Corruption 2011
Transparency International's 2011 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) makes for stark reading. Analysed alongside CPIs for the last five years, what it shows is next to no improvement in the perceptions of corruption across much of the developing world.
The CPI ranks countries according to their perceived levels of public sector corruption. The 2011 index draws on different assessments and business opinion surveys carried out by independent and reputable institutions. Countries are ranked from 1 (highest level of corruption) to 10 (lowest level of corruption). Any figure above 7 is very good and, in reality, any figure above 6 indicates a country has little problem with corruption.
Unsurprisingly, the developed world comes out best. New Zealand tops the rankings (9.5), with other English-speaking countries Australia (8.8), Canada (8.7) and the UK (7.8) all ranked highly (Britain's relatively lower rank has been put down to the infiltration of organised crime in immigration and border security). The Nordic countries are consistently high performers, with Finland (9.4), Denmark (9.4), Sweden (9.3), Norway (9.0) and Iceland (8.3) all doing well. The United States registered a respectable 7.1, a figure it has hovered around for five years. Singapore (9.2) and Hong Kong (8.4) remained the leading non-Western countries.
The poll indicates a strong link between economic development and low levels of corruption. It is no accident that Qatar (7.2), Chile (7.2), the UAE (6.8) and Botswana (6.1) all did well. All four have been star economic performers over the last couple of decades.
The developing world indicates severe cause for concern. South Asia remains one of the most corrupt regions on earth. India ranked at 3.1 in 2011, a fall of four points from 3.5 in 2006. This now places it below Sri Lanka in the region, a country which has moved fractionally up from 3.2 in 2006 to 3.3 in 2011. Bangladesh remains severely corrupt by world standards, with a ranking of 2.7. This is, however, a considerable improvement from the 2.0 ranking it held in 2006.
Pakistan is now the most corrupt country in the region at 2.5, albeit an improvement from 2.4 in 2006 (having dropped to 2.3 in 2010).
Of the other emerging markets, Brazil was ranked at 3.7 in 2011, a position now held for three years. That said, it is only a slight improvement from the 3.5 ranking it received in 2006. China ranked at 3.6, a position it has hovered around for the last five years. Russia ranked at 2.4 €" poor for a country at its level of development and up 3 points from 2010 €" but only up 1 point from five years ago.
In Sub-Saharan Africa, there is little cause for cheer. Nigeria ranked at 2.4 for the second year running, a drop of 1 point from 2009 and 3 points from 2008, although 2 points up from five years ago. On the other side of the continent Kenya struggled with a derisory 2.2, only 1 point up from 2006. More positively, Ghana ranked at 3.9, up 2 points from 2006 but down 2 points from 2010. Sierra Leone registered a tremendous improvement. The former failed state now ranks at 2.5, having ranked at 2.1 in 2006.
The world's poorest countries rank the lowest. Congo ranked at 2.0, Sudan at 1.6, Afghanistan at 1.5 and Somalia finished last at 1.0. In Central Asia, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan both ranked at 1.6, with Tajikistan at 2.3 and Kyrgyzstan at 2.1.
Ease of doing business and extent of economic freedom appear to correlate strongly with low levels of corruption. The English-speaking world, Scandinavia, Singapore and Hong Kong all ranked well for both. New Zealand €" which ranked 1st in the CPI 2011 €" ranked third for ease of doing business that same year. Singapore and Hong Kong ranked 5 and 12 on the CPI 2011, while ranking at 1 and 2 for ease of doing business respectively. Other free economies include the US (4th), Denmark (5th), Norway (6th) and the UK (7th). In the 2012 Index of Economic Freedom, Hong Kong ranked 1st, with Singapore 2nd, Australia 3rd and New Zealand 4th.
The 2011 CPI makes depressing reading for those who hoped for improvements in the developing world. Perception is not an exact science and must always be treated as guidance rather than gospel. Nevertheless over five years, only those developing countries which have cut bureaucracy and made business more efficient have seen real success in curbing corruption.
The CPI ranks countries according to their perceived levels of public sector corruption. The 2011 index draws on different assessments and business opinion surveys carried out by independent and reputable institutions. Countries are ranked from 1 (highest level of corruption) to 10 (lowest level of corruption). Any figure above 7 is very good and, in reality, any figure above 6 indicates a country has little problem with corruption.
Unsurprisingly, the developed world comes out best. New Zealand tops the rankings (9.5), with other English-speaking countries Australia (8.8), Canada (8.7) and the UK (7.8) all ranked highly (Britain's relatively lower rank has been put down to the infiltration of organised crime in immigration and border security). The Nordic countries are consistently high performers, with Finland (9.4), Denmark (9.4), Sweden (9.3), Norway (9.0) and Iceland (8.3) all doing well. The United States registered a respectable 7.1, a figure it has hovered around for five years. Singapore (9.2) and Hong Kong (8.4) remained the leading non-Western countries.
The poll indicates a strong link between economic development and low levels of corruption. It is no accident that Qatar (7.2), Chile (7.2), the UAE (6.8) and Botswana (6.1) all did well. All four have been star economic performers over the last couple of decades.
The developing world indicates severe cause for concern. South Asia remains one of the most corrupt regions on earth. India ranked at 3.1 in 2011, a fall of four points from 3.5 in 2006. This now places it below Sri Lanka in the region, a country which has moved fractionally up from 3.2 in 2006 to 3.3 in 2011. Bangladesh remains severely corrupt by world standards, with a ranking of 2.7. This is, however, a considerable improvement from the 2.0 ranking it held in 2006.
Pakistan is now the most corrupt country in the region at 2.5, albeit an improvement from 2.4 in 2006 (having dropped to 2.3 in 2010).
Of the other emerging markets, Brazil was ranked at 3.7 in 2011, a position now held for three years. That said, it is only a slight improvement from the 3.5 ranking it received in 2006. China ranked at 3.6, a position it has hovered around for the last five years. Russia ranked at 2.4 €" poor for a country at its level of development and up 3 points from 2010 €" but only up 1 point from five years ago.
In Sub-Saharan Africa, there is little cause for cheer. Nigeria ranked at 2.4 for the second year running, a drop of 1 point from 2009 and 3 points from 2008, although 2 points up from five years ago. On the other side of the continent Kenya struggled with a derisory 2.2, only 1 point up from 2006. More positively, Ghana ranked at 3.9, up 2 points from 2006 but down 2 points from 2010. Sierra Leone registered a tremendous improvement. The former failed state now ranks at 2.5, having ranked at 2.1 in 2006.
The world's poorest countries rank the lowest. Congo ranked at 2.0, Sudan at 1.6, Afghanistan at 1.5 and Somalia finished last at 1.0. In Central Asia, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan both ranked at 1.6, with Tajikistan at 2.3 and Kyrgyzstan at 2.1.
Ease of doing business and extent of economic freedom appear to correlate strongly with low levels of corruption. The English-speaking world, Scandinavia, Singapore and Hong Kong all ranked well for both. New Zealand €" which ranked 1st in the CPI 2011 €" ranked third for ease of doing business that same year. Singapore and Hong Kong ranked 5 and 12 on the CPI 2011, while ranking at 1 and 2 for ease of doing business respectively. Other free economies include the US (4th), Denmark (5th), Norway (6th) and the UK (7th). In the 2012 Index of Economic Freedom, Hong Kong ranked 1st, with Singapore 2nd, Australia 3rd and New Zealand 4th.
The 2011 CPI makes depressing reading for those who hoped for improvements in the developing world. Perception is not an exact science and must always be treated as guidance rather than gospel. Nevertheless over five years, only those developing countries which have cut bureaucracy and made business more efficient have seen real success in curbing corruption.
