementioned concepts in their programmes. This initiative could be complemented by a series of joint and related measures, including:
Joint training for university teachers on integrity and anti-corruption.
Developing of standardised and pedagogically mediated educational materials to be used to support courses in related subjects.
A system for recognising higher-education institutions with good integrity practices (e.g. an award from an academic research fund).
Workshops to promote integrity run by public entities with responsibilities in the integrity system, such as the DIGEIG and specialised oversight entities.
Ethics and integrity courses that encourage dialogue and keynote lectures with specialists, publications, communications, etc.
Case studies on ethical dilemmas, which can be part of student essay competitions or graduation papers.
Leverage the social outreach of universities to implement initiatives in local communities, such as citizen oversight committees, ethics clinics where students advise public institutions, among others.
The Dominican Republic could also encourage the development and certification of master's degree studies and specialised courses in public integrity and anti-corruption, both for public officials and for anyone in the private sector with an interest. In addition, incentives (e.g. time) could be offered for public officials to undertake new and existing training courses. Finally, the Dominican Republic could take advantage of existing academic networks to promote academic events related to the theme and encourage the participation of higher-education students.
5.2.4. The Dominican Republic should invest in developing teachers’ capacities in integrity and corruption prevention
The implementation of education for integrity content requires a strong teacher training component and the provision of the necessary classroom tools. Teachers are a key determinant of the success of any reform of the curriculum or content introduced into formal education, as they are the ones who operate in the classroom, interact with students and implement MINERD's strategies on a day-to-day basis.
A wealth of specialist literature confirms that teacher quality has an impact on student outcomes. A recent World Bank compilation on the subject notes that “teaching is the profession on which all others depend” (World Bank, 2021[10]). Furthermore, in a 2022 research on “Teaching careers: training, profiles, performance”, the Dominican Institute for Evaluation and Research on Educational Quality (Instituto Dominicano de Evaluación e Investigación de la Calidad Educativa, IDEICE) emphasises that “the quality of teaching practice is what will ultimately influence whether students complete each cycle and level with the competencies set out in the Dominican curriculum, so research on teaching provides essential data for decision-making” (IDEICE, 2022[11]).
Additionally, the Ten-Year Plan Horizonte 2034, under Strategic Axis 3 –professionalised and committed teachers who possess the competencies, skills and support required to guide students’ learning and holistic development– commits to strengthening initial, continuous and specialised teacher training. This is based on the understanding that teachers are a cornerstone of education quality and student success, as they act as guides, facilitators and mediators of the learning process, creating conditions that promote students’ overall development (Ministry of Education of the Dominican Republic, 2024[12]).
Training for educators should therefore be a core component of any programme for education for integrity. Education for integrity requires specific skills and knowledge to help create an environment of trust, respect and tolerance between students and teachers so they can address contemporary social issues such as corruption, ethical dilemmas and lack of integrity (OECD, 2018[2]).
In view of this, it is essential for the Dominican Republic to strengthen its efforts to build teachers’ capacities and skills to enable them to implement strategies and good practices for the education of children and young people in integrity. These efforts can be framed within ongoing projects, in particular, initiatives stemming from the Dominican Republic’s 2014-2030 National Pact for Education Reform (Pacto Nacional para la Reforma Educativa), Chapter 5 of which, on dignifying and developing teaching as a career, addresses teacher training and career development.
As such, the MINERD could develop a teacher training programme focused on the development of knowledge and skills in integrity and anti-corruption. This programme could build on the existing structure of the teaching career to include integrity and anti-corruption components in the courses that teachers are already required to complete. In doing so, it is important to ensure that teachers not only develop the right skills to teach pupils about public integrity and combating corruption, but also the capacity to foster an environment of trust and openness. Only in this way will teachers be able to create a safe space where students can share their views and concerns about values and handle difficult and sensitive conversations about ethical and moral issues that may arise in the classroom (OECD, 2018[2]).
In addition, the MINERD and the MESCyT could collaborate with teachers' unions and professional associations to develop courses and presentations for teachers. Consideration could be given to involving the main stakeholders in the integrity system in these courses and presentations, including the DIGEIG, the Chamber of Accounts, the Comptroller General of the Republic, the Judiciary, and specialised national and international social organisations, who could offer specific modules. Additionally, many of these entities have online learning platforms on integrity and anti-corruption that could be adapted for teachers, taking advantage of their knowledge of the subject and reducing costs. The involvement of other public institutions and civil society can contribute to achieving broad coverage in the country. As an example of a practical activity, an award for good practice in teaching integrity and anti-corruption could be presented at traditional teachers' conferences. This will encourage educators to share their pedagogical methods with their peers and will also provide personal motivation (i.e. to gain recognition). This could be complemented by visits and presentations by international peers sharing modern pedagogical methodology related to the topic.
Training should be complemented by the development of materials (handbooks and materials for guidance) that can be used in the classroom to teach content on integrity, including objectives, procedures, materials and forms of assessment. The material may include guidelines on how to deliver the lesson in a dynamic and engaging way for students, how to communicate key concepts effectively and how to foster respectful and open dialogue within the classroom.
An important aspect of teacher training is the evaluation to assess outcomes and define new areas for action. The MINERD and the MESCyT could develop indicators to assess students' acquisition of knowledge and skills and, based on these, revise the programme as necessary. A partnership with institutions dedicated to evaluation could facilitate this process, e.g. the IDEICE, specialised NGOs and international actors. Some instruments already exist at the international level and can contribute to this purpose, including the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS), the updated teacher evaluations performed by the IDEICE, and academic research in the classroom by university centres.
The recommendations in this section focus on the formal education system, the cornerstone of education for integrity. However, education for integrity cannot be an isolated effort in the classroom. The messages that students receive and learn in their classrooms need to be reinforced in their daily lives outside the school. To this end, the following section offers recommendations aimed at promoting a culture of integrity in Dominican society through an ongoing awareness-raising campaign targeting society at large.
Cultivating a culture of integrity in society is essential for norms and standards to be implemented. The OECD Recommendation on Public Integrity emphasises the need to raise awareness in society of the benefits of public integrity and reduce tolerance of violations of integrity standards (OECD, 2017[1]). Social permissiveness towards corruption can undermine any efforts to cultivate integrity, as people tend to ignore messages that are not compatible with their belief set and therefore fail to notice signs of risk (OECD, 2017[13]; Lunn, 2014[14]).
Recent international studies present two general findings for the Dominican Republic. On the one hand, key international integrity metrics are tending to improve. As pointed out in Chapter 1, Transparency International identifies the Dominican Republic as one of only seven countries in the world that have exhibited significant improvements in the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) over the last five years, achieving a score of 37 in the 2025 ranking (Transparencia Internacional, 2025[15]; Transparencia Internacional, 2025[16]).
On the other hand, tolerance of clientelism continues to be widespread and entrenched in the country. Indeed, factors related to patronage, clientelism, nepotism and a tolerance of these practices are the main challenges carried over from previous years and the most difficult to change significantly. For example, the 2018 Latinobarómetro survey reported that the Dominican Republic was the country with the highest percentage of tolerance for corruption “if it solves the country's problems” (56%, compared to a 40% average for Latin America) (Corporación Latinobarómetro, 2018[17]). In 2020, this percentage increased, with 61.9% of the population indicating agreement with the statement “some degree of corruption is tolerable if problems are solved” (Corporación Latinobarómetro, 2020[18]).
The 2022-2023 Democratic Culture Survey (Encuesta Cultura Democrática, ECD) updated these results, showing that the population is almost evenly divided between those who tolerate and those who do not tolerate corruption if problems are solved (Figure 5.1). The ECD also reveals tolerance for specific corrupt practices: 15.4% of the population indicated that paying a bribe to a public employee could be tolerated and 12.5% said that paying a bribe to a police officer could be tolerated (Oliva Álvarez and Cañete Alonso, 2024[19]).
Surveys also support the view that clientelism is one of the greatest challenges for the Dominican Republic. The ECD collected significant data on this phenomenon, confirming that clientelism is widespread in the country: 66% of people agree with the statement “if a family member or close friend wins political office, they should help you get a government job or a public contract”, 80% of people agree with the statement “if someone wins political office and you worked on their campaign, they should help you get a job or public contract” and 47.8% of people agree with the statement “if a politician gives you or a family member financial assistance or does you or a family member a major favour, you would feel obliged to vote for him or her in the next election” (Oliva Álvarez and Cañete Alonso, 2024[19]). Moreover, since 2016, the Americas Barometer of the LAPOP Lab (Latin American Public Opinion Project) at Vanderbilt University has reported that more than 60% of Dominicans think that most politicians are corrupt. This percentage has remained stable: in 2023, it was 62% and was close to the average for the Latin American region.
Additionally, perceptions of corruption remain widespread. The ECD shows that Dominicans consider corrupt conduct is highly prevalent among the political class and public employees. When asked “how often are members of the following social sectors involved in corruption”, respondents' opinions indicate they believe politicians and public employees are the groups most inclined to engage in corrupt practices. In particular, 4 out of 5 Dominicans (79.6%) believe that politicians engage in corrupt practices “quite often” or “very often” and 2 out of 3 Dominicans (66.5%) think the same of public employees. The perception of widespread corruption also extends to businesspeople (59%), ordinary Dominicans (53.6%) and the media (50.8%) (Oliva Álvarez and Cañete Alonso, 2024[19]).
These findings suggest that, despite institutional progress, social norms remain permissive towards clientelism and transactional forms of corruption. The persistence of tolerant attitudes towards corruption and clientelism show that legal and institutional reforms alone are insufficient. Addressing integrity challenges in the Dominican Republic therefore requires complementary efforts aimed at transforming underlying social norms, expectations and behaviours across society.
5.3.1. The DIGEIG could lead a national awareness-raising campaign aimed at the whole-of-society and encouraging the country to make a national commitment to Dominican integrity
The Directorate General of Ethics and Government Integrity (Dirección General de Ética e Integridad Gubernamental, DIGEIG) plays a key role in promoting awareness-raising on public integrity and citizen participation in corruption prevention. To raise public awareness, the DIGEIG has, for the fourth consecutive year, organised the #DominicanaSinCorrupción National Campaign for Integrity, in connection with which videos, graphic materials in social media and didactic guides were produced. 103 public and private institutions were involved in the campaign. In addition, each year, one week is dedicated to ethics, a date established by Decree No. 252-2005. The 2025 Ethics Week, “Together We Are Integrity” (Juntos Somos Integridad), was organised by the DIGEIG and the Permanent Commission for the Celebration of National Citizens' Ethics Day Activities. The week included 561 activities organised by more than 129 participating public institutions, with the aim of promoting and strengthening ethical values and integrity (DIGEIG, 2025[20]).
However, these initiatives have largely focused on the public sector and have not yet fully addressed social norms that sustain tolerance of clientelism and corruption. Given the persistence of these attitudes described above, awareness-raising efforts should evolve from institutional communication campaigns towards broader social norm change interventions.
To that end, and building on the “#DominicanaSinCorrupción” campaign, the DIGEIG could promote a campaign calling for a national commitment to Dominican integrity (“commitment” refers to a direct responsibility, the act of committing oneself: agreeing, reaching an understanding, sharing common values). While the DIGEIG can build on the good practices and lessons learned from the “#DominicanaSinCorrupción” campaign, the citizen campaign should take three additional new aspects into account:
1. Co-create core campaign content with citizens, taking more innovative communication principles and lessons from behavioural science into account.
2. Embrace and promote, through the campaign, the adhesion of multiple sectors and actors in Dominican society to bring about a real change in social norms.
3. Strengthen the democratic principles of transparency, accountability, citizen participation and social control (citizen oversight) as key elements to improve government performance and strengthen citizen confidence in public institutions (see also next section).
On the first point, the DIGEIG could start with a participatory consultation process to identify positive values that can be emphasised and determine the triggers of negative values with a view to reducing them. The consultation can take advantage of the existing capacity of the DIGEIG and local authorities, so that the greatest outreach can be achieved at the initial stage of defining values and key messages. This may include choosing the main slogan and name of the campaign in order to achieve greater ownership.
Regarding the second point, involving a large segment of the population representing different social groups living in the Dominican Republic will make it possible to incorporate the needs, perceptions and visions of various key groups in society, including vulnerable populations and, in particular, to gather the views of youth. From the outset, the campaign must be supported from the highest level of the state, with the consequent involvement of leading institutions in the Dominican integrity system. Political parties and community forces can also be included, so that Dominican society as a whole is represented. In parallel to this leadership by public authorities, the support of various social sectors such as business, academia, organised society, the media and citizens in general should be sought.
As part of the campaign design process, the DIGEIG should identify:
Expected outcomes (e.g. behaviours to be modified or skills to be developed)
Target audiences (e.g. adults, youth, vulnerable communities)
The key messages to be conveyed (taking into account possible unintended effects, see below)
The communication channels to be used (e.g. television, website, social media, print media)
Ongoing evaluation mechanisms (e.g. opinion surveys, website analysis, participation in events, number of complaints submitted, etc.). Evaluating campaigns allows for a better understanding of outcomes and impacts, facilitating changes and improvements, and more effective prioritisation of the use of limited public resources.
Regarding the third element listed above: When designing integrity and anti-corruption awareness and communication activities, countries should be aware of possible unintended consequences. For example, reminding people of the extent and costs of corruption may simply reinforce the idea that corruption is the norm, making it easier to justify one's own unethical behaviour (“everyone does it”). Corruption can thus become a self-fulfilling prophecy, where these messages reinforce existing perceptions (Corbacho et al., 2016[21]; Cheeseman and Peiffe, 2021[22]; Peiffer, 2018[23]). The DIGEIG could, therefore, draw on recent behavioural science research (Ajzenman, 2021[24]; Bicchieri and Xiao, 2009[25]; Corbacho et al., 2016[21]; Gino, Ayal and Ariely, 2009[26]; Robert and Arnab, n.d.[27]) and consider designing and implementing awareness-raising campaigns or activities that explicitly focus on desirable behaviours, making them visible and helping to reinforce them as the social norm.
The content of the campaign should thus include a list of no more than five social and individual integrity commitments, derived from the co-creation process and aligned with existing efforts. General campaign content could also be tailored to different audiences, e.g. young people, older people, private sector workers, to ensure that messages relate to their everyday experiences. According to research (Peiffer and Walton, 2022[28]), the effectiveness of anti-corruption campaigns increases when the three T's strategy is applied: Targeting audiences; Tailoring content according to the audience; and Testing their reaction before launching it. By way of example, if the campaign has content related to clientelism, this practice has different manifestations depending on the sector, so specific messages could be developed referring to situations familiar to each audience. The DIGEIG could promote the creation of a toolkit for communicators to generate evidence and storytelling that are relevant to different audiences. Finally, before they are shared on a large scale, messages could be tested in a small group to assess their impact and avoid counterproductive effects. Lessons learned from the pilot could then lead to improvements and help refine messages.
The Dominican Republic could begin by drawing inspiration from examples from Ecuador (Box 5.2) and the recommendations for successful education campaigns set out in Table 5.2 to pursue the following purposes:
Raise ethical standards by example: given the high level of tolerance for corruption and clientelism, the campaign will be seen as a strategy to elevate the principles of integrity, emphasising that the majority of the population seek the best for themselves and their community, and the best comes through upholding public integrity and the collective interest. This means it is important to explain how practices that are so deeply rooted in everyday activities can be rejected, providing tools and arguments to achieve this. Stories of good practice where behaviour change was achieved, anecdotal accounts of “How did I do it when I was in a critical situation” and stories involving well-known personalities could be useful.
Generate a sense of co-responsibility: a key component of the campaign is raising awareness of the public’s responsibility for integrity. People are not just passive bystanders, they have a duty to comply with the law, they can be proactive in tackling corruption. There are two sides to the corruption equation, and if one side opts out, corruption becomes unviable. If there is no payer, there is no taker.
Raise awareness of the personal and social costs of behaviour that falls short of integrity standards by providing real data and stories: it is important to raise awareness of the personal, social and economic costs of these practices. It is important that these messages contain clear information about the financial, personal, health, education and infrastructure costs of diverting funds in corruption scandals, including loss of life, failure to provide services and fulfil rights.
“Creole Honesty” (Honestidad Criolla) campaign
On 9 December 2019, the International Chamber of Commerce (Cámara de Comercio Internacional, ICC), through the Integrity and Anti-Corruption Commission (Comisión de Integridad y Anticorrupción), launched the “Creole Honesty” (Honestidad Criolla) campaign, with the aim of promoting a cultural change in Ecuadorian society and preventing acts of corruption. The campaign, which includes a YouTube video, seeks to send a positive message to Ecuadorians, to promote a change in citizens' behaviour and to stop normalising acts that are wrong, such as petty corruption and bad actions. The video shows citizens who, given the choice to act contrary to integrity, for example, by buying pirated films, plagiarising publications or accepting bribes, decide to act honestly and contribute to change. In addition, during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the campaign included a video on what “Creole Honesty” meant in the framework of COVID-19 vaccination, an area of high risk for corruption.
“I Am a Victim of Corruption!” (¡Yo si soy víctima de la corrupción!) campaign
In 2022, the Foundation Against Corruption (Fundación Lucha contra la Corrupción) launched the “I Am a Victim of Corruption!” (¡Yo si soy víctima de la corrupción!) campaign with the support of private companies, international co-operation organisations, student organisations and young people. This campaign aimed to develop collective awareness on several issues: to boost citizens' commitment to the fight against corruption; to enhance the involvement of young people, particularly students, in the fight against corruption; and to develop, in constructive terms, the role of social networks as a mechanism for transmitting social demands to political authorities. Through different media (social networks, strategic alliance with the Student Union Foundation (Fundación Unión Estudiantil) and traditional media) young Ecuadorians between 16 and 18 years old were invited to express in videos, to be published on TikTok or Twitter, their views on one or more of the following topics:
Why citizens are victims of corruption, not just the State.
Why the National Assembly (Asamblea Nacional) should declare that citizens are indeed victims of corruption. What is the role of citizens in the fight against corruption?
Encouraging the National Assembly to process the Draft Organic Law Reforming the Comprehensive Organic Criminal Code to Clarify the Role of the Citizen as Private Prosecutor in Corruption-Related Crimes.
On 15 August 2022, an award ceremony for the winners of the competition was held at the National Assembly's Commission for Political Oversight and Control (Comisión de Fiscalización y Control Político de la Asamblea Nacional).
Source: (OECD, 2024[9])
Although the co-created design process is a fundamental aspect of the campaign, once the content has been defined and tested through pilots, its most visible expression will be its mass permanent dissemination through various media, both online and in communities and institutions, social networks, fairs, visits to educational centres, etc. To this end, it is crucial to build partnerships with both traditional and new media, even involving the, in the design consultation, and then encouraging them to take ownership, so the messages continue to go out in a range of forms. Other private sector support could come from universities’ schools of journalism, chambers of media, radio and television, and the Dominican College of Journalists (Colegio Dominicano de Periodistas).
5.3.2. The Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology, together with the DIGEIG, could develop a strategy to promote research on integrity and combating corruption
Obtaining better information and generating applicable knowledge or applied research on integrity issues is vital for informed debate and, above all, for improving how the associated public policies are formulated and implemented. This calls for more specific studies to allow for a detailed analysis and develop tools that provide systematic and permanently updated information that is easily available to the public.
The Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology (MESCyT), together with the National Council for Higher Education, Science and Technology (Consejo Nacional de Educación Superior, Ciencia y Tecnología, CONESCyT) and the DIGEIG, in alliance with the academic sector, should formulate a strategy to promote research and initiatives on integrity and anti-corruption. While respecting academic independence, the aim of this strategy would be to build a community of specialised, innovative researchers from different disciplines skilled in the research techniques needed to generate knowledge and carry out independent, in-depth studies of the dynamics of corruption and the functioning of the integrity system in the country. This could include a specialised line of research in an existing academic centre (such as Flacso Dominican Republic or a school of law, sociology or administration), or, more ambitiously, the creation of a new research centre for this field. For example, the University of Buenos Aires in Argentina has a Centre for Transparency and Anti-Corruption studies (Centro de Estudios sobre Transparencia y Lucha contra la Corrupción), dedicated to research, debate and training in transparency policies, public ethics, oversight and the fight against corruption.
Participation in decision-making processes helps to strengthen trust in political decision-making processes because it implies a higher degree of transparency (Rivera, 2018[30]; Seligson, 1980[31]), and at the same time, reduces the risks of political capture (OECD, 2017[32]). It can also help produce an outcome that is fairer and more representative of the interests of the population. Thus, the OECD Recommendation on Public Integrity recommends “encouraging transparency and stakeholders’ engagement at all stages of the political process and policy cycle to promote accountability and the public interest”, including through actions that grant all stakeholders, in particular the private sector, civil society and individuals, access in the development and implementation of public policies related to public integrity (OECD, 2017[1]).
In terms of trust, trust in the national government in the Dominican Republic is similar to the OECD average: 39% of respondents in the Dominican Republic place high or moderately high trust in the national government, while 47% have low or no trust (OECD, 2025[33]).
The figures for trust in different public institutions vary considerably. The Democratic Culture Survey (ECD) shows that the institutions with the greatest legitimacy in the Dominican Republic are the Central Electoral Board (41%), the Presidency (38%), the Armed Forces (35%) and Municipalities (33%).; it is worth noting that none of them are trusted by more than half of the population. At the other extreme, the least-trusted institutions are the Legislature, political parties and the National Police. In all three cases, approximately only 1 in 5 Dominicans have high or moderate trust, with no significant change between the 2016 and 2023 surveys (Oliva Álvarez and Cañete Alonso, 2024[19]). These data are summarised in Figure 5.2.
The OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions in Latin America and the Caribbean indicates that many Dominicans doubt that public officials apply fair treatment and integrity; only 35% believe their benefit applications will be handled fairly and just 32% believe that public officials will turn down bribes. Both of these figures are below the OECD average of 52% and 36%, respectively (OECD, 2025[33]).
In this regard, strengthening participatory mechanisms is expected to help boost trust in public institutions and officials, and that this restored reputation will in turn motivate officials and citizens in general to breach integrity standards less frequently and reduce the extent to which they accept them.
One key way to involve people is through institutionalised, regular, formal channels for participation with clear rules. While citizen participation always depends on a real willingness to share public decision-making powers, it can take many forms.
Citizen participation generally falls into three broad categories (OECD, 2017[34]):
Information: an initial level of participation characterised by a one-way relationship in which the government produces and delivers information to stakeholders. It covers both on-demand provision of information and “proactive” measures by the government to disseminate information.
Consultation: more advanced level of participation that entails a two-way relationship in which stakeholders provide feedback to the government and vice-versa. It is based on the prior definition of the issue for which views are being sought and requires the provision of relevant information, in addition to feedback on the outcomes of the process.
Engagement: when stakeholders are given the opportunity and the necessary resources (e.g. information, data and digital tools) to collaborate during all phases of the policy-cycle and in the service design and delivery. This recognises citizens as equal participants in setting the agenda, proposing projects or policy options and shaping dialogue, although the responsibility for the final decision or policy formulation in many cases lies with the authorities.
The OECD has developed a range of resources to help governments ensure the quality of citizen engagement (OECD, 2021[35]; OECD, 2001[36]; OECD, 2017[34]; OECD, 2020[37]; OECD, 2022[38]). The following recommendations are intended to help strengthen citizen participation in the Dominican Republic in order to cultivate integrity in the whole-of-society, foster trust in public institutions and improve integrity policies.
5.4.1. The Dominican Republic could ensure that integrity system entities and entities that provide public services publish relevant information and offer effective channels for citizen engagement
To facilitate meaningful citizen participation in the development of an integrity system, public institutions should first ensure that citizens have access to clear, timely and relevant information about the initiatives being undertaken, the stakeholders involved, and their respective roles in the process. This includes explaining how and why citizens can participate, how their input will be used, what follow-up actions will be taken, and how their contributions influence decision making.
Transparency and openness in public institutions are therefore essential for public integrity. They allow citizens to engage based on evidence and, where they choose to do so, to exercise their social oversight role. Moreover, digital channels can make transparency and participation more dynamic, facilitating ongoing interaction between public institutions and citizens.
The most basic level of participation involves the right to be informed. Article 3 of the Dominican Republic’s Law on Access to Public Information (Ley de Acceso a la Información Pública, LAIP) defines ten types of information that must be disclosed by public bodies on a permanent and up-to-date basis (proactive transparency) (see also Chapter 4). These include budgets, projects, procurement, public officials and statistics, etc. It also indicates that all branches and agencies of the State must publish on their websites information about: a) their structure, employees, operating regulations, projects, management reports, databases; b) their customer or user support service for queries, complaints and suggestions; c) bilateral procedures or transactions (Article 5).
However, it is also important that all members of society are aware of the public institutions relevant to public integrity (see also Chapter 1) and understand the nature of their mandates and role within the Dominican integrity system. A lack of clarity about who is responsible for what in the State can often lead to misplaced expectations and misunderstandings, which in turn can result in misperceptions about the performance of public entities and their integrity. It is crucial, therefore, that the websites of the bodies responsible for various parts of the integrity system contain substantive, transparent and user-friendly information on their work in this area.
Institutions that are particularly vulnerable to corruption could also provide relevant and up-to-date information on their performance. For example, entities that deal with permits, documentation, operating licenses or patents, etc., could invest in statistical portals that make their work transparent and useful for academic and journalistic research, thereby facilitating accountability. This is in line with the OECD Recommendation on Open Government and evidence suggesting that the use of technological tools can help make public administration more transparent, make certain decisions less susceptible to officials’ discretion and facilitate the detection of irregularities, so contributing to anti-corruption efforts and good governance (Castro and Lopes, 2022[39]).
Online media can also function directly as channels for citizen participation. Few citizens are likely to be able to attend meetings, public consultations or workshops in person during working hours, but many would be willing to participate in an hour-long virtual meeting in the evening, or to vote in a consultation via their mobile phone, for example. Given the digital skills and internet usage of 75% of the Dominican population (Government of the Dominican Republic, 2022[40]), the immediacy, reach, and continuous availability provided by digital connectivity can be leveraged to enhance citizen participation. Although other age groups, for whom more traditional and face-to-face media are important, should not be ignored, a strategy focused on the internet could be especially appealing to those young people who are digital natives. The Dominican Republic has the highest rates of attendance at online meetings in the Americas (LAPOP, 2023[41]), and a number of government initiatives are in place to digitalise processes and interactions with the public, so such a strategy would be feasible.
These initiatives include:
The “National Observatory for the Quality of Public Services” (Observatorio Nacional de la Calidad de los Servicios Públicos) platform set up to improve the quality of services, through observation, research and satisfaction surveys on the quality of public services, with the participation of the users/customers of Dominican public administration institutions.
The National Citizen Attention System (Sistema Nacional de Atención Ciudadana) 311 (Decree No. 694-2009), which provides a single point of contact for requests for access to information, whistleblowing, complaints and any type of disagreement.
The 2030 Digital Agenda, one axis of which is dedicated to digital government, with the goal of ensuring a “modern, digital, open and transparent State at the service of citizens”. It sets strategic objectives, lines of action and compliance indicators to drive the digital transformation of the Dominican State; improve access to information; and strengthen interoperability mechanisms, digital identity and signature procedures, and data management.
Strategies such as these, designed to engage citizens and foster accountability, can be harnessed in the service of integrity policies and have the potential to reduce the risk of corruption in certain processes and to facilitate social oversight. The issue of whistleblowing is specifically addressed in Chapter 7 of this Integrity Review.
The Dominican Republic has an established political tradition of citizen participation. According to Article 75 of its Constitution, one of the fundamental duties of citizens is to “ensure the robustness and quality of democracy, respect for public property and the transparent exercise of public functions”, while a number of laws and decrees affecting different sectors of public administration establish mechanisms for participation. The country was also among the first in Latin America to recognise participatory budgeting at the constitutional level (Government of the Dominican Republic, 2010[3]), and it has a system of governance and citizen participation at the local level (overseen by the Public Administration Monitoring System, Sistema de Monitoreo de la Administración Pública, SISMAP) which involves mechanisms such as open councils, citizen consultations, oversight bodies, forums and other initiatives.
In practice, the 2023 Americas Barometer survey showed that, of eight countries examined, the Dominican Republic had the highest rates of citizen participation in local government (17%), community improvement boards (32%) and political party meetings (33%) (LAPOP, 2023[41]). A growing interest among citizens in the channels of access to information has also been observed, as reflected in the increase in the number of requests registered on the Single Portal for Requesting Access to Public Information (Portal Único de Solicitud de Acceso a la Información Pública, SAIP), mainly related to statistics, procurement and public services.
It should also be noted, however, that the relatively high levels of participation in the Dominican Republic have been declining since 2010, and the formal participation mechanisms in place tend not to attract young people, the demographic that is most disenchanted with democratic values (LAPOP, 2023[41]; Oliva Álvarez and Cañete Alonso, 2024[19]).
Dominican authorities such as the DIGEIG could open, redesign or strengthen regular channels for citizen engagement. As recommended in Chapter 1, these channels for engaging citizens and concerned civil society organisations would be particularly relevant for the work of the Presidential Transparency and Anti-Corruption Commission (Comisión Presidencial para la Transparencia y la Anticorrupción, CPTA) and the temporary inter-institutional commission set up by Decree No. 407-2025 to monitor the preparation, development and implementation of the country's Public Integrity System and which is responsible for leading the development of the country's first national integrity strategy. It is vital to give citizens and organised civil society the opportunity to share ideas and concerns on the issues that they see as priorities. For example, in the future, the CPTA could ensure that draft public policies in the field of public integrity are published with sufficient time for public consultation, and invite civil society organisations to participatory workshops to give them the opportunity to share ideas on specific issues and provide feedback.
In addition, key entities of the integrity system such as the DIGEIG, the Comptroller General of the Republic, the Chamber of Accounts, the Ombudsman, the Specialised Prosecutor for the Prosecution of Administrative Corruption (Procuraduría Especializada de Persecución de la Corrupción Administrativa), the Directorate General of Public Procurement (Dirección General de Contrataciones Públicas) and/or the Financial Analysis Unit (Unidad de Análisis Financiero, UAF) could have open channels of communication so that civil society entities can easily access them to learn about their activities and independently monitor the impact of government initiatives (citizen audits). In the case of the UAF, these channels of communication must comply with the confidentiality regime established in Law No. 155-2017 and the international standards applicable to financial intelligence units, in order to safeguard the restricted and confidential nature of the relevant information.
5.4.2. The CASFL could issue a call to non-profit associations to provide training on civic education and integrity, focusing on fostering local level participation and youth engagement
The National Centre for the Promotion and Development of Non-Profit Associations (Centro Nacional de Fomento y Promoción de las asociaciones sin fines de lucro, CASFL), created by Law No. 122-2005, is empowered to engage the public in the formulation, monitoring, implementation and evaluation of social development policies and gender and equity policies. The CASFL has a number of valuable tools at its disposal, in particular, it manages the public funds granted to non-profit organisations (NPOs) and carries out monitoring visits.
However, to date, the CASFL has not funded any associations to train citizens to engage in participation mechanisms, social oversight or advocacy on public integrity issues. It could, therefore, consider opening a specialised call for funding applications for NPOs working on these issues. This would allow it to allocate funds to NPOs that offer programmes aimed at encouraging and educating the public to exercise active citizenship, for example, training in participatory budgeting or oversight methodologies for education boards or other social monitoring activities. However, it should be noted there is a risk of an adverse effect known as “crowding-out” (Bolle and Otto, 2010[42]) associated with monetary incentives, where organisations that were intrinsically motivated to carry out these activities are replaced by others who are just looking for funding to finance their other activities. The terms of reference must take these risks into account and set selection criteria that help identify NPOs with a demonstrated commitment and capacity to promote active citizenship, such proven track record of delivering training or civic education programmes, previous experience supporting citizen participation, social accountability or oversight initiatives, expertise of the proposed training team, and established links with local communities or vulnerable groups.
Generally speaking, the Dominican Republic could focus citizen participation initiatives (from CASFL and others) on local level participation and youth engagement. On one hand, focusing on the local level reflects the fact that people are more attracted to issues that are closer to them and where they can have a tangible impact. Additionally, this would take advantage of the average levels of trust in local government and a tendency towards higher levels of participation in local organisations (LAPOP, 2023[41]). On the other hand, young people have increasingly disengaged from more formal participation channels, despite being recognised in both the legal and strategic frameworks as a fundamental part of the country's development.
To remedy this, the 2010-2030 National Development Strategy (Estrategia Nacional de Desarrollo) strives to involve young people at the highest level, and this approach is also recommended for the integrity policy. Examples of engaging children and young people include the creation of youth town councils (Disla, 2016[43]); local boards on youth and security, citizenship; youth consultation schemes and other long-term efforts by municipalities in the Dominican Republic (Madera, 2021[44]). Congresses have also been held, such as the “Future is Now: Adolescents and Youth Decide” (El Futuro es Ahora: Adolescentes y Juventudes deciden) co-ordinated by the United Nations in the Dominican Republic, the Ombudsman, the Ministry of Youth (Ministerio de Juventud), and the Ministry of Economy, Planning and Development (Ministerio de Economía, Planificación y Desarrollo) and the Ministry of Education. At this event, held in Santo Domingo in September 2024, “over 100 young people representing municipal councils, civil society organisations and leaders from around the country gave their views and made recommendations about issues of national importance, including the reform processes taking place” (UN, 2024[45])
In May 2025, the Second National Congress on Ethics and Youth (Segundo Congreso Nacional de Ética y Juventud) was held, at which the President of the Republic signed the Youth Pact for Ethics and Transparency (Pacto Juvenil por la Ética y la Transparencia) after giving a keynote speech on the vital role of young people for building a culture of integrity and promoting government transparency. The event was structured around three panels, a round table and an inaugural TED Talk. This intergenerational dialogue effort brought together officials from various ministries, legislators, academics, communicators and digital activists, as well as 500 young Dominicans, notably including the first Provincial Youth Ethics Ambassadors (Embajadores Provinciales de la Ética Juvenil) (Ministry of Youth of the Dominican Republic, 2025[46]; Presidencia, 2025[47]).
Such efforts are key to engaging and empowering young people. The Dominican Republic could also consider actively including young people in internships and other activities implemented by integrity actors such as the DIGEIG, the Office of the Comptroller of the Republic and the Chamber of Accounts. Box 5.3 contains examples of how Costa Rica and Peru have involved young people in external audit processes that the Dominican Republic could draw on.
Costa Rica
The “Youth Comptrollers” (Contralores juveniles) Programme is an initiative set up in 2016 by the Office of the Comptroller General of the Republic of Costa Rica and the Ministry of Public Education. It is aimed at young people between the ages of 12 and 17. Its aim is to train, through a series of activities, young students from public and private high schools around the country to be agents of change, to engage, and to become aware of the need to monitor the welfare of the community. The activities of the young comptrollers focus on the value of “probity” (probidad) and on learning the basic principles of public procurement and budgeting and the management of public resources in their high schools.
Peru
The Office of the Comptroller General of the Republic of Peru has a programme of school audits carried out by “youth auditors” (auditores juveniles) aimed at students in 1st to 5th years of secondary school, with a presence in every province. Students are asked to fill out a form with the help of their parents or teachers about the quality and functioning of their community or school, scoring aspects such as social relations in the school, road signs around educational institutions, the cleanliness of public spaces (parks, schools, libraries, etc.), public safety or eco-efficiency. This exercise is intended to help students to learn to exercise their duties and rights, strengthening their citizenship awareness; to strengthen the culture of integrity, with an educational and preventive approach to combating corruption; to encourage teamwork, critical thinking and decision making; to teach respect for public goods and an understanding of their value; and to improve the services provided by the State.
Source: Costa Rica: (Office of the Comptroller General of the Republic of Costa Rica, n.d.[48]). Peru: (CGR, n.d.[49]).
5.4.3. The DIGEIG should seek to institutionalise the participation of the public and organised civil society in the development and monitoring of its national public integrity strategies
As emphasised in Chapter 1, a constructive dialogue between the public stakeholders in the Dominican Republic's integrity system and the whole-of-society is key. The Dominican Republic is currently preparing to develop its first National Public Integrity Strategy (Estrategia Nacional de Integridad Pública). For this particular exercise, the views of citizens, civil society organisations and the private sector can be especially helpful for identifying the main issues and risk areas for corruption and providing fresh insights on how to tackle them.
It is therefore recommended that the country ensures effective participation of the whole-of-society in the development of this and future strategies, to reinforce its relevance, legitimacy and credibility. Such efforts could be led by the DIGEIG. Among Latin American OECD countries, the integrity strategies of Chile and Costa Rica are particularly strong in this regard:
Costa Rica’s National Strategy for Integrity and Corruption Prevention (Estrategia Nacional de Integridad y Prevención de la Corrupción, ENIPC) represents the first national effort to articulate and strengthen initiatives carried out by a range of entities with competencies relating to ethics, integrity and anti-corruption. Its objective was to unify institutional responses to these issues and establish an inter-institutional implementation mechanism, involving a diversity of stakeholders, responsibilities and shared resources. The ENIPC was developed under the leadership of the Office of the Attorney for Public Ethics (Procuraduría de la Ética Pública), with the participation of stakeholders from all branches of government, as well as representatives from the private sector, civil society and academia, and it was subject to public consultation (ENIPC, 2021[50]).
Chile's National Public Integrity Strategy (Estrategia Nacional de Integridad Pública, ENIP) is the outcome of a process in which over sixty public institutions, representatives from politics, academia, the private sector and citizens participated through round tables and workshops co-ordinated by entities such as the Office of the Comptroller General (, social consultation processes with vulnerable groups and an online public consultation. Notable efforts were made to include in the deliberations social groups traditionally excluded from the formal political sphere, including benefit claimants, women, youth, persons with disabilities, migrants, prisoners, indigenous peoples and members of the Afro-descendant community (Government of Chile, 2023[51]).
Finally, Romania has also taken steps to make its integrity policies more participatory. In addition to involving academia and civil society in the development of its 2021-2025 National Anti-Corruption Strategy, Romania set up working groups to oversee the implementation of the strategy as a whole and of specific strategies for high-risk sectors such as health (Box 5.4). These working groups include one composed of civil society stakeholders, helping to ensure that the monitoring of the strategy also serves as a tool for accountability and social oversight (OECD, 2023[52]; Ministerul Justiției, 2021[53]).
The monitoring of Romania's 2016-2020 National Anti-Corruption Strategy (NAS) took place through on-site visits (“thematic missions”) by the Technical Secretariat, attached to the Ministry of Justice’s Crime Prevention Department, involving all relevant stakeholders, grouped into five co-operation platforms:
Platform of independent authorities and anti-corruption institutions
Platform of central public administration
Platform of the local public administration, co-ordinated in partnership with the Ministry of Development, Public Works and Administration
Platform of the business sector
Platform of civil society
The supervisory responsibilities of the Technical Secretariat of the Ministry of Justice include driving the implementation of the NAS, preparing annual monitoring reports, conducting on-site evaluation missions and convening platform meetings. Although the platforms could be improved to increase their effectiveness, their contribution to the development and implementation of NAS was, in general, positive.
Source: (OECD, 2021[54])
The Dominican Republic could consider drawing on these good practices when developing and monitoring its integrity strategy, adapting them to the national context, institutional architecture and the resources available for implementing a participatory policy cycle. During the design and subsequent implementation of the strategy, it will also be important to publicise the results of monitoring and the assessment of outcomes in an accessible and transparent form that facilitates open oversight and accountability and helps maintain public support for the reforms that are needed (for more information see Chapter 1).
The private sector is both part of the problem and part of the solution with regard to a culture of public integrity. When companies evade taxes, offer bribes, or engage in fraud associated with public procurement, they distort markets, reduce competitiveness and discourage investment and trade. However, the private sector can also be a force for good, driving the change needed to bring about integrity reforms, practising responsible business conduct and exerting influence responsibly in public policy-making and implementation processes (see Chapter 8). An approach to public integrity that covers the whole of society requires governments to partner with the private sector to encourage good practice and to work together to uphold public integrity (OECD, 2017[1]).
5.5.1. Through public-private partnerships, the expansion of compliance programme coverage in the private sector could be promoted, customised for different types of companies and sectors, and externally verified
Governments can cultivate shared responsibility and the adoption of a culture of integrity in the private sector in a number of ways. For example, governments can support integrity in business by ensuring that relevant legislation is in place. This not only covers anti-corruption measures, but also includes responsible business conduct, such as protecting human rights, the environment and consumer interests, and ensuring international labour standards, taxation standards, and corporate governance structures are in place. Moreover, public integrity in companies includes issues related to how companies participate in the policy-making process through lobbying and political financing (e.g. “responsible influence”, see Chapter 8) (OECD, 2020[55]).
Governments can also encourage the implementation of integrity standards in the private sector through a combination of sanctions and incentive regimes and by providing guidance to companies on the design, implementation and evaluation of their integrity compliance programmes (OECD, 2020[55]; OECD/UN, 2024[56]). The OECD Anti-Bribery Recommendation (Section XXIII.D) further highlights the relevance of incentives for compliance on business integrity in order to prevent and detect bribery of foreign public officials in international business as well as the importance of collective action and partnerships between the private and public sector in awareness-raising activities (OECD, 2009[57]).
The Dominican Republic has demonstrated progress recently on promoting integrity in the private sector, for example:
The Directorate General of Public Procurement (Dirección General de Contrataciones Públicas, DGCP), which oversees the National Public Procurement and Contracting System (Sistema Nacional de Compras y Contrataciones Públicas), encourages public-private alliances as a means of driving a cultural change towards more transparent procurement processes. Its efforts include publishing a Code of Ethics and Integrity Guidelines (Código de Pautas de Ética e Integridad), a Guide to Good Practice for the Application of Due Diligence (Guía de Buenas Prácticas para la Aplicación de la Debida Diligencia), and a Guide to Integrated Risk Management in the Public Procurement Process (Guía para la Gestión Integral de Riesgos en el Proceso de Contratación Pública). It has also produced a Regulatory Compliance Programme for Public Procurement in the Dominican Republic (Programa de Cumplimiento Regulatorio en las Contrataciones Públicas de la República Dominicana), driven efforts to encourage green and sustainable procurement in accordance with the parameters of the Inter-American Network of Government Procurement (Red Interamericana de Compras Gubernamentales, RICG), and provided training for agents of the National Public Procurement and Contracting System.
With regard to competitive tendering, progress has been made on regulating and sanctioning collusion in public procurement and contracting. According to information shared by the Dominican Republic, general guidelines for plans on compliance with competitive tendering policies (Lineamientos Generales para los Planes de Cumplimiento en Materia de Política de Competencia) have been drawn up and compliance reports and recommendations have been submitted to the National Congress.
Law No. 155-2017 on combating money laundering and the financing of terrorism establishes the minimum obligations for regulated entities, which include having a compliance programme (Article 34). This Law also requires regulated entities to designate a compliance officer who will act as the liaison with the supervisory authority, depending on the relevant economic sector, and with the Financial Analysis Unit. In 2024, 1 June was declared National Compliance Day, coinciding with the enactment of Law No. 155-2017.
An agreement was signed between the National Council for Private Business (Consejo Nacional de la Empresa Privada, CONEP) and the Directorate General of Ethics and Government Integrity (Dirección General de Ética e Integridad Gubernamental, DIGEIG) aimed at cultivating a culture of transparency and corporate responsibility in the private sector. This agreement includes developing a digital platform to publicise companies’ compliance programmes, share existing good practice and promote actions by the private sector.
Building on this progress, the following measures would further enhance the Dominican private sector's shared responsibility for integrity and drive the implementation of effective domestic measures.
First, when developing the country’s future national integrity strategy, it is recommended that the strategy explicitly includes business sector risks and that the business sector is actively consulted during its design (see also Chapter 1). Engaging the private sector in the strategy helps identify and mitigate the risks of corruption that are shared by both sectors. Consulting the private sector in the development of the strategy allows it to better reflect the sector’s real situation and challenges, so the measures adopted will be more legitimate, relevant and feasible. It also fosters co-operation and trust between sectors, which is key to preventing corruption. The Dominican Republic could organise consultations on the content of the strategy with representatives of the private sector, such as CONEP. In addition, to ensure that the measures proposed in the strategy reflect good international business practice, the Government could also invite representatives of private companies or business associations to comment on the draft strategy.
Second, the DIGEIG could consider extending the requirement to have compliance programmes to a larger number of companies, given that it is currently mandatory only for “Regulated Entities” as defined in the Law on Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism. This should be complemented with a greater focus on enforcement to improve the quality and implementation of existing programmes. According to the 2024 Regional Compliance Perception Index –prepared by EY Central America, Panama and the Dominican Republic with the World Compliance Association– 46% of the respondents considered that the commitment of companies’ governing bodies to the compliance culture in the Dominican Republic is “low” or “very low” (Guzmán Molina, 2024[58]). In addition, 54% of all respondents rated the quality of their own compliance programme as “very low” or “moderate”, highlighting the need to strengthen these structures (Crespo, 2024[59]). Expanding compliance programme requirements in terms of scope and quality could be based on legal reforms that present them as potential benefits for companies.
Two types of benefits for companies can be highlighted (OECD/UN, 2024[56]):
Mitigating factor: authorities with enforcement powers implement measures to encourage companies to design effective internal controls, ethics and compliance programmes and other measures, particularly as a potential mitigating factor. In the United Kingdom and Germany, for example, administrative fines or penalties may be reduced if a company is found to have an effective compliance programme. This use of compliance programmes as mitigating factor for reducing penalties, could empower judges to review the effectiveness of compliance programmes. Authorities must, however, ensure that the mere existence of internal controls and ethics and compliance programmes or measures does not fully exonerate the company from liability (OECD, 2025[60]).
Access to public funds: Government agencies could take into account the existence of internal controls and ethics and compliance programmes or measures in their decisions regarding the granting of public benefits, such as subsidies, licences, public procurement contracts, contracts funded from official development aid and official export credits. A growing practice for some governments is to require external verification of a company’s compliance programme before granting access to public contracts and other public goods (OECD, 2020[55]). Countries such as Italy, South Korea and Germany have established compliance programme review bodies. Italy, for example, has a points-based rating system applicable to companies' compliance programmes, which can give them an advantage in public tendering processes (OECD, 2021[61]).
For either of these benefits to apply, it is important to verify that these programmes do not just exist on paper, but are effective, so they are not treated as mere bureaucratic legal requirements (Box 5.5) (OECD, 2021[61]; OECD, 2025[60]). It is important, therefore, to encourage companies to develop a culture of integrity. This means urging them to address the informal aspects of their corporate culture that can encourage or undermine integrity in their dealings with public officials. These include such aspects as management example and commitment, rewards and bonus structures, psychological safety and organisational voice and silence factors, internal team dynamics, and external relationships with stakeholders (OECD, 2020[55]).
A compliance programme reflects the specificity of the firm, the environment in which it operates and the risks that it faces in its day-to-day operations. However, it is possible to identify common elements that characterise a well-designed programme.
Risk assessment, prioritisation, and abatement: A firm should regularly identify and assess its compliance risks, in particular when entering new markets or hiring for key staff. Companies should identify operations, units and personnel most at risk.
Strong leadership and management commitment: Compliance programmes must have the full, visible support of the firm’s leadership (president, board, CEO). The resources committed to the programme, including (in larger firms) a dedicated and empowered compliance officer, demonstrate the commitment of senior management to compliance.
Transparency, communications and documentation, including from the company leadership in the form of, for example, guidelines, and public statements, to increase accountability and contribute to awareness raising and education. Coherent and regular messages from management should make clear that competition violations will not be tolerated, i.e. that the company will not defend or support violators and that they will face negative consequences. Implementation of a compliance programme should be well documented to assist with continuous improvement and attest to compliance efforts.
Auditing, monitoring, evaluation: The compliance programme should be characterised by a drive for continuous improvement. Therefore, it should be subject to regular monitoring to ensure it remains up to date, effective and continues to deliver the core objectives which should also be continuously assessed. Effectiveness can be tested, for example, through surveys, training evaluations, interviews with key individuals to verify knowledge of and attitudes towards compliance and illegal conducts.
Training: A compliance programme should include mandatory compliance training for all staff in positions with identified risks as well as part of new employee induction. Training should be adapted to the company’s risks and profile.
Reporting: A system that ensures that staff can report contraventions of the compliance programme or competition infringements confidentially and without the threat of retaliation.
Ex-post review to verify whether infringements have occurred, why they occurred, whether management has dealt with them appropriately, and identifying measures that can be taken to strengthen the compliance programme.
Source: (OECD, 2021[61]; OECD, 2009[57])
To further ensure the effectiveness of compliance programmes, the Dominican Republic could develop independent monitoring or supervisory initiatives to periodically verify the results of these programmes (OECD, 2025[60]; OECD, 2025[62]). Some monitoring mechanisms can be implemented internally within the company, such as quarterly reviews by an ethics committee that reports to the annual meeting of shareholders, or statistical platforms that collect key integrity and anti-corruption indicators and generate reports for internal audit and management committees, the board of directors, and other corporate governance bodies. External mechanisms focus on the independent assessment of corporate compliance programmes could also be implemented. They include third party reviews such as sector benchmarking studies carried out by academic bodies, or consultancy exercises to review the maturity of programmes based on OECD and other widely recognised guidelines. There are also tools developed by experienced international bodies including the OECD, the World Compliance Association and Transparency International to assess specific processes, such as supply chains, whistleblowing mechanisms, due diligence and anti-bribery practices.
Third, another way to encourage the adoption of compliance programmes could be through the creation of a voluntary certification and recognition scheme for companies' compliance programmes based on defined standards. The drafting of these standards could be led by an alliance between the Ministry of Industry, Trade and MSMEs (Ministerio de Industria, Comercio y Mipymes), the Financial Analysis Unit (UAF), the DGCP, the DIGEIG and CONEP, so that each institution contributes in accordance with its legal mandate and within the scope of its competences. These standards would serve as a guide for companies to design and strengthen their compliance programmes, without prejudice to the necessary alignment with applicable sectoral regulations and the competent regulatory authorities in each area. Such an initiative would cultivate an ethical culture beyond mandatory compliance, encouraging all businesses to improve their anti-corruption practices.
In particular, it is recommended that the standards include the guidelines for Compliance Programmes developed by the DGCP (2021-2022). Public-private partnerships to manage integrity programmes would allow them to be subject to risk-based quality assessments and strengthen multi-sector dialogue. Publishing lists of certified businesses would also improve transparency and boost trust in the business sector's commitment to support public integrity. The Dominican Republic could draw on examples from other countries (see Box 5.6).
Brazil’s Pro-Ethics programme is a voluntary initiative led by the Office of the Comptroller General of the Union (CGU), in partnership with the Ethos Institute (Instituto Ethos) and other public and private entities. Its aim is to develop anti-corruption and integrity measures to cultivate an ethical and transparent business culture, especially in companies’ dealings with the public sector. Set up in 2010 and updated in 2014, Pro-Ethics has inspired similar programmes in other countries, such as Paraguay.
Main features:
Voluntary participation with public recognition: companies that operate in Brazil are free to register and are assessed annually through a qualitative questionnaire that examines the effectiveness and maturity of their anti-corruption programmes. Companies that meet the standards are awarded the public Pro-Ethics Seal in recognition of their commitment to integrity. In the 2022-2023, 367 companies applied and 84 were certified.
Multi-sector governance: the programme is supervised by a committee that includes the CGU, the Ethos Institute, the Ministry of Industry and Trade (Ministério do Desenvolvimento, Indústria, Comércio e Serviços), the National Confederation of Industry (Confederação Nacional da Indústria, CNI), and other organisations. This ensures co-operation between government, business and civil society, promoting a shared culture of integrity.
Qualitative and risk-based assessment: rather than a purely formal approach, assessments are based on an in-depth analysis of the implementation of internal controls, risk management and ethical leadership in line with international good practices. The criteria are regularly updated.
Transparency and recognition: the list of companies awarded certification is announced at a public ceremony to encourage positive business role models.
Sources: (CGU, 2024[63]; CGU, n.d.[64]).
As part of setting up a voluntary recognition and certification scheme, the Dominican Republic could produce a manual of assessment criteria to help companies correctly draft the content of their compliance programmes and guide their implementation, as well as awareness-raising and training programmes for interested companies on the OECD’s instruments for responsible business conduct, in particular its Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct (OECD, 2018[65]; OECD, 2023[66]).
For the purposes of this exercise, it would be important to ensure that the standards are flexible enough to be tailored for different economic sectors, company sizes, regions and forms of governance. A small or medium-sized company will require different guidance on implementing a compliance programme compared to a transnational company with a robust compliance department (OECD, 2022[67]). In the interests of fairness and proportionality, the benefits mentioned above should also reflect the differences between companies. It is recommended that the specific manuals or protocols for compliance programmes should transparently and clearly spell out this different treatment. It is also important to ensure that the criteria are regularly updated so that the guidelines remain relevant and responsive to a changing business environment.
A final important step will be to assign powers to the UAF for reviewing programmes to ensure they comply with Law No. 155-2017 on Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism, ensuring it is not just a formal annual requirement but contributes positive, visible benefits to the organisation. This must be performed independently of the voluntary certification scheme and would apply to all companies subject to Law No. 155-2017.
5.5.2. The DIGEIG could strengthen the evidence base on business integrity practices and challenges
To develop effective laws, policies and guidance to support business integrity, governments need reliable and up-to-date information and data to enable them to understand issues such as business integrity risks, the reasons behind corrupt behaviour, and why companies may struggle to implement integrity programmes. Information broken down by company size and sector, as well as more detailed information on the quality of anti-corruption and compliance programmes, is also useful for developing additional more customised policies and guidelines. Finally, regularly updated information and data also make it possible to measure progress over time and to identify where additional attention and resources should be devoted or which measures are not producing the expected outcomes and need to be modified.
The information currently available in the Dominican Republic on business integrity practices, needs and challenges is limited. When this Integrity Review was being prepared, no specific specialised research came to light on the private sector's perspective and experiences in integrity and anti-corruption.
In addition to consulting the private sector participation during the development of the national integrity strategy (Chapter 1), the DIGEIG could take the initiative to strengthen the evidence base on business integrity practices and challenges. This would involve partnering with relevant public institutions, such as the Ministry of Industry, Trade and MSMEs and the Ministry of Economy, Planning and Development. The experience of the French Anti-Corruption Agency (AFA) in implementing a national survey on business integrity is a useful example of a government-led survey to better understand the challenges related to business integrity practices (Box 5.7).
To measure business integrity practices and challenges, the DIGEIG could also strengthen its partnerships with the academic community, industry associations and/or private sector organisations. Academic partners help safeguard the independence and methodological soundness of the research, while sector associations can help distribute the surveys and the results to their members.
In 2020, the French Anti-Corruption Agency (AFA) conducted a national survey to analyse French companies' understanding of corruption risks and the legal framework governing corruption and assess the maturity of their corruption prevention and detection systems. The survey was open to all companies regardless of size, and consisted of an anonymous online questionnaire. Professional organisations were key partners in publicising the survey and actively participated in communication activities to mobilise their members. As a result, the survey was sent out to over 2 000 enterprises, of which some 400, including small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), provided actionable responses.
The survey provided key information on the business integrity landscape in France, for example:
Although companies reported having a clear understanding of corruption offences, and although 70% of them have an anti-corruption compliance programme, these compliance programmes had significant shortcomings in terms of risk mapping and third-party risk management.
The role of the head of the compliance function is crucial for the effective implementation of compliance systems and should be strengthened.
SMEs (which are not subject to the compliance obligations set out in Article 17 of the Sapin II Law on transparency in economic life) seem to be lagging behind in the implementation of anti-corruption compliance programmes.
The results of the survey will serve as a baseline against which to measure progress and gaps in business integrity in the future. In addition, they helped inform the AFA's 2021 priorities and recommendations for business integrity.
Source: (AFA, 2020[68])
Promoting education on integrity at all levels of the education system
The Ministry of Education could extend the content of the “Ethics and Citizenship” core competency to cover other key aspects of education for integrity.
The Ministry of Education could strengthen education for integrity through more customised learning and extracurricular activities.
Universities could consider including courses on public integrity and anti-corruption in their curricula.
The Dominican Republic should invest in developing teachers’ capacities in integrity and corruption prevention.
Promoting a civic culture of integrity in the Dominican Republic
The DIGEIG could lead a national awareness-raising campaign aimed at the whole-of-society and encouraging the country to make a national commitment to Dominican integrity.
The Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology, together with the DIGEIG, could develop a strategy to promote research on integrity and combating corruption.
Engaging citizens in institutions and civil society organisations in public decision-making
The Dominican Republic could ensure that integrity system entities and entities that provide public services publish relevant information and offer effective channels for citizen engagement.
The CASFL could issue a call to non-profit associations to provide training on civic education and integrity, focusing on fostering local level participation and youth engagement.
The Dominican Republic should seek to institutionalise the participation of the public and organised civil society in the development and monitoring of its national public integrity strategies.
Enhancing the business sector’s joint responsibility and engagement with public integrity
Through public-private partnerships, the expansion of compliance programme coverage in the private sector could be promoted, customised for different types of companies and sectors, and externally verified.
The DIGEIG could strengthen the evidence base on business integrity practices and challenges.
References
[68] AFA (2020), National Diagnostic Survey of Anti-Corruption Systems in Business - 2020 Survey results, Agence Française Anticorruption, Paris, https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/files/2021-03/National%20Diagnostic.pdf (accessed on 28 July 2025).
[24] Ajzenman, N. (2021), “The Power of Example: Corruption Spurs Corruption”, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, Vol. 27/2, pp. 230-57, https://doi.org/10.1257/APP.20180612.
[4] Asociación Internacional para la Evaluación del Rendimiento Académico (2016), Estudio Internacional de Educación Cívica y Ciudadana (ICCS), https://ideice.gob.do/documentacion/publicaciones-msg-set-id-6-art-p1-154-estudio-internacional-de-educacion-civica-y-ciudadana-iccs-2016-republica-dominicana.
[25] Bicchieri, C. and E. Xiao (2009), “Do the right thing: But only if others do so”, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, Vol. 22/2, pp. 1191-208, https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.621.
[42] Bolle, F. and P. Otto (2010), “A Price Is a Signal: on Intrinsic Motivation, Crowding-out, and Crowding-in”, Kyklos, Vol. 63/1, pp. 9-22, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6435.2010.00458.x.
[39] Castro, C. and I. Lopes (2022), “E-Government as a Tool in Controlling Corruption”, International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 46/16, pp. 1137–1150, https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2022.2076695.
[49] CGR (n.d.), Auditores Juveniles - Documentos, Contraloría General de la República, https://www.gob.pe/institucion/contraloria/colecciones/5435-auditores-juveniles-documentos.
[63] CGU (2024), Relatório Pró-Ética 2022-2023, Controladoria-Geral da União, https://www.gov.br/cgu/pt-br/assuntos/integridade-privada/avaliacao-e-promocao-da-integridade-privada/empresa-pro-etica-antigo/relatorios-de-avaliacao/2022-2023/RelatrioPrtica20222023Final.pdf.
[64] CGU (n.d.), O Pró-Ética, Controladoria-Geral da União, https://www.gov.br/cgu/pt-br/assuntos/integridade-privada/avaliacao-e-promocao-da-integridade-privada/empresa-pro-etica/o-pro-etica.
[22] Cheeseman, N. and C. Peiffe (2021), “The Curse of Good Intentions: Why Anticorruption Messaging Can Encourage Bribery”, American Political Science Review, pp. 1-15, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055421001398.
[21] Corbacho, A. et al. (2016), “Corruption as a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: Evidence from a Survey Experiment in Costa Rica”, American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 60/4, pp. 1077-1092, https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12244.
[18] Corporación Latinobarómetro (2020), Latinobarómetro 2020 Dominican Republic, https://www.latinobarometro.org/latinobarometro-2020#LAT-2020-selected-country-header (accessed on 24 June 2026).
[17] Corporación Latinobarómetro (2018), Informe 2018, https://www.latinobarometro.org/latContents.jsp.
[59] Crespo, A. (2024), Más del 50% de las organizaciones necesita fortalecer su programa de Cumplimiento, https://www.ey.com/es_ce/newsroom/2024/12/organizaciones-fortalecer-programa-cumplimiento (accessed on 15 December 2025).
[20] DIGEIG (2025), Celebración del Día Nacional de la Ética Ciudadana 2026, https://www.digeig.gob.do/celebracion-del-dia-nacional-de-la-etica-ciudadana-2024 (accessed on 25 June 2025).
[43] Disla, N. (2016), “Juventud y municipalidad en República Dominicana: experiencias de participación comunitaria a nivel local”, Observatorio Político Dominicano 26 de enero 2016, https://www.opd.org.do/index.php/analisis-gobiernolocal/2107-juventud-y-municipalidad-en-republica-dominicana-experiencias-de-participacion-comunitaria-a-nivel-local.
[50] ENIPC (2021), Estrategia Nacional de Integridad y Prevención de la Corrupción (ENIPC) 2021-2030, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1q4ZoSuoZ4mxHcgApyHYTyE-PWCWhOdTP/view.
[26] Gino, F., S. Ayal and D. Ariely (2009), “Contagion and differentiation in unethical behavior: the effect of one bad apple on the barrel”, Psychological science, Vol. 20/3, pp. 393-8, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02306.x.
[51] Government of Chile (2023), Estrategia Nacional de Integridad Pública, Ministerio Secretaría General de la Presidencia, Santiago.
[40] Government of the Dominican Republic (2022), Agenda Digital 2030 República Dominicana, https://agendadigital.gob.do/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Agenda-Digital-2030-v2.pdf.
[3] Government of the Dominican Republic (2010), Constitución de la República Dominicana, https://www.cijc.org/es/NuestrasConstituciones/REP%C3%9ABLICA-DOMINICANA-Constitucion.pdf.
[58] Guzmán Molina, U. (2024), Es bajo RD importancia dan empresas para incorporar integridad, https://hoy.com.do/economia/es-bajo-rd-importancia-dan-empresas-para-incorporar-integridad_1021109.html (accessed on 15 December 2025).
[11] IDEICE (2022), Plan estratégico institucional 2022-2025, https://ideice.gob.do/transparencia/plan-estrategico (accessed on 28 November 2025).
[41] LAPOP (2023), Pulso de la democracia en la República Dominicana 2023, Vanderbilt University, Center for Gloabl Democracy, Latin American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP), https://www.vanderbilt.edu/lapop/ABDOM2023-Pulso-de-la-democracia-final-20240216.pdf (accessed on 26 July 2025).
[14] Lunn, P. (2014), Regulatory Policy and Behavioural Economics, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264207851-en.
[44] Madera, N. (2021), “Participación juvenil ciudadana en República Dominicana”, Revista Latinoamericana Liderazgo Innovación y Sociedad, Ministerio de Administración Pública, Observatorio Nacional de la Calidad de los Servicios Públicos, pp. 114- 140.
[29] Mann, C. (2011), Behaviour changing campaigns: success and failure factors, U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre, Bergen, https://www.u4.no/publications/behaviour-changing-campaigns-success-and-failure-factors.
[53] Ministerul Justiției (2021), Metodologia de monitorizare a implementarii SNA 2021-2025, https://sna.just.ro/en/a/metodologia-de-monitorizare/metodologia-de-monitorizare-a-implementarii-sna-2021-2025.
[12] Ministry of Education of the Dominican Republic (2024), Plan Decenal de Educación Horizonte 2034, https://www.ministeriodeeducacion.gob.do/media/banners/cd802da8011b0478894bc91cc5b9e4d534dd97f7plan-de-educacion-horizonte-2034pdf.pdf (accessed on 1 April 2026).
[5] Ministry of Education of the Dominican Republic (2023), Adecuación curricular Nivel primario, https://www.educando.edu.do/portal/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2.-Adecuacion-Nivel-Primario-Oct-2023-.-Final.pdf?_gl=1*1s (accessed on 20 May 2025).
[46] Ministry of Youth of the Dominican Republic (2025), Ministerio de la Juventud celebra 2do Congreso Nacional de Ética y Juventud 2025, https://juventud.gob.do/ministerio-de-la-juventud-celebra-2do-congreso-nacional-de-etica-y-juventud-2025/.
[62] OECD (2025), Companies’ assessments of anti-corruption compliance, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/977ed5a8-en.
[60] OECD (2025), Governments’ assessments of corporate anti-corruption compliance, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e798903c-en.
[8] OECD (2025), OECD Integrity Review of Brazil 2025: Consolidating Progress on Public Integrity, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/cfcce75d-en.
[33] OECD (2025), OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions in Latin America and the Caribbean 2025 Results, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ea3385cf-en.
[6] OECD (2024), Facts not Fakes: Tackling Disinformation, Strengthening Information Integrity, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d909ff7a-en.
[9] OECD (2024), Promoting Public Integrity across Ecuadorian Society: Towards a National Integrity System, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/bae418f9-en.
[66] OECD (2023), Líneas Directrices de la OCDE para Empresas Multinacionales sobre Conducta Empresarial Responsable, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7abea681-es.
[52] OECD (2023), Strengthening Romania’s Integrity and Anti-corruption Measures, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ff88cfa4-en.
[38] OECD (2022), “Engaging citizens in cohesion policy: DG REGIO and OECD pilot project final report”, OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, No. 50, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/486e5a88-en.
[67] OECD (2022), “Toolkit for raising awareness and preventing corruption in SMEs”, OECD Business and Finance Policy Papers, No. 21, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/19e99855-en.
[61] OECD (2021), “Competition Compliance Programmes”, OECD Roundtables on Competition Policy Papers, No. 257, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9f6a5618-en.
[54] OECD (2021), Evaluation of the Romanian National Anti-corruption Strategy 2016-2020, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/gov/ethics/evaluation-romanian-national-anti-corruption-strategy-2016-2020.pdf (accessed on 18 February 2022).
[35] OECD (2021), OECD Handbook on Open Government for Peruvian Public Officials, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/gov/open-government/guia-de-la-ocde-sobre-gobierno-abierto-para-funcionarios-publicos-peruanos-2021.pdf.
[37] OECD (2020), Innovative Citizen Participation and New Democratic Institutions: Catching the Deliberative Wave, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/339306da-en.
[55] OECD (2020), OECD Public Integrity Handbook, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ac8ed8e8-en.
[2] OECD (2018), Education for Integrity Teaching on Anti-Corruption, Values and the Rule of Law, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2018/03/education-for-public-integrity_31701aee/133291ea-en.pdf.
[65] OECD (2018), OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/15f5f4b3-en.
[13] OECD (2017), Behavioural Insights and Public Policy: Lessons from Around the World, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264270480-en.
[32] OECD (2017), Preventing Policy Capture: Integrity in Public Decision Making, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264065239-en.
[34] OECD (2017), “Recommendation of the Council on Open Government”, OECD Legal Instruments, OECD/LEGAL/0438, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438.
[1] OECD (2017), “Recommendation of the Council on Public Integrity”, OECD Legal Instruments, OECD/LEGAL/0435, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0435.
[57] OECD (2009), “Recommendation of the Council for Further Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions”, OECD Legal Instruments, OECD/LEGAL/0378, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0378.
[36] OECD (2001), Citizens as Partners: OECD Handbook on Information, Consultation and Public Participation in Policy-Making, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264195578-en.
[56] OECD/UN (2024), A Resource Guide on State Measures for Strengthening Business Integrity, OECD Publishing, Paris/UN, New York, https://doi.org/10.1787/c76d7513-en.
[48] Office of the Comptroller General of the Republic of Costa Rica (n.d.), Juntos somos más, Programa de Contralores Juveniles y Galardón de la Probidad, https://sites.google.com/cgr.go.cr/juntos-somos-mas/.
[19] Oliva Álvarez, G. and R. Cañete Alonso (2024), Cultura Democrática en República Dominicana: Análisis de la Encuesta de Cultura Democrática 2022-2023, Ministerio de Economía, Planificación y Desarrollo, https://mepyd.gob.do/publicacion/cultura-democratica-en-republica-dominicana-2022-2023/.
[23] Peiffer, C. (2018), “Message Received? Experimental Findings on How Messages about Corruption Shape Perceptions”, British Journal of Political Science, pp. 1-19, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123418000108.
[28] Peiffer, C. and G. Walton (2022), “Getting the (right) message across: How to encourage citizens to report corruption”, Development Policy Review, Vol. 40/5, https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12621.
[7] Prada, M. (2021), “Las competencias ciudadanas en la clase de Educación Física: entre las miradas desde la docencia y el discurso planteado en el currículo dominicano”, Revista Educación, Vol. 45/1, http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=44064134025.
[47] Presidencia (2025), Presidente Abinader resalta rol transformador de la juventud en la ética y la transparencia, https://presidencia.gob.do/noticias/presidente-abinader-resalta-rol-transformador-de-la-juventud-en-la-etica-y-la.
[30] Rivera, S. (2018), “Confianza y participación política en América Latina.”, Revista Mexicana De Ciencias Políticas Y Sociales, https://doi.org/10.22201/fcpys.2448492xe.2019.235.65728.
[27] Robert, I. and M. Arnab (n.d.), “Is dishonesty contagious?”, Economic Inquiry, Vol. 51/1, pp. 722-734, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.2012.00470.x.
[31] Seligson, M. (1980), “Trust, efficacy and modes of political participation: A study of Costa Rican peasants”, British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 10/1, pp. 75-98.
[16] Transparencia Internacional (2025), Índice de Percepción de la Corrupción 2024: la corrupción tiene un papel devastador en la crisis climática, https://www.transparency.org/es/press/2024-corruption-perceptions-index-corruption-playing-devastating-role-climate-crisis.
[15] Transparencia Internacional (2025), Índice de Percepción de la Corrupción 2025, Berlín, https://www.transparency.org/en/countries/dominican-republic.
[45] UN (2024), El Futuro es Ahora: Más de 100 jóvenes presentan recomendaciones para el desarrollo nacional, United Nations in the Dominican Republic, https://dominicanrepublic.un.org/es/279190-el-futuro-es-ahora-m%C3%A1s-de-100-j%C3%B3venes-presentan-recomendaciones-para-el-desarrollo-nacional.
[10] World Bank (2021), Docentes Exitosos, Alumnos Exitosos- Reclutamiento y Apoyo de la Profesion mas Importante para la Sociedad, The World Bank Group, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099112223145527674/pdf/P1781940c83f6a0dc0a9f609c197017aa04.pdf.