比特派安卓版下载链接地址|corruption

作者: 比特派安卓版下载链接地址
2024-03-13 01:28:36

Corruption - Wikipedia

Jump to content

Main menu

move to sidebar

hide

Navigation

Main pageContentsCurrent eventsRandom articleAbout WikipediaContact usDonate

Contribute

HelpLearn to editCommunity portalRecent changesUpload file

Create account

Personal tools

Create account Log in

Pages for logged out editors learn more

ContributionsTalk

Contents

move to sidebar

hide

(Top)

1Definitions and scales

Toggle Definitions and scales subsection

1.1Petty corruption

1.2Grand corruption

1.3Systemic corruption

2Causes

3By sector

Toggle By sector subsection

3.1Public sector

3.1.1Judicial

3.1.2Military

3.1.3Natural resources

3.1.4Political

3.1.5Police

3.2Private sector

3.2.1Legal

3.2.2Corporate

3.2.2.1Examples

3.2.3Education

3.2.4Healthcare

3.2.5Labor unions

3.2.6Arms trafficking

3.2.7Philosophy

3.3Religious organizations

4Methods

Toggle Methods subsection

4.1Bribery

4.2Embezzlement, theft and fraud

4.3Graft

4.4Extortion and blackmail

4.5Influence peddling

4.6Networking

4.7Abuse of discretion

4.8Favoritism, nepotism and clientelism

5Measurement

6Relationship to economic growth

7Prevention

Toggle Prevention subsection

7.1Enhancing civil society participation

8Anti-corruption programmes

9In popular culture

10Legal corruption

Toggle Legal corruption subsection

10.1Examples

10.1.1Foreign corrupt practices of industrialized OECD countries 1994 study

10.1.2"Specific" legal corruption: exclusively against foreign countries

10.2Siemens corruption case

11Historical responses in philosophical and religious thought

12Corruption by country

13See also

14References

15Further reading

Toggle the table of contents

Corruption

104 languages

AfrikaansAlemannischАԥсшәаالعربيةAzərbaycancaتۆرکجهবাংলাБеларускаяБеларуская (тарашкевіца)БългарскиBosanskiBrezhonegCatalàČeštinaCymraegDanskDeutschཇོང་ཁEestiΕλληνικάEspañolEsperantoEuskaraفارسیFrançaisFryskGaeilgeGalegoગુજરાતી한국어Հայերենहिन्दीHrvatskiBahasa IndonesiaInterlinguaÍslenskaItalianoעבריתJawaಕನ್ನಡქართულიҚазақшаKiswahiliKreyòl ayisyenKurdîКыргызчаLatinaLatviešuLietuviųLimburgsLombardMagyarМакедонскиMalagasyമലയാളംमराठीმარგალურიمصرىBahasa MelayuNederlandsनेपाली日本語Norsk bokmålNorsk nynorskOccitanOʻzbekcha / ўзбекчаਪੰਜਾਬੀپښتوPolskiPortuguêsQaraqalpaqshaRomânăРусскийСаха тылаसंस्कृतम्ScotsShqipSimple EnglishسنڌيSlovenčinaSlovenščinaSoomaaligaکوردیСрпски / srpskiSrpskohrvatski / српскохрватскиSundaSuomiSvenskaTagalogதமிழ்Татарча / tatarçaతెలుగుไทยТоҷикӣTürkçeTwiУкраїнськаاردوTiếng ViệtWinaray吴语Yorùbá粵語中文

Edit links

ArticleTalk

English

ReadEditView history

Tools

move to sidebar

hide

Actions

ReadEditView history

General

What links hereRelated changesUpload fileSpecial pagesPermanent linkPage informationCite this pageGet shortened URLDownload QR codeWikidata item

Print/export

Download as PDFPrintable version

In other projects

Wikimedia CommonsWikiquote

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power

"Corrupt" redirects here. For other uses, see Corrupt (disambiguation).

For other uses, see Corruption (disambiguation).

A map depicting Corruption Perceptions Index in the world in 2022; a higher score indicates lower levels of corruption. 100 – 90 89 – 80 79 – 70 69 – 60 59 – 50 49 – 40 39 – 30 29 – 20 19 – 10 9 – 0 No data

Corruption is a form of dishonesty or a criminal offense which is undertaken by a person or an organization which is entrusted in a position of authority, in order to acquire illicit benefits or abuse power for one's personal gain. Corruption may involve many activities which include bribery, influence peddling and embezzlement and it may also involve practices which are legal in many countries.[1] Political corruption occurs when an office-holder or other governmental employee acts with an official capacity for personal gain. Corruption is most common in kleptocracies, oligarchies, narco-states, and mafia states.[citation needed]

Corruption and crime are endemic sociological occurrences which appear with regular frequency in virtually all countries on a global scale in varying degrees and proportions. Recent data suggests corruption is on the rise.[2] Each individual nation allocates domestic resources for the control and regulation of corruption and the deterrence of crime. Strategies which are undertaken in order to counter corruption are often summarized under the umbrella term anti-corruption.[3] Additionally, global initiatives like the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 16 also have a targeted goal which is supposed to substantially reduce corruption in all of its forms.[4]

Definitions and scales[edit]

A billboard in Zambia exhorting the public to "Just say no to corruption".

Stephen D. Morris,[5] a professor of politics, wrote that political corruption is the illegitimate use of public power to benefit a private interest. Economist Ian Senior defined corruption as an action to secretly provide a good or a service to a third party to influence certain actions which benefit the corrupt, a third party, or both in which the corrupt agent has authority.[6] World Bank economist Daniel Kaufmann[7] extended the concept to include "legal corruption" in which power is abused within the confines of the law—as those with power often have the ability to make laws for their protection. The effect of corruption in infrastructure is to increase costs and construction time, lower the quality and decrease the benefit.[8]

Corruption is a complex phenomenon and can occur on different scales.[9] Corruption ranges from small favors between a small number of people (petty corruption),[10] to corruption that affects the government on a large scale (grand corruption), and corruption that is so prevalent that it is part of the everyday structure of society, including corruption as one of the symptoms of organized crime (systemic corruption).

A number of indicators and tools have been developed which can measure different forms of corruption with increasing accuracy;[11][12] but when those are impractical, one study suggests looking at bodyfat as a rough guide after finding that obesity of cabinet ministers in post-Soviet states was highly correlated with more accurate measures of corruption.[13][14]

Petty corruption[edit]

Petty corruption occurs at a smaller scale and takes place at the implementation end of public services when public officials meet the public. For example, in many small places such as registration offices, police stations, state licensing boards,[15][16] and many other private and government sectors.[clarification needed]

Grand corruption[edit]

Grand corruption is defined as corruption occurring at the highest levels of government in a way that requires significant subversion of the political, legal and economic systems. Such corruption is commonly found in countries with authoritarian or dictatorial governments but also in those without adequate policing of corruption.[17]

The government system in many countries is divided into the legislative, executive and judicial branches in an attempt to provide independent services that are less subject to grand corruption due to their independence from one another.[18]

Systemic corruption[edit]

Systemic corruption (or endemic corruption)[19] is corruption which is primarily due to the weaknesses of an organization or process. It can be contrasted with individual officials or agents who act corruptly within the system.

Factors which encourage systemic corruption include conflicting incentives, discretionary powers; monopolistic powers; lack of transparency; low pay; and a culture of impunity.[20] Specific acts of corruption include "bribery, extortion, and embezzlement" in a system where "corruption becomes the rule rather than the exception."[21] Scholars distinguish between centralized and decentralized systemic corruption, depending on which level of state or government corruption takes place; in countries such as the post-Soviet states both types occur.[22] Some scholars argue that there is a negative duty[clarification needed] of western governments to protect against systematic corruption of underdeveloped governments.[23][24]

Corruption has been a major issue in China, where society depends heavily on personal relationships. By the late 20th century that combined with the new lust for wealth, produced escalating corruption. Historian Keith Schoppa says that bribery was only one of the tools of Chinese corruption, which also included, "embezzlement, nepotism, smuggling, extortion, cronyism, kickbacks, deception, fraud, squandering of public money, illegal business transactions, stock manipulation and real estate fraud." Given the repeated anti-corruption campaigns it was a prudent precaution to move as much of the fraudulent money as possible overseas.[25]

In Latin American countries, corruption is permitted as a result of the cultural norms of the institution. In countries like the United States, there is a relatively strong sense of trust among strangers, one that is not found in Latin American countries. In Latin American countries, this trust does not exist, whereas the social norms imply that no stranger is responsible for the wellbeing or happiness of another stranger. Instead, the trust is found in acquaintances. Acquaintances are treated with trust and respect—a level of trust that is not found among acquaintances in countries like the United States. This is what permits for corruption in Latin American countries. If there is a strong enough trust within an administration that no one will betray the rest, corruptive policies will take place with ease. In the United States, this could not occur, as there is not a strong enough trust among the members of an administration to allow for corruption. In Latin American countries, there is a stronger value in individuality, which includes that of acquaintances, unlike in countries like the United States, which fails to include acquaintances.[26]

Causes[edit]

Per R. Klitgaard[27] corruption will occur if the corrupt gain is greater than the penalty multiplied by the likelihood of being caught and prosecuted.

Since a high degree of monopoly and discretion accompanied by a low degree of transparency does not automatically lead to corruption, a fourth variable of "morality" or "integrity" has been introduced by others. The moral dimension has an intrinsic component and refers to a "mentality problem", and an extrinsic component referring to circumstances like poverty, inadequate remuneration, inappropriate work conditions and inoperable or over-complicated procedures which demoralize people and let them search for "alternative" solutions.

According to a 2017 survey study, the following factors have been attributed as causes of corruption:[28]

Greed of money, desires.

Higher levels of market and political monopolization

Low levels of democracy, weak civil participation and low political transparency

Higher levels of bureaucracy and inefficient administrative structures

Low press freedom

Low economic freedom

Large ethnic divisions and high levels of in-group favoritism

Gender inequality

Poverty

Political instability

Weak property rights

Contagion from corrupt neighboring countries

Low levels of education

Lack of commitment to society

Extravagant family

Unemployment

Lack of proper policies against corruption

It has been noted that in a comparison of the most corrupt with the least corrupt countries, the former group contains nations with huge socio-economic inequalities, and the latter contains nations with a high degree of social and economic justice.[29]

By sector[edit]

Corruption can occur in many sectors, whether they be public or private industry or even NGOs (especially in public sector). However, only in democratically controlled institutions is there an interest of the public (owner) to develop internal mechanisms to fight active or passive corruption, whereas in private industry as well as in NGOs there is no public control. Therefore, the owners' investors' or sponsors' profits are largely decisive.

Public sector[edit]

Public corruption includes corruption of the political process and of government agencies such as tax collectors and the police, as well as corruption in processes of allocating public funds for contracts, grants, and hiring. Recent research by the World Bank suggests that who makes policy decisions (elected officials or bureaucrats) can be critical in determining the level of corruption because of the incentives different policy-makers face.[30]

Judicial[edit]

In the Renaissance fresco The Good and the Bad Judge (Monsaraz, Portugal), the Bad Judge, depicted as having two faces, is shown taking bribes: the nobleman to the right offers him gold coins from a purse, and the villein to the left gives him a pair of partridges.

Judicial corruption refers to the corruption-related misconduct of judges, through the receiving or giving of bribes, the improper sentencing of convicted criminals, bias in the hearing and judgement of arguments and other forms of misconduct. Judicial corruption can also be conducted by prosecutors and defense attorneys. An example of prosecutorial misconduct, occurs when a politician or a crime boss bribes a prosecutor to open investigations and file charges against an opposing politician or a rival crime boss, in order to hurt the competition.[31]

Governmental corruption of the judiciary is broadly known in many transitional and developing countries because the budget is almost completely controlled by the executive. The latter critically undermines the separation of powers, because it fosters financial dependence on the judiciary. The proper distribution of a nation's wealth, including its government's spending on the judiciary, is subject to constitutional economics.

The judiciary may be corrupted by acts of the government, such as through budget planning and various privileges, and by private acts.[32] Corruption in judiciary may also involve the government using its judicial arm to oppress opposition parties. Judicial corruption is difficult to completely eradicate, even in developed countries.[33]

Military[edit]

Military corruption refers to the abuse of power by members in the armed forces, in order for career advancement or for personal gain by a soldier or soldiers. One form of military corruption in the United States Armed Forces is a military soldier being promoted in rank or being given better treatment than their colleagues by their officers due to their race, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender, religious beliefs, social class or personal relationships with higher-ranking officers in spite of their merit.[34] In addition to that, the US military has also had many instances of officers sexually assaulting fellow officers and in many cases, there were allegations that many of the attacks were covered up and victims were coerced to remain silent by officers of the same rank or of higher rank.[35]

Another example of military corruption, is a military officer or officers using the power of their positions to commit activities that are illegal, such as skimming logistical supplies such as food, medicine, fuel, body armor or weapons to sell on the local black market.[36][37] There have also been instances of military officials, providing equipment and combat support to criminal syndicates, private military companies and terrorist groups, without approval from their superiors.[38] As a result, many countries have a military police force to ensure that the military officers follow the laws and conduct of their respective countries but sometimes the military police have levels of corruption themselves.[39]

Natural resources[edit]

Within less democratic countries, the presence of resources such as diamonds, gold, oil, and forestry increases the prevalence of corruption. Corruption includes industrial corruption, consisting of large bribes, as well as petty corruption such as a poacher paying off a park ranger to ignore poaching. The presence of fuel extraction and export is unambiguously associated with corruption, whereas mineral exports only increased corruption in poorer countries. In wealthier countries, mineral exports such as gold and diamonds are actually associated with reduced corruption. The international Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative seeks to create best practices for good governance of gas, oil, and minerals, particularly focusing on the state management of revenue from these resources. Any valued natural resource can be affected by corruption, including water for irrigation, land for livestock grazing, forests for hunting and logging, and fisheries.[40]

The presence or perception of corruption also undermines environmental initiatives. In Kenya, farmers blame poor agricultural productivity on corruption, and thus are less likely to undertake soil conservation measures to prevent soil erosion and loss of nutrients. In Benin, mistrust of government due to perceived corruption led small farmers to reject the adaptation of measures to combat climate change.[40]

Political[edit]

Main article: Political corruption

A political cartoon from Harper's Weekly, 26 January 1878, depicting U.S. Secretary of the Interior Carl Schurz investigating the Indian Bureau at the U.S. Department of the Interior. The original caption for the cartoon is: "THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR INVESTIGATING THE INDIAN BUREAU. GIVE HIM HIS DUE, AND GIVE THEM THEIR DUES."

Political corruption is the abuse of public power, office, or resources by elected government officials for personal gain, by extortion, soliciting or offering bribes. It can also take the form of office holders maintaining themselves in office by purchasing votes by enacting laws which use taxpayers' money.[41] Evidence suggests that corruption can have political consequences- with citizens being asked for bribes becoming less likely to identify with their country or region.[42]

The political act of graft (American English), is a well known and now global form of political corruption, being the unscrupulous and illegal use of a politician's authority for personal gain, when funds intended for public projects are intentionally misdirected in order to maximize the benefits to illegally private interests of the corrupted individual(s) and their cronies. In some cases government institutions are "repurposed" or shifted away from their official mandate to serve other, often corrupt purposes.[43]

The Kaunas "Golden Toilet"

The Kaunas golden toilet case was a major Lithuanian scandal. In 2009, the municipality of Kaunas (led by mayor Andrius Kupčinskas) ordered that a shipping container was to be converted into an outdoor toilet at a cost of 500,000 litai (around 150,000 euros). It was to also require 5,000 litai (1,500 euros) in monthly maintenance costs.[44] At the same time when Kaunas's "Golden Toilet" was built, Kėdainiai tennis club acquired a very similar, but more advanced solution for 4,500 euros.[44] Because of the inflated cost of the outdoor toilet, it was nicknamed the "Golden Toilet". Despite the investment, the "Golden Toilet" remained closed for years due to the dysfunctionality and was a subject of a lengthy anti-corruption investigation into those who had created it and[44] the local municipality even considered demolishing the building at one point.[45] The group of public servants involved in the toilet's procurement received various prison sentences for recklessness, malfeasance, misuse of power and document falsifications in a 2012 court case, but were cleared of their corruption charges and received compensation, which pushed the total construction cost and subsequent related financial losses to 352,000 euros.

On 7 July 2020, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a global think tank, released a report claiming the Emirati city, Dubai, of being an enabler of global corruption, crime and illicit financial flows. It stated that the global corrupt and criminal actors either operated through or from Dubai. The city was also called a haven for trade-based money laundering, as it gives space to free trade zones, with minimal regulatory laws and customs enforcement.[46]

A report in September 2022 revealed that British Members of Parliament received a total of £828,211 over a period of eight years from countries of the Saudi-led coalition in the Yemeni Civil War. The money was granted in the form of all-expenses-paid trips to 96 MPs by Saudi Arabia (at least £319,406), Bahrain (£197,985), the United Arab Emirates (£187,251), Egypt (£66,695) and Kuwait (£56,872). MPs also received gifts, including a £500 food hamper, tickets for a Burns Supper, an expensive watch and a day out at the Royal Windsor Horse Show. The Saudi-led coalition was alleged of attempting to buy influence in the UK. While the MPs registered the trips and gifts at Westminster as per the rules, critics called it “absolutely shameful” to accept donations from countries with poor human rights records.[47]

Police[edit]

Main article: Police corruption

A 1902 cartoon depicts a police officer whose eyes are covered with a cloth labelled "bribes".

Police corruption is a specific form of police misconduct designed to obtain financial benefits, personal gain, career advancement for a police officer or officers in exchange for not pursuing or selectively pursuing an investigation or arrest or aspects of the "thin blue line" itself where force members collude in lies to protect their precincts, unions and/or other law enforcement members from accountability. One common form of police corruption is soliciting or accepting bribes in exchange for not reporting organized drug or prostitution rings or other illegal activities. When civilians become witnesses to police brutality, officers are often known to respond by harassing and intimidating the witnesses as retribution for reporting the misconduct.[48] Whistleblowing is not common in law enforcement in part because officers who do so normally face reprisal by being fired, being forced to transfer to another department, being demoted, being shunned, losing friends, not being given back-up during emergencies, receiving professional or even physical threats as well as having threats be made against friends or relatives of theirs or having their own misconduct exposed.[49] In America another common form of police corruption is when white supremacist groups, such as Neo-Nazi Skinheads or Neo-Confederates (such as the Ku Klux Klan), recruit members of law enforcement into their ranks or encourage their members to join local police departments to repress minorities and covertly promote white supremacy.[50]

Another example is police officers flouting the police code of conduct in order to secure convictions of suspects—for example, through the use of surveillance abuse, false confessions, police perjury and/or falsified evidence. Police officers have also been known to sell forms of contraband that were taken during seizers (such as confiscated drugs, stolen property or weapons).[51] Corruption and misconduct can also be done by prison officers, such as the smuggling of contraband (such as drugs or electronics) into jails and prisons for inmates or the abuse of prisoners.[52][53] Another form of misconduct is probation officers taking bribes in exchange for allowing paroles to violate the terms of their probation or abusing their paroles.[54] More rarely, police officers may deliberately and systematically participate in organized crime themselves, either while on the job or during off hours. In most major cities, there are internal affairs sections to investigate suspected police corruption or misconduct. Similar entities include the British Independent Police Complaints Commission.

Private sector[edit]

Private sector corruption occurs when any institution, entity or person that is not controlled by the public sector company, household and institution that is not controlled by the public sector engages in corrupt acts. Private sector corruption may overlap with public sector corruption, for example when a private entity operates in conjunction with corrupt government officials, or where the government involves itself in activity normally performed by private entities.

Legal[edit]

Main article: Attorney misconduct

Corruption facilitated by lawyers is a well known form of judicial misconduct. Such abuse is called Attorney misconduct. Attorney misconduct can be either conducted by individuals acting on their own accord or by entire law firms. A well known example of such corruption are mob lawyers. Mob lawyers are attorneys who seek to protect the leaders of criminal enterprises as well as their criminal organizations, with the use of unethical and/or illegal conduct such as making false or misleading statements, hiding evidence from prosecutors, failing to disclose all relevant facts about the case, or even giving clients advice on how to commit crimes in ways that would make prosecution more difficult for any investigating authorities.[55]

Corporate[edit]

What is corruption? - Transparency.org

You are using an outdated browser. Most of this website should still work, but after upgrading your browser it will look and perform better.

About

What we do

Countries

Campaigns

Donate

News

Blog

Press

Library

Home

About

What is corruption?

We define corruption as the abuse of entrusted power for private gain.Corruption erodes trust, weakens democracy, hampers economic development and further exacerbates inequality, poverty, social division and the environmental crisis.Exposing corruption and holding the corrupt to account can only happen if we understand the way corruption works and the systems that enable it.

Please accept marketing cookies to view this video.

What is corruption?

Externally hosted content may include ads. These aren't endorsed by or reflect Transparency International's views.

The Basics

Corruption can take many forms, and can include behaviours like:public servants demanding or taking money or favours in exchange for services, politicians misusing public money or granting public jobs or contracts to their sponsors, friends and families, corporations bribing officials to get lucrative dealsCorruption can happen anywhere: in business, government, the courts, the media, and in civil society, as well as across all sectors from health and education to infrastructure and sports.Corruption can involve anyone: politicians, government officials, public servants, business people or members of the public. Corruption happens in the shadows, often with the help of professional enablers such as bankers, lawyers, accountants and real estate agents, opaque financial systems and anonymous shell companies that allow corruption schemes to flourish and the corrupt to launder and hide their illicit wealth.Corruption adapts to different contexts and changing circumstances. It can evolve in response to changes in rules, legislation and even technology.

See our anti-corruption glossary for more examples of corrupt behaviour

Corruptionary A-Z

The costs of corruption

Political costs

Your freedom and rule of law.

Social costs

Your participation and even your trust in government.

Environmental costs

Your chance for a healthy environment and a sustainable future.

Economic costs

Your opportunity to build and grow wealth.

To Fight Corruption, We Must Embrace Transparency

Transparency is all about knowing who, why, what, how and how much. It means shedding light on formal and informal rules, plans, processes and actions. Transparency helps us, the public, hold all power to account for the common good. Seeking and receiving information is a human right that can act as a safeguard against corruption, and increase trust in decision makers and public institutions. However, transparency is not only about making information available, but ensuring it can be easily accessed, understood and used by citizens.

But transparency is only the first step to curbing corruption

We have learned from over twenty-five years of experience that corruption can only be kept in check if representatives from government, business and civil society work together for the common good.

See our Strategy to know how Transparency International is working across society to enhance accountability and integrity

Our Strategy

Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

First name *

Last name *

Email address *

View our Privacy Policy.

Your registration is almost complete. Please go to your inbox and confirm your email address in the email we just sent to you

Share our vision

Stay informed

Subscribe to our weekly newsletter to get the latest news and updates from Transparency International

First name *

Last name *

Email address *

View our Privacy Policy.

Your registration is almost complete. Please go to your inbox and confirm your email address in the email we just sent to you

Engage

We're active in over 100 countries. Here's how to contact one of our national chapters

Select a country

Argentina

Armenia

Australia

Austria

Azerbaijan

Bahrain

Bangladesh

Belarus

Belgium

Benin

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Brazil

Bulgaria

Burundi

Cambodia

Cameroon

Canada

Chile

Colombia

Costa Rica

Czech Republic

Côte d’Ivoire

Democratic Republic of the Congo

Denmark

Dominican Republic

Ecuador

El Salvador

Estonia

Fiji

Finland

France

Georgia

Germany

Ghana

Greece

Greenland

Guatemala

Guyana

Honduras

Hungary

Iceland

Indonesia

Ireland

Israel

Italy

Jamaica

Jordan

Kazakhstan

Kenya

Kosovo

Kuwait

Kyrgyzstan

Latvia

Lebanon

Liberia

Lithuania

Madagascar

Malawi

Malaysia

Maldives

Mali

Malta

Mauritius

Mexico

Moldova

Mongolia

Montenegro

Morocco

Mozambique

Nepal

Netherlands

New Zealand

Niger

Nigeria

North Macedonia

Norway

Pakistan

Palestine

Panama

Papua New Guinea

Peru

Portugal

Republic of the Congo

Romania

Russia

Rwanda

Senegal

Serbia

Seychelles

Sierra Leone

Slovakia

Slovenia

Solomon Islands

South Africa

South Korea

Spain

Sri Lanka

Sweden

Switzerland

Taiwan

Togo

Trinidad and Tobago

Tunisia

Turkey

Uganda

Ukraine

United Kingdom

United States

Vanuatu

Venezuela

Zambia

Zimbabwe

Donate

Your support will help us tackle corruption and the corrupt. Take action and donate now to help us end corruption

Donate now

Join the conversation on social media

About

What is corruption?

The organisation

Our story

Our impact

National Chapters

Who We Are

What we do

Corruption Perceptions Index

Global Corruption Barometer

Our priorities

Advocacy

Projects

Advocacy and legal advice centres

Anti-Corruption Helpdesk

Knowledge Hub

International Anti-Corruption Conference

Updates

News

Blog

Press

Library

Corruption

By country

End corruption

Corruptionary A-Z

Report corruption

Career & tender opportunities

Contact

How we operate

How we're funded

How we're accountable

Our people

Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under CC BY-ND 4.0

Bot technology provider: ChatBot

Privacy

Donor Privacy

Cookie Notice

Terms

Impressum

A look at how corruption works in the Philippines | Inquirer Business

July 10, 2022

News

Global Nation

Business

Lifestyle

Entertainment

Technology

Sports

opinion

USA & Canada

bandera

CDN Digital

Pop

Preen

Noli Soli

Scout PH

Videos

F&B

Esports

Multisport

Mobility

Project Rebound

Advertise

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

SUBMIT

News

global nation

business

lifestyle

entertainment

technology

sports

opinion

MOBILITY

JOB MARKET

STOCK EXCHANGE

PROPERTY GUIDE

COLUMNS

STOCK MARKET QUARTERLY

CLASSIFIEDS

PROJECT REBOUND

business / BoardTalk

BoardTalk

MAPping the Future

A look at how corruption works in the Philippines

By: Raymond A. Abrea - @inquirerdotnet

Philippine Daily Inquirer / 02:01 AM March 13, 2023

The Philippines is perceived to be one of the most corrupt countries in the world. Of 180 countries, the Philippines ranked 116 in terms of being least corrupt. This means that the country is almost on the top one-third of the most corrupt countries, based on the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) published by Transparency International.

According to CPI, the Philippines scored a total of 33 points out of 100. Even as far back as 2012, it has fluctuated around the same CPI score, with the highest score being 38 points in 2014 and the lowest being 33 points in 2021 and 2022. To further contextualize how low it scored, the regional average CPI score for the Asia-Pacific region is 45, with zero as highly corrupt. And of the 31 countries and territories in the region, the Philippines placed 22nd (tied with Mongolia).

It must be noted, however, that CPI measures perceptions of corruption and is not necessarily the reality of the state of corruption. CPI reflects the views of experts or surveys of business people on a number of corrupt behavior in the public sector (such as bribery, diversion of public funds, nepotism in the civil service, use of public office for private gain, etc.). CPI also measures the available mechanisms to prevent corruption, such as enforcement mechanisms, effective prosecution of corrupt officials, red tape, laws on adequate financial disclosure and legal protection for whistleblowers.

These data are taken from other international organizations, such as the World Bank, World Economic Forum, private consulting companies and think tanks.FEATURED STORIES

BUSINESS

Marcos welcomes Coca-Cola’s $1 billion expansion plans in PH

BUSINESS

BIZ BUZZ: SkyCable spills more tea

BUSINESS

BIZ BUZZ: Davao grabs Head balls

Of course, measuring actual corruption is quite difficult, especially as it involves under-the-table activities that are only discovered when they are prosecuted, like in the case of the ill-gotten wealth of the Marcoses, which was estimated to be up to $10 billion based on now-deleted Guinness World Records and cited as the “biggest robbery of a government.” Nevertheless, there still exists a correlation between corruption and corruption perceptions.

4 Syndromes

Corruption does not come in a single form as well. In a 2007 study, Michael Johnston, a political scientist and professor emeritus at Colgate University in the United States, studied four syndromes (categories) of corruption that were predominant in Asia, citing Japan, Korea, China and the Philippines as prime examples of each category.

The first category is Influence Market Corruption, wherein politicians peddle their influence to provide connections to other people, essentially serving as middlemen. The second category is Elite Cartel Corruption, wherein there exist networks of elites that may collude to protect their economic and political advantages. The third form of corruption is the Official Mogul Corruption, wherein economic moguls (or their clients) are usually the top political figures and face few constraints from the state or their competitors.

Finally, there is the form of corruption that the Philippines is familiar with. Oligarch-and-Clan Corruption is present in countries with major political and economic liberalization and weak institutions. Corruption of this kind has been characterized by Johnston as having “disorderly, sometimes violent scramble among contending oligarchs seeking to parlay personal resources into wealth and power.” Other than the Philippines, corruption in Bangladesh, India, Malaysia, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka falls under the same syndrome.

In the Philippines, Oligarch-and-Clan Corruption manifests itself in the political system. As Johnston noted, in this kind of corruption, there is difficulty in determining what is public and what is private (i.e., who is a politician and who is an entrepreneur). Oligarchs attempt to use their power for their private benefit or the benefit of their families. From the Aquinos, Binays, Dutertes, Roxases and, most notoriously, the Marcoses, the Philippines is no stranger to political families. In a 2017 chart by Todd Cabrera Lucero, he traced the lineage of Philippine presidents and noted them to be either related by affinity or consanguinity.

Oligarchy

Corruption in the Philippines by oligarch families is not unheard of. In fact, the most notable case of corruption in the Philippines was committed by an oligarchic family—the Marcos family. The extent of the wealth stolen by former dictator Ferdinand Marcos Sr. and his wife has been well-documented. In fact, several Supreme Court cases clearly show the extent of the wealth that the Marcoses had stolen.

In an Oligarch-and-Clan system of corruption, oligarchs will also leverage whatever governmental authority they have to their advantage. Going back to the Marcos example, despite their convictions, the Marcoses have managed to weasel their way back into power, with Ferdinand Marcos Jr. becoming the 17th President despite his conviction for tax violation. Several politicians have also been convicted of graft and corruption (or have at least been hounded by allegations of corruption) and still remain in politics. As observed by Johnston in his article, though Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos are the popular images of corruption in the Philippines, he also noted other entrenched oligarchs throughout the country.

Finally, factions also tend to be “unstable and poorly disciplined.” The term “balimbing” is often thrown around in local politics but, more than that, the Philippines is also familiar with politically-motivated violence and disorder.

All these features are characteristics of Oligarch-and-Clan corruption, where these oligarchic families continue to hold power and politicians exploit their positions to enrich themselves or their families.

Corruption, no matter what kind, needs to be curbed. It results in loss of government money, which could have been used to boost the economy and help ordinary citizens, especially those from the lower income sectors.

According to the 2007 study, the Office of the Ombudsman had, in 1999, pegged losses arising from corruption at P100 million daily, whereas the World Bank estimates the losses at one-fifth of the national government budget. For relatively more updated figures, former Deputy Ombudsman Cyril Ramos claimed that the Philippines had lost a total of P1.4 trillion in 2017 and 2018. These estimates are in line with the World Bank estimates of one-fifth (or 20 percent) of the national budget.

So grave is the adverse effect of corruption that the international community recognized it as an international crime under the United Nations Convention Against Corruption where perpetual disqualification of convicted officials is recommended.

But the question stands: can corruption be eradicated in developing countries like the Philippines? Many Philippine presidents promised to end corruption in their political campaigning, but none has achieved it so far. If the government truly wants to end corruption, it must implement policies directed against corruption, such as lifting the bank secrecy law, prosecuting and punishing corrupt officials, increasing government transparency and more. INQ

This is part of the author’s presentation at DPI 543 Corruption: Finding It and Fixing It course at Harvard Kennedy School, where he is MPA/Mason fellow.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

SIGN ME UP

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

This article reflects the personal opinion of the author and not the official stand of the Management Association of the Philippines or MAP. He is a member of MAP Tax Committee and MAP Ease of Doing Business Committee, co-chair of Paying Taxes on Ease of Doing Business Task Force and chief tax advisor of Asian Consulting Group. Feedback at [email protected] and [email protected].

Corruption: Its Meaning, Type, and Real-World Example

Investing

Stocks

Cryptocurrency

Bonds

ETFs

Options and Derivatives

Commodities

Trading

Automated Investing

Brokers

Fundamental Analysis

Markets

View All

Simulator

Trade

Research

My Games

Leaderboard

Banking

Savings Accounts

Certificates of Deposit (CDs)

Money Market Accounts

Checking Accounts

View All

Personal Finance

Budgeting and Saving

Personal Loans

Insurance

Mortgages

Credit and Debt

Student Loans

Taxes

Credit Cards

Financial Literacy

Retirement

View All

News

Markets

Companies

Earnings

CD Rates

Mortgage Rates

Economy

Government

Crypto

ETFs

Personal Finance

View All

Reviews

Best Online Brokers

Best Savings Rates

Best CD Rates

Best Life Insurance

Best Personal Loans

Best Mortgage Rates

Best Money Market Accounts

Best Auto Loan Rates

Best Credit Repair Companies

Best Credit Cards

View All

Academy

Investing for Beginners

Trading for Beginners

Become a Day Trader

Technical Analysis

All Investing Courses

All Trading Courses

View All

Live

Please fill out this field.

Investing

Stocks

Cryptocurrency

Bonds

ETFs

Options and Derivatives

Commodities

Trading

Automated Investing

Brokers

Fundamental Analysis

Markets

View All

Simulator

Trade

Research

My Games

Leaderboard

Banking

Savings Accounts

Certificates of Deposit (CDs)

Money Market Accounts

Checking Accounts

View All

Personal Finance

Budgeting and Saving

Personal Loans

Insurance

Mortgages

Credit and Debt

Student Loans

Taxes

Credit Cards

Financial Literacy

Retirement

View All

News

Markets

Companies

Earnings

CD Rates

Mortgage Rates

Economy

Government

Crypto

ETFs

Personal Finance

View All

Reviews

Best Online Brokers

Best Savings Rates

Best CD Rates

Best Life Insurance

Best Personal Loans

Best Mortgage Rates

Best Money Market Accounts

Best Auto Loan Rates

Best Credit Repair Companies

Best Credit Cards

View All

Academy

Investing for Beginners

Trading for Beginners

Become a Day Trader

Technical Analysis

All Investing Courses

All Trading Courses

View All

Economy

Government and Policy

Monetary Policy

Fiscal Policy

Economics

View All

Financial Terms

Newsletter

About Us

Table of Contents

Expand

Table of Contents

What Is Corruption?

Understanding Corruption

Causes

Prevention

Real-World Example

Corruption FAQs

The Bottom Line

Financial Crime & Fraud

Definitions A - L

Corruption: Its Meaning, Type, and Real-World Example

James Chen

Full Bio

James Chen, CMT is an expert trader, investment adviser, and global market strategist.

Learn about our

editorial policies

Updated May 13, 2023

Reviewed by

Thomas J. Catalano

Reviewed by

Thomas J. Catalano

Full Bio

Thomas J Catalano is a CFP and Registered Investment Adviser with the state of South Carolina, where he launched his own financial advisory firm in 2018. Thomas' experience gives him expertise in a variety of areas including investments, retirement, insurance, and financial planning.

Learn about our

Financial Review Board

Fact checked by

Timothy Li

Fact checked by

Timothy Li

Full Bio

Timothy Li is a consultant, accountant, and finance manager with an MBA from USC and over 15 years of corporate finance experience. Timothy has helped provide CEOs and CFOs with deep-dive analytics, providing beautiful stories behind the numbers, graphs, and financial models.

Learn about our

editorial policies

Investopedia / Julie Bang

Corruption in the Philippines - Wikipedia

Jump to content

Main menu

move to sidebar

hide

Navigation

Main pageContentsCurrent eventsRandom articleAbout WikipediaContact usDonate

Contribute

HelpLearn to editCommunity portalRecent changesUpload file

Create account

Personal tools

Create account Log in

Pages for logged out editors learn more

ContributionsTalk

Contents

move to sidebar

hide

(Top)

1Perceived decline and resurgence

2Plunder, graft, and malversation

Toggle Plunder, graft, and malversation subsection

2.1Stolen wealth of the Marcos family

3Corruption in the police service and armed forces

4Corruption in the judicial system

5Political nepotism and cronyism

6Notes

7See also

8References

9Further reading

Toggle the table of contents

Corruption in the Philippines

3 languages

Oʻzbekcha / ўзбекчаTagalog中文

Edit links

ArticleTalk

English

ReadEditView history

Tools

move to sidebar

hide

Actions

ReadEditView history

General

What links hereRelated changesUpload fileSpecial pagesPermanent linkPage informationCite this pageGet shortened URLDownload QR codeWikidata item

Print/export

Download as PDFPrintable version

In other projects

Wikimedia Commons

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

State of corruption in the country

This article needs to be updated. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (October 2022)

Political corruption

Forms and concepts

Bribery

Cronyism

Economics of corruption

Electoral fraud

Elite capture

Influence peddling

Kleptocracy

Mafia state

Nepotism

Pyrrhic defeat theory

Slush fund

Simony

State capture

State-corporate crime

Throffer

Anti-corruption

International Anti-Corruption Court

Group of States Against Corruption

International Anti-Corruption Academy

International Anti-Corruption Day

United Nations Convention against Corruption

Corruption by country

Africa

Angola

Botswana

Cameroon

Chad

Comoros

Democratic Republic of the Congo

Egypt

Equatorial Guinea

Eritrea

Ethiopia

Ghana

Guinea-Bissau

Kenya

Liberia

Mauritius

Morocco

Nigeria

Senegal

Sierra Leone

Somalia

South Africa

South Sudan

Sudan

Tanzania

Tunisia

Uganda

Zambia

Zimbabwe

Asia

Afghanistan

Armenia

Azerbaijan

Bahrain

Bangladesh

Cambodia

China

Cyprus

Georgia

India

Indonesia

Iran

Iraq

Israel

Jordan

Kuwait

Kyrgyzstan

Kazakhstan

Lebanon

Malaysia

Myanmar

Nepal

North Korea

Pakistan

Philippines

Singapore

South Korea

Sri Lanka

Syria

Tajikistan

Thailand

Turkey

Turkmenistan

Uzbekistan

Vietnam

Yemen

Europe

Albania

Austria

Belgium

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Bulgaria

Croatia

Czech Republic

Denmark

Finland

France

Germany

Greece

Hungary

Iceland

Ireland

Italy

Kosovo

Latvia

Lithuania

Luxembourg

North Macedonia

Northern Ireland

Moldova

Montenegro

Netherlands

Norway

Poland

Portugal

Romania

Russia

Serbia

Slovakia

Slovenia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

Ukraine

United Kingdom

Vatican City

North America

Canada

Mexico

United States

Central America

Costa Rica

Cuba

El Salvador

Haiti

Nicaragua

South America

Argentina

Bolivia

Brazil

Chile

Colombia

Ecuador

Paraguay

Peru

Uruguay

Venezuela

Oceania

Australia

New Zealand

Papua New Guinea

vte

The Philippines suffers from widespread corruption,[1] which developed during the Spanish colonial period.[2][3] According to GAN Integrity's Philippines Corruption Report updated May 2020, the Philippines suffers from many incidents of corruption and crime in many aspects of civic life and in various sectors. Such corruption risks are rampant throughout the state's judicial system, police service, public services, land administration, and natural resources.

Examples of corruption in the Philippines include graft, bribery, cronyism, nepotism, impunity, embezzlement, extortion, racketeering, fraud, tax evasion,vote buying, lack of transparency, lack of sufficient enforcement of laws and government policies, and consistent lack of support for human rights.[4]

Researchers have proposed that corruption and poor governance as among the causes of poverty in the Philippines.[5]

The Philippines signed the United Nations Convention against Corruption on December 9, 2003, with the Senate ratifying the convention on November 6, 2006. In 2012, the Senate declared that National Anticorruption Day shall be celebrated yearly on December 9.[6]

Perceived decline and resurgence[edit]

Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index scores a list of countries on a scale from 0 ("highly corrupt") to 100 ("very clean"), then ranks them by score. The country ranked first is perceived to have the most honest public sector.[7]

In 2012, President Benigno Aquino said that, according to Transparency International, the factors driving the progress in the Philippines' Corruption Perception Index scores at that time were improved government service and reduced red tape.[8] Between 2012 and 2014, the Philippines's score rose from 34 to its highest-ever score of 38.[9]

A November 2020 Transparency International survey of nearly 20,000 citizens from 17 countries, surveyed mostly between June and September 2020, showed that Filipinos have more confidence in their government's tackling of corruption than their Asian neighbors, although they also believe corruption in government remains a big problem. 64% of Philippine respondents thought that corruption had decreased in the last 12 months, while 24% believed that it had increased. This was better than the average across Asia, where only 32% believed that corruption had decreased and 38% said that it had increased.[10]

In contrast, the 2022 Corruption Perceptions Index, which scored 180 countries worldwide, gave the Philippines a score of 33. When ranked by score, the Philippines ranked 116th among the 180 countries in the Index. For comparison with worldwide scores, the best score was 90 (ranked 1), the worst score was 12 (ranked 180), and the average score was 43.[9] For comparison with regional scores, the highest score among Asia Pacific countries[Note 1] was 87, the lowest score was 15 and the average score was 45.[11] In 2021 and 2022, Transparency International reported the Philippines as a "significant decliner" in score for the region; the country had dropped to a score of 33 in those years from its 2014 high of 38.[12][11]

Plunder, graft, and malversation[edit]

See also: Coco Levy Fund scam, Fertilizer Fund scam, and Trial of Joseph Estrada

The Anti-Plunder Law (Republic Act 7080) was signed into law after the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos was toppled in the 1986 People Power Revolution. The law was filed in the Senate by Senator Jovito Salonga and in the House of Representatives by Representative Lorna Verano-Yap. The measure was signed into law by President Corazon Aquino in 1991. Salonga said that previous laws against corruption "were clearly inadequate to cope with the magnitude of the corruption and thievery committed during the Marcos years".[13]

In 1997, the first plunder case was filed against tax official Dominga Manalili. She and two others were convicted of plunder in 2001 by the Quezon City Regional Trial Court for diverting P260 million of tax payments to unauthorized bank accounts.[13]

In 2001, former President Joseph Estrada and incumbent San Juan Mayor Jinggoy Estrada became the first elected officials to be charged with plunder. Joseph Estrada was accused of pocketing P4 billion in jueteng bribes and excise taxes from tobacco. He was convicted of plunder by the Sandiganbayan anti-graft court in 2007 and later pardoned by President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.[13]

In 2012, the Philippine Office of the Ombudsman filed a P366-million plunder case against Arroyo over the alleged misuse of intelligence funds assigned to the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office. In 2013, Arroyo and Janet Lim Napoles were charged with plunder over the Malampaya fund scam.[13]

In 2014, incumbent senators Bong Revilla, Jinggoy Estrada, and Juan Ponce Enrile along with Janet Lim Napoles were charged with plunder before the Sandiganbayan for allegedly pocketing kickbacks in the pork barrel scam.[14]

As of 2016, there have been 33,772 cases of corruption filed before the Sandiganbayan. Of these, 10,094 are malversation cases and 7,968 are graft cases.[15]

Stolen wealth of the Marcos family[edit]

Main article: Unexplained wealth of the Marcos family

The total amount of the fortune that the Marcos family stole during the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos is estimated at $10 billion.[16] The Supreme Court of the Philippines has issued three separate rulings ordering the Marcoses to return the wealth stolen from the country.[17]

Corruption in the police service and armed forces[edit]

See also: Euro Generals scandal, Ninja cops of the Philippine drug war, and 2011 Armed Forces of the Philippines corruption scandal

The Police System of the Philippines poses a high risk of corruption, with the Philippines National Police (PNP) considered to be one of the most corrupt institutions within the country. There are several reports of national police officers and members of the military engaging in criminal activities such as extortion, corruption and involvement in local rackets. Private businesses also report that they cannot solely rely on the support of the police and half of them choose to pay for private security. [4]

According to CNN Philippines, Police Commissioner Sombero was under investigation in a corruption case for allegedly facilitating a PHP50 million bribe from gambling tycoon Jack Lam, who tried to bribe immigration authorities to release approximately 1,300 Chinese nationals who were working in his resorts illegally.[18]

Corruption in the judicial system[edit]

Corruption in the Philippine judicial system is also a major problem. Bribery and irregular payments in return for favorable judicial decisions are quite common. Although judicial officials are independent by law, rich and powerful groups and individuals wield control and influence over the judicial system and influence the outcomes of civil and criminal proceedings. Financial investment dispute often take an unnecessarily long time due to staffing shortages, lack of resources, and corruption in the court system. The low salaries of judicial officials help exacerbate the problem of bribery in exchange for favors. The judiciary is also criticized for making non-transparent and biased judicial decisions.[4]

Political nepotism and cronyism[edit]

Further information: Political dynasties in the Philippines, List of political families in the Philippines, and Cronies of Ferdinand Marcos

The Philippine political arena is mainly arranged and operated by families or alliances of families, rather than organized around the voting for political parties.[19] Called the padrino system, one gains favor, promotion, or political appointment through family affiliation (nepotism) or friendship (cronyism), as opposed to one's merit. The padrino system has been the source of many controversies and corruption in the Philippines.

According to the Civil Service Commission (CSC), nepotism is a form of corruption or abuse of authority that violates Article IX (B), Section 2 (2) of the Constitution that states that "Appointments in the civil service shall be made only according to merit and fitness to be determined, as far as practicable, and, except to positions which are policy-determining, primarily confidential, or highly technical, by competitive examination." Nepotism favors a few individuals and compromises fairness in the hiring and promotion process in government.[20]

Notes[edit]

^ Afghanistan, Australia, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, China, Fiji, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Laos, Malaysia, Maldives, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, New Zealand, North Korea, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Vanuatu, and Vietnam

Corruption - Our World in Data

uption - Our World in DataOur World in DataBrowse by topicLatestResourcesAboutSubscribeDonateGdoc/AdminCorruptionHow common is corruption? What impact does it have? And what can be done to reduce it?By Esteban Ortiz-Ospina and Max RoserThis page was first published in October 2016 and last revised in January 2024.CorruptionEmpirical ViewEvidence from surveysEvidence from law enforcement and regulationWhat is the relationship between corruption and development?Education and corruptionWhat is the relationship between corruption and accountability?How effective are top-down audits to reduce corruption?How important is the link between cultural norms and corruption?Definitions, Measurement and Data QualityDefinitionMeasurement limitationsRelationship between sourcesInteractive charts on corruptionEndnotesCitationLicenceContentsThis topic page presents research and data on corruption — an important problem imposing political, economic, and environmental costs on societies worldwide.Corruption involves many different aspects, and it is therefore hard to give a precise and comprehensive definition. However, at the core of most definitions of corruption is the idea that a corrupt act implies the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. Classic examples include bribery, clientelism, and embezzlement. Other, often more subtle and even legal examples of corruption include lobbying and patronage.While long-run data on corruption is very limited, historical examples suggest that corruption has been a persistent feature of human societies over time and space. Two examples are the sale of parliamentary seats in ‘rotten boroughs’ in England before the Reform Act of 1832, and ‘machine politics’ in the US at the turn of the 19th century.1The unethical and often illegal nature of corruption makes measurement particularly complicated. Corruption data usually comes from direct observation (e.g. law enforcement records and audit reports), or perception surveys (e.g. public opinion surveys or expert assessments). In this topic page, we discuss data from both sources and discuss their underlying limitations.As we show, although precise corruption measurement is difficult, there is a clear correlation between perception and behavior; so available corruption data provides valuable information that, when interpreted carefully, can tell us something important about our world and contribute to developing effective policies.For example, the data from perception surveys suggests that corruption correlates with human development, and several studies exploiting rich data from law enforcement records have shown that education is an important element explaining this relationship. Specifically, the data supports the idea that voters with more education tend to be more willing and able to monitor public employees and take action when these employees violate the law.See all interactive charts on corruption ↓Empirical ViewEvidence from surveysWhere is perceived corruption high?The non-governmental organization Transparency International (TI) estimates a 'Corruption Perception Index', which is arguably the most widely used indicator of corruption worldwide and shown in the map here.The index scores countries on a scale of 0-100, where 0 means that a country is perceived as highly corrupt and 100 means that a country is perceived as very clean. The indicator is representative of experts’ opinions, as it is constructed by taking the averages of various standardized expert surveys, including those from the Bertelsmann Foundation, the World Economic Forum, the World Bank, and many others.2While TI's Corruption Perception Index has been estimated since 1995, the methodology has been changed recurrently up until 2012. As such, the data presented here starts in 2012. You can explore country-specific trends by clicking on the 'Chart' tab and then clicking 'Edit countries and regions' in the upper-right corner.As we can see, countries that have received high scores (and thus are perceived as the ‘cleanest’) are Denmark, New Zealand, Finland, Singapore, and Sweden. At the other extreme, countries that have received low scores (and the highest perceived corruption) include Somalia, Syria, South Sudan, Yemen, and North Korea.We can see that scores are fairly stable, and drastic changes in ranking are not common.Where do people perceive corruption to be a major problem?The data visualized previously relied on the perception of experts (e.g. business people, country analysts, etc.). Now we analyze data representing the perceptions of everyday people confronting corruption around the world.The Global Corruption Barometer, also produced by Transparency International, surveys individuals worldwide, asking them about their opinions and experiences regarding corruption. The visualization shows the average national perception of corruption, as rated on a scale of 1 to 5 by respondents who were asked: "To what extent do you think that corruption is a problem in the public sector in this country?".The map shows that everyday people's perception of the problems associated with corruption correlates with expert opinion (seen in the previous section) about how much corruption there is. However, the correlation is far from perfect, indicating that these two indicators present us with different perspectives.The fact that the perceptions of experts and other citizens diverge is at the heart of perception measures: experts and non-experts have different reference points against which they assess whether corruption is a problem. Indeed, in countries where the public finds corruption extremely intolerable, the perception of its implications may be extreme, even if baseline corruption levels are lower than in other countries.Corruption is sometimes hard to tackle precisely because it is common, so people perceive it to be a natural economic transaction: it is easier to act corruptly if many other individuals think it is acceptable to be corrupt.Which institutions do people perceive as most corrupt?The Global Corruption Barometer produced by Transparency International asks individuals across countries whether they perceive specific institutions as corrupt. The chart presents, by institution, the global aggregate figures. The numbers correspond to the percentage of survey respondents who think that "Most" or "All" of each institution is corrupt in their home country.The estimates show that, globally, people perceive domestic police forces and the legislature to be particularly corrupt.Perceived corruption of political partiesThe next visualization digs deeper into corruption perceptions, specifically in the context of politics. It shows the percentage of survey respondents in each country who think political parties are "corrupt or extremely corrupt".As we can see, there is substantial cross-country heterogeneity, and patterns again show differences concerning general corruption perceptions.Where are people more likely to pay bribes to access public services?Bribery is one of the most common forms of corruption. The following visualization shows the share of people who report having paid a bribe to access public services in the 12 months prior to the survey. The data comes from the Global Corruption Barometer, produced by Transparency International, and the public services in question are: education; judiciary; medical and health; police; registry and permit services; utilities; tax revenue and/or customs; and land services.Once again, cross-country heterogeneity stands out. In some countries, a majority of survey respondents report having paid a bribe within the past year. In other countries, only a few percent of the respondents report having paid a bribe in the same time window.While these results show that in some countries the paying of bribes is very rare, we have to consider that these estimates come from ordinary people interacting locally. As we show below, many countries where normal people do not frequently pay bribes, have far-from-perfect international records regarding international private-sector bribery.How does petty corruption affect people with low incomes?For those without money and connections, paying even small bribes to access basic public services such as public health or police can have significant consequences. Petty corruption in the form of bribes often acts as a regressive tax, since the burden typically falls disproportionately on people with low incomes.This visualization, taken from the World Development Report (2011), uses data from Ecuador to estimate the cost of bribes paid relative to income. More specifically, the right panel shows the self-reported cost of bribes paid by households (as a share of household income), while the left panel shows the self-reported cost of bribes paid by firms (as a share of firm revenue). The presented estimates are in percent and come from a 1999 survey of 1,164 enterprises and another of 1,800 households.As we can see from this example, petty corruption seems to act as a regressive tax: poor households tend to pay a larger share of their income on bribes to access public services.Estimates of the cost of bribes relative to income, Ecuador, 1999 – World Development Report (2011)Where are firms more likely to be asked for bribes?Bribes are also requested from and paid by firms in the private sector. The following visualization shows, for a selection of countries, the percentage of firms experiencing at least one bribe payment request during six transactions dealing with utility access, permits, licenses, and taxes. The data comes from the World Bank's Enterprise Surveys.According to this source, a large majority of firms report being asked for bribes in some countries, while in others, it is almost no firm.Which countries are perceived by business executives as more likely to 'export corruption'?The previous visualization provides evidence of the frequency with which firms are requested to pay bribes — the demand side of bribing. Here, we explore the supply side, using data from Transparency International's 'Bribe Payers Survey.'The survey asks senior business executives around the world for their perceptions of the likelihood of companies from countries they have business dealings with engaging in bribery when doing business in the executive’s own country.Based on the answers, Transparency International estimates the average of the scores given by all the respondents who rated each country (on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 means firms always pay bribes in that country, and 10 means they never do). This gives the so-called 'Bribe Payers Index'.3The map shows the results.Evidence from law enforcement and regulationMany firms from high-income countries engage in bribery across the worldThe Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) in the US was passed in 1977 to make the bribery of foreign officials illegal. The visualization from the Mintz Group shows the global distribution of all penalties in US Government FCPA cases since 1977. Darker colors in the map denote larger penalties for activities in the corresponding country. Total penalties are measured in US dollars, so this chart combines the number and magnitude of cases. In Argentina, for example, the dark color is mainly due to one very large case involving Siemens (450 Million USD penalty, in 2008). An interactive version of this map, including details regarding specific penalties, is available from the Mintz Group at http://www.fcpamap.com.These official records show that US firms have paid bribes in 80 countries since 1977—including in many OECD countries.Penalties in U.S. Government FCPA Cases Since 1977 – Mintz Group ©4Diplomats from countries with high corruption perception tend to break traffic rules abroad more oftenCorruption is commonly defined as "the abuse of entrusted power for private gain." Here, we provide evidence of how diplomats in New York City abused their diplomatic status to break traffic rules by parking illegally.UN mission personnel and their families benefit from diplomatic immunity. In New York City, until November 2002, diplomatic immunity implied that UN mission personnel could park illegally and avoid paying the corresponding fines. The visualization maps the average unpaid annual New York City parking violations per diplomat by the diplomat's country of origin from November 1997 to November 2002. The data comes from Fisman and Miguel (2007)5, who in turn obtained information compiled by the New York City Department of Finance.As we can see from the map, this ‘revealed-preference’ measure of corruption among diplomats correlates positively with the survey-based measures of corruption we have already discussed. Diplomats from countries where corruption perception is low (e.g. Denmark) seem to be generally less likely to break parking rules abroad, even in situations in which there are no legal consequences.While the correlation is not perfect (e.g. Colombia has a high corruption perception but zero unpaid parking violations in the data) Fisman and Miguel (2007) show that statistically speaking, the positive correlation between corrupt behavior by diplomats 'abroad,' and corruption perception 'at home,' remains after controlling for factors such as national income in the diplomats’ home country, or the diplomats' salaries. This evidence suggests that cultural norms are one of the factors that affect corrupt behavior.OECD countries are increasingly providing procedures for public officials to report corruptionCorruption is not something that only affects low-income countries—and in fact, many high-income countries have become increasingly aware of this in recent years.The table details a list of OECD countries and whether they have specific procedures for public officials to report misconduct or suspected corruption.Procedures for public officials to report misconduct or suspected corruption (2000 vs 2009) – OECD6As we can see, since 2000 many OECD countries have developed formal mechanisms to allow public officials to expose corruption ('whistle-blowing') more easily. Specifically, the table shows that the share of OECD countries that reported having legal whistle-blowing procedures went up from 44.8% in the year 2000 (13 out of 29 countries in the sample) to 79.3% in 2009 (23 out of 29 countries in the sample). Today, many of these countries supplement legal provisions with internal rules (e.g. minimum requirements for whistle-blowing programs).These recent changes show that legal provisions to fight corruption are relatively new, and high-income countries are still trying to find new policy instruments to deal with corruption.What is the relationship between corruption and development?This visualization shows the cross-country relationship between development (as measured by the United Nations Human Development Index) and corruption (as measured by Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index).As we can see, countries that score higher in the Corruption Perception Index (i.e. countries seen as less corrupt) tend also to have better scores in the Human Development Index.Education and corruptionThe relationship in the visualization above is just a correlation: many factors simultaneously drive corruption and development. Education is an important case in point.The next scatter plot provides evidence of the cross-country relationship between educational attainment and corruption. The horizontal axis measures corruption using Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index, and the vertical axis measures average years of schooling.As we can see, there is again a strong positive relationship: countries where people are more educated tend to have better scores in the Corruption Perception Index.Several academic studies have tried to establish the extent to which this relationship is causal. Glaeser and Saks (2006)7, for example, show that within the US, states that are better educated tend to be less corrupt—notably, they show that this relationship holds even when using historical factors like Congregationalism in 1890 as a proxy for the current levels of schooling. In other words, they find that historical levels of education predict differences in levels of corruption across States several generations later. This is consistent with other studies that support the theory that voters with more education tend to be more willing and able to monitor public employees and to take action when these employees violate the law.What is the relationship between corruption and accountability?One of the most widely accepted mechanisms of controlling corruption is to ensure that those entrusted with power are held responsible for reporting their activities. This is the idea behind so-called 'accountability' measures against corruption.8The visualization shows the cross-country relationship between corruption and accountability. Here, corruption is measured as the share of people who admit having paid bribes in the past 12 months (as per the estimates from the Global Corruption Barometer), and accountability is measured by the Accountability Transparency Index developed by Williams (2015).9 This index is constructed from a number of underlying indicators that provide information about the extent of free media, fiscal transparency, and political constraints.As we can see, people are less likely to pay bribes in countries with stronger institutions supporting accountability.Ferraz and Finan (2011)10 show there is evidence that this relationship is causal. Specifically, they show that electoral accountability causally affects the corruption practices of incumbent politicians in Brazil. There is significantly less corruption in municipalities where mayors can run for reelection, and the positive effect of accountability via reelection is more pronounced among municipalities with less access to information and where the likelihood of judicial punishment is lower.How effective are top-down audits to reduce corruption?A common policy prescription to fight corruption is to increase monitoring and punishments. The logic supporting such policies is straightforward: better monitoring and harsher punishments increase the expected cost of acting corruptly, so people rationally choose not to break the rules.To test the extent to which monitoring and punishments effectively reduce corruption, economists often rely on 'policy experiments,' where they administer these policies to 'treatment groups.' Olken (2007)11 follows this approach, increasing the probability of central government audits from 4 percent to 100 percent (the 'policy treatment') in the context of Indonesian village road projects.The study compares the outcomes for villages that received this intervention with those that did not and finds that audits significantly reduced missing expenditures, as measured by discrepancies between official project costs and independent engineers’ estimates. The following visualization summarizes these results. The height of the bars shows the percentage of expenditures that engineers found missing.As we can see, missing expenditures were much lower in villages where audits were certain.The study provides further evidence of the extent to which officials in charge of road projects responded to private incentives: it finds that (i) audits were most effective when officials faced elections soon, and (ii) village elites shifted to nepotism (the practice of hiring family members), which is a form of corruption that was harder for audits to detect.Effect of audits on missing expenditures in an Indonesian Randomized Control Trial – Figure 2 in J-pal Policy Briefcase (2012)12How important is the link between cultural norms and corruption?A study by Fisman and Miguel (2007)13 shows that diplomats from countries where corruption perception is low (e.g. Denmark) seem to be generally less likely to break parking rules abroad, even in situations in which there are no legal consequences.A world map showing the number of parking violations per diplomat across different UN diplomatic delegations in the New York, US, is available here. You can read more about the data in our section on Evidence from law enforcement and regulation above.Fisman and Miguel (2007) show that the positive correlation between corrupt behavior by diplomats ‘abroad’ and corruption perception ‘at home’ remains after controlling for factors such as national income in the diplomats’ home country or the diplomats’ salaries. This evidence suggests that cultural norms are one of the factors that affect corrupt behavior.Definitions, Measurement and Data QualityDefinitionCorruption involves many different aspects, and it is therefore hard to give a precise and comprehensive definition. However, at the core of most definitions of corruption is the idea that a corrupt act implies the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. Classic examples include bribery, clientelism, and embezzlement. Other, often more subtle – and sometimes even legal – examples of corruption include lobbying and patronage.Measurement limitationsThe unethical and often illegal nature of corruption makes measurement particularly complicated. Corruption data usually comes from direct observation (typically law-enforcement records) or perception surveys (e.g. general-population attitudinal surveys or expert assessments).The main disadvantage of direct observation is that corruption is difficult to observe, as should be clear from its definition. This means that estimates are likely biased and are not generally suitable for cross-country comparisons since differences in levels may stem from differences in law enforcement rather than actual differences in corruption.On the other hand, the main disadvantage of measuring the perception of corruption, rather than corrupt behavior directly, is that estimates are susceptible to how survey respondents — both experts and everyday people — form perceptions in the first place. For instance, differences in perceived corruption between countries may stem from differences in how corruption is defined or morally viewed rather than differences in actual behavior.In any case, despite these limitations, both sources provide valuable information regarding underlying patterns. For example, studies relying on direct observation have been widely used for within-country studies, specifically in contexts where law enforcement is considered to be broadly constant across states or municipalities (see, for example, Glaeser and Saks 2006 14, and Ferraz and Finan 201115).Relationship between sourcesThis visualization shows the relationship between two different survey-based measures of corruption. In the vertical axis, perception is measured using Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index (lower scores reflect higher perceived corruption). In the horizontal axis, corruption is measured using self-reported bribe paying behavior (estimated as the share of survey respondents who reported having paid a bribe to access public services in the last year).As we can see from this plot, there is a clear association between both measures: countries where people often report having to pay bribes also tend to score low in the Corruption Perception Index.The fact that corruption perception does contain information about corrupt behavior has been corroborated by detailed case studies. Olken (2009)16, for example, shows that citizens' perception of corruption in infrastructure projects correlates with objective measures of 'missing expenditures', as measured by independent engineers’ estimates in Indonesia.Interactive charts on corruptionPolitical corruption indexAverage rating of perceived corruption in public sectorBribe payers indexBribery incidence for firmsBribery prevalenceBribery ratesCorruption Perception IndexCorruption Perception Index vs. share of people who have bribedHuman Development Index vs. Corruption Perception IndexIncidence of bribe requests, private sectorPerception of corruption by institutionShare of people who think political parties are very corruptUnpaid parking violations per diplomat in New York City by country of originChart 1 of 13Endnotes'Rotten boroughs' were constituencies that had a tiny electorate, and could thus be used by a wealthy patron to secure influence; at the turn of the 19th century in immigrant US cities, 'machine politics' involved hierarchical political organizations that provided social services and jobs in exchange for votes. For more information, see: Aidt, T. S. (2003). Economic analysis of corruption: a survey. The Economic Journal, 113(491), F632-F652.The list of sources that are considered (subject to availability for each country) are:African Development Bank - Governance RatingsBertelsmann Foundation - Sustainable Governance IndicatorsBertelsmann Foundation - Transformation IndexIMD World Competitiveness YearbookPolitical Risk Services - Country Risk GuideWorld Bank - Country Performance and Institutional AssessmentWorld Economic Forum - Executive Opinion SurveyWorld Justice Project - Rule of Law IndexEconomist Intelligence Unit - Country Risk AssessmentGlobal Insight - Country Risk RatingsPolitical and Economic Risk Consultancy - Asian IntelligenceFreedom House - Nations in TransitMethodological details are available from Transparency InternationalCopyright© 2016 Mintz Group LLC. All Rights Reserved. The information and graphics contained in this map are copyrighted and may not be distributed, modified, reproduced in whole or in part without the prior written permission of Mintz Group LLC.Fisman, R., & Miguel, E. (2007). Corruption, norms, and legal enforcement: Evidence from diplomatic parking tickets. Journal of Political economy, 115(6), 1020-1048.This is Table D3 in OECD Government at a Glance (2009)Glaeser, E. L., & Saks, R. E. (2006). Corruption in America. Journal of public Economics, 90(6), 1053-1072.Transparency International defines accountability as "the concept that individuals, agencies and organisations (public, private and civil society) are held responsible for reporting their activities and executing their powers properly."Williams, A. (2015). A global index of information transparency and accountability. Journal of Comparative Economics, 43(3), 804-824.Ferraz, C., & Finan, F. (2011). Electoral accountability and corruption: Evidence from the audits of local governments. The American Economic Review, 101(4), 1274-1311.Olken, Benjamin A. (2007). "Monitoring Corruption: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia." Journal of Political Economy 115(2): 200-249.This Policy Briefcase was issued in March 2008, and revised in May 2012. The data comes from Olken, Benjamin A. 2007. "Monitoring Corruption: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia." Journal of Political Economy 115(2): 200-249.Fisman, R., & Miguel, E. (2007). Corruption, norms, and legal enforcement: Evidence from diplomatic parking tickets. Journal of Political Economy, 115(6), 1020-1048.Glaeser, E. L., & Saks, R. E. (2006). Corruption in america. Journal of public Economics, 90(6), 1053-1072.Ferraz, C., & Finan, F. (2011). Electoral accountability and corruption: Evidence from the audits of local governments. The American Economic Review, 101(4), 1274-1311.Olken, B. A. (2009). Corruption perceptions vs. corruption reality. Journal of Public Economics, 93(7), 950-964.Cite this workOur articles and data visualizations rely on work from many different people and organizations. When citing this topic page, please also cite the underlying data sources. This topic page can be cited as:Esteban Ortiz-Ospina and Max Roser (2019) - “Corruption” Published online at OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved from: 'https://ourworldindata.org/corruption' [Online Resource]BibTeX citation@article{owid-corruption,

author = {Esteban Ortiz-Ospina and Max Roser},

title = {Corruption},

journal = {Our World in Data},

year = {2019},

note = {https://ourworldindata.org/corruption}

}Reuse this work freelyAll visualizations, data, and code produced by Our World in Data are completely open access under the Creative Commons BY license. You have the permission to use, distribute, and reproduce these in any medium, provided the source and authors are credited.The data produced by third parties and made available by Our World in Data is subject to the license terms from the original third-party authors. We will always indicate the original source of the data in our documentation, so you should always check the license of any such third-party data before use and redistribution.All of our charts can be embedded in any site.Our World in Data is free and accessible for everyone.Help us do this work by making a donation.Donate nowAboutContactFeedbackJobsFundingHow to useDonatePrivacy policyLatest workAll chartsTwitterFacebookInstagramThreadsGitHubRSS FeedLicenses: All visualizations, data, and articles produced by Our World in Data are open access under the Creative Commons BY license. You have permission to use, distribute, and reproduce these in any medium, provided the source and authors are credited. All the software and code that we write is open source and made available via GitHub under the permissive MIT license. All other material, including data produced by third parties and made available by Our World in Data, is subject to the license terms from the original third-party authors.Please consult our full legal disclaimer.Our World In Data is a project of the Global Change Data Lab, a registered charity in England and Wales (Charity Number 118643

2022 Corruption Perceptions Index: Explore the… - Transparency.org

You are using an outdated browser. Most of this website should still work, but after upgrading your browser it will look and perform better.

About

What we do

Countries

Campaigns

Donate

News

Blog

Press

Library

Home

CPI

2022

Corruption Perceptions Index

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

Show the 2022 scores

Download the report 2022

A world urgently in need of action

The 2022 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) shows that most countries are failing to stop corruption.

The CPI ranks 180 countries and territories around the world by their perceived levels of public sector corruption, scoring on a scale of 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean).

The global average remains unchanged for over a decade at just 43 out of 100. More than two-thirds of countries score below 50, while 26 countries have fallen to their lowest scores yet. Despite concerted efforts and hard-won gains by some, 155 countries have made no significant progress against corruption or have declined since 2012.

Conflict, security and trouble at the top

Global peace has been deteriorating for 15 years. Corruption has been both a key cause and result of this.

Corruption undermines governments' ability to protect people and erodes public trust, provoking more and harder to control security threats. On the other hand, conflict creates opportunities for corruption and subverts governments' efforts to stop it.

Even countries with high CPI scores play a role in the threats that corruption poses to global security. For decades, they have welcomed dirty money from abroad, allowing kleptocrats to increase their wealth, power and destructive geopolitical ambitions.

Leaders can fight corruption and promote peace all at once. Governments must open up space to include the public in decision-making – from activists and business owners to marginalised communities and young people. In democratic societies, the people can raise their voices to help root out corruption and demand a safer world for us all.

Daniel Eriksson

Chief Executive Officer, Transparency International

Post this

CPI 2022: Highlights and insights

News •

31 January 2023

Countries failing to address their corruption problems worsen the effects of the climate crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic and growing security threats across the globe.

CPI 2022: Trouble at the top

News •

31 January 2023

While 2022 has seen some progress, advanced economies are still not pulling their weight in the fight against cross-border corruption.

CPI 2022: Corruption as a fundamental threat to peace and security

News •

31 January 2023

Corruption and conflict fuel each other. This underlines the urgent need for transparency and anti-corruption efforts to create a safer world.

What’s happening around the world?

While every country faces different corruption challenges, this year’s index reveals ongoing stagnation around the world.

Countries in the top-scoring region, Western Europe and the European Union, have been at a standstill for over a decade or have declined over the past five years. Undue influence over decision-making, poor enforcement of integrity safeguards and threats to the rule of law continue to undermine governments’ effectiveness.

On the other end of the index, countries with low scores are also unable to make significant progress. In many parts of the Americas, Eastern Europe and Central Asia, and Sub-Saharan Africa, restrictions and attacks on civic space and basic freedoms continue as multiple crises threaten security and stability, democracy and human rights. Similarly, in various Asia Pacific countries, rising authoritarianism dilutes civil society’s function as a watchdog, while many leaders are prioritising economic recovery over anti-corruption efforts. In the Middle East and North Africa, where unequal political and economic power is deeply intertwined with conflict, corruption is undermining democratic processes, causing pervasive civil unrest and fuelling violence.

Check out the latest corruption wins, scandals and predictions for each region of the world.

Jump straight to the full CPI report and other popular materials.

CPI 2022 for the Americas: Fertile ground for criminal networks and human rights abuses

News • 31.01.2023

A lack of bold, decisive action to fight corruption and strengthen public institutions fuels organised criminal activities and other sources of violence.

CPI 2022 for Asia Pacific: Basic freedoms restricted as anti-corruption efforts neglected

News • 31.01.2023

As authoritarianism grows and restrictions on civic space and basic freedoms imposed during the pandemic remain in place, the region stagnates for the fourth year in a row.

CPI 2022 for Eastern Europe & Central Asia: Growing security risks and authoritarianism threaten progress against corruption

News • 31.01.2023

High-level corruption is closely linked to political instability, weakened institutions and – in the most extreme cases – violent conflict.

CPI 2022 for Middle East & North Africa: Corruption fuels ongoing conflict

News • 31.01.2023

As corruption, authoritarianism and insecurity fuel each other, the region is in decline.

CPI 2022 for Sub-Saharan Africa: Corruption compounding multiple crises

News • 31.01.2023

Corruption is damaging crucial enablers of progress – democracy, security and development – across Sub-Saharan Africa.

CPI 2022 for Western Europe & EU: Undue influence and fragmented anti-corruption measures hurt progress

News • 31.01.2023

While once again the top-scoring region in the CPI, anti-corruption efforts have stalled in most countries for more than a decade.

Full 2022 Materials

CPI 2022 Report

CPI 2022 Global Results & Trends

CPI 2022 Methodology

CPI 2022 Maps

Graphics to use and share

Map and index

Global map

Regional maps

Please accept marketing cookies to view this video.

The CPI Explained

The CPI is the most widely used global corruption ranking in the world. But how is it calculated? What kinds of corruption does it cover? And why are certain countries not included? Watch this short explainer video, or dive straight into the most frequently asked questions.

Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

First name *

Last name *

Email address *

View our Privacy Policy.

Your registration is almost complete. Please go to your inbox and confirm your email address in the email we just sent to you

Share our vision

Stay informed

Subscribe to our weekly newsletter to get the latest news and updates from Transparency International

First name *

Last name *

Email address *

View our Privacy Policy.

Your registration is almost complete. Please go to your inbox and confirm your email address in the email we just sent to you

Engage

We're active in over 100 countries. Here's how to contact one of our national chapters

Select a country

Argentina

Armenia

Australia

Austria

Azerbaijan

Bahrain

Bangladesh

Belarus

Belgium

Benin

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Brazil

Bulgaria

Burundi

Cambodia

Cameroon

Canada

Chile

Colombia

Costa Rica

Czech Republic

Côte d’Ivoire

Democratic Republic of the Congo

Denmark

Dominican Republic

Ecuador

El Salvador

Estonia

Fiji

Finland

France

Georgia

Germany

Ghana

Greece

Greenland

Guatemala

Guyana

Honduras

Hungary

Iceland

Indonesia

Ireland

Israel

Italy

Jamaica

Jordan

Kazakhstan

Kenya

Kosovo

Kuwait

Kyrgyzstan

Latvia

Lebanon

Liberia

Lithuania

Madagascar

Malawi

Malaysia

Maldives

Mali

Malta

Mauritius

Mexico

Moldova

Mongolia

Montenegro

Morocco

Mozambique

Nepal

Netherlands

New Zealand

Niger

Nigeria

North Macedonia

Norway

Pakistan

Palestine

Panama

Papua New Guinea

Peru

Portugal

Republic of the Congo

Romania

Russia

Rwanda

Senegal

Serbia

Seychelles

Sierra Leone

Slovakia

Slovenia

Solomon Islands

South Africa

South Korea

Spain

Sri Lanka

Sweden

Switzerland

Taiwan

Togo

Trinidad and Tobago

Tunisia

Turkey

Uganda

Ukraine

United Kingdom

United States

Vanuatu

Venezuela

Zambia

Zimbabwe

Donate

Your support will help us tackle corruption and the corrupt. Take action and donate now to help us end corruption

Donate now

Join the conversation on social media

About

What is corruption?

The organisation

Our story

Our impact

National Chapters

Who We Are

What we do

Corruption Perceptions Index

Global Corruption Barometer

Our priorities

Advocacy

Projects

Advocacy and legal advice centres

Anti-Corruption Helpdesk

Knowledge Hub

International Anti-Corruption Conference

Updates

News

Blog

Press

Library

Corruption

By country

End corruption

Corruptionary A-Z

Report corruption

Career & tender opportunities

Contact

How we operate

How we're funded

How we're accountable

Our people

Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under CC BY-ND 4.0

Bot technology provider: ChatBot

Privacy

Donor Privacy

Cookie Notice

Terms

Impressum

Access Denied

You don't have permission to access "http://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/12/why-fighting-corruption-is-key-to-addressing-the-world-s-most-pressing-problems/" on this server.

Reference #18.354e6168.1710264514.ae73351

Home - Transparency.org

You are using an outdated browser. Most of this website should still work, but after upgrading your browser it will look and perform better.

About

What we do

Countries

Campaigns

Donate

News

Blog

Press

Library

Featured

HOW DOES YOUR COUNTRY MEASURE UP ON THE CORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEX 2023?

180 countries. 180 scores.

Explore the results

We have one vision, a world free of corruption

Our global movement works in over 100 countries to end the injustice of corruption by promoting transparency, accountability and integrity.

What is corruption?

We define corruption as the abuse of entrusted power for private gain.

Research

To end corruption we must first understand it. That’s why we look at what causes corruption and what works against it.

Advocacy

To end corruption, we advocate for power to be held accountable. Everywhere.

Combating Corruption

Skip to Main Navigation

Global Search

Search button

WHO WE ARE

Leadership, organization, and history

WHAT WE DO

Projects, products, and services

WHERE WE WORK

Countries and regions

UNDERSTANDING POVERTY

Global data and statistics, research and publications, and topics in poverty and development

WORK WITH US

Jobs, procurement, training, and events

News

The World Bank’s digital platform for live-streaming

WHO WE ARE

With 189 member countries, staff from more than 170 countries, and offices in over 130 locations, the World Bank Group is a unique global partnership: five institutions working for sustainable solutions that reduce poverty and build shared prosperity in developing countries.

About the World Bank

Overview

Organization

Partners

History