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 centre for business & professional ethics UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA

Stakeholders Other AU SADC Country A Country B Country C Country D Aid agencies Civil society International Business Unified Methodology ? Convention Secretariats Convention Secretariats UN Convention Signatories / individual countries

Overview Monitoring instruments Monitoring implementation of international legal instruments Measuring instruments Measuring of corruption Tracking of institutional / governance features

Monitoring Instruments

International legal instruments Africa AU Convention SADC Protocol ECOWAS Protocol America’s Inter-American Convention Europe (GRECO) Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions Criminal Law Convention Civil Law Convention UN 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 a. Composite / perception indices TI - Corruption Perception Index WBI - Worldwide Governance Indicators b. Alternative approaches 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: 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 Sample base What is measured

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 Instruments tracking institutional features Instruments measuring corruption prevalence Counter-check Information & Counter-check

Interaction between instruments Monitoring implementation of Legal Conventions Instruments tracking institutional features Instruments measuring corruption prevalence Counter-check Information & Counter-check