1 / 16

Juanita R i año Transparency International transparency

Juanita R i año Transparency International www.transparency.org. The Empirics of Governance May 1-2, 2008 Washington D.C. Measuring governance and corruption internationally: progress thus far. Corruption high on the international agenda Increased understanding of its nature :

tolla
Télécharger la présentation

Juanita R i año Transparency International transparency

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Juanita Riaño Transparency International www.transparency.org The Empirics of Governance May 1-2, 2008 Washington D.C.

  2. Measuring governance and corruption internationally: progress thus far • 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

  3. Validity Measurement Tools: Production Process Legitimacy, credibility, reliability What for? (Purpose) Type Method Sample Data Measurement process What (Target) What’s possible? (Resources, information, capacity) Use (communication, advocacy, interpretation etc.)

  4. Measurement Tools: Production Process What for? (Purpose) • Awareness • Academic research • Advocacy, Policy reform • Diagnostics (targeting action) • Monitoring (policy evaluation) What do we want to measure? (Target) • Costs of Corruption • Trends of corruption • Extent of corruption What’s possible? • Information available • Capacity • Funding • What you want and what you need

  5. 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.

  6. Aggregate Indicators: What NOT? and What NOT for? WHAT NOT: • Not an in-countrydiagnostic 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.

  7. Perceptions-based data • 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

  8. 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

  9. What about people perceptions regarding corruption vs. experts perceptions? r=0.64 Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2007 and CPI 2007

  10. Aggregate indicators are just one variable in the equation…

  11. TI’s global assessment tools

  12. 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

  13. 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 • Setperformance targets and monitor reforms

  14. 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

  15. 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.

  16. the coalition against corruption www.transparency.org

More Related