
In producing the index, the scores of countries/territories in source surveys and assessments derived from the specific corruption-related questions, are combined to calculate a single score for each country.
Possible attempts to do so such as by comparing bribes reported, the number of prosecutions brought or court cases directly linked to corruption cannot be taken as definitive indicators of corruption levels. Rather they show how effective prosecutors, the courts or the media are in investigating and exposing corruption.
One reliable method of compiling comparable country data is to capture perceptions of those in a position to offer expert assessments of public sector corruption in a given country.
The CPI is based on the following sources, some of them are not freely accessible. (G) indicates that the source was used for the compilation of Georgia’s ranking:
Individual data sources can be used to identify whether compared to the previous year’s CPI score there has been a change in perceived levels of corruption in a particular country. TI has used this approach in 2010 to assess country progress and identify what can be considered as changes in perceptions of corruption, using the two criteria that:
(a) a change of at least 0.3 points in the CPI score is present, and;
(b) the direction of this change is confirmed by more than half of the data sources evaluating the country.
Based on these criteria, the following countries showed an improvement from 2009 to 2010: Bhutan, Chile, Ecuador, FYR Macedonia, the Gambia, Haiti, Jamaica, Kuwait, and Qatar. The following countries showed deterioration from 2009 to 2010: the Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Madagascar, Niger and the United States.
Moreover, the CPI is mostly an assessment of perception of administrative and political corruption. It is not a verdict on the levels of corruption of entire nations or societies or of their international policies and activities. Citizens of those countries/territories that score at the lower end of the CPI have shown the same concern about and condemnation of corruption as the public in countries that perform strongly. For more information, see TI’s Global Corruption Barometer.
In addition to the Corruption Perceptions Index, TI’s portfolio of global research includes:
For a full list of reports and more information on the National Integrity System model, please see:http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/nis [12].
Links
[1] http://www.adb.org/Documents/Report s/Country -Performance-Assessment - Exercise/default.asp
[2] http://www.afdb.org/pls/portal/url/ITEM/500 8432D529957FAE040C00A0C3D3A86
[3] http://www.bertelsmann-transformation-index.de/en/bti/
[4] http://go.worldbank.org/S2THWI1X60
[5] http://www.freedomhouse.hu/index.php ?opt ion=com_content&task=view&id=196
[6] http://www.weforum.org/documents/GCR09/index.html
[7] http://gcr.weforum.org/gcr2010/
[8] http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/gcb
[9] http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/bpi
[10] http://www.transparency.org/publications/gcr
[11] http://transparency.ge/en/project/national-integrity-system-nis-assessment
[12] http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/nis