CORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEX 2010 - Rai-see

TRANSPARENCYINTERNATIONALthe global coalition against corruptionCORRUPTIONPERCEPTIONSINDEX 2010www.transparency.org

Transparency International (TI) is the global civil society organisation leadingthe fight against corruption. Through more than 90 chapters worldwide and aninternational secretariat in Berlin, TI raises awareness of the damaging effectsof corruption and works with partners in government, business and civil societyto develop and implement effective measures to tackle it.CONTENTS2010 RESULTS2WHAT IS THE CORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEX?42010 FACTSVISUALISING THE CORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEX56RESULTS BY REGIONAMERICAS8ASIA PACIFIC9EASTERN EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA10EUROPEAN UNION AND WESTERN EUROPE11MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA12SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA13ANNEX A: SHORT METHODOLOGICAL NOTEANNEX B: SOURCES OF INFORMATIONwww.transparency.orgEvery effort has been made to verify the accuracy of the information contained in this report. All information wasbelieved to be correct as of October 2010. Nevertheless, Transparency International cannot accept responsibilityfor the consequences of its use for other purposes or in other contexts.ISBN: 978-3-935711-60-9 2010 Transparency International. All rights reserved.Design: Sophie EverettPrinted on 100% recycled paper.1516

TRANSPARENCY ANDACCOUNTABILITY ARECRITICAL TO RESTORINGTRUST AND TURNINGBACK THE TIDE OFCORRUPTIONWith governments committing huge sums to tackle theworld’s most pressing problems, from the instabilityof financial markets to climate change and poverty,corruption remains an obstacle to achieving muchneeded progress.The 2010 Corruption Perceptions Index shows thatnearly three quarters of the 178 countries in the indexscore below five, on a scale from 10 (very clean) to0 (highly corrupt). These results indicate a seriouscorruption problem.2010 CPI ScoreVeryClean8.0 - 8.97.0 - 7.96.0 - 6.95.0 - 5.94.0 - 4.93.0 - 3.92.0 -2.9HighlyCorrupt1.0 - 1.90.0 - 0.9No dataCOUNTRY/RANK TERRITORY1To address these challenges, governments need to1integrate anti-corruption measures in all spheres, from1their responses to the financial crisis and climate2010changeCPI Score44to commitments by the international community toVery69.010.0eradicate poverty. Transparency International advocatesClean7stricter implementation of the UN Convention against8.0 - 8.98Corruption, the only global initiative that provides a 7.0 - 7.98framework for putting an end to corruption.106.0 - 6.911Denmark, New Zealand and Singapore are tied at the5.0 - 5.911top of the list with a score of 9.3, followed closely by 4.0 - 4.913Finland and Sweden at 9.2. At the bottom is Somalia143.0 - 3.9with a score of 1.1, slightly trailing Myanmar and152.0 -2.915Afghanistan at 1.4 and Iraq at 1.5.171.0 - 1.9HighlyNotable among decliners over the past yearare some17Corrupt19of the countries most affected by a financialcrisis 0.0 - 0.920precipitated by transparency and integrity deficits. No data21Among those improving in the past year, the general22absence of OECD states underlines the fact that22all nations need to bolster their good governance24mechanisms.2526The message is clear: across the globe, transparency27and accountability are critical to restoring trust and28turning back the tide of corruption. Without them,28global policy solutions to many global crises are at risk.3029.0 - 10.0COUNTRY/RANK TERRITORYSCOREDenmarkNew raliaSwitzerlandNorwayIcelandLuxembourgHong KongIrelandAustriaGermanyBarbadosJapanQatarUnited KingdomChileBelgiumUnited StatesUruguayFranceEstoniaSloveniaCyprusUnited Arab 54545656565959SpainPortugalBotswanaPuerto RicoTaiwanBhutanMaltaBruneiKorea (South)MauritiusCosta RicaOmanPolandDominicaCape audi ArabiaCzech RepublicKuwaitSouth 74.74.74.64.54.54.44.44.44.34.3Transparency 87878787878858587878787COUNTRY/RANK TERRITORYSCORETunisiaCroatiaFYR tenegroRomaniaBulgariaEl SalvadorPanamaTrinidad and 3.53.53.53.53.53.53.43.43.33.33.33.3Corruption Perceptions Index 5110110110110110110116116116116Bosnia andHerzegovinaDjiboutiGambiaGuatemalaKiribatiSri LankaSwazilandBurkina FasoEgyptMexicoDominican RepublicSao Tome & vaSenegalBeninBoliviaGabonIndonesiaKosovoSolomon aPhilippinesSierra CameroonCôte ibyaNepalParaguayYemenCambodiaCentral auKenyaLaosPapua New GuineaRussiaTajikistanDemocratic Republicof the CongoGuineaKyrgyzstanVenezuelaAngolaEquatorial 51.41.41.13

2010 FACTSThe 2010 CPI measures the degree to which publicsector corruption is perceived to exist in 178 countriesaround the world. It scores countries on a scale from10 (very clean) to 0 (highly corrupt).The 2010 results are drawn from 13 surveys andassessments published between January 2009 andSeptember 2010.WHAT IS THE CORRUPTIONPERCEPTIONS INDEX?The 2010 CPI covers two countries fewer than lastyear’s edition. The slight change resulted from individualsources adjusting the range of countries they assess.These adjustments in coverage made it possible toinclude Kosovo for the first time, but led to the exclusionof Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, andSuriname, for which only two sources of information wereavailable this year.Transparency International (TI) defines corruption as the abuse of entrustedpower for private gain. This definition encompasses corrupt practices in boththe public and private sectors. The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) rankscountries according to perception of corruption in the public sector. The CPIis an aggregate indicator that combines different sources of information aboutcorruption, making it possible to compare countries.Given its methodology, the CPI is not a tool that issuitable for trend analysis or for monitoring changes in theperceived levels of corruption over time for all countries.Year-to-year changes in a country/territory’s score canresult from a change in the perceptions of a country’sperformance, a change in the ranking provided by originalsources or changes in the methodology resulting from TI’sefforts to improve the index.The 2010 CPI draws on different assessments and business opinion surveyscarried out by independent and reputable institutions1. It captures informationabout the administrative and political aspects of corruption. Broadly speaking,the surveys and assessments used to compile the index include questionsrelating to bribery of public officials, kickbacks in public procurement,embezzlement of public funds, and questions that probe the strength andeffectiveness of public sector anti-corruption efforts.If a country is featured in one or more specific datasources for both of the last two CPIs (2009 CPI and 2010CPI), those sources can be used to identify whether therehas been a change in perceived levels of corruption inthat particular country compared to the previous year.TI has used this approach in 2010 to assess countryprogress over the past year and to identify what can beconsidered to be a change in perceptions of corruption.These assessments use two criteria:For a country or territory to be included in the index a minimum of three ofthe sources that TI uses must assess that country. Thus inclusion in the indexdepends solely on the availability of information.Perceptions are used because corruption – whether frequency or amount– is to a great extent a hidden activity that is difficult to measure. Over time,perceptions have proved to be a reliable estimate of corruption. Measuringscandals, investigations or prosecutions, while offering ‘non-perception’ data,reflect less on the prevalence of corruption in a country and more on otherfactors, such as freedom of the press or the efficiency of the judicial system.TI considers it of critical importance to measure both corruption and integrity,and to do so in the public and private sectors at global, national and locallevels.2 The CPI is therefore one of many TI measurement tools that servethe fight against corruption.(a) there is a year-on-year change of at least 0.3 points ina country’s CPI score, and(b) the direction of this change is confirmed by more thanhalf of the data sources evaluating that country.Based on these criteria, the following countries showedan improvement from 2009 to 2010: Bhutan, Chile, Ecuador,FYR Macedonia, Gambia, Haiti, Jamaica, Kuwait andQatar. The following countries showed deterioration from2009 to 2010: the Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary,Italy, Madagascar, Niger and the United States.For detailed information on the sources of information please see Annex Band visit our website at www. transparency.org/cpi2Examples include National Integrity System assessments, which evaluate the degree ofintegrity, transparency and accountability in a country’s anti-corruption institutions, and theBribe Payers Index, which evaluates expert views of the supply of foreign bribery.14Transparency InternationalCorruption Perceptions Index 20105

VISUALISING THECORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEXDENMARK NEW ZEALAND SINGAPORE FINLAND SWEDENCANADA NETHERLANDS AUSTRALIA SWITZERLAND NORWAYICELAND LUXEMBOURG HONG KONG IRELANDAUSTRIA GERMANY BARBADOS JAPAN QATARUNITED KINGDOM CHILE BELGIUM UNITED STATESURUGUAY FRANCE ESTONIA SLOVENIA CYPRUSUNITED ARAB EMIRATES ISRAEL SPAIN PORTUGALBOTSWANA PUERTO RICO TAIWAN BHUTAN MALTABRUNEI KOREA(SOUTH) MAURITIUS COSTA RICA OMANPOLAND DOMINICA CAPE VERDE LITHUANIA MACAUBAHRAIN SEYCHELLES HUNGARY JORDAN SAUDI ARABIACZECH REPUBLIC KUWAIT SOUTH AFRICA MALAYSIANAMIBIA TURKEY LATVIA SLOVAKIA TUNISIA CROATIAFYR MACEDONIA GHANA SAMOA RWANDAITALY GEORGIA BRAZIL CUBA MONTENEGRO ROMANIABULGARIA EL SALVADOR PANAMA TRINIDAD AND TOBAGOVANUATU CHINA COLOMBIA GREECE LESOTHO PERUSERBIA THAILAND MALAWI MOROCCO ALBANIA INDIAJAMAICA LIBERIA BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA DJIBOUTIGAMBIA GUATEMALA KIRIBATI SRI LANKA SWAZILANDBURKINA FASO EGYPT MEXICO DOMINICAN REPUBLICSAO TOME AND PRINCIPE TONGA ZAMBIA2010 CPI ScoreVeryClean9.0 - 10.08.0 - 8.97.0 - 7.96.0 - 6.95.0 - 5.94.0 - 4.93.0 - 3.92.0 -2.9HighlyCorrupt1.0 - 1.90.0 - 0.9ALGERIA ARGENTINA KAZAKHSTAN MOLDOVASENEGAL BENIN BOLIVIA GABON INDONESIA KOSOVOSOLOMON ISLANDS ETHIOPIA GUYANA MALI MONGOLIAMOZAMBIQUE TANZANIA VIETNAM ARMENIA ERITREAMADAGASCAR NIGER BELARUS ECUADOR LEBANONNICARAGUA SYRIA TIMOR-LESTE UGANDA AZERBAIJANBANGLADESH HONDURAS NIGERIA PHILIPPINESSIERRA LEONE TOGO UKRAINE ZIMBABWE MALDIVESMAURITANIA PAKISTAN CAMEROON CÔTE D IVOIREHAITI IRAN LIBYA NEPAL PARAGUAY YEMEN CAMBODIACENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC COMOROS CONGO-BRAZZAVILLEGUINEA-BISSAU KENYA LAOS PAPUA NEW GUINEA RUSSIATAJIKISTAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGOGUINEA KYRGYZSTAN VENEZUELAANGOLA EQUATORIAL GUINEA BURUNDI CHAD SUDAN TURKMENISTANUZBEKISTAN IRAQ AFGHANISTAN MYANMAR SOMALIACountries appear in order of rank. Please see countrylisting on p. 2 for exact country scoring and ranking.6Transparency InternationalCorruption Perceptions Index 20107

RESULTS BY REGION: AMERICASRANKREGIONALRANKCOUNTRY / TERRITORYCPI 2010 SCOREASIA PACIFIC90% CONFIDENCE INTERVAL*SURVEYS USEDLOWER BOUND UPPER BOUNDREGIONALRANKCOUNTRY / TERRITORYCPI 2010 SCORE90% CONFIDENCE INTERVALSURVEYS USEDLOWER BOUND UPPER BOUND61Canada8.98.79.0611New 4United States7.16.57.78134Hong 28336Puerto Rico5.85.36.44336Taiwan5.85.56.29417Costa 5.83388Brunei5.54.76.13699Brazil3.73.24.37399Korea .837311El 3.63.24.156212Samoa4.13.44.737311Trinidad and 4.739818Mexico3.12.93.379117Sri Lanka3.22.93.6710119Dominican 82.53.1611020Solomon 2.6415430Papua New nmar1.40.91.93*The confidence intervals reflect the precision of the CPI scores.They indicate the range within which the most accurate value ofthe CPI score is most likely to fall. The wider a confidence intervalis, the less precise the score.8RANKTransparency InternationalCorruption Perceptions Index 20109