CORRELATES OF CORRUPTION
BO ROTHSTEIN
SÖREN HOLMBERG
WORKING PAPER SERIES 2011:12 QOG THE QUALITY OF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTE
Department of Political Science University of Gothenburg
Economic Equality (gini index) 5
Economic Freedom 6
GDP / Capita Growth 7
Population below $2 a Day (%) 8
Foreign Credit Rating 9
Welfare
Human Development Index 10
Government Revenue (% of GDP) 11
Tax Revenue (% of GDP) 12
Social Security Laws 13
Average Schooling Years 14
Health
Life Expectancy 15
Healthy Life Years 16
Infant Mortality Rate 17
Maternal Mortality Rate 18
Government Expenditure on Health (% of total health) 19 Private Expenditure on Health (% of total health) 20
Environment
CO2 Emissions / Capita 21
Access to Improved Drinking Water 22
Access to Adequate Sanitation 23
Gender
Gender Equality 24
Secondary Education Enrollment (female) 25
Crime
Homicide Rate 26
Number of Police Officers 27
Confidence in Parliament (democracies only) 31
Confidence in Government (all countries) 32
Confidence in Government (democracies only) 33
Happiness Feeling of Happiness 34 Life Satisfaction 35 Democracy Level of Democracy 36 Quality of Government Government Effectiveness 37
Control of Corruption 2002 and 2009 38
4
Afghanistan Australia Barbados Belgium Bhutan Brunei Bulgaria Belarus Cape Verde Chad Chile Equatorial Guinea Estonia Finland Gabon Germany Ireland Israel ItalyJapan South Korea Luxembourg Mauritania New Zealand Niger Norway Qatar Russia Sao Tome S. Arabia Singapore Suriname Sweden TrinidadUnited Arab Emirates
Turkmenistan Ukraine USA Uruguay
0
25
00
0
50
00
0
GD
P
/ C
a
p
ita
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.71
Sources: Gleditsch (2002), World Bank (2002-2008)
GDP / Capita
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
5
Albania Angola Austria Bangladesh Belgium Bolivia Bosnia Belize Bulgaria Chile Comoros Costa Rica Denmark Finland France Djibouti Greece Haiti Hungary Israel Latvia Liberia Maldives Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nigeria Norway Panama Russia St Lucia Sao Tome Singapore Slovakia South Africa Zimbabwe Suriname Sweden Tunisia Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine Egypt USA Uruguay30
40
50
60
70
80
E
co
n
o
m
ic
E
q
u
a
lit
y
(R
e
ve
rse
d
G
in
i-i
n
d
e
x)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.13
Sources: World Development Indicators (1995-2008), World Bank (2002-2008)
Economic Equality
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
6
Australia Austria Bahrain Belgium Bolivia Bosnia Myanmar Belarus Cambodia Cape Verde Cuba Cyprus El Salvador Estonia Fiji Finland France Haiti Ireland Israel Jamaica Japan North Korea Libya Lithuania Luxembourg Nepal New Zealand Norway Paraguay Russia Singapore Slovenia Zimbabwe Suriname Sweden Trinidad and TobagoTunisia USA Yemen Serbia
0
20
40
60
80
E
co
n
o
m
ic
F
re
e
d
o
m
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.56
Sources: Heritage Foundation (2002), World Bank (2002-2008)
Economic Freedom
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
7
Afghanistan Argentina Australia Armenia Barbados Myanmar ChinaDem. Rep. Congo
Dominica Equatorial Guinea Estonia Finland Georgia Gambia Greece Haiti Iceland Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Japan Lithuania Madagascar Malawi Mauritania New Zealand Nigeria Russia Sao Tome Senegal Sierra Leone Slovenia Zimbabwe Sweden Turkmenistan USA Uruguay Venezuela
-2
0
-1
0
0
10
20
GD
P
/ C
a
p
ita
Gr
o
w
th
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.01
Sources: World Development Indicators (2002-2005), World Bank (2002-2008)
GDP / Capita Growth
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
8
Argentina Bangladesh Bhutan Bosnia Brazil Sri Lanka Chile China Costa Rica Djibouti Haiti Hungary India Iran Kazakhstan Kenya Lesotho Madagascar Mali MozambiquePapua New Guinea
Paraguay Russia Sao Tome Senegal South Africa Tunisia Turkmenistan
0
50
10
0
P
o
p
u
la
tio
n
B
e
lo
w
$
2
a
D
a
y
(%
)
-2
-1
0
1
2
Control of Corruption
R²=0.26
Sources: World Bank (1995-2008)
Population Below $2 a Day
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
9
Albania Angola Austria Chile China Taiwan Costa Rica Cyprus France Ghana Greece Grenada Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Kazakhstan Jordan Lithuania Malaysia New Zealand NorwayPapua New Guinea
Peru Poland Russia Saudi Arabia Sweden Switzerland Uganda Macedonia Egypt USA Uruguay
2
4
6
8
10
Fo
re
ig
n
C
re
d
it
R
a
tin
g
-2
-1
0
1
2
Control of Corruption
R²=0.62
Sources: Standard & Poor's (2011), World Bank (2002-2008)
Foreign Credit Rating
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
10
Angola Azerbaijan Argentina Bahamas Belgium Bhutan Botswana Solomon Islands Myanmar Cambodia Chile
Dem. Rep. Congo Benin Denmark Eq. Guinea Eritrea Finland France Djibouti Ghana Greece Grenada Haiti India Israel Italy Japan South Korea Lesotho Latvia Mali Mexico Oman Namibia Niger Nigeria Norway Russia Sierra Leone Singapore South Africa Sweden Tajikistan Egypt USA Burkina Faso Venezuela
.2
.4
.6
.8
1
H
u
m
a
n
D
e
ve
lo
p
m
e
n
t
In
d
e
x
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.47
Sources: UNDP (2002), World Bank (2002-2008)
Human Development Index
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
11
Afghanistan Algeria Austria Bahamas Armenia Barbados Belgium Bosnia Botswana Brazil Belize Myanmar Burundi Belarus Chile China
Czech Republic Denmark
Estonia Finland Germany India Indonesia Israel Jamaica Kazakhstan Lesotho Madagascar Malaysia Mauritius Oman Norway Paraguay Qatar Russia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Zimbabwe Spain Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Thailand
United Arab Emirates Ukraine Macedonia USA
0
10
20
30
40
50
G
o
ve
rn
m
e
n
t
R
e
ve
n
u
e
(%
o
f
G
D
P
)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.30
Sources: World Development Indicators (1996-2008), World Bank (2002-2008)
Government Revenue
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
12
Albania Algeria Bahrain Barbados Belgium Botswana Brazil Myanmar Cambodia Canada
Central African Republic
Chile
China
Denmark
Fiji France Finland
Georgia Iceland Iran Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Jordan Kuwait Lebanon Lesotho Madagascar Morocco Oman Namibia Norway
Papua New Guinea
Qatar Russia Serbia Seychelles Singapore Zimbabwe Spain Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria
United Arab Emirates Turkey USA Burkina Faso Zambia
0
10
20
30
40
T
a
x
R
e
ve
n
u
e
(%
o
f
G
D
P
)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.17
Sources: World Development Indicators (1996-2008), World Bank (2002-2008)
Tax Revenue
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
13
Argentina Australia Belgium Bolivia Brazil Chile Colombia Denmark Ecuador Finland Georgia India Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Kazakhstan Jordan Latvia Lithuania Malawi Malaysia Morocco Netherlands New Zealand Nigeria Poland Russia Senegal Singapore
Vietnam South Africa
Zimbabwe Spain Sweden Ukraine Tanzania USA Burkina Faso Uruguay Venezuela
0
.2
.4
.6
.8
S
o
ci
a
l S
e
cu
rit
y
L
a
w
s
In
d
e
x
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.27
Sources: Botero et al (1997-2002), World Bank (2002-2008)
Social Security Laws Index
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
14
Afghanistan Argentina Australia Austria Bolivia Brazil Cameroon Chile Taiwan Costa Rica Ecuador Finland Ghana Greece Haiti Iceland Iraq Israel Japan Jordan Kenya South Korea Mali Mauritius Mexico Mozambique Nepal Niger Norway Panama Paraguay Portugal Senegal Singapore Sweden Switzerland Tunisia USA
0
5
10
15
A
ve
ra
g
e
S
ch
o
o
lin
g
Y
e
a
rs
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.65
Sources: Barro & Lee (2000), World Bank (2002-2008)
Average Schooling Years
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
15
Afghanistan Albania Angola Argentina Australia Bahamas Bangladesh Barbados Bhutan Botswana Solomon Islands Brunei Cape Verde China Cuba Benin Denmark
Equatorial Guinea Ethiopia
Eritrea Estonia Finland Ghana Greece Haiti India Iraq Italy Cote d'Ivoire Japan Liberia Liechtenstein Malawi Mongolia Russia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia South Africa Zimbabwe Swaziland Sweden Syria Togo Ukraine USA Burkina Faso Venezuela Zambia
40
50
60
70
80
L
ife
E
xp
e
ct
a
n
cy
a
t
B
ir
th
(
Y
e
a
rs)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.41
Source: World Bank (2000-2008)
Life Expectancy at Birth
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
16
Myanmar Syria Guatemala Ecuador Switzerland Belgium Slovenia Denmark Argentina Japan Finland Sweden Italy
Greece Spain Australia
Zimbabwe Slovakia Panama Chile Swaziland Mongolia South Africa USA Russia Nigeria Bahamas Ethiopia Djibouti Afghanistan Lesotho Mozambique Botswana Iraq Grenada Angola
Antigua and Barbuda Paraguay Yemen Tuvalu Sierra Leone Kiribati Mali Ghana Cuba Haiti Bhutan Solomon Islands
30
40
50
60
70
80
H
e
a
lth
y
L
ife
Y
e
a
rs
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.44
Sources: WHO (-), World Bank (2002-2008)
Healthy Life Years
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
17
Afghanistan Argentina Australia Bahamas Belgium Bhutan Cameroon Cape Verde China
Dem. Rep. Congo
Cuba Eritrea Finland Gambia India Iraq S. Korea Kyrgyzstan Liberia Mali Mauritania Mozambique Nigeria Paraguay Rwanda Sao Tome Sierra Leone Slovenia South Africa Sweden Tunisia Turkmenistan Uganda USA Burkina Faso Uzbekistan Venezuela
0
50
10
0
15
0
20
0
In
fa
n
t
M
o
rt
a
lit
y
(p
e
r
1
0
0
0
li
ve
b
ir
th
s)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.40
Source: World Bank (2000-2008)
Infant Mortality
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
High
18
Afghanistan Angola Australia Barbados Bhutan Botswana Cameroon
Central African Republic
Chad China Comoros Eq. Guinea Eritrea Finland Gambia Haiti India Indonesia Iran Iraq South Korea Lesotho Madagascar Malawi Mauritania Mongolia Namibia Nigeria Paraguay Rwanda Sao Tome Sierra Leone Sweden Tunisia USA
0
50
0
10
00
15
00
20
00
M
a
te
rn
a
l M
o
rt
a
lit
y
R
a
tio
(p
e
r
1
0
0
,0
0
0
li
ve
b
ir
th
s)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.22
Sources: Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation - University of Washington (2002),
World Bank (2002-2008)
Maternal Mortality Ratio
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
High
19
Afghanistan Andorra Angola Azerbaijan Australia Solomon Islands Brunei Canada Chile China Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Benin Dominica Eq. Guinea Eritrea Finland FranceGermany Kiribati Grenada Guinea Haiti India Iraq Japan North Korea Kyrgyzstan Luxembourg Malawi Maldives Morocco Namibia Nepal Netherlands Nigeria Marshall Islands Peru Russia St Lucia Singapore Vietnam South Africa Zimbabwe Sweden Switzerland Thailand Tonga Turkmenistan USA Uruguay Zambia
0
20
40
60
80
10
0
G
o
ve
rn
m
e
n
t
E
xp
e
n
d
itu
re
o
n
H
e
a
lth
(%
o
f
to
ta
l h
e
a
lth
)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.20
Sources: WHO (2001-2002), World Bank (2002-2008)
Government Expenditure on Health
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
20
Afghanistan Angola Australia Bahamas Bahrain Bolivia Solomon Islands Brunei Bulgaria Canada Chile China Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Benin Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Finland France Germany Grenada Haiti India Iraq Ireland Jamaica Japan Jordan
North Korea Luxembourg
Madagascar Maldives Oman Namibia Nepal Netherlands Nigeria Marshall Islands Panama Peru Russia Singapore Vietnam Slovenia South Africa Zimbabwe Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan Thailand Togo Tonga Turkmenistan USA Uruguay
0
20
40
60
80
10
0
P
ri
va
te
E
xp
e
n
d
itu
re
o
n
H
e
a
lth
(%
o
f
to
ta
l h
e
a
lth
)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.20
Sources: WHO (2001-2002), World Bank (2002-2008)
Private Expenditure on Health
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
21
Afghanistan Angola Australia Austria Bahrain Bangladesh Belgium Bhutan Bolivia Belize Bulgaria Myanmar Chile Comoros Equatorial Guinea Finland Djibouti Gabon Gambia Haiti Hungary Indonesia Israel Japan Kazakhstan Luxembourg Mauritania Mauritius Mongolia Netherlands New Zealand Qatar Russia Spain Suriname Swaziland Sweden Trinidad and Tobago
United Arab Emirates
Tunisia USA Yemen
0
20
40
60
C
a
rb
o
n
D
io
xi
d
e
E
m
issi
o
n
s
(t
o
n
s
p
e
r
ca
p
ita
)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.02
Sources: Environmental Performance Index (2000-2005), World Bank (2002-2008)
Carbon Dioxide Emissions
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
22
Afghanistan Angola
Antigua and Barbuda Belgium Bhutan Brazil Solomon Islands Bulgaria Belarus Cameroon Cape Verde Chile China Ecuador Ethiopia Fiji Finland Kiribati Haiti Iran Iraq Israel Italy Jordan N. Korea Laos Liberia Libya Mozambique Oman Vanuatu Nigeria Pakistan Paraguay Romania Sao Tome Somalia Sweden Tonga USA
20
40
60
80
10
0
12
0
A
cce
ss
to
I
m
p
ro
ve
d
D
rin
ki
n
g
W
a
te
r
(%
)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.34
Sources: Esty et al / WHO (2004), World Bank (2002-2008)
Access to Improved Drinking Water (%)
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
23
Bangladesh Belgium Bhutan Bosnia Botswana Brazil Belize Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Sri Lanka Chad Chile El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Ethiopia Eritrea Finland Georgia Kiribati Haiti India Iran Iraq Israel Italy Japan Kazakhstan Mauritania Oman Namibia Nigeria Marshall Islands Peru Russia Somalia South Africa Sweden ThailandTrinidad/Tobago Turkmenistan Tuvalu Ukraine Egypt USA Venezuela Yemen
0
50
10
0
A
cce
ss
to
A
d
e
q
u
at
e
S
a
n
ita
tio
n
(
%
)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.38
Sources: Environmental Performance Index (2004-), World Bank (2002-2008)
Access to Adequate Sanitation
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
24
Belgium Cameroon Sri Lanka Chad Chile Colombia Ethiopia Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Guatemala Iceland Ireland Israel Japan Jordan Latvia Lithuania Malaysia Mauritania Moldova Oman Namibia Nepal Netherlands Nigeria Norway Pakistan Philippines Russia Saudi Arabia Singapore Spain Sweden Switzerland
Syria United Arab Emirates
Turkey USA Burkina Faso Venezuela Yemen
.4
.5
.6
.7
.8
Ge
n
d
e
r E
q
u
a
lity
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.20
Sources: World Economic Forum (2005), World Bank (2002-2008)
Gender Equality
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
25
AfghanistanAngola Australia Bangladesh Belgium Bhutan Brazil Bulgaria
China Costa Rica
Denmark Eritrea Finland France Georgia Gambia Grenada Hungary Iceland Iraq Kazakhstan Kenya Libya Malaysia Mali Morocco Mozambique Vanuatu Nigeria Norway Palau Russia Seychelles Vietnam Spain Sweden Switzerland Tonga
United Arab Emirates Tunisia Tuvalu USA Burkina Faso
0
50
10
0
15
0
20
0
S
e
co
n
d
a
ry
E
d
u
ca
tio
n
E
n
ro
llm
e
n
t
(F
e
m
a
le
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.45
Sources: UNESCO (1999-2009), World Bank (2002-2008)
Secondary Education Enrollment (Female)
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
High
26
Afghanistan Angola Australia Bahamas Barbados Botswana Brazil Belize Brunei Myanmar Burundi Central African Republic
Chile China
Colombia
Comoros
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Cuba El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Guatemala Haiti Indonesia Iraq Cote d'Ivoire Jamaica Liechtenstein Mali Malta Mauritius Nigeria Russia Rwanda Singapore South Africa Sudan Sweden Tonga Egypt USA Venezuela Zambia
0
20
40
60
H
o
m
ici
d
e
r
a
te
(p
e
r
1
0
0
,0
0
0
p
o
p
ul
a
tio
n
)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.13
Sources: UN Data (2010), World Bank (2002-2008)
Homicide rate
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
27
Myanmar Syria Venezuela Belgium Japan Cyprus Finland Sweden Italy Bahrain Canada Austria Macedonia Mexico Zimbabwe Slovakia Uruguay Mauritius Chile Latvia Israel Kyrgyzstan Estonia Singapore South Africa Kazakhstan USA Kuwait Morocco Barbados Jordan Paraguay India Brunei Lebanon
0
50
0
10
00
15
00
20
00
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
P
o
lice
O
ff
ice
rs
(p
e
r
1
0
0
,0
0
0
p
o
p
ul
a
tio
n
)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.01
Sources: UN Data (2010), World Bank (2002-2008)
Number of Police Officers
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
28
Myanmar Bolivia Nepal Iceland
Venezuela Saudi Arabia Qatar Belgium
Sweden Italy
Egypt Bahrain
Zambia Macedonia Mexico Australia
New Zealand
Romania Malaysia United Arab EmiratesChile
Azerbaijan
Turkmenistan Moldova Poland
Latvia Israel
Georgia Kyrgyzstan Estonia Singapore
South Africa Kazakhstan Ukraine Belarus USA Russia
0
20
0
40
0
60
0
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
P
ri
so
n
er
s
(p
e
r
1
0
0
,0
0
0
p
o
p
ul
a
tio
n
)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.02
Sources: UNODC (2000-2006), World Bank (2002-2008)
Number of Prisoners
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
29
Australia Bangladesh Belgium Brazil Belarus Chile China Cyprus Finland Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Japan Jordan Luxembourg Netherlands New Zealand Norway Pakistan Portugal Romania Rwanda Saudi Arabia Singapore Vietnam Slovenia South Africa Zimbabwe Spain Sweden
Trinidad and Tobago Uganda Ukraine Egypt United Kingdom USA Venezuela Serbia
0
20
40
60
80
M
o
st
P
e
o
p
le
C
a
n
B
e
T
ru
st
e
d
(
%
)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.20
Sources: World Values Survey (1996-2008), World Bank (2002-2008)
Interpersonal Trust
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
High
30
Albania Azerbaijan Argentina Bangladesh Bosnia Chile China Taiwan Cyprus Finland Georgia Greece Iceland India Iran Japan Jordan South Korea Latvia Luxembourg Morocco New Zealand Nigeria Norway Philippines Russia Rwanda Slovakia Vietnam South Africa
Zimbabwe Spain Sweden
Thailand Turkey Uganda Macedonia USA Uruguay Serbia
.5
1
1.
5
2
2.
5
3
C
o
n
fid
e
n
ce
in
P
a
rli
a
m
e
n
t
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.00
Sources: World Values Survey (1996-2008), World Bank (2002-2008)
Confidence in Parliament
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
31
Albania Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Taiwan Colombia Cyprus Czech Republic Dominican Republic Finland France Georgia Ghana Greece Guatemala Iceland India Indonesia Italy Japan South Korea Latvia Luxembourg Mali Malta Mexico Moldova Netherlands New Zealand Norway Philippines Poland Slovakia Slovenia South Africa Spain Sweden Thailand Turkey Ukraine Macedonia United Kingdom USA Uruguay Venezuela Serbia Zambia
.5
1
1.
5
2
C
o
n
fid
e
n
ce
in
P
a
rli
a
m
e
n
t
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.00
Sources: World Values Survey (1996-2008), World Bank (2002-2008)
Confidence in Parliament
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
32
Albania Andorra Argentina Bangladesh Bosnia Chile China Dominican Republic Finland France Germany Iraq Italy Japan Jordan Lithuania Malaysia Mali Netherlands Nigeria Norway Peru Poland Russia Vietnam South Africa Spain Sweden Switzerland Thailand Uganda Ukraine Macedonia Egypt Tanzania USA Burkina Faso Uruguay Venezuela Serbia Zambia
.5
1
1.
5
2
2.
5
3
C
o
n
fid
e
n
ce
in
G
o
ve
rn
m
e
n
t
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.02
Sources: World Values Survey (1996-2008), World Bank (2002-2008)
Confidence in Government
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
33
Albania Andorra Argentina Brazil Chile Taiwan Colombia Croatia Czech Republic Dominican Republic Estonia Finland France Germany Ghana Guatemala India Indonesia Italy Japan Latvia Lithuania Mali Mexico Moldova Netherlands Norway Peru Philippines Poland Romania Slovenia South Africa Spain Sweden Switzerland Thailand Ukraine Macedonia United Kingdom USA Uruguay Venezuela Serbia Zambia
.5
1
1.
5
2
C
o
n
fid
e
n
ce
in
G
o
ve
rn
m
e
n
t
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.02
Sources: World Values Survey (1996-2008), World Bank (2002-2008)
Confidence in Government
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
34
Azerbaijan Austria Bangladesh Armenia Brazil Bulgaria Belarus Chile China Colombia Cyprus El Salvador Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Guatemala Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Italy Jordan Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lithuania Mali Mexico Morocco New Zealand Nigeria Poland Portugal Romania Russia Saudi Arabia Slovakia Vietnam Slovenia Zimbabwe Sweden Thailand Uganda Ukraine Egypt United Kingdom Tanzania USA Burkina Faso Venezuela Serbia Zambia
2.
5
3
3.
5
F
e
e
lin
g
o
f
H
a
p
p
in
e
ss
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.21
Sources: World Values Survey (1996-2008), World Bank (2002-2008)
Feeling of Happiness
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
High
35
AlbaniaAzerbaijan Argentina Australia Austria Bangladesh Armenia Brazil Chile China Colombia Croatia Denmark Dominican Republic El Salvador Ethiopia Estonia Finland Georgia Greece Guatemala Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Japan South Korea Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lithuania Malta Mexico Nigeria Romania Russia Saudi Arabia Singapore Slovakia Zimbabwe Spain Sweden Turkey Ukraine Egypt United Kingdom Tanzania USA Uruguay Venezuela Zambia
4
5
6
7
8
L
ife
S
a
tisf
a
ct
io
n
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.46
Sources: World Values Survey (1996-2008), World Bank (2002-2008)
Life Satisfaction
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
High
36
Antigua and Barbuda
Azerbaijan Bahrain Armenia Belgium Bhutan Bolivia Solomon Islands Brunei Myanmar China Colombia
Congo, Dem. Rep.
Croatia Cuba Cyprus Ecuador Ethiopia Eritrea Estonia Fiji Finland France Djibouti Ghana Kiribati Haiti Iran Iraq Israel Japan Jordan North Korea South Korea Kuwait Libya Malaysia Morocco Namibia Vanuatu Nigeria Marshall Islands Pakistan Paraguay Qatar Russia Rwanda Saudi Arabia Seychelles Singapore Somalia Sweden Tajikistan Turkey Tuvalu USA Burkina Faso
0
2
4
6
8
10
L
e
ve
l o
f
D
e
m
o
cr
a
cy
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.27
Sources: Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006), World Bank (2002-2008)
Level of Democracy
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
37
Afghanistan Australia Canada Chile Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Dominica Eritrea Finland France Haiti Hungary Indonesia Iraq Israel North Korea Kuwait Maldives Mexico Oman New Zealand Nigeria Russia Saudi Arabia Seychelles Sierra Leone Spain Sweden Switzerland Syria Togo
United Arab Emirates Turkey USA
-2
-1
0
1
2
G
o
ve
rn
m
e
n
t
E
ff
e
ct
ive
n
e
ss
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption
R²=0.88
Sources: Freedom House/Polity (2002-2006), World Bank (2002-2008)
Government Effectiveness
vs. Control of Corruption
High Corruption
Low Corruption
Low
38
Afghanistan
Antigua and Barbuda
Australia Bahrain Belgium Solomon Islands Brunei Myanmar
Cape Verde Taiwan
Cuba Denmark Estonia Finland France Georgia Haiti Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Kuwait Liechtenstein Lithuania Mauritania Mongolia Vanuatu New Zealand Nigeria Norway
Papua New Guinea
Qatar St Lucia Senegal Slovakia Somalia Spain Syria Togo Tuvalu Macedonia United Kingdom USA Uruguay
-2
-1
0
1
2
Co
n
tr
o
l o
f
Co
rr
u
p
tio
n
2
0
0
9
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Control of Corruption 2002
R²=0.88
Sources: World Bank (2009), World Bank (2002)
Control of Corruption 2009
vs. Control of Corruption 2002
High Corruption
Low Corruption
High Corruption
Control of Corruption ² World Bank Governance Indicators
´&RQWURO RI &RUUXSWLRQµ PHDVXUHV SHUFHSWLRQV RI FRUUXSWLRQ FRQYHQWLRQDOO\ GHILQHG DV WKH H[HUFLVH RI public power for private gain. The particular aspect of corruption measured by the various sources differs VRPHZKDW UDQJLQJ IURP WKH IUHTXHQF\ RI ´DGGLWLRQDO SD\PHQWV WR JHW WKLQJV GRQHµ WR WKH HIIHFWV RI FRUUXSWLRQRQWKHEXVLQHVVHQYLURQPHQWWRPHDVXULQJ´JUDQGFRUUXSWLRQµLQWKHSROLWical arena or in the WHQGHQF\RIHOLWHIRUPVWRHQJDJHLQ´VWDWHFDSWXUHµ
GDP / Capita ² Gleditsch Trade and GDP Data
,QRUGHUWRILOOLQJDSVLQWKH3HQQ:RUOG7DEOH·VPDUNDQGGDWD VHHEHORZ +HVWRQ6XPPHUV Aten), Gleditsch has imputed missing data by using an alternative source of data (the CIA World Fact
Book), and through extrapolation beyond available time-series. This is his estimate of GDP per Capita in
US dollars at current year international prices.
Economic Equality (Gini index) ² World Development Indicators
Gini measure of economic inequality, where greater values represent greater inequality. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database.
Economic Freedom ² Heritage Foundation
The Economic Freedom index uses 10 specific freedoms, some as composites of even further detailed and quantifiable components:
Business freedom (hf_business) Trade freedom (hf_trade) Fiscal freedom (hf_fiscal)
Freedom from government (hf_govt) Monetary freedom (hf_monetary) Investment freedom (hf_invest) Financial freedom (hf_financ) Property rights (hf_prights)
Freedom from corruption (hf_corrupt) Labor freedom (hf_labor)
Each of these freedoms is weighted equally and turned into an index ranging from 0 to 100, where 100 represents the maximum economic freedom. Although changes in methodology have been undertaken throughout the measurement period, continuous backtracking has been used to maximize comparability over time.
GDP / Capita growth ² World Development Indicators
Annual percentage growth rate of GDP per capita based on constant local currency. Sources: World Bank and OECD.
Foreign Credit Rating ² 6WDQGDUG 3RRU·V
Credit ratings are forward-ORRNLQJRSLQLRQVDERXWFUHGLWULVN6WDQGDUG 3RRU·VFUHGLWUDWLQJVexpress the DJHQF\·V RSLQLRQ DERXW WKH DELOLW\ DQG ZLOOLQJQHVV RI DQ LVVXHU VXFK DV D FRUSRUDWLRQ RU VWDWH RU FLW\ government, to meet its financial obligations in full and on time.
Credit ratings can also speak to the credit quality of an individual debt issue, such as a corporate note, a municipal bond or a mortgage-backed security, and the relative likelihood that the issue may default. 5DWLQJV DUH SURYLGHG E\ RUJDQL]DWLRQV VXFK DV 6WDQGDUG 3RRU·V FRPPRQO\ FDOOHG FUHGLW UDWLQJ agencies, which specialize in evaluating credit risk.
Each agency applies its own methodology in measuring creditworthiness and uses a specific rating scale to publish its ratings opinions. Typically, ratings are expressed as letter grades that range, for example, IURP¶$$$·WR¶'·WRFRPPXQLFDWHWKHDJHQF\·VRSLQLRQRIUHODWLYHOHYHORIFUHGLWULVN
Human Development Index ² UNDP Human Development Report
The Human Development Index (HDI) is a composite index that measures the average achievements in a country in three basic dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, as measured by life expectancy at birth;; knowledge, as measured by the adult literacy rate and the combined gross enrolment ratio for primary, secondary and tertiary schools;; and a decent standard of living, as measured by GDP per capita in purchasing power parity (PPP) US dollars.
Government Revenue (% of GDP) ² World Development Indicators
Revenue is cash receipts from taxes, social contributions and other revenues. Grants are excluded here. Measured as a percentage of GDP. Source: International Monetary Fund. (World Bank and OECD for GDP estimates.)
Tax Revenue (% of GDP) ² World Development Indicators
Tax revenue refers to compulsory transfers to the central government for public purposes. Certain compulsory transfers such as fines, penalties, and most social security contributions are excluded. Measured as a percentage of GDP. Source: International Monetary Fund. (World Bank and OECD for GDP estimates.)
Social Security Laws ² Botero, Djankov, La Porta, López-de-Silanes & Shleifer Regulation of Labor
Measures social security benefits as the average of the three variables: x Old Age, Disability and Death Benefit Index
x Sickness and Health Benefits Index x Unemployment Benefits Index
Average Schooling Years ² Barro & Lee
Census Bureau.
Healthy Life Years ² WHO Statistical Information System
Average number of years that a person can expect to live in "full health" by taking into account years lived in less than full health due to disease and/or injury.
Infant Mortality Rate ² World Development Indicators
Infant mortality rate is the number of infants dying before reaching one year of age, per 1,000 live births in a given year. Source: Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation (UNICEF, WHO, World Bank, UNPD, universities and research institutions).
Maternal Mortality Rate ² Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation University of Washington
Number of maternal deaths per 100,000 live Births.
Government Expenditure on Health (% of total health) ² WHO Statistical Information System
Government expenditure on health care services and goods as a percentage of total expenditure on health. Expenditures on health include final consumption, subsidies to producers, and transfers to households (chiefly reimbursements for medical and pharmaceutical bills). Besides domestic funds it also includes external resources (mainly as grants passing through the government or loans channeled through the national budget).
Private Expenditure on Health (% of total health) ² WHO Statistical Information System
Private expenditure on health-care services and goods as a percentage of total expenditure on health.
CO2 Emissions / Capita ² Environmental Performance Index
Emissions of greenhouse gases per capita, measured in tons of carbon dioxide equivalents.
Access to Improved Drinking Water ² Environmental Performance Index
The percentage of population with an access to an improved water source. Original source is WHO.
Access to Adequate Sanitation ² Environmental Performance Index
The percentage of population with an access to an improved source of sanitation. Original source is WHO.
Gender Equality ² World Economic Forum
All scores are reported on a scale of 0 to 1, with 1 representing maximum gender equality. The study measures the extent to which women have achieved full equality with men in five critical areas:
- Economic participation - Economic opportunity - Political empowerment - Educational Attainment - Health and well-being
Secondary Education Enrollment (female) ² UNESCO Institute for Statistics
Homicide Rate ² UNODC
Intentional homicide, rate per 100,000 population. Intentional homicide is defined as unlawful death purposefully inflicted on a person by another person.
Number of Police Officers ² UNODC
Police officers per 100,000 population.
Number of Prisoners ² UNODC
Sentenced incarcerated persons per 100,000 population
Interpersonal Trust ² World Values Survey
´*HQHUDOO\VSHDNLQJZRXOG\RXVD\WKDWPRVWSHRSOHFDQEHWUXVWHGRUWKDW\RXQHHGWREHvery careful in dealing with people?
(1) Most people can be trusted (2) &DQ·WEHWRRFDUHIXOµ
Confidence in Parliament ² World Values Survey
´,DPJRLQJWRQDPHDQXPEHURIRUJDQL]DWLRQV)RUHDFKRQHFRXOG\RXWHOOPHKRZPXFKFRQILGHQFH\RX have in them: is it a great deal of confidence, quite a lot of confidence, not very much confidence or none at all?
(1) A great deal (2) Quite a lot (3) Not very much (4) 1RQHDWDOOµ
Confidence in Government ² World Values Survey
´,DPJRLQJWRQDPHDQXPEHURIorganizations. For each one, could you tell me how much confidence you have in them: is it a great deal of confidence, quite a lot of confidence, not very much confidence or none at all?
(1) A great deal (2) Quite a lot (3) Not very much (4) 1RQHDWDOOµ
Feeling of Happiness ² World Values Survey
´7DNLQJDOOWKLQJVWRJHWKHUKRZKDSS\ZRXOG\RXVD\\RXDUH" (1) Very happy
(2) Quite happy (3) Not very happy (4) 1RWDWDOOKDSS\µ
Life Satisfaction ² World Values Survey
´$OOWKLQJVFRQVLGHUHGKRZVDWLVILHGare you with your life as a whole these days? (1) Dissatisfied
(7) (8) (9)
(10) 6DWLVILHGµ
Level of Democracy ² Freedom House / Polity
Scale ranges from 0-10 where 0 is least democratic and 10 most democratic. Average of Freedom House (fh_pr and fh_cl) is transformed to a scale 0-10 and Polity (p_polity2) is transformed to a scale 0-10. These variables are averaged into fh_polity2. The imputed version has imputed values for countries where data on Polity is missing by regressing Polity on the average Freedom House measure. Hadenius & Teorell (2005) show that this average index performs better both in terms of validity and reliability than its constituent parts.
Government Effectiveness ² World Bank Governance Indicators
