IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pfq/journl/v64y2019i3p319-336.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Scientific Reliability of International Corruption Rankings

Author

Listed:
  • Németh, Erzsébet
  • Vargha, Bálint Tamás
  • Pályi, Katalin Ágnes

Abstract

Owing to its hiding nature, corruption is difficult to measure. However, measurements lacking sufficient methodological grounds and the rankings so created pose just as much of economic risk as the corruption itself. The objective of the present study is to examine the methodological compliance of the calculation of the most well-known corruption perceptions index after having reviewed the specific literature and by using the method of document analysis. The most important criticisms formed against corruption measures in the international specific literature also highlight that in the most cases the independence of the organizations issuing the corruption measures, the transparency of data sources used and the applied methodology are not ensured. It follows from all of the above, and due to improper compilation of the respondent group and the inadequacies of the summary of the data sources - in the absence of methodological substantiation - the results are not suitable for comparing the countries, to draw scientific conclusions, and they do not even make a diagnosis related to the phenomenon examined which could serves as an efficient tool for making the appropriate policy decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Németh, Erzsébet & Vargha, Bálint Tamás & Pályi, Katalin Ágnes, 2019. "The Scientific Reliability of International Corruption Rankings," Public Finance Quarterly, Corvinus University of Budapest, vol. 64(3), pages 319-336.
  • Handle: RePEc:pfq:journl:v:64:y:2019:i:3:p:319-336
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.35551/PFQ_2019_3_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://unipub.lib.uni-corvinus.hu/8683/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/https://doi.org/10.35551/PFQ_2019_3_1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tina Søreide, 2006. "Is it wrong to rank? A critical assessment of corruption indices," CMI Working Papers WP 2006: 1, CMI (Chr. Michelsen Institute), Bergen, Norway.
    2. Dilyan Donchev & Gergely Ujhelyi, 2014. "What Do Corruption Indices Measure?," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 309-331, July.
    3. Benjamin A. Olken, 2007. "Monitoring Corruption: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(2), pages 200-249.
    4. Jacqueline Brown & William Orme & Thomas Roca, 2010. "Fear and Loathing of the Corruption Perception Index: Does Transparency International Penalize Press Freedom?," Documents de travail 158, Groupe d'Economie du Développement de l'Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ekşi, Ibrahim Halil & Doğan, Berna, 2020. "Corruption and Financial Development — Evidence from Eastern Europe and Central Asia Countries," Public Finance Quarterly, Corvinus University of Budapest, vol. 65(2), pages 196-209.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yan Leung Cheung & P. Raghavendra Rau & Aris Stouraitis, 2012. "How much do firms pay as bribes and what benefits do they get? Evidence from corruption cases worldwide," NBER Working Papers 17981, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Jamie Bologna, 2017. "Contagious corruption, informal employment, and income: evidence from Brazilian municipalities," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 58(1), pages 67-118, January.
    3. Andrew Delios & Edmund J. Malesky & Shu Yu & Griffin Riddler, 2024. "Methodological errors in corruption research: Recommendations for future research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 55(2), pages 235-251, March.
    4. Gutmann, Jerg & Padovano, Fabio & Voigt, Stefan, 2020. "Perception vs. experience: Explaining differences in corruption measures using microdata," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    5. Razafindrakoto, Mireille & Roubaud, François, 2010. "Are International Databases on Corruption Reliable? A Comparison of Expert Opinion Surveys and Household Surveys in Sub-Saharan Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1057-1069, August.
    6. Jamie Bologna, 2014. "The Effect of Informal Employment and Corruption on Income Levels in Brazil," Working Papers 14-26, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    7. Yan-Leung Cheung & P. Raghavendra Rau & Aris Stouraitis, 2021. "What Determines the Return to Bribery? Evidence from Corruption Cases Worldwide," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(10), pages 6235-6265, October.
    8. Carmelo León & Jorge Araña & Javier León, 2013. "Correcting for Scale Perception Bias in Measuring Corruption: an Application to Chile and Spain," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 114(3), pages 977-995, December.
    9. Michael Mbate, 2018. "Who bears the burden of bribery? Evidence from public service delivery in Kenya," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 36(S1), pages 321-340, March.
    10. Bologna, Jamie, 2016. "The effect of informal employment and corruption on income levels in Brazil," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 657-695.
    11. Lambsdorff Johann Graf & Schulze Günther G., 2015. "Guest Editorial: Special Issue on Corruption at the Grassroots-level: What Can We Know About Corruption?," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 235(2), pages 100-114, April.
    12. Hai Zhong, 2018. "Measuring Corruption in China: An Expenditure‐based Approach Using Household Survey Data," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 85(338), pages 383-405, April.
    13. Kaplan, David S. & Pathania, Vikram, 2010. "What influences firms' perceptions?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 419-431, December.
    14. Francesco Decarolis & Raymond Fisman & Paolo Pinotti & Silvia Vannutelli, 2019. "Rules, Discretion, and Corruption in Procurement: Evidence from Italian Government Contracting," Boston University - Department of Economics - The Institute for Economic Development Working Papers Series dp-344, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    15. World Bank, 2012. "Cameroon - Governance and Management in the Education Sector," World Bank Publications - Reports 12262, The World Bank Group.
    16. Pritchett, Lant, 2023. "Rely (only) on the rigorous evidence” is bad advice," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 119818, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Yayan Heryana & Euis Mulyati Sukarya, 2022. "The influence of Islamic Law on corruption perceptions and its impact on public trust in the City of Bandung, Indonesia," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 11(1), pages 372-378, January.
    18. Fernando Castelló-Sirvent & Pablo Pinazo-Dallenbach, 2021. "Corruption Shock in Mexico: fsQCA Analysis of Entrepreneurial Intention in University Students," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(14), pages 1-31, July.
    19. Tom Kirchmaier & Stephen Machin & Matteo Sandi & Robert Witt, 2020. "Prices, Policing and Policy: The Dynamics of Crime Booms and Busts," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 1040-1077.
    20. Galletta, Sergio, 2017. "Law enforcement, municipal budgets and spillover effects: Evidence from a quasi-experiment in Italy," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 90-105.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    corruption; perception; ranking; measurement; methodology; sample;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C18 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Methodolical Issues: General
    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pfq:journl:v:64:y:2019:i:3:p:319-336. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Adam Hoffmann (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bkeeehu.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.