Help understanding this?
Oct. 20th, 2005 03:38 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
beandelphikiTransparency International, an international organization that claims to be "devoted to combating corruption" has released its Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) for 2005. This has, most likely, hit papers around the world. Here's the graphic that was in my local paper yesterday. Supposedly, it shows which countries are "the most corrupt."
Okay. Anybody see anything PROBLEMATIC about this image? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
The rest of the story:
Iceland's honest, Chad's not
Canada ranked 14th least-corrupt nation: study
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Chad and Bangladesh were ranked most corrupt on a global watchdog group's annual list of corruption levels in 159 nations, released Tuesday. At the other end of the scale, Iceland was ranked least corrupt. Canada ranked 14th least corrupt and the U.S. came in at 17th least.
Corruption undermines efforts to eradicate poverty, with theft by public officials hampering attempts to raise the living standards of the poor, Transparency International said.
"Corruption must be vigorously addressed if aid is to make a real difference in freeing people from poverty," said Peter Eigen, chairman of the Berlin-based group.
To form its annual corruption index, Transparency International asked businessmen, academics and public officials about how countries they live in or do business with are perceived.
On a scale of one to 10, Bangladesh and Chad both scored 1.7, meaning that corruption is perceived as being rampant. The least corrupt country, Iceland, scored 9.7.
Corruption is a widespread problem in Chad, but difficult to detect in a country where most civil servants and judicial workers are paid low, and often delayed, salaries. Human rights organizations and civic groups in Chad say corruption is most widespread in the customs and tax enforcement services, the judiciary and the government procurement office.
In Bangladesh, government agencies siphoned off a reported $68 million US through corruption last year, with the communications sector the worst offender, the group said.
Turkmenistan, Myanmar, Haiti, Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea, the Ivory Coast and Angola joined Chad and Bangladesh as the most corrupt countries, the report said. After Iceland, the least corrupt were Finland, New Zealand, Denmark, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, Australia and Austria.
Mmmkay.
I kinda want to write something up for class about this. I don't know who I'd talk to about this, or whether they'd see the problems I'm seeing. Hell, I don't know if I'm correct in being uneasy about this.
Just...
In both local papers I checked yesterday, this information was given flippantly as measuring "how corrupt countries are." The TI website does not even claim to have measured this - they specify the are measuring "perceptions" only, but they also say (from their FAQs):
It is difficult to assess the levels of corruption in different countries based on hard empirical data, e.g. by comparing the number of prosecutions or court cases. Such cross-country data does not reflect actual levels of corruption; rather it highlights the quality of prosecutors, courts and/or the media in exposing corruption. The only method of compiling comparative data is therefore to draw on the experience and perceptions of those who are most directly confronted with the realities of corruption in a country.
Who did they ask to find out if the country was corrupt?
Surveys are carried out among business people and country analysts, including surveys of residents of countries.
Most disturbing is this, also from their FAQs:
Some governments have begun to wonder whether it is useful to provide aid to countries perceived to be corrupt – and have sought to use corruption scores to determine which countries receive aid, and which do not.
TI does not encourage the CPI to be used in this way.
...No shit.
I feel like this information could be greatly abused, and I'm not exactly certain what the point is of saying, "Africa is the world's most corrupt continent." No one saw that. I feel like it is already sort of obvious which areas of the world are struggling the most with corruption in their government and such, at least to those who care to look. So why is this being carried out, and why do we have newspapers throughout Western countries now printing stories that read, "Africa is the world's most corrupt continent!"
Is it just me that is uneasy about this?
Anyone have any thoughts?
Okay. Anybody see anything PROBLEMATIC about this image? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
The rest of the story:
Iceland's honest, Chad's not
Canada ranked 14th least-corrupt nation: study
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Chad and Bangladesh were ranked most corrupt on a global watchdog group's annual list of corruption levels in 159 nations, released Tuesday. At the other end of the scale, Iceland was ranked least corrupt. Canada ranked 14th least corrupt and the U.S. came in at 17th least.
Corruption undermines efforts to eradicate poverty, with theft by public officials hampering attempts to raise the living standards of the poor, Transparency International said.
"Corruption must be vigorously addressed if aid is to make a real difference in freeing people from poverty," said Peter Eigen, chairman of the Berlin-based group.
To form its annual corruption index, Transparency International asked businessmen, academics and public officials about how countries they live in or do business with are perceived.
On a scale of one to 10, Bangladesh and Chad both scored 1.7, meaning that corruption is perceived as being rampant. The least corrupt country, Iceland, scored 9.7.
Corruption is a widespread problem in Chad, but difficult to detect in a country where most civil servants and judicial workers are paid low, and often delayed, salaries. Human rights organizations and civic groups in Chad say corruption is most widespread in the customs and tax enforcement services, the judiciary and the government procurement office.
In Bangladesh, government agencies siphoned off a reported $68 million US through corruption last year, with the communications sector the worst offender, the group said.
Turkmenistan, Myanmar, Haiti, Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea, the Ivory Coast and Angola joined Chad and Bangladesh as the most corrupt countries, the report said. After Iceland, the least corrupt were Finland, New Zealand, Denmark, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, Australia and Austria.
Mmmkay.
I kinda want to write something up for class about this. I don't know who I'd talk to about this, or whether they'd see the problems I'm seeing. Hell, I don't know if I'm correct in being uneasy about this.
Just...
In both local papers I checked yesterday, this information was given flippantly as measuring "how corrupt countries are." The TI website does not even claim to have measured this - they specify the are measuring "perceptions" only, but they also say (from their FAQs):
It is difficult to assess the levels of corruption in different countries based on hard empirical data, e.g. by comparing the number of prosecutions or court cases. Such cross-country data does not reflect actual levels of corruption; rather it highlights the quality of prosecutors, courts and/or the media in exposing corruption. The only method of compiling comparative data is therefore to draw on the experience and perceptions of those who are most directly confronted with the realities of corruption in a country.
Who did they ask to find out if the country was corrupt?
Surveys are carried out among business people and country analysts, including surveys of residents of countries.
Most disturbing is this, also from their FAQs:
Some governments have begun to wonder whether it is useful to provide aid to countries perceived to be corrupt – and have sought to use corruption scores to determine which countries receive aid, and which do not.
TI does not encourage the CPI to be used in this way.
...No shit.
I feel like this information could be greatly abused, and I'm not exactly certain what the point is of saying, "Africa is the world's most corrupt continent." No one saw that. I feel like it is already sort of obvious which areas of the world are struggling the most with corruption in their government and such, at least to those who care to look. So why is this being carried out, and why do we have newspapers throughout Western countries now printing stories that read, "Africa is the world's most corrupt continent!"
Is it just me that is uneasy about this?
Anyone have any thoughts?
