A comparative empirical perspective on governance in African countries

7/29/2019 A comparative empirical perspective on governance in African countries

1/57

1

Afro-Pessimism vs. Irrational Exuberance

or a New Day for Africa Governance?:A comparative empirical perspective on

governance in African countries

Daniel Kaufmann & colleagues, World Bank Institute

www.worldbank.org/wbi/governance

Presentation at the JJ/WBGSP Scaling-Up ProgramConference, by the Joint Japan/World Bank Scholarship

Program, Washington, DC, November 12th, 2007.

If i t cannot be measured, it cannot be controlledLord Kelvin

Not everything that counts, can be counted, andnot everything that can be counted, counts

Einstein


2/57

2

Evidence challenges Myths

Moving Away from Myths and Fallacies:

Afro-pessimism from focusing too long on poorperfomers, failures, or on long term averages

Irrational Exuberance by focusing on the recent shortterm, declaring premature victory (elevator economics)

Generalizations about the whole African continent excessive averaging & stereotypes

Old notions of what drives investment

Towards a new Reality:

Governance Matters for investment climate

Understanding the rich complexity, variety and contrastsacross the continent, from one country to the next

Learning from good performers: some leaders, countries,and institutions are showing the possible

Role of the International Community and Private Sector


3/57

3

GDP growth Rates, 1960-2006 (WDI)

-2

-1

0

1

2

34

5

6

7

8

9

10

1960-9 1970-9 1980-9 1990-4 1995-9 2000-6

GDPgrowthrates

East Asia & Pacific

Low income

Countries

Sub-Saharan Africa

Av g

Sub-Saharan Africa

nonoil exporters

Source for data: WDI.


4/57

4

GDP Per Capita Growth Rates, WDI 1960-2006

-2

-1

0

1

2

34

5

6

7

8

9

10

1960-9 1970-9 1980-9 1990-4 1995-9 2000-6

GDPpercapit

agrowthrates

East Asia & Pacific

Low income

Sub-Saharan Africa

Sub-Saharan Africa

nonoil exporters

Source for data: WDI.


5/57

5

AFRICAS FIVE FASTEST GROWING ECONOMIES

STACK UP WELL WITH ASIA

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

1960's 1970's 1980's 1990's 2000~2005

AnnualGDPgrowth,simpleaverage

Africa Average Africa top performers Asia top performers China


6/57

6

BUT HIGH POPULATION GROWTH TAKES ITS TOLL

ON PER CAPITA INCOME.

-1%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10%

1960's 1970's 1980's 1990's 2000~2005

AnnualGDPpercapitagrowth,simpleave

rage

Africa Average Africa top performers Asia top performers China


7/57

7

The Long View Sobering but some hope

While Africa Stagnated, East Asia SoaredGDP per capita: Africa & East Asia, 1960-2006

-- Chart depicts income per capita in 2000 constant terms. In 1960, actual per capita income of EastAsia region was $141, whi le Sub-Saharan Afr ica average was $432; in 1974 it was $202 and $595,respectively, in 1994 it was $677 and $486, and in 2006 it was $1473 for East Asia and $583 for Af rica.-- Source: WDI, Low-income economies are those in which 2006 GNI per capita was $905 or less (53countries of which 33 from Sub-Saharan Africa).

1473

509

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

GDPpercapit

aindex1960=100

East Asia & Pacific

Low income

Sub-Saharan Africa

583


8/57

8

While Africa Stagnated, East Asia Soared

GDP per capita: Africa & East Asia, 1960-2007

-- Chart depicts income per capita in 2000 constant terms. In 1960, actual per capitaincome of East Asia region was $141, while Sub-Saharan Africa average was $432; in 1974it was $202 and $595, respect ively, in 1994 it was $677 and $486, and in 2006 it was $1473for East Asia and $583 for Afr ica (and projected to $605 for 2007).

-- Source: WDI, Low-income economies are those in which 2006 GNI per capita was $905or less (53 countries of which 33 from Sub-Saharan Africa).

1473

509

605

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

GDPpercapitaindex196

0=100

East Asia & Pacific

Low income

Sub-Saharan Africa


9/57

9

Economic Performance has improved in Africa,

and is Becoming More Diverse


10/57

10

SSA

Oil-Oil ExportingCountries

Oil-

importing

countries

6

10

14

18

22

26

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Source: IMF, SSA Regional Economic Outlook.

Macroeconomic Management has improved

(and also trade policy for instance)

Now, what is the Governance Situation...?

Inflation, 2000-06 (in %)


11/57

11

Africas Share of World Trade is Falling


12/57

12

Structural policies haveimproved

A s t r u c t u r a l sh i f t ?

Trends in African CPIA Scores: 2000-2005

3.10

3.15

3.20

3.25

3.30

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

SimpleaverageCPIAsco

resforSub-

SaharanAfrica


13/57

13

Worldwide Governance Indicators Project:

Defining Governance Broadly

Governance consists of the traditions and

institutions by which authority in a country isexercised.

This includes:

the process by which governments areselected, monitored and replaced,

the capacity of the government to effectively

formulate and implement sound policies, and the respect of citizens and the state for theinstitutions that govern economic and socialinteractions among them.


14/57

14

Worldwide Governance Indicators

Six aggregate governance indicators covering213 countries over past decade

Voice and Accountability

Political Stability/Absence of ViolenceGovernment Effectiveness

Regulatory Quality

Rule of LawControl of Corruption

Based on 31 data sources from 25 organizations,

capturing views of tens of thousands of informedstakeholders

Widely used by analysts, officials, civil society,

and researchers to monitory governance andstudy its causes and consequences


15/57

15

2006 Governance Indicators, Selected Regions

0

1020

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

East As ia NICs

('Tigers')

East Asia

developing

Sub-saharan

Afr ic a

Former Sov iet

Union

Eastern Europ e

P

ercentileRa

nk(0-100)

Voice & Accountability Polit ical Stability / Lack of Violence

Gov ernment Effectiv eness Regulatory Quality

Rule of Law Contro l of Corruption

Source for data: 'Governance Matters VI: Governance Indicators for 1996-2006, by D. Kaufmann, A.Kraay and M. Mastruzzi, June 2007 - www.govindicators.org.


16/57

16

Sub-Saharan Africa Average, 1998-2006

0

20

40

60

80

Voice &

Accountabil ity

Political

Stability / Lack

of Violence

Government

Effectiveness

Regulatory

Quality

Rule of Law Control of

Corruption

Percentile

Rank(0-100)

1998 2002 2006



17/57

17

Sub-Saharan Africa Over Time - High Growth Performers,Non Resource-Rich Countries, 1998-2006

0

20

40

60

80

Voice &

Accountabil ity

Political

Stability / Lack

of Violence

Government

Effectiveness

Regulatory

Quality


Corruption

PercentileRank(0-10

0)

1998 2002 2006

Source for data: 'Governance Matters VI: Governance Indicators for 1996-2006, by D. Kaufmann, A.Kraay and M. Mastruzzi, June 2007 - www.govindicators.org. HighPerformers, Non Oil Rich countries included Mozambique, Rwanda, Cape Verde, Uganda, Mali, Botswana, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Mauritius, Mauritania, Benin, Ghana, Senegal,Burkina Faso, Gambia, Cameroon and Namibia.


18/57

18

Sub-Saharan Africa Over Time

Resource-Rich Countries, 1998-2006

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Voice &

Accountabil ity

Political

Stability / Lack

of Violence

Government

Effectiveness

Regulatory

Quality


Corruption

Percentile

Rank(0-100

)

1998 2002 2006

Source for data: 'Governance Matters VI: Governance Indicators for 1996-2006, by D. Kaufmann, A.Kraay and M. Mastruzzi, June 2007 - www.govindicators.org. Oil Richcountries included Gabon, Congo, Nigeria, Chad, Sudan, Angola and Equatorial Guinea.


19/57

19

Sub-Saharan Africa Over Time - Low PerformersNon-Resource Rich Countries, 1998-2006

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Voice &

Accountab ili ty

Political

Stability / Lack

of Violence

Government

Effectiveness

Regulatory

Quality

Rule o f Law Contro l o f

Corruption

Percentile

Rank(0-100

)

1998 2002

2004 2006



20/57

20

Sub-Saharan Africa Resource-Rich vs. NonResource Rich Countries, 2006

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Voice &

Accountab ili ty

Political

Stability / Lack

of Violence

Government

Effectiveness

Regulatory

Quality

Rule o f Law Contro l o f

Corruption

Percentile

Rank(0-100)

OIL RICH

NON RESOURCE RICH

Source for data: 'Governance Matters VI: Governance Indicators for 1996-2006, by D. Kaufmann, A.Kraay and M. Mastruzzi, June 2007 - www.govindicators.org. Oil Richcountries included Gabon, Congo, Nigeria, Chad, Sudan, Angola and Equatorial Guinea


21/57

21

-2

0

2

Voice &

Accountability

Control of

Corruption

Government

Effectiveness

Political Stability

/ No Violence

Regulatory

quality

Rule of Law

Aver

ageGovernanceScore

High growth countries Low growth countries

Oil-Rich

Good

Bad

Chart shows average WBI governance scores by the AAP categories of countries. Oil rich countries consistently have the worstscores, followed by low performers, and finally by high performing countries. Statistically, high performers have better scores acrossall governance categories than other countries. Interestingly, and in contrast to The Economists generalization, oil rich countrieshave statistically equal scores to other countries in voice and accountability, control of corruption, and rule of law. But oil producers

have significantly lower scores on the remaining indicators.Source: A Note on Governance and Economic Performance in Sub-Saharan Africa, World Bank, page 1 August 2007.

Higher Growth and governance ratings differ significantlyamong groups of countries, WGI 2006


22/57

22

-0.5

0

0.5

Voice &

Accountability

Control of

Corruption

Government

Effectiveness

Political Stability

/ No Violence

Regulatory

quality

Rule of Law

GovernanceChange,2

006-1996

High growth countries Low growth countries Oil-Rich

Improvement

Source: A Note on Governance and Economic Performance in Sub-Saharan Africa, World Bank, page 2 August 2007.

Worsen

ing

Governance has improved in higher growth countries,WGI 1996-2006

High performing countries had both a growth acceleration and improvements in all governance indicators. Slow growers experiencedgrowth and governance deteriorations. Oil rich countries present a mixed picture. They had a significant jump in growth rates,accompanied by improvements in political stability, regulatory quality and rule of law and deteriorations in voice and accountability,control of corruption, and government effectiveness.


23/57

23

Control of Corruption, 2006: Africa Map

Source for data: : 'Governance Matters VI: Governance Indicators for 1996-2006, D. Kaufmann, A. Kraay and M. Mastruzzi, July 2007

(http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/governance/govdata/); Colors are assigned according to the following criteria: Dark Red, bottom 10th percentile rank; Light

Red between 10th and 25th ; Orange, between 25th and 50th ; Yellow, between 50th and 75th ; Light Green between 75th and 90th ; Dark Green above 90th.


24/57

24

Government Effectiveness, 2006: Africa Map





25/57

25

Control of Corruption, 2006: Selected Countries


26/57

26

Voice & Accountability, 2006: Selected Countries


27/57

27

Government Effectiveness, 2006: Selected Countries


28/57

28

Regulatory Quality, 2006: Selected Countries


29/57

29

Governance Indicators for Ghana, 1998-2006





30/57

30

Governance Indicators for Mozambique, 1998-2006





31/57

31

Governance Indicators for Zimbabwe, 1998-2006


(http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/governance/govdata/); Colors are assigned according to the following criteria: Dark Red, bottom 10th percentile rank; LightRed between 10th and 25th ; Orange, between 25th and 50th ; Yellow, between 50th and 75th ; Light Green between 75th and 90th ; Dark Green above 90th.


32/57

32

Governance Indicators for Cameroon, 1998-2006


(http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/governance/govdata/); Colors are assigned according to the following criteria: Dark Red, bottom 10th percentile rank; LightRed between 10th and 25th ; Orange, between 25th and 50th ; Yellow, between 50th and 75th ; Light Green between 75th and 90th ; Dark Green above 90th.


33/57

33

Careful about generalizations, because of

enormous Variance, at many levelsAlready observed:

-- Variance across countries in Africa-- Variance over time

-- Variance across different dimensions of

Governance within the same countryNow:

-- Variance across different institutions

within the same country-- Variance across different manifestations

of bribery, of types of corruption


34/57

34

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sub-saharan

Africa

Botswana Mozambique Tanzania Zimbabwe

Independence of Judiciary Parliament Police

% Firms reporting satisfactory quality

Quality of Institutions, 2006

Source: EOS firm survey, WEF2006.

U b dli Diff t M if t ti f B ib


35/57

35

0

20

40

60

80

100

Permits Utility Taxation Procurement Judiciary

Frequency

ofBribery

Sub-saharan Africa MozambiqueTanzania Zimbabwe

Unbundling Different Manifestations of Bribery,EOS 2006

% Firm Report High Bribery (1-3)

Source: EOS firm survey, WEF2006. Questions: In your industry, how commonly firms make undocumented extra payments or bribes connected with permits /

utilities / taxation / awarding of public contracts / judiciary? (commonnever occurs). How commonly do firms like yours make undocumented extra payments tolower level public servants / high ranking politicians, political parties, and senior public servants to secure business?

High

Bribery

LowBribery

Bribery in:


36/57

36

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sub-saharan Africa Mozambique Tanzania Zimbabwe

Foreign Currency Infrastructure Corruption

Tax Regulations Inflation

% firms reporting constraint among top 3:

Top Constraints to Business, EOS 2006

Source: EOS 2006. The question posed to the firm was: Select among the above 14 constraints the five most problematic factors for doing business in your country.Note that the overall EOS sample covers 125 countries.


37/57

37

De Jure: Index of Doing Business

0

20

40

60

80

100

Benin

Cameroo

n

Cte

d'Iv

oire

Georgia

Nige

ria

South

Afric

a

Tunisia

DoingBusinessIndex

(Rank) 2005 2006 2007

BEST

WORST

Source for data: Doing Business, 2005-2007. The Index is an average across 10 indicators: starting a business,

dealing with licenses, employing workers, registering property, getting credit, protecting investors, paying taxes,trading across borders, enforcing contract, and closing a business.


38/57

38

De Jure Index of Doing Business

0

20

40

60

80

100

OE

CD

East

AsiaN

ICs

East

Asiade

velop

ing

SouthA

sia

Sub-

saha

ranAf

rica

Mid

dleEa

st/No

rthAfri

ca

Form

erSoviet Un

ion

EasternEur

ope

Latin

Americ

a

Caribb

ean

DoingB

usinessIndex(Rank)

2005 2007

Source for data: Doing Business, 2005-2007. The Index is an average across 10 indicators: starting a business,

dealing with licenses, employing workers, registering property, getting credit, protecting investors, paying taxes,trading across borders, enforcing contract, and closing a business.

BEST

WORST


39/57

39

Press Freedom (FRH) in Sub-Saharan Africa,

1995 vs. 2006

47

44

9

Not Free

Part Free

Free

% countries in 1995

45

40

15

Not Free

Part Free

Free

% countries in 2006

Source: 2006 Freedom House. Y axis measures percentage of countries in the region with free press (rating of 30 or below), partly

free (ratings between 30 and 60) and not free (rating above 60). In 1995 there were 45 countries divided into red (21), yellow (20)and green (4). In 2006 there were 47 countries divided into red (21), yellow (19) and green (7).

Freedom of the Press is associated with


40/57

40

-1.5-

-1.0-

-0.5-

0-

0.5-

1.0-

1.5-

Not Free ofPartially Free

Freedom of the Press is associated withbetter Control of Corruption (& civil l iberties

more generally is associated with better performance of WorldBank-funded projects see WBER article 1997)

Free

_________________________________________________________________

Source for control of corruption: : 'Governance Matters V: Governance Indicators for 1996-2005, D. Kaufmann, A. Kraay and M. Mastruzzi, September

2006 (http://www.govindicators.org/). Source for Press Freedom: 2006 Freedom Houses Press Freedom Report.Terciles divided according to PressFreedom ratings (190 countries total). Free: 0-30 (69); Partly Free: 31-60 (54); Not Free: 61-100 (67).

Press FreedomStatus:

ControlofCorrupti

on

Good

r = .66

I C it F d f th P 2005


41/57

41

Income per Capita vs. Freedom of the Press, 2005

PR K

TKM

MM R

LB YCUB

ERI

ZWEUZB

GNQ

BLR

WBG

SD N

RWA

SYR

IRNTUN

SOM

CHN

YEM

LA O

ZAR

VNM

SA U

TGO

SWZ

NPL

BRN

TJK

KA Z

ETHBD I

GMB

TCD

AZE

VENRUS

BHR

IRQ

OMN

MDV

DJ I

AFG

HTI

BGD

GIN

GAB

SGP

AR E

MDA

MYS

CIVCMRBTN

AGO

ZMBLB R

KGZAR M

QAT

PA K

MA RJOREGY

COL

CA F

KH M

DZA

SYC

LB N

SL E

LK A

KEN

IDNGTM

PR Y

MRT

GEO

NER

KWT

MWI

NGA

UK R

UGA

HND

COG

THA

TZA

AL B

MDG

MK D

TURMEX

GNB

COMBI H

AR G

SEN

ROM

NIC

PA N

MOZ

SLV

LS O

ECU

YUG

PHL

TMP

PER

HRVBRA

BFA

ATG

IND

DOM

ITA

BWA

MNG

BGR

BOL

TON

CPV

SL B

NRUNA M

KOR

BEN

STP

SA M

PN G

HK G

URY

KIR

ISR

GRC

GHA

FJI

ZAF

GUY

TUV

TTO

MUS

CHL

VUT

MLI

SU R

GRD

CYP

KNA

ESP

POLHUN

FRA

BLZ

AUT

TWN

SVN

SVK

FSM

JP N

CZE

LVADMA

AU S

LCA

MLT

LTU

CRI

CA N

SM R

JA M

BR B

US A

VCT

MCODEU

EST

BH S

MHL

IRL

PR T

PC I

AD ONZLLIE

CHENLD

LUX

BELSWE

DNKIS LFIN

2

3

4

5

0 20 40 60 80 100

Press Freedom

I

ncomeperCapita

Low

Low High

High

Source for income per capita: Heston-Summers.Source for Press Freedom: Freedom House, 2006.

r = 0.50


42/57

42

Finland0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

-2 -1 0 1 2

'Voice' (including freedom o f the press), Civil

L iberties and Accountability

InfantMortality

Voice & Accountability Matters for Development

Source: KKZ 1999

G M tt Th 300% Di id d


43/57

43

Governance Matters: The 300% Dividend

1. Large Development Dividend of Good Governance:

a one-standard-deviation improvement in governance

raise incomes per capita in a country by about 300%in long-run

2. But is such a decline in corruption unrealistically

large?: NO -- One S.D. is the difference from: Eq.Guinea Iran or Uganda Mauritius Portugal Finland or New Zealand

3. The impact is from governance to incomes, and not

vice versa -- higherincomes alone will not do

4. Urgency of interventions to improve governance

D l t Di id d F G d G


44/57

44

Development Dividend From Good Governance

Low Governance Medium Governance High Governance

Contro l of Corrup tion

$300

$3,000

$30,000

Data Source for calcu lations: KK 2004. Y-axis measures predicted GDP per capita on the basis of Inst rumental Variable (IV)results for each of the 3 categories. Estimations based on various authors studies, including Kaufmann and Kraay.

Global Competitiveness Index vs. Control


45/57

45

pof Corruption, 2006

ZWE

ZMB

VNM

VEN

URY

USA

GBR

ARE

UKR

UGA

TUR

TUN

TTO

TMP

THA

TZA

TJK

TWN

CHESWE

SUR

LKA

ESP

ZAF

SVN

SVK

SGP

YUG

RUS

ROM

QAT

PRT

POL

PHL PER

PRY

PAN

PAK

NOR

NGA

NIC

NZL

NLD

NPL

NAM

MOZ

MAR

MNG

MDA

MEXMUS

MRT

MLT

MLI

MYS

MWI

MDG

MKD

LUX

LTU

LSO

LVA

KGZ

KWT

KOR

KEN

KAZ

JOR

JPN

JAM

ITA

ISR

IRL

IDN

IND

ISL

HUN

HKG

HND

GUY

GTM

GRC

DEU

GEO

GMB

FRA

FIN

ETH

EST

SLV

ECU

DOM

DNK

CZE

CYP

HRVCRI

COL

CHN

CHL

TCD

CAN

CMR

KHM

BDI

BFA

BGR

BRA

BWA

BIH

BOL

BEN

BEL

BRB

BGD

BHR

AZE

AUT

AUS

ARG

DZA

ALB

0

20

40

60

80

100

-2 1 3

Control of Corruption

G

lobalCom

petitiveIndex

Low High

High

r = 0.86

Source: EOS firm survey, WEF 2006 and 'Governance Matters VI: Governance Indicators for 1996-2006, D. Kaufmann, A. Kraay and M. Mastruzzi,July 2007 (http://www.govindicators.org/).

Responsibility of the Private Sector &


46/57

46

10-

20-

30-

40-

50-

60-

70-

Multinational inOECD, HQ in

another OECD

Multinationaloperating outside

OECD, HQ in OECD

Source: EOS2006. Questions: When firms like yours do business with the government, how much of the contract value must they offer in additional paymentsto secure the contract?. Y-axis shows percentage of firms who admitted paying bribes. Last bar excludes small with less than 50 employees.

Responsibility of the Private Sector &

Multinationals on Anti-Corruption(% of Firms Reporting Procurement Bribery, 2006)

Domestic Firms in NONOECD Countries (comparable)

_________________________________________________________________

Locationof Firm:

Country specific in depth Governance


47/57

47

Country-specific, in-depth Governance

and Anti-Corruption diagnostic surveys

A demand-driven process to improve governance and

build local capacity Key features:

Three surveys: households, firms, and public officials

Questions focus both on experience and perceptions

Questions are tested and adapted to local realities

Rigorous technical requirements in implementation

Local institution implements, with guidance from internationalexperts

Outcomes: greater local capacity, baseline governancedata, and action plan for policy reform

Th f di ti d t d


48/57

48

The power of diagnostic data and

key dimensions for analysis

1. Participatory and Transparency Tool, for all

stakeholders within the country to be involved2. Unpackage corruption administrative, state

capture, bidding, theft of public resources,purchase of licenses

3. Identify weak and strong institutions

4. Assess the costs of corruption on differentstakeholders

5. Identify key determinants of good governance

6. Input to develop concrete policyrecommendations

Corruption penalizes especially theCorruption penalizes especially the


49/57

49

Corruption penalizes especially theCorruption penalizes especially the

poorest citizenspoorest citizens(% of monthly income paid

for bribes as reported by households whosought a public service, 2000-2005

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Gha

na(200

0)

Guine

a(20

04)

Low Income Middle income High income

Corruption acts as a regressive tax, andCorruption acts as a regressive tax, and


50/57

50

Corruption acts as a regressive tax, andCo upt o acts as a eg ess e ta , a d

small firms pay more in bribes,small firms pay more in bribes, 2000-2005(% of gross monthly revenue paid in bribes, as reported byfirms)

0

1

2

3

45

6

7

89

Guine

a(20

04)

Gha

na(200

0)

Small

Medium

Large

Governance Indicators by agency


51/57

51

Governance Indicators, by agency

(based on responses of public officials from 20agencies, Guinea 2004)Audit

MechanismsEnforcement of

RulesQuality of

RulesPoliticization Resources Transparency

CitizenVoice

WageSatisfaction

ServiceState

CaptureOverall

Corruption

Ministre de la justice 63 51 55 44 37 47 72 19 67 44 39

Ministre de la Scurit 62 50 57 44 38 47 74 18 69 38 35

Ministre de lAdministration et de la Dcentralisation 61 53 54 42 39 49 75 29 70 45 45

Ministre des Finances 76 72 60 40 43 58 80 28 67 51 30

Ministre de lEnseignement Suprieurs et RechercheScientifique

62 50 56 44 35 46 74 20 69 47 42

Ministre de lUrbanisme et Habitat 76 42 33 64 75 38 5

Ministre de la Sant Publique 70 63 57 43 35 60 70 30 58 40 44

Service Communal 62 51 34 40 52 64 13 49 49Service Sous Prfectoral 58 43 55 45 32 43 72 13 64 52 37

Ministre de la Communication 52 61 44 38 46 75 42 65 69

Ministre de la Jeunesse et Sports 60 52 56 42 42 53 73 11 71 52 42

Ligue Islamique Nationale 62 60 59 41 41 49 75 28 64 43 33

Ministre de lAgriculture 61 58 57 42 38 45 77 30 65 36 36

Ministre de lenseignement Pr Universitaire 67 69 57 41 50 50 72 42 76 45 31

Ministre de la Fonction Publique 44 60 45 44 44 71 25 56 10Organisation Non Gouvernementale (ONG) 59 53 41 48 44 82 8 70 54

Entreprise Micro Finance 32 73 8 80 13

Ministre de lEnergie, Mines et Environnement 70 49 55 52 25 74

Whole Country 62 50 57 45 34 46 75 20 68 42 37

The indicators above take values between 0-100. To interpret them please keep in mind that:

-The higher the value of the governance indicator the better the quality of that dimension .-The higher the value of the corruption index, the more severe the problem.

Country Diagnostics: a few salient lessons


52/57

52

Country Diagnostics: a few salient lessons

Governance and A-C (GAC) diagnosticc affectthe policy debate and serve as an input in thedesign of a National A-C Strategy

Transparency and public dissemination of theresults are key

The approach must be participatory at each

stage of the process To unbundle corruption and institutional

weaknesses allows to identify key areas forreform

Quality control and use of rigorous analyticalmethods enhance the credibil ity of the results

Synthesis


53/57

53

Synthesis

Governance and Corruption Control is fundamentalfor Development and Growth

Data, Analysis, and formulation of action programs:all very important.. Also lessons from others, but

Concrete Reforms and country leadership is key

World Bank & rich countries can (and do) assistcountries in governance reforms, capacity building,

supporting civil society, media, etc. (incl. StAR) But international community only plays supportive

role the country leads (executive, legislative, civil

society, media, private sector, competitiveness) Key: Political, Judiciary & Procurement Reforms

Role of the Private Sector and Multinationals

Transparency, Voice, Press Freedom are key

Concretely: 10 Transparency Reform Components


54/57

54

1. Public Disclosure of Assets & Incomes of Candidates, PublicOfficials, Politicians, Legislators - & dependents

2. Public Disclosure of Political Campaign contributions byindividuals and firms, and of campaign expenditures

3. Public Disclosure of Parliamentary Votes, w/out exceptions4. Effective Implementation of Conflict of Interest Laws,

separating business, politics, legislation, & government

5. Publicly blacklisting firms bribing in public procurement

6. Effective Implementation of Freedom of Information Law,with easy access to all to government information

7. Fiscal/Financial transparency: EITI,budgets, ROSCs

8. E*procurement: transparency (web) and competition9. Media Freedoms & Media Development

10. Country Diagnostic (& Scorecard) on Transparency &Governance

And GAC, and StAR

Power of Data, Transparency and Citizen Oversight


55/57

55

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

1990 1991 1993 1994 1995

equiv. US$ per student

Intended grant Actual grant received by primary school (means)

1999

Source: Uganda Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys

Tracking Education spending in Uganda

, p y g

Public info campaign

Most effective Anticorruption Measures?


56/57

56

10%

40%

70%

Leadership

Example

Economic

Deregulation

Transparent

Budget

Public Sector

Reform

Civil Liberties/

Voice

PrivatizationAnti -Corrup tion

Commissions

%o

fresponde

ntsthatmark'h

igh'

Source: D. Kaufmann, Corruption: The Facts,Foreign Policy, Summer, 1997

Responses from Officials and Leaders in 62 countries

Data for Analysis and Informing Policy Advice,


57/57

57

Data for Analysis and Informing Policy Advice,

Not for Precise RankingsAny data on Governance, Institutions, and InvestmentClimate are subject to a margin of error. They are not

intended for precise country rankings, but to highlight

relative strengths and weaknesses and draw analytical andpolicy lessons. The data and indicators do not necessarily

reflect official views on rankings by the World Bank or its

Board of Directors. Errors are responsibility of the mainauthor. This presentation draws from collaboration and

inputs from Aart Kray and Massimo Mastruzzi as well as

staff from the Africa region.

Further materials & access to interactive data:

General: www.worldbank.org/wbi/governance

Data: www.govindicators.org

A comparative empirical perspective on governance in African countries

Documents

Transcript of A comparative empirical perspective on governance in African countries