Dear Nasir. Thank you very much for starting this space for reflection on corruption. I'm not a specialist on the subject. I want the experts to be able to give us elements to deepen, given the difficulty of measuring corruption according to empirical or theoretical bibliography. Being a social phenomenon that occurs secretly, it is expected that the conclusions that can be drawn from the different sources are not sufficiently rigorous. Transparency International has a sample covering 180 countries. More than two-thirds of countries score below 50 - their scale ranges from 0 (maximum corruption) to 100 (minimum corruption). There are only 20 countries with significant declines in recent years (Transparency International, 2018). For example, Butan is in position No 25 among 180 countries -a descending order in terms of corruption-. However Butan has a per capita income of 3.056,9 in the 2016-2018 triennium, position No 181 of the 264 countries based on the World Bank, considered by the latter as a country in the category of "Low Middle Income" (https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups).
While improvement in accountability is a necessary condition, it will then shift to methodological issues. In this last aspect, it would be a great contribution for specialists to specify the methodological strategies behind the rates of corruption - the advantages and disadvantages of each of them, corruption being an ambiguous phenomenon in which its quantification is questioned (Dogan and Kazancigil 1994), to use them and interpret them correctly.
At the moment I found some articles - but more up-to-date and diverse literature should be sought - regarding the theoretical/methodological implications for the empirical analysis of corruption.
-Respects the definitions of corruption:
Del Castillo, A. (2001) “Fundamentos de la investigación empírica reciente sobre corrupción”, Gestión y Política Pública, X (2), pp.375-402.
-On methodological issues in corruption indices::
Del Castillo, A. (2003) Building Corruption Indexes. What Do They Rellay Measure?, Documento de trabajo, CIDE-DAP núm. 119.
Lambsdorff, J. (1998) “Corruption in comparative perception”, en A. Jain (ed.) Economics of Corruption, Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 81-110.
Kaufmann, D. (1998) “Research on corruption: Critical empirical issues”, en A. Jain (ed.) Economics of Corruption, Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 129-176.
Sorry I can't have consistent answers. We await the contributions of specialists on the subject.
Greetings
Fernando
Dogan, M. y A. Kazancigil (1994) “What cannot be analyzed in statistical terms”, en M. Dogan y A. Kazancigil, Comparing Nations: Concepts, Strategies, Substance, Oxford, Blackwell.
Estimada Nasir. Muchas gracias por iniciar este espacio de reflexión sobre la corrupción. No soy un especialista en el tema. Deseo que los expertos puedan brindarnos elementos para profundizar, dado la dificultad de medir la corrupción según la bibliografía empírica o teórica. Siendo un fenómeno social que ocurre de manera secreta, es esperable las conclusiones que pueden sacarse de las distintas fuentes no tengan el rigor suficiente. En indicador que realiza Transparency International posee una muestra que abarca 180 países. Presenta como resultados más de dos tercios de los países obtienen una puntuación inferior a 50 – su escala va de 0 (máxima corrupción), a 100 (mínima corrupción). Se destacan solo 20 países con una baja significativa en los últimos años (Transparency International, 2018). Por ejemplo Butan se encuentra en la posición N°25 entre 180 países -orden descendente en términos de corrupción-. Sin embargo Butan tiempo tiene un ingreso per cápita 3.056,9 en el trienio 2016-2018, posición N° 181 de los 264 países en base del Banco Mundial, considerado por este última institución como un país en la categoría de “Ingresos Medios bajos” (https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups).
Si bien es condición necesaria la mejora en la rendición de cuentas, para luego pasar a cuestiones metodológicas. En este último aspecto, sería de gran aporte que los especialistas especifiquen las estrategias metodológicas detrás de los índices de corrupción - las ventajas y desventajas de cada uno de ellos, siendo la corrupción un fenómeno de naturaleza ambigua en donde esta puesta en duda su cuantificación (Dogan y Kazancigil 1994)-, para utilizarlos e interpretarlos los mismos correctamente.
De momento encontré algunos artículos –pero debería buscarse literatura más actualizada y diversa–, en relación las implicaciones teóricas/metodológicas para el análisis empírico de la corrupción.
-Respecto a las definiciones de corrupción:
Del Castillo, A. (2001) “Fundamentos de la investigación empírica reciente sobre corrupción”, Gestión y Política Pública, X (2), pp.375-402.
-Respecto a cuestiones metodológicas en los índices de corrupción:
Del Castillo, A. (2003) Building Corruption Indexes. What Do They Rellay Measure?, Documento de trabajo, CIDE-DAP núm. 119.
Lambsdorff, J. (1998) “Corruption in comparative perception”, en A. Jain (ed.) Economics of Corruption, Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 81-110.
Kaufmann, D. (1998) “Research on corruption: Critical empirical issues”, en A. Jain (ed.) Economics of Corruption, Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 129-176.
Perdón por no poder tener respuestas consistentes. Aguardamos los aportes de especialistas en el tema.
Saludos
Fernando
Dogan, M. y A. Kazancigil (1994) “What cannot be analyzed in statistical terms”, en M. Dogan y A. Kazancigil, Comparing Nations: Concepts, Strategies, Substance, Oxford, Blackwell.
With information and communication technology, civil society has been playing an increasing role in good governance, promoting transparency and accountability to tackle corruption. Development agencies can strengthen civil society-led, ICT-driven anticorruption initiatives by funding projects and programs that foster institutional environments conducive to participation in public affairs, promote cooperation and mobilization, and develop capacities.
Article Fighting Corruption with ICT: Strengthening Civil Society’s Role
Article Tackling Corruption Through Civil Society-Led Information an...
Thank you very much for the very interesting explanation regarding the role of civil society in the age of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) by increasing its role in good governance, promoting transparency and accountability to tackle corruption. But, don't you think that ICT has a negative role in our societies as there are negative developments with each and every positive developement? I will appreciate it very much if you can comment on the negative impact of ICT in our daily life.
I think it is better to identify the different forms that corruption takes in public service as different tactics have to be used different types of corruption.
As someone has written above we find different forms of corruption in all countries irrespect of their level of developed whether they are developed, developing and semi-developed countries. We should thus identify the different forms that corruption takes in public services in all countries and to apply differnet strategies in order to be able to deal with them.