www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/gcb transparency international global...
TRANSCRIPT
www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/gcb
Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009
Policy and Research DepartmentCommunications Department
29 May 2009
TI Global Corruption Barometer 2009
Jour fixe:
• The Barometer: What is it? What for?
• Who is surveyed
• Country coverage
• Topics covered and key findings
• Overview of press activities
What is the Global Corruption Barometer?
• The only worldwide public opinion survey on perceptions and experiences of corruption.
• Complements expert and businesspeople views (such as CPI and BPI)
• Six editions since 2003—some questions ARE comparable year-on-year!
Global Corruption Barometer 2009 what for?
To measure:
• People’s perceptions about corruption in key sectors: the judiciary, the media, parliaments or legislature, political parties, the private sector and the civil service.
• How respondents rate their government in the fight against corruption.
• People’s experiences with bribery when interacting with different public services
• General public’s views about the level of state capture and the willingness of consumers to pay a premium for clean corporate behaviour.
Who is surveyed?
In 2009• 73,132 people in 69 countries• Men and women aged 16+• Most samples are national. However in 14
countries samples are urban only.• All samples have been weighted to ensure
that they are representative of national and global populations.
Regional Classification• Asia Pacific: Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan,
Malaysia, Pakistan, Philippines, South Korea, Singapore, Thailand.
• EU+ Iceland, Israel, Norway and Switzerland: Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic,
Denmark, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg,
Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Switzerland, United Kingdom.
• Latin America: Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Panama, Peru,
Venezuela.
• Middle East and North Africa: Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco.
• Newly Independent States (NIS)+ Mongolia: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia,
Moldova, Mongolia, Russia, Ukraine.
• North America: Canada, United States.
• Sub-Saharan Africa: Cameroon, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra
Leone, Uganda, Zambia.
• Western Balkans + Turkey: Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, FYR Macedonia, Kosovo,
Serbia, Turkey.
Country coverage in 2009
New countries to the Barometer 2009:
Azerbaijan, Belarus, Brunei Darussalam, Chile, El Salvador, Hungary,
Iraq, Israel, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Liberia, Mongolia, Morocco, Sierra Leone, Uganda and Zambia.
Countries included in 2007 but not 2009:Albania, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Germany, Guatemala, Ireland, South Africa, Sweden, and Vietnam.
Key Findings of the Global Corruption Barometer 2009
• Political parties and the civil service are perceived to be the most corrupt sectors around the world
• Corruption in and by the private sector is of growing concern to the general public
• Experience of petty bribery is found to be at the same levels than in 2005. Moreover, it is reported to be growing in some parts of the world
• The police: the most likely recipients of bribes
• Ordinary people do not feel empowered to speak out about corruption
• Governments are considered to be ineffective in the fight against corruption
Political parties still viewed as the most corrupt
Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2004 and 2009
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Political Parties
Parliament/Legislature
Business/PrivateSector
Media
Judiciary
% of respondents who reported the institution to be corrupt or extremely corrupt
2004 2009
Perceptions about the most corrupt institution differ by country
Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009
Institution/Sector Country/Territory
Political Parties
Argentina, Austria, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Finland, Greece, Hungary, India, Israel, Italy, Lebanon, Malaysia, Nigeria, Serbia, South Korea, Thailand, United Kingdom, Venezuela.
Parliament/Legislature Indonesia, Panama, Romania, United States.
Business/Private SectorBrunei Darussalam, Canada, Denmark, Hong Kong, Iceland, Luxembourg, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Singapore, Spain, Switzerland.
Public officials/Civil ServantsAzerbaijan, Belarus, Cameroon, Czech Republic, Ghana, Iraq, Japan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lithuania, Morocco, Pakistan, Philippines, Poland, Russia, Senegal, Turkey, Ukraine, Zambia.
JudiciaryArmenia, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Croatia, FYR Macedonia, Georgia, Kosovo, Mongolia, Peru, Senegal, Uganda.
Petty bribery over time, by region
Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
North America
Western Balkans + Turkey
EU+
Asia Pacific
Latin America
Sub-Saharan Africa
Newly Independent States+
% of respondents who reported paying a bribe in the previous 12 months
2005 2009
Petty bribery, by country
Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009
Country/Territory
Group 1: More than 50 per cent
Cameroon, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Uganda.
Group 2: Between 23 and 49 per cent
Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bolivia, Cambodia, Ghana, Indonesia, Iraq, Kenya, Lithuania, Moldova, Mongolia, Russia, Senegal, Venezuela.
Group 3: Between 13 and 22 per cent
Belarus, Greece, Hungary, Kosovo, Kuwait, Lebanon, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Romania, Serbia, Ukraine.
Group 4: Between 7 and 12 per cent
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Chile, Colombia, Czech Republic, Hong Kong, India, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand.
Group 5: 6 per cent or less
Argentina, Austria, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, FYR Macedonia, Georgia, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Panama, Poland, Portugal, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.
% of respondents
who reported paying
bribe in the previous 12
months
Once more, police is the public institution
seen to most frequently demand bribes
Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Utilities
Tax Revenue
Medical Services
Education Services
Registry and Permit Services
Land Services
Judiciary
Police
% of respondents who reported paying a bribe in the previous 12 months
Bribery: the poor must pay most of all
Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
Utilities
Tax Revenue
Medical Services
Education Services
Registry & Permit Services
Land Services
Judiciary
Police
Lower income quintile Higher income quintile
% of respondents who reported paying a bribe in the previous 12 months
The general public does not routinely use formal channels to present bribery-related
complaints
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
% of respondents who reported paying a bribe and
did not present aformal complainabout paying abribe
did present a formalcomplain aboutpaying a bribe
Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009
Reasons for not presenting formal complaints about paying bribes
Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Tried but couldn’t
Did not know the procedure
Fear of reprisals
It would have taken too much time
It would not have helped at all
% of respondents that did not complain because...
How does the TI Global Corruption
Barometer differ from the TI Corruption
Perceptions Index The Global Corruption
Barometer:
• Assesses the general public’s views of corruption.
• It also addresses the experience of individuals (petty) corruption.
The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI):
• Focuses on expert views.
• Reflects the perceptions of informed observers on corruption in the public sector and politics
Despite these differences, there is considerable correlation between the two surveys each year
Experience v. perceptions of corruption – do they align?
Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009 and CPI 2008
12
34
56
78
910
2008
CP
I Sco
re
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
% of households paying bribes
People’s and expert’s perceptions of corruption – do they align?
Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009 and CPI 2008
12
34
56
78
910
2008
CP
I Sco
re
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Average people's perceptions score
General public’s views on State Capture, by region
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Sub-Saharan Africa
Asia Pacific
Middle East and North Africa
EU+
Western Balkans + Turkey
Latin America
North America
Newly Independent States+
% of respondents reporting that in their country the private sector use bribery to influence government policies, laws or regulations
Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009
Percentage of respondents reporting they would
be willing to pay more to buy from a corruption
free company
Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Yes No Don't Know
Yes No Don't Know
How effectively is government fighting corruption? people’s valuations by region
Source: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009
NIS+ EU+ AsiaPacific
LatinAmerica
NorthAmerica
WesternBalkans +
Turkey
MENA Sub-SaharanAfrica
% respondents reporting their governments' efforts to fight corruption to be...
Ineffective Effective
International launch: 3 of June, Brussels
Materials available:
• Press-Kit: press release + tables + FAQ (English, Spanish and French)
• Analysis report (English, Spanish and French)
• Regional summaries
• Power point presentation
• Full Barometer results on website
• EMBARGO
Key Messages
Top-Level messages
• The economic downturn means cash-strapped families are increasingly punished by petty bribery
– Families forced to make ‘impossible choices’ in allocating scarce resources
– Petty bribery on the rise in some countries further compounds the problem
• Consumers willing to pay more for products and services from corruption-free companies
– Echoing an awareness of the societal costs of corruption
– An incentive for companies to prove they are clean
Key Messages, continued
• People see business in an increasingly critical light and see illicit influence of the state by business as a serious threat
– A powerful argument for stricter corporate standards and more transparent reporting
– Proof of the damaging effects of the financial crisis and global downturn
Press Conference
• Press launch in Brussels, 10am
– Participants: Huguette Labelle, Robin Hodess, Jana Mittermaier
• Events worldwide
– National launches will take place in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Chile, India, Malaysia
– Some national chapters will prepare national press releases
Evening event
• Panel Discussion/Event
– Time: 18.00 – 21.00Venue: Club Confair, Paris, France
• Participants:
– Christian Mouillon, Ernst & Young
– David Stulb, Ernst & Young
– Huguette Labelle, Chair, TI
– Daniel Lebeque, Chair, TI France
www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/gcb
Thank youWe welcome your questions
Policy and Research DepartmentCommunications Department