Perception of Corruption in 36 Major Chinese Cities: Based on Survey of 1,642 Experts
Perception surveys remain an important tool to measure corruption. However, most existing perception surveys only analyze corruption at the national or international level, and do not provide information about corruption at local levels. But it is corruption in local areas that really influences the everyday life of ordinary people. In order to redress this lacuna, the authors developed an expert survey to measure corruption in 36 major Chinese cities, using a questionnaire that included 11 key questions about different aspects of urban corruption. This study, as the first of its kind in China, has demonstrated the great regional disparity in terms of corruption perception in the country. It has also pointed to the weaknesses of China’s anti-corruption system. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012
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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 109 (2012)
Issue (Month): 2 (November)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springer.com|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11135|
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.:
- Charles Oman & Christiane Arndt, 2006. "Governance Indicators for Development," OECD Development Centre Policy Insights 33, OECD Publishing.
- Sendhil Mullainathan & Marianne Bertrand, 2001. "Do People Mean What They Say? Implications for Subjective Survey Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 67-72, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:109:y:2012:i:2:p:211-221. 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: (Sonal Shukla)or (Rebekah McClure)
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.