Corruption Perceptions Index

The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) is an index published annually by Berlin-based Transparency International since 1995 which ranks countries "by their perceived levels of public sector[1] corruption, as determined by expert assessments and opinion surveys."[2] The CPI generally defines corruption as an "abuse of entrusted power for private gain".[3] Critics consider the CPI biased.[4]

Map showing countries and territories according to the Corruption Perceptions Index, 2020, in ascending order.
  90–99
  80–89
  70–79
  60–69
  50–59
  40–49
  30–39
  20–29
  10–19
  0–9
  Data unavailable

The 2020 CPI, published in January of 2021, currently ranks 180 countries "on a scale from 100 (very clean) to 0 (highly corrupt)" based on the situation between May 2019 and May 2020.[5][6] In the list, Denmark, Finland, New Zealand, Sweden, Singapore and Switzerland are perceived as the top 6 least corrupt nations in the world, ranking consistently high among international financial transparency, while the most perceived corrupt country in the world is Somalia, scoring 8–10 out of 100 since 2012.[7] South Sudan is also perceived as one of the most corrupt countries in the world due to constant social and economic crises, ranking an average score of 13 out of 100 in 2018.[8]

Methods

Transparency International commissioned the University of Passau's Johann Graf Lambsdorff to produce the CPI.[9] The 2012 CPI takes into account 16 different surveys and assessments from 12 different institutions.[10] The 13 surveys/assessments are either business people opinion surveys or performance assessments from a group of analysts.[3] Early CPIs used public opinion surveys.[11] The institutions are:[12]

  • African Development Bank (based in Ivory Coast)
  • Bertelsmann Foundation (based in Germany)
  • Economist Intelligence Unit (based in the UK)
  • Freedom House (based in the US)
  • Global Insight (based in US)
  • International Institute for Management Development (based in Switzerland)
  • Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (based in Hong Kong)
  • The PRS Group, Inc., (based in the US)
  • World Economic Forum
  • World Bank
  • World Justice Project (based in US)

Countries need to be evaluated by at least three sources to appear in the CPI.[11] The CPI measures perception of corruption due to the difficulty of measuring absolute levels of corruption.[13]

Validity

A study published in 2012 found a "very strong significant correlation" between the Corruption Perceptions Index and two other proxies for corruption: black market activity and an overabundance of regulation.[14]

All three metrics also had a highly significant correlation with real gross domestic product per capita (RGDP/Cap); the Corruption Perceptions Index correlation with RGDP/Cap was the strongest, explaining over three fourths of the variance.[14] (Note that a lower on this scale reflects greater corruption, so that countries with higher RGDPs generally had less corruption.)

Economic implications

Research papers published in 2007 and 2008 examined the economic consequences of corruption perception, as defined by the CPI. The researchers found a correlation between a higher CPI and higher long-term economic growth,[15] as well as an increase in GDP growth of 1.7% for every unit increase in a country's CPI score.[16] Also shown was a power-law dependence linking higher CPI score to higher rates of foreign investment in a country.

Rankings

Legend:

Scores Perceived as less corrupt Perceived as more corrupt
99–90 89–80 79–70 69–60 59–50 49–40 39-30 29–20 19–10 9–0

1998–2020

2012–2020 Corruption Perceptions Index table[17]
Rank Nation or Territory 2020[18] 2019[19] 2018[20] 2017[21] 2016[22] 2015[23] 2014[24] 2013[25] 2012[26]
Score Delta Score Delta Score Delta Score Delta Score Delta Score Delta Score Delta Score Delta Score
1 Denmark
88
1
87
1
88
88
2
90
1
91
1
92
1
91
1
90
1 New Zealand
88
1
87
87
2
89
1
90
1
91
91
91
1
90
3 Finland
85
1
86
1
85
85
4
89
1
90
1
89
89
1
90
3 Singapore
85
85
85
1
84
84
1
85
1
84
2
86
1
87
3 Sweden
85
85
85
1
84
4
88
1
89
2
87
2
89
1
88
3  Switzerland
85
85
85
85
1
86
86
86
1
85
1
86
7 Norway
84
84
84
1
85
85
2
87
1
86
86
1
85
8 Netherlands
82
82
82
82
1
83
4
87
4
83
83
1
84
9 Germany
80
80
80
1
81
81
81
2
79
1
78
1
79
9 Luxembourg
80
80
1
81
1
82
1
81
81
1
82
2
80
80
11 Australia
77
77
77
77
2
79
79
1
80
1
81
4
85
11 Canada
77
77
4
81
1
82
82
1
83
2
81
81
3
84
11 Hong Kong
77
1
76
76
1
77
77
2
75
1
74
1
75
2
77
11 United Kingdom
77
77
3
80
2
82
1
81
81
3
78
2
76
2
74
15 Austria
76
1
77
1
76
1
75
75
1
76
4
72
3
69
69
15 Belgium
76
1
75
75
75
2
77
77
1
76
1
75
75
17 Estonia
75
1
74
1
73
2
71
1
70
70
1
69
1
68
4
64
17 Iceland
75
3
78
2
76
1
77
1
78
1
79
79
1
78
4
82
19 Japan
74
1
73
73
73
1
72
3
75
1
76
2
74
74
20 Ireland
72
2
74
1
73
1
74
1
73
2
75
1
74
2
72
3
69
21 United Arab Emirates
71
71
1
70
1
71
5
66
4
70
70
1
69
1
68
21 Uruguay
71
71
1
70
70
1
71
3
74
1
73
73
1
72
23 France
69
69
3
72
2
70
1
69
1
70
1
69
2
71
71
24 Bhutan
68
68
68
1
67
2
65
65
65
2
63
63
25 Chile
67
67
67
67
1
66
4
70
3
73
2
71
1
72
25 United States
67
2
69
2
71
4
75
1
74
2
76
2
74
1
73
73
27 Seychelles
66
66
66
6
60
5
55
55
1
54
2
52
28 Taiwan
65
65
2
63
63
2
61
1
62
1
61
61
61
29 Barbados
64
2
62
6
68
68
7
61
74
1
75
1
76
30 Bahamas
63
1
64
1
65
65
1
66
71
71
71
30 Qatar
63
1
62
62
1
63
2
61
10
71
2
69
1
68
68
32 Spain
62
62
4
58
1
57
1
58
58
2
60
1
59
6
65
33 South Korea
61
2
59
2
57
3
54
1
53
3
56
1
55
55
1
56
33 Portugal
61
1
62
2
64
1
63
1
62
1
63
63
1
62
1
63
35 Botswana
60
1
61
61
61
1
60
3
63
63
1
64
1
65
35 Brunei
60
60
3
63
1
62
4
58
60
5
55
35 Israel
60
60
1
61
1
62
2
64
3
61
1
60
1
61
1
60
35 Lithuania
60
60
1
59
59
59
2
61
3
58
1
57
3
54
35 Slovenia
60
60
60
1
61
61
1
60
2
58
1
57
4
61
40 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
59
59
1
58
58
2
60
67
5
62
62
41 Cape Verde
58
58
1
57
2
55
4
59
4
55
2
57
1
58
2
60
42 Costa Rica
57
1
56
56
3
59
1
58
3
55
1
54
1
53
1
54
42 Cyprus
57
1
58
1
59
2
57
2
55
6
61
2
63
63
3
66
42 Latvia
57
1
56
2
58
58
1
57
2
55
55
2
53
4
49
45 Georgia
56
56
2
58
2
56
1
57
5
52
52
3
49
3
52
45 Poland
56
2
58
2
60
60
2
62
62
1
61
1
60
2
58
45 Saint Lucia
56
1
55
55
55
5
60
71
71
48 Dominica
55
55
2
57
57
2
59
58
58
58
49 Czech Republic
54
2
56
3
59
2
57
2
55
1
56
5
51
3
48
1
49
49 Oman
54
2
52
52
8
44
1
45
45
45
2
47
47
49 Rwanda
54
1
53
3
56
1
55
1
54
54
5
49
4
53
53
52 Grenada
53
53
1
52
52
4
56
52 Italy
53
53
1
52
2
50
3
47
3
44
1
43
43
1
42
52 Malta
53
1
54
54
2
56
1
55
1
56
1
55
1
56
1
57
52 Mauritius
53
1
52
1
51
1
50
4
54
1
53
1
54
2
52
5
57
52 Saudi Arabia
53
53
4
49
49
3
46
6
52
3
49
3
46
2
44
57 Malaysia
51
2
53
6
47
47
2
49
1
50
2
52
2
50
1
49
57 Namibia
51
1
52
1
53
2
51
1
52
1
53
4
49
1
48
48
59 Greece
50
2
48
3
45
3
48
4
44
2
46
3
43
3
40
4
36
60 Armenia
49
7
42
7
35
35
2
33
2
35
2
37
1
36
2
34
60 Jordan
49
1
48
1
49
1
48
48
5
53
4
49
4
45
3
48
60 Slovakia
49
1
50
50
50
1
51
51
1
50
3
47
1
46
63 Belarus
47
2
45
1
44
44
4
40
8
32
1
31
2
29
2
31
63 Croatia
47
47
1
48
1
49
49
2
51
3
48
48
2
46
63 Cuba
47
1
48
1
47
47
47
47
1
46
46
2
48
63 São Tomé and Príncipe
47
1
46
46
46
46
4
42
42
42
42
67 Montenegro
45
45
45
1
46
1
45
1
44
2
42
2
44
3
41
67 Senegal
45
45
45
45
45
1
44
1
43
2
41
5
36
69 Bulgaria
44
1
43
1
42
1
43
2
41
41
2
43
2
41
41
69 Hungary
44
44
2
46
1
45
3
48
3
51
3
54
54
1
55
69 Jamaica
44
1
43
1
44
44
5
39
2
41
3
38
38
38
69 Romania
44
44
3
47
1
48
48
2
46
3
43
43
1
44
69 South Africa
44
44
1
43
43
2
45
1
44
44
2
42
1
43
69 Tunisia
44
1
43
43
1
42
1
41
3
38
2
40
1
41
41
75 Ghana
43
2
41
41
1
40
3
43
4
47
1
48
2
46
1
45
75 Maldives
43
14
29
2
31
2
33
3
36
75 Vanuatu
43
3
46
46
3
43
78 Argentina
42
3
45
5
40
1
39
3
36
4
32
2
34
34
1
35
78 Bahrain
42
42
6
36
36
7
43
8
51
2
49
1
48
3
51
78 China
42
1
41
2
39
2
41
1
40
3
37
1
36
4
40
1
39
78 Kuwait
42
2
40
1
41
2
39
2
41
8
49
5
44
1
43
1
44
78 Solomon Islands
42
42
2
44
5
39
3
42
83 Benin
41
41
1
40
1
39
3
36
1
37
2
39
3
36
36
83 Guyana
41
1
40
3
37
1
38
4
34
5
29
1
30
3
27
1
28
83 Lesotho
41
1
40
1
41
1
42
3
39
5
44
5
49
49
4
45
86 Burkina Faso
40
40
1
41
1
42
42
4
38
38
38
38
86 India
40
1
41
41
1
40
40
2
38
38
2
36
36
86 Morocco
40
1
41
2
43
3
40
3
37
1
36
3
39
2
37
37
86 Timor-Leste
40
2
38
3
35
3
38
3
35
7
28
28
2
30
3
33
86 Trinidad and Tobago
40
40
1
41
41
6
35
4
39
1
38
38
1
39
86 Turkey
40
1
39
2
41
1
40
1
41
1
42
3
45
5
50
1
49
92 Colombia
39
2
37
1
36
1
37
37
37
37
1
36
36
92 Ecuador
39
1
38
4
34
2
32
1
31
1
32
1
33
2
35
3
32
94 Brazil
38
3
35
35
2
37
3
40
2
38
5
43
1
42
1
43
94 Ethiopia
38
1
37
3
34
1
35
1
34
1
33
33
33
33
94 Kazakhstan
38
4
34
3
31
31
2
29
1
28
1
29
3
26
2
28
94 Peru
38
2
36
1
35
2
37
2
35
1
36
2
38
38
38
94 Serbia
38
1
39
39
2
41
1
42
2
40
1
41
1
42
3
39
94 Sri Lanka
38
38
38
38
2
36
1
37
1
38
1
37
3
40
94 Suriname
38
6
44
1
43
2
41
4
45
9
36
36
36
1
37
94 Tanzania
38
1
37
1
36
36
4
32
2
30
1
31
2
33
2
35
102 Gambia
37
37
37
7
30
4
26
2
28
1
29
1
28
6
34
102 Indonesia
37
3
40
2
38
1
37
37
1
36
2
34
2
32
32
104 Albania
36
1
35
1
36
2
38
1
39
3
36
3
33
2
31
2
33
104 Algeria
36
1
35
35
2
33
1
34
2
36
36
36
2
34
104 Ivory Coast
36
1
35
35
1
36
2
34
2
32
32
5
27
2
29
104 El Salvador
36
2
34
1
35
2
33
3
36
3
39
39
1
38
38
104 Kosovo
36
36
1
37
2
39
3
36
3
33
33
33
1
34
104 Thailand
36
36
36
1
37
2
35
3
38
38
3
35
2
37
104 Vietnam
36
1
37
4
33
2
35
2
33
2
31
31
31
31
111 Bosnia and Herzegovina
35
1
36
2
38
38
1
39
1
38
1
39
3
42
42
111 Mongolia
35
35
2
37
1
36
2
38
1
39
39
1
38
2
36
111 North Macedonia
35
35
2
37
2
35
2
37
5
42
3
45
1
44
1
43
111 Panama
35
1
36
1
37
37
1
38
1
39
2
37
2
35
3
38
115 Moldova
34
2
32
1
33
2
31
1
30
3
33
2
35
35
1
36
115 Philippines
34
34
2
36
2
34
1
35
35
3
38
2
36
2
34
117 Egypt
33
2
35
35
3
32
2
34
2
36
1
37
5
32
32
117 Eswatini
33
1
34
4
38
1
39
4
43
4
39
2
37
117   Nepal
33
1
34
3
31
31
2
29
2
27
2
29
2
31
4
27
117 Sierra Leone
33
33
3
30
30
30
1
29
2
31
1
30
1
31
117 Ukraine
33
3
30
2
32
2
30
1
29
2
27
1
26
1
25
1
26
117 Zambia
33
1
34
1
35
2
37
1
38
38
38
38
1
37
123 Niger
32
32
2
34
1
33
2
35
1
34
1
35
1
34
1
33
124 Bolivia
31
31
2
29
4
33
33
1
34
1
35
1
34
34
124 Kenya
31
3
28
1
27
1
28
2
26
1
25
25
2
27
27
124 Kyrgyzstan
31
1
30
1
29
29
1
28
28
1
27
3
24
24
124 Mexico
31
2
29
1
28
1
29
1
30
5
35
35
1
34
34
124 Pakistan
31
1
32
1
33
1
32
32
2
30
1
29
1
28
1
27
129 Azerbaijan
30
30
5
25
6
31
1
30
1
29
29
1
28
1
27
129 Gabon
30
1
31
31
1
32
3
35
1
34
3
37
3
34
1
35
129 Malawi
30
1
31
1
32
1
31
31
31
2
33
4
37
37
129 Mali
30
1
29
3
32
1
31
1
32
3
35
3
32
4
28
6
34
129 Russia
30
2
28
28
1
29
29
29
2
27
1
28
28
134 Laos
29
29
29
29
1
30
5
25
25
1
26
5
21
134 Mauritania
29
1
28
1
27
1
28
1
27
4
31
1
30
30
1
31
134 Togo
29
29
1
30
2
32
32
32
3
29
29
1
30
137 Dominican Republic
28
28
2
30
1
29
2
31
2
33
1
32
3
29
3
32
137 Guinea
28
1
29
1
28
1
27
27
2
25
25
1
24
24
137 Liberia
28
28
4
32
1
31
6
37
37
37
1
38
3
41
137 Myanmar
28
1
29
29
1
30
2
28
6
22
1
21
21
6
15
137 Paraguay
28
28
1
29
29
1
30
3
27
3
24
24
1
25
142 Angola
27
1
26
7
19
19
1
18
3
15
4
19
4
23
1
22
142 Djibouti
27
3
30
1
31
31
1
30
4
34
34
2
36
36
142 Papua New Guinea
27
1
28
28
1
29
1
28
3
25
25
25
25
142 Uganda
27
1
28
2
26
26
1
25
25
1
26
26
3
29
146 Bangladesh
26
26
26
2
28
2
26
1
25
25
2
27
1
26
146 Central African Republic
26
1
25
1
26
3
23
3
20
4
24
24
1
25
1
26
146 Uzbekistan
26
1
25
2
23
1
22
1
21
2
19
1
18
1
17
17
149 Cameroon
25
25
25
25
1
26
1
27
27
2
25
1
26
149 Guatemala
25
1
26
1
27
1
28
28
28
4
32
3
29
4
33
149 Iran
25
1
26
2
28
2
30
1
29
2
27
27
2
25
3
28
149 Lebanon
25
3
28
28
28
28
28
1
27
1
28
2
30
149 Madagascar
25
1
24
1
25
1
24
2
26
2
28
28
28
4
32
149 Mozambique
25
1
26
3
23
2
25
2
27
4
31
31
1
30
1
31
149 Nigeria
25
1
26
1
27
27
1
28
2
26
1
27
2
25
2
27
149 Tajikistan
25
25
25
4
21
4
25
1
26
3
23
1
22
22
157 Honduras
24
2
26
3
29
29
1
30
1
31
2
29
3
26
2
28
157 Zimbabwe
24
24
2
22
22
22
1
21
21
21
1
20
159 Nicaragua
22
22
3
25
1
26
26
1
27
1
28
28
1
29
160 Cambodia
21
1
20
20
1
21
21
21
21
1
20
2
22
160 Chad
21
1
20
1
19
1
20
20
2
22
22
3
19
19
160 Comoros
21
4
25
2
27
27
3
24
2
26
26
2
28
28
160 Eritrea
21
2
23
1
24
4
20
2
18
18
18
2
20
5
25
160 Iraq
21
1
20
2
18
18
1
17
1
16
16
16
2
18
165 Afghanistan
19
3
16
16
1
15
15
4
11
1
12
4
8
8
165 Burundi
19
19
2
17
5
22
2
20
1
21
1
20
1
21
2
19
165 Republic of the Congo
19
19
19
2
21
1
20
3
23
23
1
22
4
26
165 Guinea-Bissau
19
1
18
9
28
1
27
11
16
1
17
2
19
19
6
25
165 Turkmenistan
19
19
1
20
1
19
3
22
4
18
1
17
17
17
170 Democratic Republic of the Congo
18
18
1
19
2
21
21
1
22
22
22
1
21
170 Haiti
18
18
2
20
2
22
2
20
3
17
2
19
19
19
170 North Korea
18
1
17
3
14
3
17
9
8
8
8
8
8
173 Libya
17
1
18
1
17
17
3
14
2
16
2
18
3
15
6
21
174 Equatorial Guinea
16
16
16
1
17
2
19
1
20
174 Sudan
16
16
16
16
2
14
2
12
1
11
11
2
13
176 Venezuela
15
1
16
2
18
18
1
17
17
2
19
1
20
1
19
176 Yemen
15
15
1
14
2
16
2
14
4
18
1
19
1
18
5
23
178 Syria
14
1
13
13
1
14
1
13
5
18
2
20
3
17
9
26
179 Somalia
12
3
9
1
10
1
9
1
10
2
8
8
8
8
179 South Sudan
12
12
1
13
1
12
1
11
4
15
15
1
14

2011

The 20 top countries or regions that were ranked as having the lowest perceived levels of corruption were (note scale of 10 to 1):

#CountryScore#Country/RegionScore
1 New Zealand9.511 Luxembourg8.5
2 Denmark9.412 Hong Kong8.4
 Finland13 Iceland8.3
4 Sweden9.314 Germany8.0
5 Singapore9.2 Japan
6 Norway9.016 Austria7.8
7 Netherlands8.9 Spain
8 Australia8.8 United Kingdom
  Switzerland19 Belgium7.5
10 Canada8.7 Ireland
Source:[27]

The 20 bottom countries that were ranked as having the highest perceived levels of corruption were:

#CountryScore#CountryScore
182 Somalia1.0172 Equatorial Guinea1.9
 North Korea Burundi
180 Myanmar1.5168 Libya2.0
 Afghanistan DR Congo
177 Uzbekistan1.6 Chad
 Turkmenistan Angola
 Sudan164 Yemen2.1
175 Iraq1.8 Kyrgyzstan
 Haiti Guinea
172 Venezuela1.9 Cambodia
Source:[27]

2010

The 20 top countries or regions that were ranked as having the lowest perceived levels of corruption were (note scale of 10 down to 1):

#CountryScore#Country/RegionScore
1 Denmark9.311 Iceland8.5
 New Zealand Luxembourg
 Singapore13 Hong Kong8.4
4 Finland9.214 Ireland8.0
 Sweden15 Austria7.9
6 Canada8.9 Germany
7 Netherlands8.817 Spain7.8
8 Australia8.7 Japan
  Switzerland19 Qatar7.7
10 Norway8.620 United Kingdom7.6
Source:[28]

The 20 bottom countries that were ranked as having the highest perceived levels of corruption were:

#CountryScore#CountryScore
178 Somalia1.1168 Angola1.9
176 Myanmar1.4164 Venezuela2.0
 Afghanistan Kyrgyzstan
175 Iraq1.5 Guinea
172 Uzbekistan1.6 DR Congo
 Turkmenistan159 Tajikistan2.1
 Sudan Russia
171 Chad1.7 Papua New Guinea
170 Burundi1.8 Laos
168 Equatorial Guinea1.9 Kenya
Source:[28]

Criticism and limitations

The Index has been criticized on the basis of its methodology.[29]

According to political scientist Dan Hough, three flaws in the Index include:[30]

  • Corruption is too complex a concept to be captured by a single score. For instance, the nature of corruption in rural Kansas will be different from that in the city administration of New York, yet the Index measures them in the same way.
  • By measuring perceptions of corruption, as opposed to corruption itself, the Index may simply be reinforcing existing stereotypes and cliches.
  • The Index only measures public sector corruption, ignoring the private sector. This, for instance, means the well-publicized Libor scandal or the VW emissions scandal are not counted as corrupt actions.

Media outlets frequently use the raw numbers as a yardstick for government performance, without clarifying what the numbers mean. The local Transparency International chapter in Bangladesh disowned the index results after a change in methodology caused the country's scores to increase; media reported it as an "improvement".[31]

In a 2013 article in Foreign Policy, Alex Cobham suggested that CPI should be dropped for the good of Transparency International. It argues that the CPI embeds a powerful and misleading elite bias in popular perceptions of corruption, potentially contributing to a vicious cycle and at the same time incentivizing inappropriate policy responses. Cobham writes, "the index corrupts perceptions to the extent that it's hard to see a justification for its continuing publication."[32]

However, recent econometric analyses that have exploited the existence of natural experiments on the level of corruption and compared the CPI with other subjective indicators have found that, while not perfect, the CPI is argued to be broadly consistent with one-dimensional measures of corruption.[33]

In the United States, many lawyers advise international businesses to consult the CPI when attempting to measure the risk of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act violations in different nations. This practice has been criticized by the Minnesota Journal of International Law, which wrote that since the CPI may be subject to perceptual biases it therefore should not be considered by lawyers to be a measure of actual national corruption risk.[34]

Transparency International also publishes the Global Corruption Barometer, which ranks countries by corruption levels using direct surveys instead of perceived expert opinions, which has been under criticism for substantial bias from the powerful elite.[32]

Transparency International has warned that a country with a clean CPI score may still be linked to corruption internationally. For example, while Sweden had the 3rd best CPI score in 2015, one of its state-owned companies, TeliaSonera, was facing allegations of bribery in Uzbekistan.[35]

See also

References

  1. "Corruption Perception Index". transparency.org. Retrieved 28 January 2020.
  2. Transparency International (2011). "Corruption Perceptions Index". Transparency International. Transparency International. Archived from the original on 13 December 2011. Retrieved 1 December 2011.
  3. CPI 2010: Long methodological brief, p. 2
  4. He, Ning (1 June 2016). "Rethinking the Causes of Corruption: Perceived Corruption, Measurement Bias, and Cultural Illusion". Chinese Political Science Review. 1 (2): 268–302. doi:10.1007/s41111-016-0024-0. ISSN 2365-4252.
  5. "Corruption Perceptions Index 2020". Transparency International.
  6. "Антикорупційні дистанції або Спринти та марафони України в Індексі сприйняття корупції". pravda.com.ua (in Ukrainian).
  7. Transparency International (2017). "Corruption Perceptions Index 2017". Transparency International. Transparency International. Retrieved 14 August 2017.
  8. e.V, Transparency International. "Corruption Perceptions Index 2018". www.transparency.org. Retrieved 8 January 2020.
  9. "Frequently Asked Questions: TI Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI 2005)". Retrieved 22 November 2005.
  10. CPI 2010: Long methodological brief, p. 1
  11. CPI 2010: Long methodological brief, p. 7
  12. Transparency International (2010). Corruption Perceptions Index 2010: Sources of information (PDF) (Report). Transparency International. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 December 2010. Retrieved 24 August 2011.
  13. Transparency International (2010). "Frequently asked questions (FAQs)". Corruption Perceptions Index 2010. Transparency International. Archived from the original on 2 September 2011. Retrieved 24 August 2011.
  14. Wilhelm, Paul G. (2002). "International Validation of the Corruption Perceptions Index: Implications for Business Ethics and Entrepreneurship Education". Journal of Business Ethics. Springer Netherlands. 35 (3): 177–189. doi:10.1023/A:1013882225402.
  15. Shao, J.; Ivanov, P. C.; Podobnik, B.; Stanley, H. E. (2007). "Quantitative relations between corruption and economic factors". The European Physical Journal B. 56 (2): 157. arXiv:0705.0161. Bibcode:2007EPJB...56..157S. doi:10.1140/epjb/e2007-00098-2.
  16. Podobnik, B.; Shao, J.; Njavro, D.; Ivanov, P. C.; Stanley, H. E. (2008). "Influence of corruption on economic growth rate and foreign investment". The European Physical Journal B. 63 (4): 547. arXiv:0710.1995. Bibcode:2008EPJB...63..547P. doi:10.1140/epjb/e2008-00210-2.
  17. "Corruption Perceptions Index (latest)". Transparency International. Retrieved 28 January 2021.
  18. "CPI 2020". Transparency International. Retrieved 28 January 2021.
  19. "CPI 2019". Transparency International. Retrieved 24 January 2020.
  20. "CPI 2018". Transparency International. Retrieved 29 January 2017.
  21. "CPI 2017". Transparency International. Retrieved 29 January 2017.
  22. "CPI 2016". Transparency International. Retrieved 29 January 2017.
  23. "CPI 2015". Transparency International. Retrieved 28 January 2016.
  24. "CPI 2014". Transparency International. Retrieved 16 December 2014.
  25. "CPI 2013". Transparency International. Retrieved 16 December 2014.
  26. "CPI 2012". Transparency International. Retrieved 16 December 2014.
  27. Corruption Perceptions Index 2011. Full table and rankings Archived 10 August 2012 at the Wayback Machine. Transparency International. Retrieved: 4 December 2013.
  28. Corruption Perceptions Index 2010. Full table and rankings Archived 22 January 2014 at archive.today. Transparency International. Retrieved: 4 December 2013.
  29. "Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index: Whose Perceptions Are They Anyway?" (PDF). 2005.
  30. Hough, Dan (27 January 2016). "Here's this year's (flawed) Corruption Perception Index. Those flaws are useful". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 27 January 2016.
  31. Werve, Jonathan (23 September 2008). "TI's Index: Local Chapter Not Having It". Global Integrity. Archived from the original on 14 May 2013.
  32. Cobham, Alex (22 July 2013). "Corrupting Perceptions". Foreign Policy.
  33. Hamilton, Alexander (2017). "Can We Measure the Power of the Grabbing Hand? A Comparative Analysis of Different Indicators of Corruption" (PDF). World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series.
  34. Campbell, Stuart Vincent. "Perception is Not Reality: The FCPA, Brazil, and the Mismeasurement of Corruption" 22 Minnesota Journal of International Law 1, p. 247 (2013).
  35. CPI index 2015. Accessed 3 February 2016.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.