Editing Political corruption (section)

==Measuring corruption==
Measuring corruption accurately is difficult if not impossible due to the illicit nature of the transaction and imprecise definitions of corruption.<ref name="commons.globalintegrity.org">{{cite web |url=http://commons.globalintegrity.org/2008/09/users-guide-to-measuring-corruption.html |title=A Users' Guide to Measuring Corruption |publisher=[[Global Integrity]] |date=September 5, 2008 |access-date=2010-12-11 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110131012755/http://commons.globalintegrity.org/2008/09/users-guide-to-measuring-corruption.html |archive-date=January 31, 2011 }}</ref> Few reliable measures of the magnitude of corruption exists and among those, there is a high level of heterogeneity. One of the most common ways to estimate corruption is through perception surveys. They have the advantage of good coverage, however, they do not measure corruption precisely.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last1=Olken|first1=Benjamin A.|last2=Pande|first2=Rohini|title=Corruption in Developing Countries|url=http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/1721.1/73081/1/Olken_Corruption%20in.pdf|journal=Annual Review of Economics|volume=4|pages=479–509|doi=10.1146/annurev-economics-080511-110917|year=2012|hdl=1721.1/73081|s2cid=16399354}}</ref> While "corruption" indices first appeared in 1995 with the [[Corruption Perceptions Index]] CPI, all of these metrics address different proxies for corruption, such as public perceptions of the extent of the problem.<ref name="Galtung, Fredrik 2006">Galtung, Fredrik (2006). "Measuring the Immeasurable: Boundaries and Functions of (Macro) Corruption Indices," in Measuring Corruption, Charles Sampford, Arthur Shacklock, Carmel Connors, and Fredrik Galtung, Eds. (Ashgate): 101–130.</ref> However, over time the refinement of methods and validation checks against objective indicators has meant that, while not perfect, many of these indicators are getting better at consistently and validly measuring the scale of corruption.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/113281515516828746/pdf/WPS8299.pdf |title= Can We Measure the Power of the Grabbing Hand? A Comparative Analysis of Different Indicators of Corruption|last=Hamilton|first= Alexander|date=2017|website=World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series}}</ref>

[[Transparency International]], an anti-corruption [[Non-governmental organization|NGO]], pioneered this field with the CPI, first released in 1995. This work is often credited with breaking a taboo and forcing the issue of corruption into high-level development policy discourse. Transparency International currently publishes three measures, updated annually: a CPI (based on aggregating third-party polling of public perceptions of how corrupt different countries are); a Global Corruption Barometer (based on a survey of general public attitudes toward and experience of corruption); and a [[Bribe Payers Index]], looking at the willingness of foreign firms to pay bribes. The Corruption Perceptions Index is the best known of these metrics, though it has drawn much criticism<ref name="Galtung, Fredrik 2006"/><ref>{{cite book |last=Sik |first=Endre |year=2002 |chapter=The Bad, the Worse and the Worst: Guesstimating the Level of Corruption |title=Political Corruption in Transition: A Skeptic's Handbook |editor-first=Stephen |editor-last=Kotkin |editor2-first=Andras |editor2-last=Sajo |location=Budapest |publisher=Central European University Press |pages=91–113 |isbn=978-963-9241-46-6 }}</ref><ref>Arndt, Christiane and Charles Oman (2006). Uses and Abuses of Governance Indicators (Paris: OECD Development Centre).</ref> and may be declining in influence.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=Transparency%20International |title=Media citing Transparency International |work=[[Google Trends]] |access-date=2009-12-05 |archive-date=2017-10-19 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171019142657/https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=Transparency%20International |url-status=dead }}</ref> In 2013 [[Transparency International]] published a report on the "Government Defence Anti-corruption Index". This index evaluates the risk of corruption in countries' military sector.<ref>{{cite web |title=Transparency is feasible |author=Mark Pyman |publisher=dandc.eu |date=March 2013 |url=http://www.dandc.eu/en/article/transparency-international-assesses-82-governments-defence-related-corruption-risks-first}}</ref>

The World Bank collects a range of data on corruption,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/governance/data/ |title=WBI Governance & Anti-Corruption – Data |publisher=Worldbank.org |access-date=2012-12-01}}</ref> including survey responses from over 100,000 firms worldwide<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.enterprisesurveys.org/Data/ExploreTopics/corruption |title=Corruption – World Bank Survey of Business Managers |publisher=Enterprisesurveys.org |access-date=2012-12-01}}</ref> and a set of indicators of governance and institutional quality.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://go.worldbank.org/IU54LJVHT0 |archive-url=http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20120110015159/http://go.worldbank.org/IU54LJVHT0 |url-status=dead |archive-date=2012-01-10 |title=Public Sector Governance – Indicators of Governance & Institutional Quality |publisher=Go.worldbank.org |date=2009-12-30 |access-date=2012-12-01 }}</ref> Moreover, one of the six dimensions of governance measured by the [[Worldwide Governance Indicators]] is Control of Corruption, which is defined as "the extent to which power is exercised for private gain, including both petty and grand forms of corruption, as well as 'capture' of the state by [[elite]]s and private interests."<ref>{{cite web |title=A Decade of Measuring the Quality of Governance |year=2007 |publisher=The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, The World Bank |page=3 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080527211855/http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi2007/pdf/booklet_decade_of_measuring_governance.pdf |archive-date=2008-05-27|url=http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi2007/pdf/booklet_decade_of_measuring_governance.pdf }}</ref> While the definition itself is fairly precise, the data aggregated into the Worldwide Governance Indicators is based on any available polling: questions range from "is corruption a serious problem?" to measures of public access to information, and not consistent across countries. Despite these weaknesses, the global coverage of these datasets has led to their widespread adoption, most notably by the [[Millennium Challenge Corporation]].<ref name="commons.globalintegrity.org"/>

A number of parties have collected survey data, from the public and from experts, to try to gauge the level of corruption and bribery, as well as its impact on political and economic outcomes.<ref name="bath.ac.uk"/><ref name="Hamilton, A 2014"/>
A second wave of corruption metrics has been created by [[Global Integrity]], the International Budget Partnership,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.internationalbudget.org|title=Home - International Budget Partnership|website=International Budget Partnership}}</ref> and many lesser known local groups. These metrics include the Global Integrity Index,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://report.globalintegrity.org/ |title=The Global Integrity Report &#124; Global Integrity |publisher=Report.globalintegrity.org |access-date=2012-06-07 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080308204055/http://report.globalintegrity.org/ |archive-date=2008-03-08 }}</ref> first published in 2004. These second wave projects aim to create policy change by identifying resources more effectively and creating checklists toward incremental reform. Global Integrity and the International Budget Partnership<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.internationalbudget.org/ |title=International Budget Partnership |publisher=Internationalbudget.org |date=2012-05-28 |access-date=2012-06-07}}</ref> each dispense with public surveys and instead uses in-country experts to evaluate "the opposite of corruption" – which Global Integrity defines as the public policies that prevent, discourage, or expose corruption.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://report.globalintegrity.org/methodology/whitepaper.cfm |title=The Global Integrity Report: 2009 Methodology White Paper |publisher=[[Global Integrity]] |year=2009 |access-date=2010-12-11 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110307194427/http://report.globalintegrity.org/methodology/whitepaper.cfm |archive-date=2011-03-07 }}</ref> These approaches complement the first wave, awareness-raising tools by giving governments facing public outcry a checklist which measures concrete steps toward improved governance.<ref name="commons.globalintegrity.org"/>

Typical second wave corruption metrics do not offer the worldwide coverage found in first wave projects and instead focus on localizing information gathered to specific problems and creating deep, "unpackable"{{clarify|date=December 2014}} content that matches quantitative and qualitative data. Alternative approaches, such as the British aid agency's Drivers of Change research, skips numbers and promotes understanding corruption via political economy analysis of who controls power in a given society.<ref name="commons.globalintegrity.org" /> Another approach, suggested for when conventional measures of corruption are unavailable, is to look at the bodyfat of officials, after finding that obesity of cabinet ministers in [[Eastern Bloc|post-Soviet states]] was highly correlated with more accurate measures.<ref>{{cite news |title=Are overweight politicians less trustworthy? |date=30 Jul 2020 |newspaper=[[The Economist]]|url=https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/07/30/are-overweight-politicians-less-trustworthy |access-date=23 Dec 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |title=Obesity of politicians and corruption in post-Soviet countries |last=Blavatskyy |first=Pavlo |date=18 Jul 2020 |doi=10.1111/ecot.12259 |journal=Economics of Transition and Institutional Change |volume=2020 |issue=2 |pages=343–356|s2cid=225574749 }}</ref>