Publicación:
"The Public Integrity Model in Peru: Between Regulatory Formality and Systemic Inefficiency, [El Modelo de Integridad Pública en el Perú: entre la formalidad normativa y la ineficacia sistémica]"

dc.contributor.author"Lizarzaburu Bolaños, Edmundo R.
dc.contributor.authorFlorez Alata, Hugo Gustavo
dc.contributor.authorLizarzaburu, Macarena"
dc.date.accessioned2026-10-09T04:44:40Z
dc.date.issued2026
dc.description.abstract"This article critically analyzes the Public Integrity Model implemented by the Peruvian State since 2021 in order to explain the gap between its normative design and its effective preventive capacity. In contrast to previous studies on integrity and governance, which have focused on describing institutional arrangements, measuring compliance, or assessing perceptions, the article proposes a critical-documentary approach that interrogates the normative rationality, organizational assumptions, and operational biases embedded in the policy instruments themselves. Based on the analysis of legal instruments, operational guidelines, and official reports, and on their contrast with international integrity standards and ethical governance approaches, the study shows that, despite its formal alignment with OECD recommendations, the model privileges procedural compliance and the production of documentary evidence over the verification of institutional performance. Three structural limitations are identified: the bureaucratization of the approach, the weak enforceability of incentives and sanctions, and the insufficient institutionalization of capacities, continuity, and effective stewardship. The Peruvian case reveals a broader problem of normative formalism in integrity policies, in which regulatory expansion does not guarantee preventive capacity in the absence of effective mechanisms for implementation, monitoring, and accountability. Consequently, the need is raised to reorient the model toward a systemic, context-sensitive, and verifiable-results-oriented approach. Although the documentary design does not allow causal effects on corruption or trust to be attributed, it does make it possible to identify the institutional gaps and mechanisms that constrain the model’s preventive effectiveness. © 2026, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. All rights reserved."
dc.identifier.doi10.22201/iij.25940082e.2026.22.20639
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-105041043287
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14929/1136
dc.identifier.uuid466bec75-aebe-4376-9a63-e409405cde45
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherUniversidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico
dc.relation.ispartofEstudios en Derecho a la Informacion
dc.rightshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.subjectanti-corruption policies
dc.subjectethical governance
dc.subjectinstitutional capacity
dc.subjectintegrity model
dc.subjectpublic integrity
dc.subject.ocdehttps://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#5.05.00
dc.subject.ods"ODS 16: Paz, justicia e instituciones sólidas"
dc.title"The Public Integrity Model in Peru: Between Regulatory Formality and Systemic Inefficiency, [El Modelo de Integridad Pública en el Perú: entre la formalidad normativa y la ineficacia sistémica]"
dc.typehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1
dspace.entity.typePublication
oaire.citation.issue22
oaire.citation.numbere20639
oaire.citation.volume2026

Archivos

Colecciones