Citizens’ perspectives on the form, contributory factors and impacts of white-collar crimes on local authorities in Zimbabwe

Abstract

Despite their instrumental role in the provision of a conducive environment for socio-economic development, local authorities across the globe have been riddled with a myriad of criminal activities, negatively impacting on service to their communities. On numerous occasions, local authorities in Zimbabwe have had to contend with widespread allegations of corruption and a host of other white-collar crimes. This study sought to explore citizens’ perspectives on the scourge of white-collar crime in Zimbabwe’s local authorities, with a particular focus on the trends, causes and impacts. Data were collected from purposely sampled 315 rate payers. Findings revealed that corruption, embezzlement and fraud are the major types of white-collar crime prevalent in local authorities. Poverty, poor internal controls and greediness were found to be the major drivers of white-collar crime. Poor service delivery, reduced revenues and increased expenditure were found to be the major impacts of white collar-crime. The study recommends whistleblowing, sound internal control mechanisms and regular audits as the major strategies to deal with white-collar crime in local authorities.

Keywords:

• corruption
• embezzlement
• fraud
• local authorities
• white-collar crime

1. Introduction

Local authorities play a significant role in socio-economic development and their operations require transparency and accountability. They are legally constituted, community-based state entities driven by the noble principles of a country’s laws, rules and regulations, which are all aimed at securing fundamental human rights to citizens to allow a better, reasonably secure normal human social life (Pillay, 2016). Local governments provide a variety of services to both private and public corporations, thereby creating a platform for other industries such as infrastructure development, water and sanitation, and physical and land use planning to ride and flourish. Despite the importance of such organizations globally, they have consistently performed below expectations as a result of financial issues and a general lack of corporate governance enforcement measures, coupled with council mismanagement, corruption and extortion (Woods & Mantzaris, 2012). Service delivery is increasingly deteriorating in local authorities due to different types of white-collar crime (Newsday, 2023). White-collar crime is a serious problem and has a profound adverse financial impact on individuals, communities, corporations and government agencies. White-collar crime also has a negative impact on the socio-economic rights as it denies development and quality of services to the most vulnerable members of the public (Wafawarova, 2011). Criminals who commit these illegal acts have become more sophisticated, their actions more calculated, their approach more strategic and their execution meticulously carried out.

White-collar crimes are dynamic in nature and ever evolving, with innovative approaches to fraud and new attacks happening every day and no one can speculate what fraudsters will do next. Criminals are constantly modifying their techniques to create new techniques of committing crime leading to the loss of large sums of money through activities such as fraud, embezzlement, theft, corruption and other forms of deceit which are being done in local authorities. Public sector bureaucrats have been indulging in unscrupulous actions to benefit themselves at the expense of public service delivery (Sithole, 2013). In what seems to be the trend in most African developing economies, Zimbabwean local authorities have not been spared by the scourge of white-collar crime in local authorities, with corruption being the major white-collar crime. A survey by Rusvingo (2014) revealed serious incidents of corruption at the largest local authority in Zimbabwe Harare City Council. Another study by Mutuma and Jambawo (2017) revealed that corruption is highly prevalent in water service delivery in Zimbabwe, with poor governance, economic hardships and weak accountability considered the main drivers. Cusack (2020) reported that Zimbabwe was losing at least US$1 billion to corruption, with local authorities among the institutions where corruption was rife. Similarly, the country’s Auditor General’s office, which is a constitutional office, has been consistent in exposing corruption in local authorities (Mlambo, 2021). Cases of white-collar crime in local authorities have also become a regular feature in daily state and independent news platforms.

In this study, we gathered citizens’ perspectives on the scourge of white-collar crime in Zimbabwean local authorities. The study was guided by three objectives namely: (1) To document the forms of white-collar crime in the Zimbabwean local authorities; (2) to ascertain the contributory factors to white-collar crime in the Zimbabwean local authorities; (3) to determine the impacts of white-collar crime in local authorities. The study tackles a perennial problem that has had significant implications on the socio-economic wellbeing of communities not only in Zimbabwe but in other developing economies across the globe. By articulating the nature of white-collar crime as well as the causes, findings will be a crucial reference point for policymakers who will craft prescriptive measures from an informed position. Importantly, the study proffers some prescriptive measures for dealing with white-collar crime in local authorities. The study also comes at a time when the scourge of corruption a form of white-collar crime has been regarded as one of the leading threats to economic development in Zimbabwe. Thus, findings from this study will enable a deeper understanding of the scourge of white-collar crime in local authorities.

1.1. Conceptualising white-collar crime

Defining the term “white collar-crime” has proven elusive over the years. Renowned criminologist Edwin Sutherland first coined the term white collar crime in 1940 to challenge what he considered as inequalities and classist nature of the attribution of criminal behaviour, and he defined white collar crime as crime/(s) committed by a person of respectability and high social status in the course of their occupation (Mugari, 2021). Sutherland’s work was based on the dealings of several large USA corporations and distinguished individuals, and his main argument was that members of upper social class committed many crimes which even had serious consequences than street crimes. After noting the weaknesses in Sutherland’s definition, Weisburd and Waring (2001) defined white-collar crime as economic offenses that are achieved through some combination of fraud, deception, or collusion. Given the complexity of white-collar crime, many substitute terms have been proposed over the years and many categories of white-collar crime have developed. Perhaps, the most widely used categories of white-collar crime are occupational crime and corporate crime (Mugari, 2021). Occupational crime is committed by individuals in the course of their employment and manifests through stealing, defrauding, and cheating, both in and out of an occupational context (Walsh & Hemmens, 2011). Corporate crime is a criminal activity on behalf of a business organisation committed during the course of fulfilling the legitimate role of the corporation and in the name of corporate profit and growth (Walsh & Hemmens, 2011). Given the mandate of local authorities, occupational crime would best describe the criminal activities that take place within the local authority environment. Barkan (2012) cites employee theft (pilferage and embezzlement), fraud and corruption as the main forms of occupational crimes.

1.2. Types of white-collar crime

In this section, we discuss the various types of white-collar crimes that are peculiar to local authorities. Notwithstanding the numerous white-collar crimes that are available, this section focusses on the following white-collar crimes: embezzlement, fraud, procurement fraud, corruption, nepotism, extortion and misappropriation of assets. Whilst there could be an overlap among some of these crimes, for instance corruption and nepotism, discussing them separately will help to clearly articulate the manifestation of these crimes.

Corruption is among the leading white-collar crimes in the local authorities across the globe (Schoberlein & Jenkins, 2019; Skenjana et al., 2011). Different scholars have come up with several definitions of corruption, but the notion of “abuse of public or private office for personal gain” is central to all of them. Corruption comes in different forms and the most dominant forms of corruption within the local government environments are bribery, conflict of interest, cronyism and nepotism, and illegal gratuities (Nokele & Shopola, 2021; Pyman, 2021; Skenjana et al., 2011). Bribery is the act of accepting offerings, giving, receiving, or soliciting something of value to influence the actions or decisions of public officials (Schoeman, 2014, p. 13). Inducements can take the form of gifts, loans, fees, rewards, or other advantages (Pyman, 2021). Conflict of interest arises where an individual or the entity for which they work, in our instance local government, faces a conflict between the duties and demands of one or more positions that they hold and their private interests (Skenjana et al., 2011). Nepotism and cronyism are forms of favouritism whereby someone in public office exploits his or her power and authority to provide a job or favour to a family member (nepotism), friend or associate (cronyism), even though he or she may not be qualified or has not gone through the appropriate application procedures (Nokele & Shopola, 2021; Pyman, 2021). Illegal gratuities entail provision of gifts, entertainment, charity or other hospitality that could affect or be perceived to affect the outcome of business transactions and are not reasonable and bona fide (Pyman, 2021). In some jurisdictions like Zimbabwe, some of the corruption actions that do not fall within the prescribed parameters are regarded as criminal abuse of office by a public official (Government of Zimbabwe, 2006). Closely related to corruption is extortion, which is an act of utilizing one’s access to a position of power and knowledge, either directly or indirectly to demand unmerited cooperation or compensation as a result of coercive threats (Sithole, 2013)

Fraud is also another white-collar crime that manifests in local authorities. Fraud involves actions or behaviour by a public official, other person or entity that fool others into providing a benefit that would not normally accrue to the public official, other persons or entity. The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) (2019) notes that fraud costs the public sector at least S40.3 billion annually, of which $7.8 billion relates to local governments. CIPFA (2019) also contends that fraud is a widespread cause of concern in the public sector and remains a constant financial threat to local authorities. Kurfi and Danrimi (2020) note ghost workers as a modus operandi for fraud in Nigerian municipalities, with council officials adding fictitious names and the money meant for such ghost names will finally find their way or be transferred to these officials’ account. Whilst fraud covers a broad range of criminal activities that involve deception and dishonesty, procurement fraud should be singled out as one of the dominant forms of fraud in local authorities. In South Africa, billions of rand have been lost to procurement fraud, with the country’s Auditor-General countlessly flagging tendering fraud that perpetually cripples municipalities (Nokele & Shopola, 2021). The manifestation of procurement fraud in the public sector has resulted in fruitless, unauthorised, irregular expenditure and mal-administration and has damaged economic and social programmes in local government (Mbandlwa et al., 2020).

Globally, embezzlement has also been regarded as one of the dominant white-collar crimes in public institutions such as local authorities. Embezzlement is the fraudulent appropriation of funds or property entrusted to one’s care but actually owned by someone else. It can be defined as “theft of public resources by public officials” and as such, it is understood as another form of misappropriation of public funds (Nyoni, 2017, p. 286). Public officials within the local authorities steal from the same public institution in which they are employed and from resources they are supposed to administer on behalf of the state and the public (Nyoni, 2017). A study by Kurfi and Danrimi (2020) highlighted embezzlement and reckless spending by local authorities as one of the reasons for underdevelopment in Nigeria. Closely related to embezzlement, but with a focus on other resources, is misappropriation of assets. This implies illegal appropriation of public resources for private-regarding uses (Nye, 1967).

1.3. Drivers to white-collar crime

A myriad of factors have been found to be contributing to white-collar crime in the local authorities. According to Schoberlein and Jenkins (2019), risks of white-collar crime are exacerbated by a lack of oversight, high discretion in the public sector, nepotism and patronage networks, a concentration of money and influence, and the high volume of funds involved. In developing countries, and especially at the local level, corruption risks in public procurement can be particularly problematic. White collar crime also tends to flourish where there are inadequate and ineffective controls, coupled with organisational weaknesses in the supply chain and financial management (Pillay, 2016). Supply chain management and procurement weaknesses lead to “corruption and fraud through a variety of means such as fictitious quotes and invoices, discounts, ghost suppliers, manipulated preferred supplier lists, shell companies, principal/agent schemes, hiring policy, tendering schemes, various forms of bribery, kickbacks, bid rigging” (Pillay, 2016, p. 122). According to Mawanza (2014), economic downswing activities such as recruitments freezes, unpaid leaves and layoffs create gaps in the system and weaken internal controls. If anti-corruption policies and internal control systems are weak to prevent corruption and other white-collar crimes, people will indulge in criminal activities because the chances of being caught and brought to book will be very slim. Woods and Mantzaris (2012) contend that a lack of ethics and accountability among leaders in local authorities often lead to opportunities for corruption, with increased probabilities for personal enrichment.

Inadequate salaries have also been touted as a leading cause of white-collar crime in local authorities. Local governments have failed to pay their employees competitive salaries and to pay them on time, resulting in personnel engaging in corrupt and unethical behaviour (Machinjike & Bonga, 2021). Closely related to the aspect of poor salaries is poverty, with Piven and Minnette (2015) averring that bureaucrats view poor people as easy targets, believing that they lack knowledge, financial resources and social connections to resist request for bribes, hence their lower socio-economic status makes them vulnerable. Poverty has also been considered a driver for white collar crime by several researchers (Mabika, 2015; Mawanza, 2014; Sithole, 2013). It therefore follows that when employees and ratepayers do not have adequate means to either settle their bills or earn a living, they will resort to illegal means to meet their basic needs. On another note, Pillay (2016) avers that broken social norms also fuel corruption and such breakdown in social norms can manifest through greediness.

Crimes like corruption are also fuelled by complex procedures to obtain public services, and Chene (2015) argues that citizens can be asked for bribes to circumvent complex processes or secure access to services. This resonates with Minkova (2018)’s averment that high levels of bureaucracy and considerable discretionary powers and monopoly over public services create multiple opportunities for corruption. Sithole (2013) also notes that ratepayers resort to paying of bribes as an alternative to circumvent the intricate procedures that they have to go through so that they can obtain the services that they require.

1.4. Impacts of white-collar crime

The impacts of white-collar crime on local authorities and the general communities are huge. White-collar crime significantly reduces the revenues that should be available for community development (Mabika, 2015; Sithole, 2013). Funds meant for capacity building and infrastructure improvement get lost on the way in the form of bribes and kickbacks to unscrupulous businessmen, civil servants and politicians (Carr, 2009). The loss of liquid assets will further lead to the reduction of revenue for current and capital expenditures, with the attendant reduction in the level of economic operations, reduction in revenue inflow and provision of socio-economic infrastructure for the public (Kurfi & Danrimi, 2020). It disrupts business continuity as it reduces the quality and effectiveness of critical services and threatens the stability of local authorities (Purcell, 2016). Specifically commenting on corruption on public procurement, Schoberlein and Jenkins (2019) note that this phenomenon leads to a reduced quality of goods and services and often a waste of funds. Because the goods and services delivered in public procurement include essential provisions such as healthcare, education and infrastructure, poorer citizens are usually hit hardest by corruption in public procurement (Schoberlein & Jenkins, 2019).

2. Theoretical conception: the fraud triangle theory

Several criminological theories have been propounded to explain white-collar crime causation. This study was guided by the Fraud Triangle theory. The Fraud Triangle theory was propounded by Donald Cressey during his study on why people violate trust in 1950. Cressey found that three factors must be present for a person to violate trust, and these are non-sharable financial problem also known as the perceived pressure, opportunity to commit the trust violation, and rationalisation by the trust violator (Benson & Simpson, 2009). Perceived pressure relates to the motivation that leads to unethical behaviours and according to Cressey, every fraud perpetrator faces some pressure to commit unethical behaviour (Mugari, 2021). Examples of pressures that commonly lead to white-collar crime, and which are applicable to the local authorities’ set-up, include greed, inability to pay bills, family financial problems and desire for status symbols such as a bigger house and a nice car (Abdullahi et al., 2015).

Opportunity relates to the circumstances which allow an employee to carry out the fraudulent activities and the person must see some way in which he can abuse his position of trust to solve his financial problem (Mugari, 2021). The occupational position gives the offender “legitimate access” to some situation or opportunity in which the offender can advance his or her own interests at the expense of other individuals or organisations (Benson & Simpson, 2009). Opportunity can also be created by ineffective control or governance systems, coupled with ineffective supervision and inadequate segregation of duties, thus allowing individuals to commit white-collar crime (Mugari, 2021). Rationalisation refers to the justification that the unethical behaviour is something other than criminal activity (Benson, 2015). The justification comes in different forms before and after the crime has occurred. The three major rationalisations according to Sykes and Matza (1957) are as follows: denial of responsibility, denial of injury, denial of victim and condemnation of the condemners. This theory will thus help to understand the pressures, opportunities and rationalisations behind the white-collar crime phenomenon within local authorities.

3. Methodology

3.1. Participants and sampling

The study was conducted in Marondera, a city that is located 60 km East of Harare and the provincial capital of Mashonaland East Province. The city has two local authorities one for the urban area and the other for the surrounding rural areas. A total of 315 respondents were invited to participate in the study, and the participants were predominantly the rate payers within the urban area and the surrounding rural areas. The study adopted a mixed research design. A purposive sampling technique was used to select the participants. Rate payers were identified in the wards within the urban area and surrounding rural areas. Those who appreciated the aspect of white-collar crime, and had expressed willingness to participate in the study, were included as respondents. A maximum of two adults were selected from each household until the required number of participants was reached. A total 10 participants from the 315 were also purposefully sampled for in-depth interviews, and they were selected based on their considered appreciation of the subject of white-collar crime and their in-depth understanding of the local authority operations.

3.2. Instruments and analysis

A mainly closed-ended questionnaire was used for the survey. The questionnaire had five sections, with section A relating to the demographic data; section B relating to the forms of white-collar crime; section C relating to the contributory factors to white-collar crime; section D relating to the impacts of white-collar crime; section E relating to measures to deal with white-collar crime. Respondents were required to tick the appropriate responses on a construct-specific scale and a 4-point Likert scale. Quantitative data were analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) to reveal descriptive statistics, namely: frequencies, percentages, mean and standard deviation (SD). After quantitative data analysis, indepth interviews were conducted with 10 participants. A semi-structured interview guide was used, and each interview session lasted between 35 and 45 minutes. Qualitative responses were analysed through summative content analysis and were used to support the quantitative findings.

4. Research findings

4.1. Prevalent white-collar crimes

The respondents were asked to indicate the types of white-collar crime which were prevalent at Marondera Rural District Council and the results are summarised in Table 1. Corruption topped the list as the most prevalent white-collar crime in local authorities, with a mean of 3.52 ± 0.630, which shows a gravitation towards high prevalence. Nepotism, which is a form of corruption came second, with a mean statistic of 3.33 ± 0.757.

Table 1. Types of white-collar crimes and their prevalence

	Very Low prevalence		Low prevalence		Prevalent		High prevalence		Statistics
Type of crime	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Mean	SD
Embezzlement	15	5.2	27	9.4	104	36.2	141	49.1	3.29	0.843
Fraud	13	4.5	11	3.8	157	54.7	106	36.9	3.24	0.730
Procurement Fraud	25	8.7	46	16	118	41	98	34	3.01	0.924
Corruption	4	1.4	9	3.1	107	37.3	167	58.2	3.52	0.630
Bribery	39	13.6	14	4.9	95	33.1	139	48.4	3.16	1.026
Nepotism	11	3.8	17	5.9	124	43.2	135	47	3.33	0.757
Extortion	61	24.3	44	15.3	97	33.8	85	29.6	2.72	1.106

Embezzlement was third, with a mean statistic of 3.29 ± 0.843. Fraud had a mean statistic of 3.24 ± 0.730, followed by bribery, which is a category of corruption, with a mean statistic of 3.16 ± 1.026. Procurement fraud had a mean statistic of 3.01 ± 0.924, while extortion was regarded as the least prevalent white-collar crime, at 2.72 ± 1.106.

All the interview participants indicated that corruption is the most dominant white-collar crime in local authorities. The following were some of the sentiments;

Local government is one of the worst sectors affected by corruption in Zimbabwe. You find it in the allocation of residential stands, where those with money pay bribes to get stands; double allocation of residential stands; revenue collection- In fact almost all the departments in local authorities are prone to corruption. (Participant #1)

If you want services on time, you have to pay bribes to office bearers. This is not fare as we should not be paying public officials to do what they are paid by the local authorities to do. (Participant #3)

If you perform a random check in these local authorities, you will be shocked to see that majority of the employees are somehow related to the top executives. Nepotism is rife in these local authorities. (Participant #8)

There were also general sentiments regarding crimes such as embezzlement and fraud, with the majority of the participants indicating that these two crimes are prevalent. One of the participants remarked, “with what we are paying as rates and the kind of service that citizens are getting, I believe there is massive embezzlement in these local authorities” (Participant #5). Three of the participants also singled out the procurement department as one of the departments which is worst prone to fraudulent activities.

4.2. Causes of white-collar crime

Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement on the given causes of white-collar crime on a 4-point Likert Scale (Table 2). Poverty was regarded as the major driver of white-collar crime, with a mean statistic of 3.44 ± 0.829. This was followed by a related cause, economic and financial pressures, with a mean statistic of 3.33 ± 0.847. Poor internal controls had a mean statistic of 3.2 ± 1.01, while greediness closely followed with a mean statistic of 3.15 ± 0.737. In the last position, but still gravitating towards agreement, there was a wide disparity in salary structure, with a mean statistic of 3.1 ± 0.667.

Table 2. Causes of white-collar crime

	Strongly Disagree		Disagree		Agree		Strongly Agree		Statistics
Reason	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Mean	SD
Greediness	9	3.1	32	11.1	152	52.6	94	32.5	3.15	0.737
Poverty	13	4.5	24	8.3	75	26	175	61	3.44	0.829
Economic and Financial pressure	16	5.5	24	8.3	99	34.5	149	51.9	3.33	0.847
Poor internal controls	35	12.2	18	6.3	89	31	145	50.5	3.2	1.01
Wide disparity in salary structure	10	3.5	21	7.3	187	64.7	69	23.9	3.1	0.667

All the interview participants cited the current macro-economic challenges as the major driver to white-collar crime. The following were some of the participants’ sentiments;

Local authority employees have not been spared by the effect of the economic challenges prevailing in the county. They have families to look after, kids to send to school, rent obligations, transport fares obligations. With their low salaries, they temptation to engage in criminal activities is high. (Participant #1)

Just like everyone is being affected by the current economic challenges, council employees are not an exception. However, the nature of their services is more prone to temptations of corruption and this explains why we have high corruption levels in local authorities than in other sectors. (Participant #4)

Two other participants made the following remarks regarding the aspect of greediness and internal controls;

At times I don’t buy into this narrative of lower salaries. How do you explain criminal activities by top council officials, who have everything, from motor vehicles, fuel allowance, council provided houses and above all, high salaries. It boils down to one issue- greediness. (Participant #7)

Most of these criminal activities, especially in terms of revenue leakages, are caused by ineffective internal controls within local authorities. Even the internal audit departments are not as effective as they are supposed to be. (Participant #10)

Another participant noted the bureaucratic red tape in obtaining some services at local authorities. He singled out the processes that are involved when one wants to obtain a shop licence or a licence to start a fast-food outlet. Such bureaucratic hurdles, he noted, pose as breeding grounds for corruption.

4.3. Impacts of white-collar crime

Poor service delivery was considered a major impact of white-collar crime in local authorities, with an overwhelming majority (87.5%) inclined to agree with the reason (Table 3). Poor service delivery had a mean statistic of 3.39 ± 0.819. This was followed by increased expenditure, with a mean statistic of 3.13 ± 0.728. On the third place were reduced revenue inflows, with a mean statistic of 3.11 ± 0.703. Though gravitating towards agreement, damaged reputation and the creation of an unethical work culture came least, with mean statistics of 3.09 ± 0.886 and 3.03 ± 0.806, respectively.

Table 3. Impacts of white-collar crime

	Strongly Disagree		Disagree		Agree		Strongly Agree		Statistics
Reason	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Mean	SD
Reduced revenue inflows	13	4.5	17	5.9	181	63.1	76	26.5	3.11	0.703
Increased expenditure	11	3.8	27	9.4	164	57.1	85	29.6	3.13	0.728
Poor service delivery	14	4.9	20	7	94	32.5	159	55	3.39	0.819
Creation of an unethical culture	23	8	19	6.6	170	59.2	75	26.1	3.03	0.806
Damaged reputation	20	7	40	13.8	120	41.8	107	37	3.09	0.886

Poor service delivery was mentioned at length by all the interview respondents as the leading impact of white-collar crime in local authorities. Importantly, they argued that the other impacts such as reduced revenue collected and increased expenditure will come to one key issue - poor service delivery. The following were some of the sentiments from the participants;

We are paying rates monthly but there is no improvement or development of roads, all we see are potholes in most of the roads, so where is our money going? (Participant #2)

If the local authorities are seen to be engaging in these white-collar crimes, ratepayers will withhold their money though it’s the rate payer who ultimately suffers when the local authority fails to provide the necessary services. (Participant #3)

Crimes like fraud will create fictitious and inflated expenditures for the local authorities and in the end, it will not be possible to fund critical areas like road maintenance, refuse collection and water reticulation. (Participant #6)

Another participant noted that high incidents of corruption in local authorities will attract unnecessary government interference in the running of local authorities. He noted instances where the responsible minister had to order forensic investigations in several local authorities around the country, with the costs of the forensic audits being met by the already cash-strapped councils.

4.4. Strategies for curbing white-collar crime

Among the given strategies, whistleblowing was regarded as the most effective strategy for dealing with white-collar crime in local authorities, with a mean statistic of 3.25 ± 0.868 (Table 4). In the second position was the implementation of sound internal controls, with a mean statistic of 3.12 ± 0.894. Auditing, as a strategy to curb white-collar crime, came third, with a mean statistic of 3.09 ± 0.876. Though it can be regarded as an internal control measure, segregation of duties had a mean statistic of 3.06 ± 0.893. Awareness campaigns had a mean statistic of 3.02 ± 0.789, while a code of conduct came last, with a mean statistic of 2.98 ± 0.989.

Table 4. Strategies for curbing white-collar crime

	Strongly Disagree		Disagree		Agree		Strongly Agree		Statistics
Reason	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Freq	%	Mean	SD
Auditing	19	6.6	41	14.3	122	42.5	105	36.3	3.09	0.876
Awareness campaigns	15	5.2	41	14.3	154	53.7	77	26.8	3.02	0.789
Sound internal controls	18	6.3	45	15.6	108	37.6	116	40.4	3.12	0.894
Code of conduct	30	10.5	53	18.5	97	33.8	117	37.3	2.98	0.989
Segregation of duties	24	8.4	34	11.8	130	45.3	99	34.5	3.06	0.893
Whistleblowing	18	6.2	27	9.3	108	37.6	134	46.7	3.25	0.868

Whistleblowing was also considered by the interview participants as the most effective measure against white-collar crime in local authorities. Four of the participants argued that since some of the criminal activities are institutionalised, whistleblowing from within and outside the local authorities will be the most viable strategy. The importance of sound internal control systems was over-emphasised, with participants raising issues such as: maintenance of asset registers; access control to the local authorities’ computer and physical systems; proper documentation; and strict adherence to all laid down procedures. The importance of both internal and external auditing was emphasised by most of the participants, with three participants noting the need to increase the frequency and thoroughness of internal audits, while others highlighted the need for frequent surprise audits.

As regards awareness campaigns, most of the participants indicated that much of the efforts should be directed to the rate payers so that they are sensitised on the effects of paying bribes and the need to expose criminal activities by local authority employees. Apart from the suggested measures, participants also noted the need for electing competent individuals as local authority representatives, as well as the need to employ local authority employees based on merit.

5. Discussion

The results reveal that corruption is the most dominant white-collar crime in Zimbabwe’s local authorities. It also follows that nepotism and bribery, both manifestations of corruption, were also considered dominant forms of white-collar crime. These findings confirm Schoberlein and Jenkins (2019) and Skenjana et al. (2011)’ s position that corruption is among the leading white-collar crimes in the local authorities across the globe. Moreover, nepotism and bribery were also viewed as the leading forms of corruption in local authorities by Nokele and Shopola (2021) and Pyman (2021). This finding is not surprising, especially given the frequent news reports about corruption in most urban local authorities in Zimbabwe. The corruption levels within the local authorities also mirror the magnitude of the scourge in other sectors of the economy, as corruption has been regarded as one of the leading causes of the economic challenges in the country.

The findings also identified embezzlement as another prevalent white-collar crime within local authorities in Zimbabwe. Previous studies in Nigeria (Kurfi & Danrimi, 2020) and Zimbabwe (Nyoni, 2017) also identified embezzlement as one of the prevalent white-collar crimes within local authorities. Given, the role of local authorities in collecting revenue from rate payers and channeling it towards service delivery, opportunities and temptations to engage in embezzlement abound, as argued by Donald Cressey’s fraud triangle theory. Fraud, in its various manifestations, including procurement fraud, was also viewed as prevalent within the local authorities. Overall, and with the exception of extortion, all the other white-collar crimes had a mean above 3.0, meaning they ranged from prevalent to high prevalence. This therefore shows that white-collar crime, though manifested in different forms, is rife within Zimbabwe's local authorities.

In what seems to mirror the current economic outlook for Zimbabwe, poverty was regarded as the major driver to white-collar crime within the local authorities. It logically follows that the aspect of economic and financial pressures comes second among the drivers of white-collar crime within the local authorities. Lower salaries, which is the scenario in most of the sectors in Zimbabwe, create financial pressures on council employees, leading them to engage in criminal activities such as corruption, embezzlement and fraud. This is typical of the “pressure” component of the fraud triangle theory. The finding on poverty as one of the major drivers of white-collar crime in local authorities is consistent with previous findings by Sithole (2013), Mawanza (2014), Mabika (2015), and Piven and Minnette (2015). Moreover, Machinjike and Bonga (2021) also confirm that Zimbabwean local authorities have failed to pay their employees competitive salaries and to pay them on time, resulting in personnel engaging in corrupt and unethical behaviour. As correctly argued by one of the participants, council employees have obligations such as school fees, rentals and transport costs and if the salary cannot meet these obligations, they will be tempted to engage in criminal activities. In what seems to confirm the fraud triangle theory’s proposition on the causes of white-collar crime, the findings reveal that much of the causes emanate from financial-induced pressure, leaving council employees with no option but to engage in crime in order to meet their pressing financial needs. In resonance with Woods and Mantzaris (2012) and Mawanza (2014), poor internal controls were also viewed as significant drivers to white-collar crime. As argued by Mugari (2021) and in resonance with the fraud triangle theory, poor internal controls, coupled with ineffective supervision and inadequate segregation of duties, create opportunities for white-collar crime. Without effective internal control systems, malcontents within local authorities will exploit any loopholes within the systems to engage in criminal activities. Greediness was also considered as a cause of white-collar crime. This scenario aptly explains criminal activities by top officials within the local authorities. Such officials have very attractive perks in the form of motor vehicles, fuel provision, housing and fees for their children. Thus, their engagement in criminal activities is actuated by greed rather than need.

As regards the impacts of white-collar crime, respondents considered poor service delivery as the major impact of white-collar crime. There are several explanations to this scenario. First, funds that are meant for infrastructure maintenance and other services such as garbage collection are lost due to white-collar crime - a situation which is also reiterated by Carr (2009) and Kurfi and Danrimi (2020). Second, employment to critical positions based on nepotism will lead to poor quality decisions that negatively impact the communities. Lastly, and as argued by Schoberlein and Jenkins (2019), procurement and tender-related criminal activities will result in acquisition of sub-standard goods and poor workmanship, thus impacting the standard of life within the communities. The other major impacts - reduced revenue and increased expenditure will also converge to the key issue of service delivery, as depleted revenue inflows reduce the funds for service delivery, while increased expenditure limits the quantity of services to the communities. The results also confirm the findings by previous researchers that white-collar crime significantly reduces the revenues that should be available for community development (Mabika, 2015; Sithole, 2013) and also reduces the quality and effectiveness of critical services (Purcell, 2016). Overall, it follows that citizens are more concerned with their community wellbeing through provision of quality service by local authorities and criminal activities will deal a heavy blow on this ideal situation.

In terms of dealing with white-collar crime, respondents considered whistleblowing as the most effective measure. As argued by some of the participants, when white-collar crime permeates the whole local authority system, the most potent way of exposing it is through whistleblowing. For it to be effective, whistleblowing needs to be supported by sound whistle-blower protection mechanisms. Given the opportunities that are presented by weak internal systems in the commission of white-collar crimes, it follows that having sound internal control measures becomes an imperative anti-white-collar crime measure. There should be well-documented internal control systems in relation to financial records, computer systems and physical assets. Auditing is also crucial in exposing white collar crimes like fraud and embezzlement and findings recommend an increase in the frequency of internal audits, as well as surprise audits. Segregation of duties among local authorities’ employees and awareness campaigns that emphasise on educating communities against colluding with employees to engage in criminal activities were also regarded as effective strategies.

6. Conclusion

Results of this study reveal the extent of the criminal activities that characterise local authorities in Zimbabwe, as well as the contributory factors to these white-collar crimes. In what seems to be the trend in local authorities across the globe, corruption is the most prevalent white-collar crime in local authorities, and it manifests through actions such as nepotism and bribery. Embezzlement and fraud are also prevalent white-collar crimes. Poverty was regarded as the main driver of white-collar crime and this is largely due to the current macro-economic challenges in the nation, with most sectors of the economy surviving on very low salaries. Poor internal controls, as another driver of white-collar crime, present employees with opportunities to engage in criminal activities. White-collar crime by top local authority officials is actuated by greed, hence greediness is another driving force behind white-collar crime. The major impact of white collar-crime in local authorities is poor service delivery, with the two other impacts namely reduced revenue and increased expenditure also having the ultimate impact on service delivery. Whistleblowing is the most ideal mechanism against white-collar crime in local authorities and should be supported by sound internal control systems, regular audits and segregation of duties.

The major limitation of this study lies in the fact that it was conducted in an environment that was characterised by acute economic challenges. These economic challenges affected all the employee levels in the broad society; hence, the financial challenges and poverty were mainly considered as the main drivers of white-collar crime. Whilst the findings of this study reveal that white-collar crime is mainly driven by financial-induced pressure, it would be ideal to have another study which specifically focuses on why those in the top management and with all the attractive perks engage in white-collar crime. Such a study would be ideal in an environment of economic prosperity. Another limitation also lies in the sample structure of the respondents as most of the ratepayers may not have in-depth knowledge of the forms of white-collar crime, thus making it a predominantly perception survey. Notwithstanding this limitation, the findings present a good starting point for future in-depth studies on white-collar crime in local authorities.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Ishmael Mugari

Ishmael Mugari holds a Doctorate in Police Science. His research focuses on criminology, police accountability, police strategy and national security issues.

Gillian S. Chigwandaza

Gillian S. Chigwandaza was an undergraduate student at Bindura University of Science Education.

Emeka E. Obioha

Emeka E. Obioha is a Professor of Sociology at Walter Sislulu University. His research focuses on social problems, deviance, social control, policing, conflicts and systems equilibrium analysis.