The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Politics of Perception: Use and Abuse of Transparency International's Approach to Measuring Corruption
Abstract
The annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), published by Transparency International (TI), has had a pivotal role in focusing attention on corruption. Despite recent critiques of the CPI, it remains highly influential on research into the causes of corruption and is also extensively used to galvanise support for measures to fight corruption. In this article we explore the CPI in more depth in order to highlight how the index has been used for political ends which may not always turn out to be supportive of anti-corruption efforts. The argument is developed in four sections: in the first, we focus on Transparency International's definition of corruption, highlighting some conceptual difficulties with the approach adopted and its relationship to the promotion of ‘good governance’ as the principal means of combating corruption. In the second section, we outline some methodological difficulties in the design of the Corruption Perceptions Index. Although the CPI has been much criticised, we demonstrate in the third section that the index continues to exercise great influence both in academic research and in the politics of anti-corruption efforts, particularly as exercised by Transparency International itself. In the final section we argue that the CPI contributes to the risk of creating a ‘corruption trap’ in countries where corruption is deeply embedded, as development aid is increasingly made conditional on the implementation of reforms which are impossible to achieve without that aid.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The lessons of failure: learning and blame avoidance in public policy-making
Howlett, M. (2012) · International Political Science Review · doi:10.1177/0192512112453603 · Cited by 331
Degrees of integrity: the threat of corruption in higher education
Chapman, D. W., & Lindner, S. (2016) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2014.927854 · Cited by 152
Local governance, corruption, and public service quality: evidence from a national survey in Vietnam
Nguyen, T. V., Bach, T. N., Le, T. Q., & Le, C. Q. (2017) · International Journal of Public Sector Management · doi:10.1108/ijpsm-08-2016-0128 · Cited by 72
Metadata
- Authors
- Andersson, S., & Heywood, P. M.
- Venue
- Political Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2009-12
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 746-767
- ISSN
- 0032-3217 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9248
- OpenAlex
- W2125879813
- Cited by
- 416
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 26.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Politics of Perception: Use and Abuse of Transparency International's Approach to Measuring Corruption. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2008.00758.x
- The paper
- Andersson, S., & Heywood, P. M. (2009). The Politics of Perception: Use and Abuse of Transparency International's Approach to Measuring Corruption. Political Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2008.00758.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.