Are steering committees the governance fix in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) infrastructure projects?

This study investigates whether Project Steering Committees (PSCs) can effectively enhance accountability, transparency, and reduce corruption risk in large infrastructure projects in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). It employs a comparative qualitative case study design focused on three high-value infrastructure projects in Malawi, combining primary interviews with secondary document analysis, and guided by the Conceptual Project Governance Framework (CPGF). The cases span three governance models: formally constituted PSCs supported by donors, embedded Project Implementation Units (PIUs), and informal coordination mechanisms. To interpret governance dynamics and explain inter-case variation, the study applies a combined theoretical lens integrating project governance theory, institutional analysis, and public choice theory. Findings indicate that inclusive, strategically mandated PSCs with legal authority substantially improve oversight and constrain discretionary abuse. In contrast, informal or politically influenced structures correlate with higher corruption vulnerability and opaque decision-making. By offering rare project-level, empirically grounded insights, the study advances scholarship on infrastructure governance in LMICs and provides actionable guidance for institutionalizing oversight mechanisms in complex project environments.