Transcript Personal factors

Towards a Unified Methodology
for Measuring Corruption
Global Forum V on Fighting Corruption and Safeguarding Integrity
2 – 5 April 2007
Johannesburg, South Africa
Kris Dobie &
Prof. Michelo Hansungule
UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA
centre for business &
professional ethics
Stakeholders
Other
Country A
AU
Country B
SADC
Country C
UN
Country D
Convention
Secretariats
International
Business
Convention Signatories /
individual countries
Unified
Methodology
?
Civil society
Aid agencies
Overview
Monitoring instruments
Monitoring implementation of
international legal instruments
Measuring instruments
Measuring of corruption
Tracking of institutional / governance
features
Monitoring Instruments
Monitoring Instruments
International legal instruments
Africa



AU Convention
SADC Protocol
ECOWAS Protocol
America’s

Inter-American Convention
Europe (GRECO)



UN


Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in
International Business Transactions
Criminal Law Convention
Civil Law Convention
UN Convention against Corruption
UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime
Indicators / measurables
• Anti-Corruption legislation
• Anti-corruption bodies
• Standards of conduct in public functions, and
mechanisms to implement
• Transparency / access to information
• Witness / whistleblower protection
• Sound management practices (Public finances, hiring
and procurement)
• Private Sector standards and oversight
• Civil Society & Media freedom
• Minimum guarantees for a fair trial
• Political party funding
• Organised crime / money laundering
• Extradition / international cooperation
• Asset recovery
• Compensation for damage
• Public education
The way forward
Monitoring fatigue
Report / result sharing between monitoring
bodies
GRI for conventions?
Forum / conference fatigue?
Measuring Instruments
Our criteria
Potential for global application
Comparable figures for country-level corruption
Outline
Analysis of current approaches
1. Surveys
Composite / perception indices
a.
•
•
TI - Corruption Perception Index
WBI - Worldwide Governance Indicators
Alternative approaches
b.
•
•
•
TI – Global Corruption Barometer
TI – Bribe Payers Index
WB – Business Environment and Enterprise Performance
Survey
2. Tracking of Institutional Features
•
Global Integrity Index
Composite indices
TI - Corruption Perception Index / WBI - Worldwide Governance Indicators
Strengths
Larger country coverage
Gives us something to
work with
Limitations
Opaque results
Cannot recognise
reformers
Lack of recommendations
Misuse of information
Perception indices
TI - Corruption Perception Index / WBI - Worldwide Governance Indicators
Perceptions can be influenced by:
Media freedom
Focus of the media on corruption scandals
Corruption statistics
We should distinguish between:
Vague perception questions 
Quantitative experience based questions 
Alternative approaches
What do these single source surveys add to the
picture?
TI – Global Corruption Barometer
Adds experience questions
Not just a single score
TI – Bribe Payers Index
Measures supply side of corruption (business contribution)
Not truly experiential questions 
WB – Business Environment and Enterprise
Performance Survey
Measures both administrative corruption and political
(relational) corruption
The way forward
Measuring corruption prevalence
The reality:
Composite indexes have limitations, but still
provide the widest coverage.
Single source surveys provide useful
information, but have limited coverage
The way forward
Measuring corruption prevalence
Recommendation:
Standardised instrument implemented at country
level
Data forwarded to international body to incorporate
in an accessible database
Following aspects need to be agreed on:

What is
measured



Sample
base



Perception and experience indicators
Petty and grand corruption / Administrative and political
Supply and demand side
Business and government corruption
Business and government
Urban and rural
Experts (resident and non-resident) and general population
Tracking of institutional features
Global Integrity Index
Measures public integrity systems


Existence: ‘In law…’
Effectiveness: ‘In practice…’
Expert assessment (peer reviewed)
Over 290 indicators with pre-defined criteria
Categories






Civil Society, Public Information and Media
Electoral and Political processes
Branches of Government
Administration and Civil Service
Oversight and Regulatory Mechanisms
Anti-Corruption Mechanisms and Rule of Law
Tracking of institutional features
Global Integrity Index
Strengths
Transparency
Clear policy implications
Changes can be tracked
Inclusion of ‘stories’
Limitations:
Lack of Global Coverage
Does not measure corruption
Challenges
Measuring in a way that is legitimate
and informative to many (most)
stakeholders
Achieving global coverage
The way forward
Tracking institutional features
The Global Integrity Index provides useful
information, but should be balanced by information
on the prevalence of corruption
Interface between
Monitoring & Measuring
Instruments
Interaction between instruments
Monitoring
implementation
of Legal
Conventions
Information &
Counter-check
Instruments
tracking
institutional
features
Counter-check
Instruments
measuring
corruption
prevalence
Interaction between instruments
Monitoring
implementation
of Legal
Conventions
Information &
Counter-check
Instruments
tracking
institutional
features
Counter-check
Instruments
measuring
corruption
prevalence