H&N Publications INTERNATIONAL

International Journal for Asian Contemporary Research, 6(2):31-36

Research Article

Political Transparency as a Catalyst for Sustainable Development and Peace: The Case of Bangladesh

Mohammad Abul Kalam Azad
Mohammad Abul Kalam Azad

Associate Professor and Director, Center for General Education, Manarat International University, Dhaka, Bangaldesh


Received: 28 August, 2026 || Accepted: 12 September , 2026 || Published: 22 September, 2026

 

A B S T R A C T

Political transparency refers to the openness, accessibility, and reliability of information concerning public decisions, institutions, policies, and the use of public resources. It is closely connected with accountability because information becomes politically meaningful when citizens, legislatures, courts, journalists, and civil society can use it to scrutinize public authority. This article examines the relationship between political transparency, sustainable development, and peace in Bangladesh through a qualitative analysis of legislation, international governance indicators, institutional reports, and established academic literature. The analysis focuses particularly on the Right to Information Act, 2009; institutional accountability; corruption control; electoral and political governance; media freedom; digital government; and citizen participation. The evidence indicates that transparency can support development by improving the conditions for accountable institutions, more informed participation, and more effective monitoring of public resources. It can also contribute to peace by reducing uncertainty, improving the legitimacy of public institutions, and creating non-violent channels through which citizens can challenge decisions and demand accountability. At the same time, transparency by itself does not automatically produce accountability. As Fox (2007) emphasizes, information may remain ineffective when citizens lack the institutional power or capacity to act on it. The article therefore argues that Bangladesh needs an integrated transparency framework combining access to information, institutional independence, effective oversight, media freedom, digital accessibility, civic capacity, and credible enforcement. Such reforms are relevant not only to democratic governance but also to Sustainable Development Goal 16, which links peaceful and inclusive societies with effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions.

Keywords: political transparency, good governance, sustainable development, peace, accountability and right to information.

Copyright information: Copyright © 2026 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License


    To cite this article: Azad, M.A.K. 2026. Political Transparency as a Catalyst for Sustainable Development and Peace: The Case of Bangladesh. International Journal for Asian Contemporary Research, 6 (2), 31-36  

 

References

  1. Bangladesh. (2009). Right to Information Act, 2009 (Act No. XX of 2009). Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.
  2. Cordis, A. S., & Warren, P. L. (2014). Sunshine as disinfectant: The effect of state Freedom of Information Act laws on public corruption. Journal of Public Economics, 115, 18–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2014.03.010
  3. Fisman, R., Malatinszky, A., & Yegen, E. (2026). Electoral incentives and government transparency: Evidence from Freedom of Information requests (NBER Working Paper No. 35248). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w35248
  4. Fox, J. (2007). The uncertain relationship between transparency and accountability. Development in Practice, 17(4–5), 663–671. https://doi.org/10.1080/0961452070146995
  5. Fukuyama, F. (2013). What is governance? Governance, 26(3), 347–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12035
  6. Grindle, M. S. (2004). Good enough governance: Poverty reduction and reform in developing countries. Governance, 17(4), 525–548. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0952-1895.2004.00256.x
  7. Hollyer, J. R., Rosendorff, B. P., & Vreeland, J. R. (2011). Democracy and transparency. The Journal of Politics, 73(4), 1191–1205. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381611000880
  8. Human Rights Watch. (2023, May 3). Bangladesh: End crackdown against journalists and critics.
  9. Iqbal, Z., & Starr, H. (2008). Bad neighbors: Failed states and their consequences. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 25(4), 315–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/07388940802397400
  10. Kaufmann, D., & Kraay, A. (2024). The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and 2024 update (World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 10952). World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-10952
  11. Kaufmann, D., & Kraay, A. (2024). The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and 2024 update (Policy Research Working Paper No. 10952). World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-10952
  12. Lederach, J. P. (1997). Building peace: Sustainable reconciliation in divided societies. United States Institute of Peace Press.
  13. McMillan, J., & Zoido, P. (2004). How to subvert democracy: Montesinos in Peru. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18(4), 69–92. https://doi.org/10.1257/0895330042632690
  14. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press.
  15. OECD. (2023). Government at a glance 2023. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/3d5c5d31-en
  16. Peisakhin, L., & Pinto, P. (2010). Is transparency an effective anti-corruption strategy? Evidence from a field experiment in India. Regulation & Governance, 4(3), 261–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01081.x
  17. Rodrik, D., Subramanian, A., & Trebbi, F. (2004). Institutions rule: The primacy of institutions over geography and integration in economic development. Journal of Economic Growth, 9(2), 131–165. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOEG.0000031425.72248.85
  18. Sachs, J. D. (2015). The age of sustainable development. Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/sach17314
  19. Transparency International Bangladesh. (2025, February 11). Bangladesh ranks 151st with lowest score of 23 in 13 years: A result of fallen kleptocratic and authoritarian rule that sheltered and nurtured corruption.
  20. Transparency International. (2025). Corruption Perceptions Index 2024.
  21. United Nations. (2024a). The Sustainable Development Goals report 2024. United Nations.
  22. United Nations. (2024b). United Nations e-government survey 2024: Accelerating digital transformation for sustainable development. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
  23. World Bank. (2026). Worldwide Governance Indicators, 2026 update. World Bank.
  24. World Bank. (2026). Worldwide Governance Indicators. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/worldwide-governance-indicators
  25. Worthy, B. (2010). More open but not more trusted? The effect of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 on the United Kingdom central government. Governance, 23(4), 561–582. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2010.01498.x
  26. Žuffová, M. (2020). Do FOI laws and open government data deliver as anti-corruption policies? Evidence from a cross-country study. Government Information Quarterly, 37(3), 101511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101511

  Article View: 36 times

      

Quick Links

Latest Article

Political Transparency as a Catalyst for Sustainable Development and Peace: The Case of Bangladesh

AI-Driven High-Throughput Phenotyping for Drought-Resilient Maize ( Zea mays L) in Bangladesh

Women's Security, Dignity, and Responsibilities in Islam: An Analysis from the Bangladesh Context

Determinants of Customers' Behavioral Intentions to Adopt Internet Banking Services

Effects of Seedlings Transplanting Time and Variety on the Yield and Quality of Summer Onion (Allium cepa L.) Seed

Optimizing Nitrogen and Phosphorus Fertilizer Doses to Enhance Yield and Quality of Maize