> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://oecd-media-support-principles.gfmd.info/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://oecd-media-support-principles.gfmd.info/toolkit/case-studies-and-field-insights/case-study-4-governance-risk-and-the-role-of-media-oversight-in-infrastructure-investments.md).

# Case Study 4: Governance risk and the role of media oversight in infrastructure investments

{% hint style="info" %}

### **Core issue**

Large-scale infrastructure investments can face governance and credibility risks when independent scrutiny is not integrated into programme design.
{% endhint %}

### **Context**

The Global Gateway is the EU’s flagship investment strategy, mobilising significant resources for infrastructure across sectors such as energy, transport, digital, health, and education.

Infrastructure programmes of this scale are often exposed to risks related to:

* corruption and procurement manipulation
* limited transparency in implementation
* weak or fragmented public oversight

These risks are typically addressed through formal governance and compliance mechanisms. Independent scrutiny by media actors further addresses these risks by strengthening accountability and should therefore be systematically integrated into programme design.

### **What happened**

The EU increasingly positions infrastructure investments as opportunities to integrate broader governance, transparency, and accountability objectives, rather than treating them solely as technical delivery processes. However, consultations suggest that the systematic integration of independent scrutiny within infrastructure programming remains uneven in practice.

In response, some programmes and initiatives have begun to explore ways of incorporating journalistic oversight, including:

* support for investigative reporting on procurement and project delivery
* collaboration between local and international media partners
* training in data, budget, and infrastructure reporting

In parallel, investigative journalism networks have monitored public procurement and infrastructure spending across regions, demonstrating that media scrutiny can:

* identify irregularities and risks at an early stage
* complement formal accountability mechanisms
* improve public understanding of complex projects

These approaches remain uneven, but where they are systematically embedded across infrastructure programmes, they can strengthen transparency, accountability, and public trust.

### **Why this matters**

This case illustrates the importance of linking media support with broader governance and development interventions.

Consultations and sector evidence highlight that where independent scrutiny is absent or weak:

* corruption and mismanagement risks increase
* public trust in infrastructure investments can erode
* information gaps can be filled by speculation or competing narratives

Integrating media support into infrastructure programmes can therefore strengthen both accountability and credibility.

### **Implications for practice**

* Consider integrating **independent media and investigative capacity** into infrastructure and governance programmes
* Treat media scrutiny as a **complement to formal oversight**, not a separate activity
* Support **collaboration between journalists, civil society, and governance actors**
* Address **information gaps proactively** to reduce space for disinformation or speculation
* Ensure that communication strategies go beyond promotion and support **transparency and public understanding** of projects

### **Most relevant for**

* [**Heads of Mission / Ambassadors**:](/toolkit/role/heads-of-mission-ambassadors.md) Positioning infrastructure investments within broader governance and credibility considerations
* [**Programme and project managers**:](/toolkit/role/programme-and-project-managers.md) Designing projects that integrate transparency and media components
* [**Policy officers / thematic specialists**:](/toolkit/role/policy-officers-thematic-specialists.md) Ensuring coherence between media support, governance, and development policy
* [**Communications teams**:](/toolkit/role/communications-teams.md) Framing infrastructure investments in ways that support transparency and public trust

***

{% hint style="info" %}

### **Linked principles**

* [**Principle 3**](/toolkit/principle/3-adopt-a-whole-of-system-approach.md) **– Take a whole-of-system approach**
* [**Principle 5**](/toolkit/principle/5-improve-coordination.md) **– Improve coordination of support**
  {% endhint %}

> **Evidence base**
>
> * Consultation inputs highlighting the need to integrate independent scrutiny into large-scale development and infrastructure programmes
> * Public information on Global Gateway and similar infrastructure initiatives
>   * [European Commission - Global Gateway overview](https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/policies/global-gateway/global-gateway-overview_en)​
>   * ​[OECD - Anti-corruption and infrastructure governance](https://www.oecd.org/en/about/projects/infrastructure-anti-corruption.html)
> * Evidence from investigative journalism networks monitoring procurement and public spending across regions
> * OECD and other research on governance risks in infrastructure investment

{% hint style="info" %}
**Key lesson**\
Infrastructure investment and information integrity are closely linked. Integrating independent scrutiny can strengthen accountability, credibility, and public trust.[OECD - Anti-corruption and infrastructure governance](https://www.oecd.org/en/about/projects/infrastructure-anti-corruption.html)
{% endhint %}