IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ifwedp/5566.html

How Much Do Perceptions of Corruption Really Tell Us?

Author

Listed:
  • Weber Abramo, Claudio

Abstract

Regressions and tests performed on data from Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2004 survey show that personal or household experience of bribery is not a good predictor of perceptions held about corruption among the general population. In contrast, perceptions about the effects of corruption correlate consistently among themselves. However, no consistent relationship between opinions about general effects and the assessments of the extent with which corruption affects the institutions where presumably corruption is materialized is found. Countries are sharply divided between those above and below the US$ 10,000 GDP per capita line in the relationships between variables concerning corruption. Among richer countries, opinions about institutions explain very well opinions concerning certain effects of corruption, while among poorer countries the explanatory power of institutions for the effects of corruption falls. Furthermore, tests for dependence applied between the variables in the sets of respondents for each of 60 countries also show that, for most of them, it is likely that experience does not explain perceptions. On the other hand, opinions tend to closely follow the trend of other opinions. Additionally, it is found that in the GCB opinions about general effects of corruption are strongly correlated with opinions about other issues, as much as to justify the hypothesis that it would suffice to measure the average opinion of the general public about human rights, violence etc. to accurately infer what would be the average opinion about least petty and grand corruption. The findings reported here challenge the value of perceptions of corruption as indications of the actual incidence of the phenomenon.

Suggested Citation

  • Weber Abramo, Claudio, 2007. "How Much Do Perceptions of Corruption Really Tell Us?," Economics Discussion Papers 2007-19, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ifwedp:5566
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.economics-ejournal.org/economics/discussionpapers/2007-19
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/17942/1/dp2007-19.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Roca, 2011. "Measuring corruption: perception surveys or victimization surveys?," Working Papers hal-00625179, HAL.
    2. Zakharov, Nikita, 2019. "Does corruption hinder investment? Evidence from Russian regions," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 39-61.
    3. 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.
    4. Rajul Awasthi & Nihal Bayraktar, 2015. "Can tax simplification help lower tax corruption?," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 5(2), pages 297-330, December.
    5. Arruñada, Benito, 2020. "The impact of experience on how we perceive the rule of law," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 251-269, June.
    6. Thomas Roca, 2011. "Measuring corruption: perception surveys or victimization surveys? Towards a better comprehension of populations’ perception mechanisms: press freedom, confidence and gossip," Documents de travail 167, Groupe d'Economie du Développement de l'Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV.
    7. Heyman Fredrik & Tingvall Patrik Gustavsson, 2015. "The Dynamics of Offshoring and Institutions," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 15(4), pages 1975-2016, October.
    8. Germana Corrado & Luisa Corrado & Giuseppe De Michele & Francesco Salustri, 2017. "Are Perceptions of Corruption Matching Reality? Theory and Evidence from Microdata," CEIS Research Paper 420, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 14 Dec 2017.
    9. Singh, Sunny & Bhattacharya, Kaushik, 2015. "Does easy availability of cash effect corruption? Evidence from panel of countries," MPRA Paper 65934, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. 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).
    11. Axel Dreher & Christos Kotsogiannis & Steve McCorriston, 2011. "The Impact of Institutions on the Shadow Economy and Corruption: A Latent Variables Approach," Chapters, in: Friedrich Schneider (ed.), Handbook on the Shadow Economy, chapter 13, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Tingvall, Patrik, 2011. "Dynamic Effects of Corruption on Offshoring," Ratio Working Papers 182, The Ratio Institute.
    13. 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.
    14. Christian Bjørnskov, 2011. "Combating Corruption: On the Interplay between Institutional Quality and Social Trust," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(1), pages 135-159.
    15. Staffan Andersson & Paul M. Heywood, 2009. "The Politics of Perception: Use and Abuse of Transparency International's Approach to Measuring Corruption," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(4), pages 746-767, December.
    16. Thomas Herzfeld & Iryna Kulyk & Axel Wolz, 2018. "Is Agribusiness Different? Firm-Level Evidence of Perceived Corruption in Post-Soviet Countries," Eastern European Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(6), pages 504-521, November.
    17. Jamie Bologna, 2014. "Is the Internet an effective mechanism for reducing corruption experience? Evidence from a cross-section of countries," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(10), pages 687-691, July.
    18. José-Miguel Bello y Villarino, 2021. "Measuring Corruption: A Critical Analysis of the Existing Datasets and Their Suitability for Diachronic Transnational Research," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 157(2), pages 709-747, September.
    19. Benno Torgler & Marco Piatti, 2013. "Extraordinary Wealth, Globalization, And Corruption," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 59(2), pages 341-359, June.
    20. 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.
    21. Singh, Sunny Kumar & Bhattacharya, Kaushik, 2017. "Does easy availability of cash affect corruption? Evidence from a panel of countries," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 236-247.
    22. Nicholas Charron & Lewis Dijkstra & Victor Lapuente, 2015. "Erratum to: Mapping the Regional Divide in Europe: A Measure for Assessing Quality of Government in 206 European Regions," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 124(3), pages 1059-1059, December.
    23. Gamberger, Dragan & Smuc, Tomislav, 2013. "Good governance problems and recent financial crises in some EU countries," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 7, pages 1-20.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law
    • H11 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Structure and Scope of Government
    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:ifwedp:5566. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iwkiede.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.