How to measure corruption in a country? Through opinion poll about the extent of corruption, as many claimed after the country’s public performance discloses in the annual report of? They affect the centrality of the theme in public opinion, obviously of great interest, but not the extent of real corruption. Here the distinction between what literature calls small (Petty) and large (grand) corruption. Small corruption involves unique, individualized and non -institutionalized transactions of small value; The Great is institutionalized, involving public bureaucracies, political parties, state, being recurring and of high value.
Vitimization research is the most relevant about the extension of. Typical relevant questions refer to if in the last year the respondent paid bribes. There are techniques for mitigating the problem of answers on sensitive themes: In addition to anonymity, the question can be asked with reference to attempts to charge bribes rather than effective payment.
And even here there are bias. People have direct experience – but selective – only of small corruption. She comes from her experience with the police, the health service, inspectors, customs, city halls. It does not involve experience in participating in bids, parliamentary amendments, pension funds, etc. And even this experience should be calibrated. The opinion of those who do not directly use a service – for example, – is disregarded, or the answers weighted by the frequency of use (higher frequency, higher weight).
In the case of great corruption – – those involved are the high level of multinational companies and high employees. They are the main agents involved and their answers are one of the most important sources. The size of the samples and research used – in general thousands of observations and aggregation of research results for most countries – allows extreme (outliers) responses to be controlled. Expert opinions that monitor in countries are another data source for the international indices used.
The small corruption in the country is similar to the average of (organization for economic cooperation and development) and the smallest. The percentage of Brazilians who declared to have paid bribes (police, tax, service providers, etc.) increased from 2011 to 2019. As for data on “attempts to obtain bribe”, the percentages of people who answered positively to the question “ever in the last 12 months some civil servant asked for a bribe” were 4.8% (), 26.2% (Mexico) , 19% (Paraguay), 13.9% (Peru) and 7.7% ().
Great corruption comes to light through public exposure of cases such as DA in the US, which allowed comparisons on the distribution of bribes between here the second lowest reason (18%) after Argentina. But in.
Gift Link: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release seven free hits from any link per day. Just click on F Blue below.
