Transparency International:Researching Corruption

Jana MittermaierDirector, EU Office

Research Overview

• Big picture: Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI)

• Household perspective: Global Corruption Barometer

• Country diagnostics: National Integrity System Studies

• Thematic: Global Corruption Reports, Sectored Reports, Working Papers, Policy Positions

http://www.transparency.org/research

Global Corruption Perceptions Index

Index

…scores and ranks countries according to the perception of corruption in the public sector.

…an aggregate indicator that combines different sources of information about corruption, making it possible to compare countries.

(at least 3 sources for 3 years)

2011 - CPI

°c

European Results 2011

Global RegCountry /

Territory Score

2 1 Denmark 9.4

2 1 Finland 9.4

4 3 Sweden 9.3

6 4 Norway 9.0

7 5 Netherlands 8.9

8 6 Switzerland 8.8

11 7 Luxembourg 8.5

13 8 Iceland 8.3

14 9 Germany 8.0

16 10 Austria 7.8

16 10 UK 7.8

19 12 Ireland 7.5

Global RegCountry /

Territory Score

25 14 France 7.0

29 15 Estonia 6.4

30 16 Cyprus 6.3

31 17 Spain 6.2

32 18 Portugal 6.1

35 19 Slovenia 5.9

39 20 Malta 5.6

41 21 Poland 5.5

50 22 Lithuania 4.8

54 23 Hungary 4.6

57 24 Czech Republic 4.4

61 25 Latvia 4.2

66 26 Slovakia 4.0

69 27 Italy 3.9

75 28 Romania 3.6

80 29 Greece 3.4

86 30 Bulgaria 3.3

TI Global Corruption Barometer

Barometer- People’s views -

The Global Corruption Barometer is the biggest worldwide public opinion survey on perceptions and experiences of corruption.

What is the TI Barometer?

Largest cross-country survey to collect citizen views about corruption

More than 91,500 people in 86 countries around the world were interviewed including in 24 European countries

Which institutions are trusted to curb corruption and whether government’s efforts to fight corruption are working

2010: Regional Classification

Asia Pacific EU+ Latin AmericaMiddle

East&North Africa

North America NIS+Sub-Saharan

AfricaWestern Balkans +

Turkey

Afghanistan Austria Argentina Iraq Canada Armenia Cameroon Bosnia & Herzegovina Australia Bulgaria Bolivia Israel United States Azerbaijan Ghana CroatiaBangladesh Czech Republic Brazil Lebanon Belarus Kenya FYR MacedoniaCambodia Denmark Chile Morocco Georgia Liberia KosovoChina Finland Colombia Palestine Moldova Nigeria SerbiaFiji France El Salvador Mongolia Senegal TurkeyHong Kong Germany Mexico Russia Sierra LeoneIndia Greece Peru Ukraine South AfricaIndonesia Hungary Venezuela UgandaJapan Iceland ZambiaKorea (South) IrelandMalaysia ItalyNew Zealand LatviaPakistan LithuaniaPapua New Guinea LuxembourgPhilippines NetherlandsSingapore NorwaySolomon Islands PolandTaiwan PortugalThailand RomaniaVanuatu SloveniaVietnam Spain

SwitzerlandUnited Kingdom

How has level of corruption changed?-- The biggest increase is perceived by respondents in North America and EU+

73%

67%

62%

57% 57%

51%

47%45%

56%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

EU+ North America Sub-SaharanAfrica

Middle East andNorth Africa

WesternBalkans+Turkey

Latin America Asia Pacific NIS+ Total

% o

f res

pond

ents

rep

ortin

g co

rrup

tion

incr

ease

d in

the

past

thre

e ye

ars

To what extent do you perceive the institutions to be affected by corruption? Political parties viewed as most corrupt!

33%

26%

39%

44%

54%

47%

28%

57%

60%

71%

30%

31%

39%

41%

43%

52%

53%

59%

61%

80%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Military

NGOs (non governmentalorganisations)

Education system

Media

Judiciary

Business/private sector

Religious bodies

Police

Parliament/legislature

Political parties

% of people reporting the sector/institution to be corrupt or extremely corrupt

2004 2010

Transparency in Corporate Reporting

(TRAC)

TRAC methodology

• Published in July 2012

• Assesses 105 of world’s largest publicly-listed companies along three dimensions:

– Reporting of anti-corruption programmes

– Organisational disclosure

– Country-by-country disclosure

• Low levels of transparency and corporate reporting across all the sectors concerned.

• Demonstrated poor performance of the financial sector compared to its peers.

• Financial corporations scored an average of 2.3% for their reporting by country of operation.  

National Chapter Research

National Progress Reports

• Enlargement countries

– Assess performance of judiciary, legislature and public administration, political party financing

– Tool is based on EU governance and anti-corruption membership requirements and good practice standards

• ENP: Monitoring Action Plans

– Indicator-based framework to assess progress in delivering on governance and anti-corruption commitments made in ENP Action Plans (Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan)

• EU: Ranking of transparency of state- and city-owned companies by TI Slovakia:

– http://blog.transparency.org/2012/09/11/making-slovak-state-companies-more-transparent/

National Integrity System

Assessment

What is NIS?

• Holistic approach to analyse the robustness and effectiveness of a country’s institutions in preventing & fighting corruption

• A well-functioning NIS provides effective safeguards against corruption

• When institutions lack of appropriate regulations and unaccountable behaviour, corruption is likely to thrive with negative knock-on effects for equitable growth, sustainable development and social cohesion.

• Strengthening NIS promotes better governance and ultimately contributes to a more just society.

PR

IVA

TE

S O C I E T Y’ S V A L U E S

QU

ALIT

Y OF

LIFE

RULE OF LAW

AU

DIT

OR

GEN

ER

AL

OM

BU

DS

MA

N

WA

TC

HD

OG

AG

EN

CIE

SP

UB

LIC

SER

VIC

E

LEG

ISLA

TU

RE

EX

EC

UTIV

EJU

DIC

IAR

Y

N A T I O N N A T I O N A L I N T E

A L I N T E G R I T YG R I T Y

CIV

IL SECT

OR

SOCIETY

INTER

NA

TIO

N

L ACTORS

M E DI

A

SUSTAIN-ABLE DEVELOP-MENT

Holistic Analysis of the Pillars of Integrity

European NIS

• Multi-country project findings of 25 NIS assessments carried out across Europe in 2011

• The initiative systematically assesses the anti-corruption systems of 25 European states, and advocates for sustainable and effective reform

• It highlights important trends across the region

• Pointing to the most significant deficiencies and gaps in the national integrity systems

• Shining the light on some promising practices

• Financial support by European Commission DG Home Affairs

Key strength

• Legal frameworks: Legislation on corruption prevention is relatively well-developed across the region.

• Public expenditure oversight: Supreme audit institutions are generally assessed as strong players in the fight against corruption. Exceptions to this trend include those in Greece, Portugal, Romania and Spain,

• Electoral processes: Electoral processes are generally robust in the region, with electoral management bodies performing well in administering free and fair elections. Exceptions include Bulgaria and Romania, where electoral processes still pose significant problems.

Key Weaknesses

1. Political party financing is inadequately regulated across the region

2. Lobbying remains veiled in secrecy

3. Parliaments are not living up to ethical standards

4. Access to information is limited in practice

5. High corruption risks remain in public procurement

6. Protection for whistleblowers is severely lacking

--- Link between business and politics too close

Link to results

http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/pub/money_politics_and_power_corruption_risks_in_europe

Thank you!

www.transparencyinternational.eu