CORRUPTION IS EATING US UP: A Call To Action
Survey Report on Citizens’ Knowledge, Perceptions and Experiences of Corruption in the PRU DISTRICT
Ghana Integrity Initiative (GII) Local Chapter of Transparency International Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition
DISCLAIMER The author's views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. The Ghana Integrity Initiative (GII) Consortium was established in 2014, comprising GII, Ghana Anti- Corruption Coalition (GACC) and SEND GHANA to implement a 4-year USAID funded project titled “Accountable Democratic Institutions and Systems Strengthening (ADISS)” in 50 districts across the ten regions of Ghana.
ADISS seeks to renew and build upon on-going efforts and also increase the capacities of anti- corruption CSOs to motivate citizens to apply pressure on policy makers and institutions through a number of targeted and focused actions with the aim to reduce corruption in Ghana.
Compiled and Edited by ADISS Research Team
Designed & Printed by Kricyimage
Every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of the information contained in this report. All information was believed to be correct as of February, 2017. Nevertheless, GII Consortium cannot accept responsibility for the consequences of its use for other purposes or in other contexts.
978 – 9988 – 2 – 0844 – 8
© GII Consortium February, 2017. All rights reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
1.0 BACKGROUND 1 1.1 Knowledge, Perceptions and Experiences of Corruption Survey 1 1.2 Research Objectives 1
2.0 METHODOLOGY 1 2.1 Scope and Sampling 1 2.2 Research Design and Tool 1 2.3 Sources and Methods of Data Collection 1
3.0 DATA ANALYSIS 2
4.0 RESULTS 2 4.1.1 Demographic Characteristics of Sample: Sex, Age, Settlement Type, Educational Level, Literacy and Employment 2 4.1.2 Knowledge of Corruption 3 4.1.3 Change in the Level of Corruption over the past 12 months 3 4.1.4 Effort made by the District Assembly and District level Governance Institutions to Fight Corruption in the District 4 4.1.5 Most Trusted Institution to Fight Corruption 4 4.1.6 Citizens' Perception of Corruption in Institutions 5 4.1.7 Citizens' Actual Experience with Corruption: Payment of Bribe 5 4.1.8 Reasons for Paying Bribe 6 4.1.9 Citizens Willingness to Fight Corruption 7
Knowledge, Perceptions and Experiences of Corruption Report: Pru District iii TABLE OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
FIGURE 4.1.1 Demographic Characteristics of Sample 2 FIGURE 4.1.2 Citizens Knowledge on Forms of Corruption 3 FIGURE 4.1.3 Citizens' Assessment of the Change in the Level of Corruption 3 FIGURE 4.1.4 Citizens' Recognition of Effort of District Assembly to Fight Corruption 4 FIGURE 4.1.5 Citizens' Con idence in Institutions to Fight Corruption 4 FIGURE 4.1.6 Citizens' Perception of Corruption in Institutions 5 FIGURE 4.1.7 Percentage of Citizens Who made contact with the above Institutions and Paid Bribe 5 FIGURE 4.1.8 Reasons for Paying Bribe 6 FIGURE 4.1.9 Citizens' Willingness to Fight Corruption 6
iv Knowledge, Perceptions and Experiences of Corruption Report: Pru District 1.0 BACKGROUND
1.1 Knowledge, Perceptions and Experiences of Corruption Survey
The GII Consortium (comprising Ghana Integrity Initiative, Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition, and SEND GHANA) conducted a Survey on the Knowledge, Perceptions and Experiences of Corruption in 50 districts across the 10 regions of Ghana. Research on the prevalence of corruption had always focused on perception and often aggregated at national level. This survey is novel in capturing citizens' actual experiences of corruption within their districts, focusing on where and how corruption manifests in their daily lives. This report, provides district speci ic evidence as the basis for engaging district level government institutions and stakeholders with the aim to reducing corruption at the subnational level.
1.2 Research Aim/ Objectives
The primary aim of the research was to assess the state of citizens' knowledge on corruption, perceptions and actual experiences on corruption at the district level. The speci ic objectives were: 1. To assess citizens' understanding of corruption; 2. To know citizens' assessment of the level of corruption in their districts; 3. To know how and where citizens experience corruption at the district level.
2.0 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Scope and Sampling
Sample for the study was determined by means of strati ied random sampling. Each district was strati ied based on the various settlements; urban, peri-urban and rural. For the sample size determination, the margin of error was +/-5% and at 95% con idence level. The population of each district was used to determine the appropriate sample size. The average sample size of the districts was 384. The same sampling methodology was adopted for all the 50 targeted districts.
2.2 Research Design and Tool
This was a research survey where data consistent with the objectives of the study was collected using a questionnaire. The questionnaire was categorized into three (3) sections. The sections sought information regarding: I. Demographic Characteristics of Respondents II. Knowledge of Corruption III. Perceptions and Experiences of Corruption
2.3 Sources and Methods of Data Collection
The survey collected primary, quantitative and qualitative data between April and May, 2016. The data came from households by means of face to face interviews using a structured questionnaire. Households were selected by means of a random walk method. The questionnaire was administered via an electronic platform by trained citizen groups in all the districts.
Knowledge, Perceptions and Experiences of Corruption Report: Pru District 01 3.0 DATA ANALYSIS
Data was analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software. SPSS was used to generate descriptive statistics and tested for statistical signi icance using the Chi-Square test. Statistical tests of signi icance were performed on the data at 0.05 (5%) level of signi icance. The results are presented by means of info-graphics to make them easily comprehensible, reader-friendly and appealing to a larger audience.
4.0 RESULTS
4.1 Pru District
The Pru District shares boundaries with seven (7) other districts, namely East Gonja to the North (Northern Region), Sene East and West to the East, Nkoranza and Atebubu-Amantin to the South and Kintampo-North and South to the West, all in the Brong Ahafo Region. The population of the District is 129,248 and the sample size for this district is 388.
4.1.1 Demographic Characteristics of Sample: Sex, Age, Settlement Type, Educational Level, Literacy and Employment.
Figure 4.1.1: Demographic Characteristics of Sample
70.0 60.0 ) 50.0 ((%
ts 40.0
den 30.0 20.0 Respon 10.0 0.0 l s s s s s s e e e ic a r r r r r r ry te an ne ee e ed y y y ale e a at at a
sity b on r r r u dent 8 y m Male Bas a Rur a on e e No e 35 45 60 e r e Ur - - - ploy ploy iz Oth ond ad F R Lit Stu r c ri Urban Illit niv m 18 36 46 an e G U low 1 g Se P t r E r Occup o or Em Be Above 60 y os Or P ct e o No leg ociety te Se Col blic Sect il S v Pu Priva Ci Sex Age Se lement Type Educa onal Level Literacy Employment Demographic Characteri cs
Source: Field survey, 2016
Figure 4.1.1 summarizes the demographic characteristics of all respondents. The gender composition of respondents is even. In terms of age, the sample is diverse with representation from all age groups above 18 years. Similarly, the distribution of settlement types is diverse, almost equally across urban, peri-urban and rural settlements. All respondents have attained some form of formal education and are largely private sector employees. See above for details.
02 Knowledge, Perceptions and Experiences of Corruption Report: Pru District 4.1.2 Knowledge on Forms of Corruption Figure 4.1.2: Citizens Knowledge on Forms of Corruption
Yes No
100
21.6 27.3 80
) 45.4
(% 56.4 58.8
ts 69.1 78.4 75.5
den 60 80.7 84.3 Respon 40 78.4 72.7
54.6 20 43.6 41.2 30.9 21.6 24.5 19.3 15.7 0 Bribery Fraud Embezzlement Paying Nepo sm Favouri sm Extor on Abuse of Conflict of Illegal Facilita on fee Discre on Interest Contribu on
Manifesta on of corrup on
Source: Field survey, 2016
Figure 4.1.2 provides an analysis of respondents knowledge on the manifestation of acts of corruption in their daily lives. Interesting 1 in every 5 respondents did not think bribery constituted an act of corruption. However, it is alarming to note that majority of respondents did not believe that nepotism, payment of facilitation fees, embezzlement, fraud, extortion, among others could be classi ied as acts of corruption. See the above for details.
4.1.3 Change in the level of corruption in the past 12 months Figure 4.1.3: Citizens' Assessment of Change in the Level of Corruption n DON'T KNOW p o u
DECREASED A LOT of corr
l e
ev DECREASED A LITTLE the l n
i STAYED THE SAME
ange INCREASED A LITTLE n ch o
on INCREASED A LOT
ercep 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 P Respondents (%)
Source: Field survey, 2016
In Pru, a little over two-third of the respondents felt that corruption in the district had remained the same ( igure 41.1.3). Three out of ten did not know the status of corruption as to whether it had increased or not, while about 5% believed the canker had decreased. See the igure above for details.
Knowledge, Perceptions and Experiences of Corruption Report: Pru District 03 4.1.4 Effort made by the Assembly and District level Governance institutions to Fight Corruption in the District
Figure 4.1.4: Citizens' Assessment of Effort of District Assembly and District Level Governance Institutions to Fight Corruption
11% Yes
30% No 59%
Don't Know
Source: Field survey, 2016
Emerging from the igure above is a worrying revelation only one-tenth of respondents con irmed knowledge of efforts being made to curb corruption in their district.
4.1.5 Most Trusted Institution to Fight Corruption
Figure 4.1.5: Citizens' Confidence in Institutions to Fight Corruption
Don't Know
Nobody
Business or Private Sector
Media
ons NGOs tu
Ins Central Government
Other MDAs in the District
CHRAJ
Assembly Officials
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 Respondents (%)
Source: GII Consortium, 2016NB: Figures are presented in percentages
Strikingly, the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), which is the institution mandated to ight against corruption in Ghana is the least trusted in Pru. One-tenth of respondents simply did not believe that any one could curb corruption. On the other hand, the media is the irst institution which respondents trusted to ight corruption. See the above for details.
04 Knowledge, Perceptions and Experiences of Corruption Report: Pru District 4.1.6 Citizens' Perception of Corruption in Institutions
Figure 4.1.6 below captures the survey results on citizens' perception on corruption. Interestingly there is no Passport Of ice sited within the districts yet over 95% rated it as the most corrupt. This is followed by the Police Service, Education sector and the Ghana Revenue Authority. The igure below provides the details.
Figure 4.1.6: Citizens Perception of Corruption in Institutions
Not at all corrupt Slightly corrupt Somewhat corrupt Very corrupt Extremely Corrupt Don't Know
U lity Service Providers
Passport Office
Health system
Religious Bodies
MILITARY
Public sector
Business or Private sector
poli cal par es Business Ghana U lity poli cal Public Religious Educa on Health Passport POLICE or Private MEDIA JUDICIAR MILITARY NGOs Revenue DVLA Service par es sector Bodies system system Office sector Y Authority Providers Not at all corrupt 7.7 2.6 35.1 40.2 8.2 14.2 19.2 37.4 44.6 6.5 18.7 5.7 1.0 1.0 13.1 Slightly corrupt 10.3 6.2 23.7 19.6 23.7 9.3 14.3 12.9 22.9 4.9 20.7 16.3 3.6 4.2 18.3 Somewhat corrupt 19.8 14.9 11.3 16.5 23.2 14.7 12.7 8.8 8.5 18.3 24.1 21.2 10.9 4.7 22.9 Very corrupt 41.2 57.0 10.6 5.9 24.5 18.6 16.1 8.2 13.7 49.6 21.2 34.4 2.6 13.6 18.8 Extremely Corrupt 6.4 11.9 1.0 0.5 1.0 4.1 3.4 0.5 1.3 10.6 3.1 4.9 81.8 1.6 2.1 Don't Know 14.4 7.5 18.3 17.3 19.3 39.2 34.3 32.2 9.0 10.1 12.2 17.6 74.9 24.7
Source: Field survey, 2016
4.1.7 Citizens' Actual Experience with Corruption: Payment of Bribe
Figure 4.1.7: Percentage of citizens who made contact with selected institutions and paid a bribe
100 90 80 70
(%) 60
dents 50 40
Respon 30 20 10 0
Had contact Paid a Bribe Ins tu ons
Source: Field survey, 2016
Knowledge, Perceptions and Experiences of Corruption Report: Pru District 05 Figure 4.1.7 shows the results of citizen's contact with various district institutions and the number of them who paid bribes. The blue colour indicates the percentage of people who have had contact with the respective institution in the past 12 months. The red colour captures the percentage of those who had contact and paid bribes. Services dealing with registry and permit as well as birth and marriage certi icates score highest with 92% of those who made contact paying bribe. This is followed by service associated with land as 71% of citizens who had contact reported paying bribe. One-third of respondents had contact with Assembly Of icials out of which 62% reported paying bribes. See the igure above for details.
4.1.8 Reasons for Paying Bribe
Figure 4.1.8: Reasons for Paying Bribe ( %)
6.1 The bribe was paid to speed 21.2 things up 13.6 The bribe was paid to avoid a problem with the authori es The bribe was paid to receive 10.1 a service en tled to Cannot remember
Other 49.0
Source: Field survey, 2016
Figure 4.1.8 probes the reasons why respondents paid bribes. Nearly half of respondents paid bribes in order to receive services for which ordinarily they were entitled to.
06 Knowledge, Perceptions and Experiences of Corruption Report: Pru District 4.1.9 Citizens' Willingness to Fight Corruption
Figure 4.1.9: Citizens' Willingness to Fight Corruption
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
I would report an incident of corrup on 8.2 12.1 59.0 20.6 p on ru
cor 3.6 7.0 59.0 30.4
t I would get involved in figh ng corrup on h g o fi t I would support my friend or colleague, if they 4.15.7 69.3 20.9 fought against corrup on ingness ll Ordinary people can make a difference in the 8.8 9.0 61.1 21.1 Wi fight against corrup on
Respondents (%)
Source: GII Consortium, 2016NB: Figures are expressed in percentages (%)
Despite respondents' relatively low awareness of the roles of anti-corruption institutions and the forms of manifestations of corruption, majority are ready and willing to ight corruption, as igure 4.1.9 above suggests. They would report incidence of corruption, get involved in ighting corruption, support a colleague or friend in ighting corruption and believed that ordinary people could make a difference in ighting corruption.
Knowledge, Perceptions and Experiences of Corruption Report: Pru District 07