U4 Expert Answer Corruption and governance indicators in selected Asian countries Query Can you provide an overview of corruption indicators in the following countries: Nepal, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Myanmar/ Burma? Content Summary 1. Corruption levels in selected Asian countries This answer provides an overview of governance 2. Other governance and corruption-related and corruption-related indicators in Afghanistan, indicators Bangladesh, India, Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan and Tajikistan. 3. References Author(s): Maíra Martini, Transparency International, [email protected] Reviewed by: Marie Chêne, Transparency International, [email protected] Date: 23 February 2016 Number: 2016:3 U4 is a resource centre for development practitioners who wish to effectively address corruption challenges in their work. Expert Answers are produced by the U4 Helpdesk – operated by Transparency International – as quick responses to operational and policy questions from U4 Partner Agency staff. Corruption and governance indicators in selected Asian countries The 2015 CPI assessed 168 countries and territories, ranking them using a scale of 0 (highly 1. Corruption levels in selected corrupt) to 100 (very clean). As shown in the table Asian countries below, all countries of interest score below 40 out of 100. India is the best performer of the group Available indicators show that corruption in with a score of 38 points and occupying place 76 Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Kyrgyzstan, in the ranking. Afghanistan is the worst performer Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan and Tajikistan is a of the group and also one of the worst overall, significant problem, affecting a wide range of ranking 166, behind only North Korea and sector and institutions. Somalia (Transparency International 2016). There has been limited progress in fighting Analysis of the scores over time shows that the corruption in these countries, with serious perception of corruption has remained rather consequences for the population. In particular, the stable in the region. None of the countries of majority of these countries have a poor track interest has improved or declined since 2012 – record of promoting transparency and the small variations seen below, such as for accountability. Opaqueness and secrecy have Myanmar or Afghanistan, are not statistically been for many years the norm in the public sector significant as they fall within the confidence and more needs to be done to ensure that interval, meaning that the change is within the government decision-making happens in a confidence interval and does not necessarily transparent and accountable manner so that reflect a real improvement. corruption can be prevented and, when it happens, detected and punished. Corruption Perceptions Index’s scores Most companies in the majority of these countries consider corruption as a major impediment for Country 2015 2014 2013 2012 doing business. Afghanistan 11 12 8 8 Analysis of available governance indicators also points to money laundering as an issue of concern Bangladesh 25 25 27 26 in the region. Most of the countries of interest have an inadequate legal framework to combat India 38 38 36 36 money laundering. Kyrgyzstan 28 27 24 24 Another problem identified in these countries relates to the lack of transparency in the Myanmar 22 21 21 15 management of public finances. This is particularly relevant since many of the countries of Nepal 27 29 31 27 interest rely extensively on funds from development assistance. Improvements are Pakistan 30 29 28 27 required to ensure that money entering the domestic budget is spent adequately and that Tajikistan 26 23 22 22 there are enough safeguards to prevent abuses. Source: Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) Global Corruption Barometer (GCB) CPI measures the level of perceived corruption in GCB is a worldwide public opinion survey on the public sector in countries. It is a composite perceptions and experiences of corruption. As a index, based on global surveys and expert poll of the general public, it provides an indicator assessments of corruption. Since 2012, CPI of how corruption is viewed and experienced at scores can be compared from one year to the national level and how efforts to curb corruption next, but changes in scores do not necessarily around the world are judged on the ground. mean that a country has improved or declined. A more thorough analysis is necessary to ensure The last available data for the majority of the that the change is statistically significant countries of interest is from 2013. Myanmar and (Transparency International 2016). Tajikistan were not part of the assessment. In the www.U4.no U4 EXPERT ANSWER 2 Corruption and governance indicators in selected Asian countries current round (2015-2016), the survey is being Nepal and in Pakistan corruption seems to have carried out at regional level. increased for 72% of respondents. In Afghanistan, on the other hand, the majority of people believe Respondents to the 2013 GCB in the countries of that corruption levels either stayed the same interest perceive corruption in the public sector as (32%) or decreased a little (22%). a significant problem (see table below), with more than 70% of the surveyed population perceiving The approval of governments’ action to fight corruption as a problem or as a serious problem. corruption varies across countries. In Afghanistan, In Kyrgyzstan and in Pakistan, only 9% of the back in 2013, 49% of respondents thought the population think corruption in the public sector is government was effective in fighting corruption. In not a problem. Similarly, a significant percentage India, only 9% of the respondents considered the of individuals surveyed in these countries perceive government’s actions effective, and in Nepal only corruption to have increased in the two years 13% (see below). preceding the survey (see below). For instance, in Global Corruption Barometer 2013 % of citizens who % of citizens who % of citizens that believe think corruption is a believe corruption has the gov’t is effective in problem1 increased2 fighting corruption Afghanistan 71 40 49 Bangladesh 76 60 25 India 80 71 9 Kyrgyzstan 91 41 17 Nepal 85 72 13 Pakistan 91 72 16 Source: Transparency International 2013 1 Answers include both citizens who consider corruption to be a problem and citizens who consider corruption to be a serious problem. 2 Surveyed individuals answered to the following question: “Over the past two years how has the level of corruption in this country/territory changed?” The percentage data include citizens who believe corruption increased a little or increased a lot. www.U4.no U4 EXPERT ANSWER 3 Corruption and governance indicators in selected Asian countries The police, political parties and public officials are Enterprise surveys perceived by citizens in the countries of interest to Enterprise Surveys, conducted by the World Bank be the most corrupt among 12 institutions Group, measure firms’ perceptions of country analysed. business environments and experience with government processes, including informal When asked about their experience with payments and corruption. They measure, among corruption, respondents in the countries of interest other things, the percentage of firms that expect to confirm that corruption is a reality in several engage in bribery to access public services or institutions and sectors. In Afghanistan, for secure government contracts, and provides an instance, 65% of citizens who had been in contact estimate of the number of businesses that with the judiciary in the year preceding the survey consider corruption to be a major constraint for reported paying bribes. This corroborates with the doing business in the country (World Bank Group fact that 60% of individuals surveyed perceive the 2016). judiciary as the most corrupt institution in the country. Of the Afghan respondents, 58% also An analysis of the countries of interest shows that reported paying bribes to access registry and in all of them, firms’ perception and experience licences, and 51% to the police (Transparency with corruption is high (see table below). In International 2013). Afghanistan, for instance, 34.6% of companies surveyed reported having had to give gifts or In Bangladesh, 72% of citizens who had been in make informal payments to access services. contact with the police in the year preceding the Almost 50% of the companies surveyed, reported survey reported paying bribes. The police are also being expected to give gifts to secure a perceived as the most corrupt institution in government contract. The value of the gift/ Bangladesh by 60% of citizens. Of the informal payments is also higher than in other Bangladeshi respondents, 63% also reported countries in the region, reaching approximately paying bribes to judiciary services and 44% to 4.5% of contract value. Overall, 62.6% of land services. companies consider corruption a major constraint for doing business in the country. In India, experience with corruption also seems to be high among citizens who have had contact with In Bangladesh, bribery incidence is also much the police, with 62% of people reporting having higher than the average of countries in South paid bribes. The percentage of individuals Asia, with more than 47% of respondents to the reporting paying bribes to access registry and survey reporting having had to pay a bribe (see permit services (61%) and land services (58%) table below), while 43.9% reported that a gift or are also high. informal payment was requested when dealing with utilities access, permits, licences and taxes. In Nepal, 40% of those who had contact with the The percentage of enterprises that reported being land services reported paying bribes. In the same expected to give gifts to access procurement country, 37% reported paying bribes to the contracts is also high (48.9%). Corruption seems judiciary services and 30% to the police. Political to be particularly rampant for an import licence, parties and public officials are perceived as the with 77.2% of firms reporting being expected to most corrupt for 90% and 85% of individuals give gifts against a regional average of 27.4%.