Data in measuring corruption and governance at country level
Well aware of the challenges of developing indicators for measuring corruption and governance, national statistical offices need to take the lead in developing necessary indicators. Any survey is guided by its objectives. The common specific direct objectives for this kind of survey can be categorized under three main themes namely; measurement, reduction and preventive. To respond to these objectives, the following models of data source considerations are suggested;
Survey data collection approach: perception surveys have been used over time in developing global indices and should be maintained and customized even at country level. These surveys tend to estimate the probability or the likelihood of occurrence, but not the occurrence of corruption itself. They are more qualitative in nature, but easily adaptable quantitatively, hence the derivation of indices such as the CPI (corruption perception index) and WGI (world governance index). This type of data attempts to respond to the measurement objective mentioned. But should the fight against corruption only be measured? What then is the relevance of these indices in the fight against corruption and bad governance?
Administrative data collection and institutionalization approach: these are majorly secondary data sources including reports. They are indicative of the actual values and incidences of corruption and either bad or good governance practices. They are based on the precinct of administrative data which is known to be flawed in the most developing countries, but if strengthened is best method of establishing the actuality of corruption and also its magnitude. However, this approach like the one mentioned before, just helps us to measure the extent and subsequently suggest measures to reduce the tendency, but will not prevent the corruption and bad acts of governance. In the medical statistical terms this is an autopsy!
Surveillance data collection approach: these are primarily instantaneous and can be preventive. Corruption and bad governance tend to follow a known procedure which takes time to complete. Therefore, if intervened along their way, it is possible to prevent the occurrence of these societal evil practices! In order to achieve this strong objective of prevention, there is need to strengthen information and communication in the following; anti-corruption organizations, watchdogs and also empowering national systems.
You are welcome to comment…
Ronald Wesonga is a Statistician and a Specialist in Statistical Computing. Over the last decade, he has developed vast experience in data management...
June 19th, 2010 at 11:26 am
Great, I never knew this, thanks.
June 21st, 2010 at 5:54 am
Thank you Ronald, congratulation for this…I am sure it will contribute in promoting the work in this field
thanks
June 21st, 2010 at 11:48 am
Hello,
Thanks for sharing this important information. it will assist practitioners to contribute effectively in the area of governance and corruption
June 24th, 2010 at 8:13 am
Mr. Wesonga, I enjoyed reading the article. To complete your thoughts and cycle of combating corruption it should be argued that once the statisticians have given us the data on the type/nature, trends, incidences etc of corruption it is now the turn of policy makers and administrators to come up with policies, laws, mechanisms that will effectively prevent corruption from taking place. Supplemnetary work is needed in the area of work-process re-engineering i.e. identify areas in the work-process where there is potential for corruption to take place and put in preventive mechanisms!