THE United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) has developed methodologies that measure social phenomenon such as corruption using evidence or experience-based surveys.
We have provided assistance to 20 countries, including Malaysia, to develop their own evidence-based surveys for the purpose of understanding the phenomenon in the country and formulating effective intervention plan and action.
Whenever we measure social phenomenon such as corruption, we have to be aware that there is no neutral system or approach. We have to be aware of the objective of the measurement.
Is it to raise awareness? Is it to advocate for something? If the objective is just to raise awareness and draw attention, it is fine to design a survey that is not so vigorous.
But if the objective is to really understand the deeper issue in society and to find ways to activate and develop policies and measures, then it is necessary to find the appropriate way to measure corruption.
What we are developing in UNODC is to understand what is the real problem, for example, what is the type of corruption or bribery that is affecting the population, the public sector or the business sector. The objective of the choice of measurement method then is to intervene, to act and be proactive on this issue.
Limitations of perception-based indicators
If we want to know what is the real situation in a country or sector, we need to have a reliable instrument. For example, it is very hot these days in Europe, but if we ask an older person or a younger person what the temperature is, we may get very different answers.
The older person will probably suffer more than the young person in the same weather. It is important to know what is the perception of an older person or a younger person with regard to the temperature so we can make a decision to do something for the older person.
However, this is different from knowing what is the real temperature in a given city, a country or time. Similarly in corruption, if you ask the questions only to a certain group of people, for example, a certain population or only to businesses or so-called experts what their perception of corruption is, you will get different answers.
There is a lot of research and literature on this. It is a fact that perceptions are influenced by different factors such as social expectations, public debates and the media.
While it is interesting to know the perceptions, it is different to measure the real extent and scope of corruption in the country.
Experience/evidence-based indicators
When measuring corruption through experience or evidence-based indicators, it is necessary first of all to develop a matrix that is based on solid methodologies. This is especially so when we measure social phenomenon which admittedly is very difficult to measure.
This is simply because it is a hidden phenomenon and those who commit corruption usually do not have incentives to divulge or report to the authorities.
However, it is possible that by using certain methodologies, we can develop measures that are accurate and results that can be compared across countries. We can also obtain results that can be compared across time and understand when there is an increase or decrease in corruption.
We can understand which sectors are more affected by bribery or if those affected are men or women as bribe payers or takers, and if they are officials, and what are their different behaviours when they are involved in corruption.
There are many things we can derive from the data and understand many more things. These are consolidated and transparent methods and everybody can replicate the methodology. Therefore, these methods become a common good.
In contrast with perception-based indexes, evidence-based surveys and indicators are not produced by a certain group of individuals or organisations through methods that are highly subjective and very often are not as transparent where only a number or ranking is released.
The information of how they are developed are often not known or can be replicated. Therefore, it is important to produce high quality, transparent matrix that is based on large scale surveys on populations or the business sector or the public sector.
This is why the UNODC supports and promotes experience and evidence-based methods to measure corruption based on transparent and direct methods.
The UNODC has provided assistance to around 20 countries worldwide. Assistance may range from technical advice/dedicated workshops to train how to conduct such surveys up to direct financial support and technical supervision.
Besides this, we have conducted several training workshops at regional level, including in the framework of sustainable development goals (SDG) monitoring. – July 26, 2022
Enrico Bisogno is the chief of data and statistics section of the Vienna, Austria-based United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).
The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Focus Malaysia.
