What Transparency International’s corruption index doesn’t see

Tiny Nordic countries, western Europe, the US and Asian economies including Singapore, Hong Kong and Japan frequently top Corruption Perceptions Index rankings. Yet, anomalies abound.

South Korea’s performance improved as the country suffered from scandals associated with the now-impeached president Park Geun-hye. And, despite more than 100,000 anti-corruption indictments, China’s ranking has improved slowly.

The Philippines was seen as least corrupt when the drug trade thrived. When the government of Rodrigo Duterte began its fight against corruption, the ranking fell. Myanmar has steadily improved, while more than half a million Rohingya Muslims have fled persecution into Bangladesh. These anomalies are systemic.

The index does not measure actual corruption, but perceived corruption, which adds to bias. In theory, the index tries to bypass the bias problem by including “different” perceptions. In practice, most come from the US and a few European countries, including the World Bank, The Economist Intelligence Unit, Freedom House, Global Insights and the Political and Economic Risk Consultancy. In the emerging world, these sources are often criticised for a pro-US and pro-Western bias.