Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Uncovering High-Level Corruption: Cross-National Objective Corruption Risk Indicators Using Public Procurement Data

Abstract

Measuring high-level corruption is subject to extensive scholarly and policy interest, which has achieved moderate progress in the last decade. This article develops two objective proxy measures of high-level corruption in public procurement: single bidding in competitive markets and a composite score of tendering ‘red flags’. Using official government data on 2.8 million contracts in twenty-eight European countries in 2009–14, we directly operationalize a common definition of corruption: unjustified restriction of access to public contracts to favour a selected bidder. Corruption indicators are calculated at the contract level, but produce aggregate indices consistent with well-established country-level indicators, and are also validated by micro-level tests. Data are published at http://digiwhist.eu/resources/data/.

Copyright
Footnotes
Hide All
*

Department of Sociology, University of Cambridge (email: mf436@cam.ac.uk); Government Transparency Institute (email: gaborkoxis@gmail.com). The authors would like to express their gratitude to generous funding from the European Union 7th Framework program (grant title: ANTICORRP; grant agreement no: 290529) and the Dutch Presidency of the European Union (project title: Public Integrity and Trust in Europe). They also thank the anonymous reviewers and numerous people commenting on earlier drafts of this article and database, in particular, Alina Mungiu-Pippidi, István János Tóth, Carl Dahström, Johannes Wachs, Luciana Cingolani, Nicholas Charron and Viktor Lapuente. Replication data sets are available in Harvard Dataverse at: https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.7910/DVN/6XYZOD and online appendices are available at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123417000461.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Andersson Staffan, and Heywood Paul M.. 2009. The Politics of Perception: Use and Abuse of Transparency International’s Approach to Measuring Corruption. Political Studies 57:746767.
Arndt Christiane, and Oman Charles. 2006. Uses and Abuses of Governance Indicators. Paris: OECD.
Auriol Emmanuelle, Flochel Thomas, and Straub Stephane. 2016. Public Procurement and Rent-Seeking: The Case of Paraguay. World Development 77:395407.
Charron Nicholas, Dahlström Carl, Fazekas Mihály, and Lapuente Victor. 2017. Careers, Connections, and Corruption Risks: Investigating the Impact of Bureaucratic Meritocracy on Public Procurement Processes. Journal of Politics 79 (1):89103.
Charron Nicholas, Dijkstra Lewis, and Lapuente Victor. 2014. Regional Governance Matters: Quality of Government Within European Union Member States. Regional Studies 48 (1):6890.
Coviello Decio, and Mariniello Mario. 2014. Publicity Requirements in Public Procurement: Evidence from a Regression Discontinuity Design. Journal of Public Economics 109:76100.
DG GROWTH. 2015. TED Structured Dataset (2009–2014), Tenders Electronic Daily, Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union. Brussels: European Commission.
Escresa Laarni, and Picci Lucio. 2016. Trends in Corruptions Around the World. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 22 (3):543564.
European Commission. 2014. Public Procurement Indicators 2012. Brussels: European Commission.
Fazekas Mihály, and Kocsis Gábor. 2017. Replication Data for: Uncovering High-Level Corruption: Cross-National Objective Corruption Risk Indicators Using Public Procurement Data. doi:10.7910/DVN/6XYZOD, Harvard Dataverse, V1.
Fazekas Mihály, Tóth István János, and King Larry P.. 2016. An Objective Corruption Risk Index Using Public Procurement Data. European Journal of Criminal Policy and Research 22 (3):369397.
Golden Miriam A., and Picci Lucio. 2005. Proposal for a New Measure of Corruption, Illustrated with Italian Data. Economics & Politics 17 (1):3775.
Kaufmann Daniel, Mastruzzi Massimo, and Kraay Aart. 2010. The Worldwide Governance Indicators. Methodology and Analytical Issues. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Klasnja Marko. 2016. Corruption and the Incumbency Disadvantage: Theory and Evidence. Journal of Politics 77 (4):928942.
Knack Stephen, Kugler Mark, and Manning Nick. 2003. Second-Generation Governance Indicators. International Review of Administrative Sciences 69:345364.
Kurtz Marcus J., and Schrank Andrew. 2007. Growth and Governance: Models, Measures, and Mechanisms. The Journal of Politics 69 (2):538554.
Lambsdorff Johann Graf. 2006. Measuring Corruption – The Validity and Precision of Subjective Indicators (CPI). In Measuring Corruption, edited by Charles Sampford, Arthur Shacklock, Carmel Connors, and Fredrik Galtung, 81100. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Mungiu-Pippidi Alina. 2006. Corruption: Diagnosis and Treatment. Journal of Democracy 17 (3):8699.
North Douglass C., Wallis John Joseph, and Weingast Barry R.. 2009. Violence and Social Orders. A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting Recorded Human History. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Rose Richard, and Peiffer Caryn. 2015. Paying Bribes for Public Services. A Global Guide to Grass-Roots Corruption. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Rothstein Bo, and Teorell Jan. 2008. What Is Quality of Government? A Theory of Impartial Government Institutions. Governance 21 (2):165190.
Sequeira Sandra. 2012. Advances in Measuring Corruption in the Field. In New Advances in Experimental Research on Corruption , edited by Danila Serra and Leonard Wantchekon, 145176. Bingley: Emerald Publishing.
Shaxson Nicholas, and Christensen John. 2014. The Finance Curse. How Oversized Financial Centres Attack Democracy and Corrupt Economies. Chesham: Tax Justice Network.
Transparency International. 2012. Corruption Perceptions Index 2012. Berlin: Transparency International.
World Bank. 2009. Fraud and Corruption. Awareness Handbook. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

British Journal of Political Science
  • ISSN: 0007-1234
  • EISSN: 1469-2112
  • URL: /core/journals/british-journal-of-political-science
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

Fazekas and Kocsis supplementary material 1
Appendix

 Word (900 KB)
900 KB
PDF
Supplementary materials

Fazekas and Kocsis supplementary material
Appendix

 PDF (769 KB)
769 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 9
Total number of PDF views: 108 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 1007 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 24th August 2017 - 17th December 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.