Abstract
The relevance of the study stems from the fact that the sphere of construction and infrastructure recovery in Ukraine combines high capital intensity, a large volume of public investment, multi-level coordination, a complex project cycle, and heightened vulnerability to discretionary decisions, conflicts of interest, and manipulation at different stages of project implementation. Under the conditions of full-scale war and large-scale post-war reconstruction, anti-corruption support in this sphere acquires independent managerial significance. The purpose of the article is to substantiate the organizational and legal support of anti-corruption mechanisms of public administration in the sphere of construction and infrastructure recovery and to develop a risk-oriented model for their integration into the full management cycle of a recovery project. The methodological basis of the study combines systemic, institutional, comparative legal, logical-analytical, and content-analytical approaches. The source base includes Ukrainian legal acts, OECD analytical documents, studies by the National Agency on Corruption Prevention and the Basel Institute on Governance, materials from DREAM, CoST, Prozorro and DOZORRO, as well as recent academic works on corruption in construction projects, public procurement, and digital transparency. The article systematizes the stages of corruption risk concentration in the project cycle of construction and infrastructure recovery, characterizes the current institutional architecture of anti-corruption support, and generalizes the legal, institutional, digital, control, and civic instruments aimed at ensuring integrity. A cross-cutting model of anti-corruption support for a recovery project is proposed, combining prevention, digital traceability, internal and external control, audit, and public monitoring within a single integrity framework. It is shown that the practical value of this model lies in its potential use as an analytical and applied framework for improving the governance of recovery projects at the national and local levels. At the same time, the model requires further operationalization through a system of performance indicators, which opens a direction for further research.
References
1. Otsinka koruptsiinykh ryzykiv u sferi budivnytstva, rekonstruktsii ta remontu tsyvilnoi infrastruktury dlia vidnovlennia Ukrainy [Assessment of corruption risks in the construction, reconstruction and renovation of civilian infrastructure for the recovery of Ukraine]. (2025). Natsionalne ahentstvo z pytan zapobihannia koruptsii, Derzhavna audytorska sluzhba Ukrainy, & Basel Institute on Governance. https://baselgovernance.org/sites/default/files/2025-07/Restoration%20risk%20report%20UA.pdf (in Ukrainian)
2. OECD. (2023). Public procurement in the post-war reconstruction of Ukraine: Main challenges. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/c427b561-en
3. OECD. (2025). OECD Integrity and Anti-Corruption Review of Ukraine. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/7dbe965b-en
4. Pro DREAM: systema upravlinnia publichnymy investytsiiamy [About DREAM: Public Investment Management System]. (2026). DREAM. https://dream.gov.ua/ua/about (in Ukrainian)
5. Lehtinen, J., Locatelli, G., Sainati, T., Artto, K., & Evans, B. (2022). The grand challenge: Effective anti-corruption measures in projects. International Journal of Project Management, 40(4), 347–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2022.04.003
6. Amoah, C., & Steyn, D. (2023). Barriers to unethical and corrupt practices avoidance in the construction industry. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, 41(6), 85–101. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBPA-01-2022-0021
7. Zarghami, S. A. (2024). The labyrinth of corruption in the construction industry: A system dynamics model based on 40 years of research. Journal of Business Ethics, 195(2), 335–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05637-8
8. Decarolis, F., & Giorgiantonio, C. (2022). Corruption red flags in public procurement: New evidence from Italian calls for tenders. EPJ Data Science, (11), Article 16. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-022-00325-x
9. Soylu, A., Corcho, O., Elvesaeter, B., Badenes-Olmedo, C., Yedro-Martinez, F., Kovacic, M., Posinkovic, M., Medvescek, M., Makgill, I., Taggart, C., Simperl, E., Lech, T. C., & Roman, D. (2022). Data quality barriers for transparency in public procurement. Information, 13(2), Article 99. https://doi.org/10.3390/info13020099
10. Waxenecker, H., & Prell, C. (2024). Corruption dynamics in public procurement: A longitudinal network analysis of local construction contracts in Guatemala. Social Networks, (79), 154–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2024.07.001
11. Suardi, I., Rossieta, H., Djakman, C., & Diyanty, V. (2024). Procurement governance in reducing corruption in the Indonesian public sector: A mixed method approach. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), Article 2393744. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2393744
12. Puspita, A. C., & Gultom, Y. M. L. (2024). The effect of e-procurement policy on corruption in government procurement: Evidence from Indonesia. International Journal of Public Administration, 47(2), 117–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2022.2093900
13. Adjorlolo, G., Tang, Z., Wauk, G., Adu Sarfo, P., Braimah, A. B., Blankson Safo, R., & N-yanyi, B. (2025). Evaluating corruption-prone public procurement stages for blockchain integration using AHP approach. Systems, 13(4), Article 267. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems13040267
14. Saelawong, T., Yomnak, T., Chaiwat, T., Poopunpanich, S., & Sutuktis, C. (2024). Transparency and budget savings in public procurement: Evidence from Thailand’s Infrastructure Transparency Initiative (CoST). Journal of Financial Crime, 31(6), 1407–1419. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-10-2023-0282
15. Ambituuni, A. (2026). Infrastructure transparency initiative and anticorruption in public infrastructure projects: a principal–agent perspective to the antecedents that enable (or hinder) the effectiveness of transparency. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 33(7), 5934–5957. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-02-2025-0273
16. Mohamed, M. H., Mohamed, A. A., & Mohamed, M. M. (2025). Assessing the anti-corruption capability of public e-procurement adoption: A case study in the Federal Government of Somalia. Public Integrity, 27(4), 440–456. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2024.2344353
17. Ukraine Fifth Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment (RDNA5). (2026). World Bank Group, Government of Ukraine, European Commission, & United Nations. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099022026094036395/pdf/P514499-22f93f3a-4278-42bc-b907-db9553d12069.pdf
18. OECD. (2025). OECD Economic Surveys: Ukraine 2025. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/940cee85-en
19. Adam, I. (2024). Anti-corruption across the public procurement cycle. Transparency International Knowledge Hub. https://knowledgehub.transparency.org/helpdesk/anti-corruption-across-the-public-procurement-cycle
20. Pro zapobihannia koruptsii [On Prevention of Corruption] (Law of Ukraine No. 1700-VII of October 14, 2014). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/go/1700-18 (in Ukrainian)
21. Derzhavne ahentstvo vidnovlennia ta rozvytku infrastruktury Ukrainy. (2026). Struktura Ahentstva [Agency structure]. https://restoration.gov.ua/structure/ (in Ukrainian)
22. Pro publichni zakupivli [On Public Procurement] (Law of Ukraine No. 922-VIII of December 25, 2015). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/go/922-19 (in Ukrainian)
23. Pro zatverdzhennia osoblyvostei zdiisnennia publichnykh zakupivel tovariv, robit i posluh dlia zamovnykiv, peredbachenykh Zakonom Ukrainy “Pro publichni zakupivli”, na period dii pravovoho rezhymu voiennoho stanu v Ukraini ta protiahom 90 dniv z dnia yoho prypynennia abo skasuvannia [On approval of the peculiarities of public procurement of goods, works and services for contracting authorities under martial law in Ukraine and within 90 days after its termination or cancellation] (Resolution No. 1178 of October 12, 2022). Kabinet Ministriv Ukrainy. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/go/1178-2022-%D0%BF (in Ukrainian)
24. Kharchenko, N. V. (2025). Prevention of corruption risks in open tenders with special conditions. Academic Visions, (43). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15721202
25. DREAM. (2026, March 17). Ukraine updates its State Single Project Pipeline in the DREAM system. https://dream.gov.ua/news/article-127
26. The CoST Infrastructure Data Standard (Version 2.0). (2024). CoST. https://infrastructuretransparency.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/New-IDS-English.pdf
27. The impact of the Prozorro procurement system on the Ukrainian economy. Law in Transition Journal. (2025). European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. https://www.ebrd.com/content/dam/ebrd_dxp/assets/pdfs/legal-transition/Law%20in%20Transition%20journal/LiTJ%202025/ebrd-lit25-the-impact-of-the-prozorro-procurement-system-on-the-ukrainian-economy.pdf
28. Prozorro. (2026). Risk indicators. https://risks.prozorro.gov.ua/
29. DOZORRO saved UAH 186 million for the budget since the start of the year. (2026, April 10). Transparency International Ukraine. https://ti-ukraine.org/en/news/dozorro-saved-uah-186-million-for-the-budget-since-the-start-of-the-year/
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 Viktor Leschynsky