Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Measuring corruption: perception surveys or victimization surveys? Towards a better comprehension of populations’ perception mechanisms: press freedom, confidence and gossip

Contents:

Author Info

  • Thomas Roca

    (GED, Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV)

Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    While methodologies and survey techniques recorded progress over the years, corruption measurement remains a many-headed monster. Since 2003 and the first publication of Transparency International’s Global Corruption Barometer, researchers have access to population’s feeling about the corruption scourge across institutions. Thereby, wider room emerged for populations’ perceptions in the field of corruption quantification. In this paper, we analyze the gulf separating perceived corruption from experienced bribe situations using global household surveys in a Panel dataset. We show that the gap between these two types of data can be wide and unevenly distributed across countries. Introducing further objective and subjective data we try to puzzle out perception mechanisms. Bien que les techniques d’enquête et les méthodologies se soient améliorées au fil des années, la mesure corruption demeure problématique. Depuis 2003 et la première publication du Baromètre Mondial de la Corruption par Transparency International, les chercheurs ont dorénavant accès aux perceptions des populations pour évaluer l’étendue de la corruption au sein de différentes administrations. Dans cet article, nous analysons l’écart entre les perceptions de la corruption et l’expérience concrète de celle-ci en utilisant des données de panel issues d’enquêtes ménages menées à une échelle mondiale. Nous comparons ainsi, au sein même des populations, les écarts entre expériences et perceptions de la corruption, afin d’isoler au mieux les mécanismes à l’oeuvre dans la construction des perceptions. Nous montrons alors que les écarts entre ces deux types de donnée peuvent être importants et inégalement distribués.(Full text in english)

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://ged.u-bordeaux4.fr/ceddt167.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by Groupe d'Economie du Développement de l'Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV in its series Documents de travail with number 167.

    as in new window
    Length: 26 pages
    Date of creation: Jun 2011
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:mon:ceddtr:167

    Contact details of provider:

    Related research

    Keywords:

    Find related papers by JEL classification:

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Naci Mocan, 2004. "What Determines Corruption? International Evidence from Micro Data," NBER Working Papers 10460, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Reinikka, Ritva & Svensson, Jakob, 2006. "Using Micro-Surveys to Measure and Explain Corruption," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 359-370, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mon:ceddtr:167. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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