juanita riaño transparency international the empirics of governance may 1-2, 2008 washington d.c
TRANSCRIPT
Juanita RiañoTransparency International
www.transparency.org
The Empirics of GovernanceMay 1-2, 2008
Washington D.C.
• Corruption high on the international agenda
• Increased understanding of its nature:• supported by broader research base
• Growth in development of new measurement tools:• especially surveys
• at global, regional and national levels
• complemented by other initiatives and tools
Measuring governance and corruption internationally: progress thus far
Measurement Tools: Production Process
What (Target)
What for? (Purpose)
What’s possible? (Resources, information,
capacity)
Type
Method
Sample
Data
Measurement process
Use (communication,
advocacy, interpretation etc.)
Validity
Legitimacy, credibility, reliability
What do we want to
measure? (Target)
What for? (Purpose)
What’s possible?
• Awareness• Academic research• Advocacy, Policy reform• Diagnostics (targeting action)• Monitoring (policy evaluation)
• Information available• Capacity• Funding• What you want and what you need
Measurement Tools: Production Process
• Costs of Corruption• Trends of corruption• Extent of corruption
Aggregate Indicators: What for?• To create public awareness of corruption and put
corruption on the public debate contributing to create a climate for change.
• To offer a snapshot of the extent of the corruption problem.
• To enhance comparative understanding of levels of corruption and trends over time.
• To motivate new research and complementary diagnostic analysis on causes and consequences of corruption.
Aggregate Indicators: What NOT? and What NOT for?
WHAT NOT: • Not an in-country diagnostic tool: doesn’t offer
analysis on causes, dynamics or consequences of corruption
WHAT NOT FOR: • Not to make inferences about petty/grand corruption,
public-private sector interface, etc.• Not to design policy actions or country reforms.
• Unbiased, hard data difficult to obtain or validity questionable
•e.g. comparing number of prosecutions, court cases or media coverage as a way to measure effectiveness and capacity of a country's judiciary in prosecuting corruption.
• Legal definition of bribery and corruption may differ (e.g. facilitation payments)
• Perception questions have become more rigorous, experiential and quantitative.
• Cultural biases seem not to be as strong as they were originally thought (tested e.g. by vignettes)
• Even the fact-based data have elements of subjectivity involved
Perceptions-based data
Interpreting perceptions• Potential bias resulting from cultural
background.• Residents
– Comparing to other problems, not countries– Standard of ethics
• Expatriates– Dominance of a cultural heritage in the
sample– Lacking cultural understanding
What about people perceptions regarding corruption vs. experts
perceptions?
Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2007 and CPI 2007
22.
53
3.5
4E
xten
t of c
orru
ptio
n as
see
n by
citi
zens
2 4 6 8 10Corruption Perceptions Index 2007
r=0.64
Aggregate indicators are just one variable in the equation…
TI’s global assessment tools
Aggregate indicators
CPI, BPI
Diagnosis Barometer, NIS Country Studies and Scoring Systems, Promoting Revenue Transparency, PCMS, CRINIS, CACTI, Global Corruption Report
Monitor OECD report cards, A-C Conventions Gap Analysis, ALACs
Prevent Business Principles, Integrity Pacts
At the National Level…
• TI national chapters have developed a wide range of tools that provide indicators for the fight against corruption:– National household surveys: TI Bangladesh, TI
Lithuania, TI Madagascar, TI Mexico, TI Morocco, TI Peru, TI Russia
– Index of public institutions: TI Kenya, TI Colombia– Public sector diagnostics: TI Bangladesh, TI
Nicaragua– Monitoring political party financing: TI Bulgaria, TI
Latvia – Private sector assessment: TI Mexico, TI Madagascar
The Kenya Bribery Index, an example.
• Captures bribery experiences among general public on an annual basis
• Who is bribed, how much and for what?• Results have been used to
– Provide information on the nature and extent of bribery in Kenya
– Generate public awareness– Advocate for and support reforms– Set performance targets and monitor reforms
Lessons learned
• Methodolgies- Use of expertise- Right for the purpose of the tool
• Process: validation (external, internal) – who else has seen it?
• Communication: as important as production• If the tool is solid, criticism is a sign of success• Don‘t ask more from a tool than it can bear
Measuring corruption: challenges ahead
• Improving use of results by various stakeholders (civil society, private sector and governments) and to convert research into policy.
• Taking stock of what we have learnt, without reinventing the wheel.
• Strengthening research in diagnostic indicators.• Supporting repetition of tools over time, in order to set
performance targets and measure anti-corruption efforts.
• Extending coverage of measuring corruption tools to countries/sectors where no data-research has been conducted so far.
www.transparency.org
the coalition against corruption