Скачать презентацию WP 5 Pan European Survey Measuring Governance at Скачать презентацию WP 5 Pan European Survey Measuring Governance at

c864e61f4e243e17941768ffc17369ac.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 55

WP 5: Pan European Survey Measuring Governance at the Sub. National Level Nicholas Charron, WP 5: Pan European Survey Measuring Governance at the Sub. National Level Nicholas Charron, Associate Professor Quality of Government Institute, University of Gothenburg

Governance & Corruption in Europe • Not just a problem for ’developing countries’ • Governance & Corruption in Europe • Not just a problem for ’developing countries’ • "The links between corruption and the ongoing financial and fiscal crisis in these countries can no longer be ignored, “ (Finn Heinrich, TI, 2012) • “Corruption in Greece Continues Virtually Unchecked” (Der Spiegel, 2012) • The European Commission has described corruption as a “disease that destroys a country from within” and that “Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain – the euro zone’s most financially troubled nations – have deeply rooted problems in their public administration, namely that officials are not accountable for their actions” (Irish Times, 2012)

• 1. 2. 3. Defining & Measuring Governance (Qo. G) in General Key • 1. 2. 3. Defining & Measuring Governance (Qo. G) in General Key building concepts: Impartiality (Rothstein and Teorell 2008) Corruption, Definition: «Public abuse for private gain» Quality/ effectiveness (Kaufmann, Kraay & Mastruzzi) • “NON ZELI AD ZELUM, NEC MERITI AD MERITUM, SED SOLUM NUMERI AD NUMERUM FIAT COLLATIO” (“comparison should be made not on zeal, nor merit, but solely of numbers”) Gregorius X (12101276, Papa 1271) • Although Qo. G measures still imperfect, improving in both scope and availability world-wide • like some measures of’democracy’, most measures of Qo. G are mostly SUBJECTIVE, built mostly on opinions by experts, firms, citizens, NGO’s, etc.

Measuring Governance in EU Lots of indicators: 1. CPI 2. WGI 3. ICRG 4. Measuring Governance in EU Lots of indicators: 1. CPI 2. WGI 3. ICRG 4. Freedom House 5. Eurobarometer & more…

What about below the country level? • EU is a community of regions (ERDF, What about below the country level? • EU is a community of regions (ERDF, REGIO, structural funds, etc. ) • Regional difference in development wider than states at times: Ex. 2011 unemployment rates in: IT: Bolzano (2. 7%) vs. Sicilia (14. 7%) ES: Pais Vasco (10. 5%) vs. Andalucia(28%) BE: Flanders (5. 1%) vs. Wallonne (11. 5%) SK: Bratislava Kraj (6. 2%) vs. Východné Slovensko (18. 5%) Country ex. : Denmark (7. 4%) vs. Bulgaria (10. 4%) **So we need to measure corruption/governance at regional level as well. .

The ’European Quality of Government Index’ (EQI) • Almost all existing corruption/ Qo. G The ’European Quality of Government Index’ (EQI) • Almost all existing corruption/ Qo. G data (from the mid-1990 s) at national-level • 2010: we present 1 st (and only) mulit-country, sub national data on Qo. G to date. Funded by EU Commission (REGIO) • We created a Qo. G Composite Index for 172 E. U. regions • The study is based on a citizen-survey of respondents in EU • 34, 000 respondents in 18 countries (+/- 200 per region). They are the ’consumers’ of Qo. G • 16 Qo. G-focused (all translated into country languages) questions on: – personal experiences & perceptions – of the Quality, Corruption & Impartiality… – …on Education, Health care, and Law Enforcement – 2013: we build on this past research in WP 5

Selected Publications on the EQI data Article: Charron, Nicholas, Lewis Dijkstra & Victor Lapuente Selected Publications on the EQI data Article: Charron, Nicholas, Lewis Dijkstra & Victor Lapuente (2013): Regional Governance Matters: Quality of Government within European Union Member States, Regional Studies, Link: DOI: 10. 1080/00343404. 2013. 770141 Book: ’Quality of Government and Corruption from a European Perspective’ eds. Charron, Nicholas, Victor Lapuente and Bo Rothstein. 2013. Edward Elgar Publishing EU Commission Working Paper: ‘Charron, Nicholas, Lewis Dijkstra & Victor Lapuente. 2012. ’Regional Govrnance Matters: A Study on Regional Variation of Quality of Government in the EU Link: http: //ec. europa. eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/work/2012_02_go vernance. pdf

2013 Survey: the sample 2013 Survey: the sample

The Questions • 34 questions total • 20 Focused primarily on regional level governance The Questions • 34 questions total • 20 Focused primarily on regional level governance in 3 sectors: education, health care & law enforcement, as well as media & elections (16 go to build the’EQI’) • 7 demographic • Other 7: social trust, perceptions of ’meritocracy’ in public & private sectors, party support, electoral corruption

Personal Experience with Primary Services in Question Personal Experience with Primary Services in Question

Personal Experience with Primary Services in Question Personal Experience with Primary Services in Question

Personal Experience with Primary Services in Question Personal Experience with Primary Services in Question

Other info on respondents Other info on respondents

Other info on respondents Other info on respondents

Other info on respondents Other info on respondents

Perception of what it takes for sucess in public sector Perception of what it takes for sucess in public sector

Perception of what it takes for sucess in private sector Level of Perceived Meritocracy: Perception of what it takes for sucess in private sector Level of Perceived Meritocracy: Sucess in Private Sector Turkey Austria Ireland UK Germany Finland Denmark Netherlands Belgium Italy France Czech Rep. Sweden Portugal Slovak Rep. Hungary Romania Spain Greece Poland Kosovo Bulgaria Croatia Ukraine Serbia hard work 2 4 country average 6 Luck & Connections

Other info on respondents Perceived Meritocracy of Private Sector in Italian Regions ITD 2 Other info on respondents Perceived Meritocracy of Private Sector in Italian Regions ITD 2 - Provincia Autonoma Trento ITD 1 - Provincia Autonoma Bolzano/Bozen ITC 4 - Lombardia ITD 3 - Veneto ITC 2 - Valle d'Aosta/Vallée d'Aoste ITD 4 - Friuli-Venezia Giulia ITD 5 - Emilia-Romagna ITE 1 - Toscana ITC 3 - Liguria ITC 1 - Piemonte ITF 4 - Puglia ITF 3 - Campania ITE 3 - Marche ITE 2 - Umbria ITE 4 - Lazio ITF 2 - Molise ITF 5 - Basilicata ITG 1 - Sicilia ITF 6 - Calabria ITF 1 - Abruzzo ITG 2 - Sardegna 0 1 2 3 4 mean regional response 5 6

EQI data, 2010 & 2013 EQI data, 2010 & 2013

3 ’Pillars’ of EQI • Corruption, Impartialtiy & quality • For ex. , for 3 ’Pillars’ of EQI • Corruption, Impartialtiy & quality • For ex. , for corruption, We combine perceptions and experiences of citizens (as opposed to ’experts’ – less risk of ’feedback loop’) Two types of questions: A. general perceptions questions (0 -10, higher = more perceived corruption) B. Experiences with ’petty corruption’ *Let’s look at the aggregated regional scores

Results from 2010 Results from 2010

% of respondents paying any bribe in last 12 months % of respondents paying any bribe in last 12 months

Building the Index 1. Aggregation Aggregate 400 respondents by region for each of 16 Building the Index 1. Aggregation Aggregate 400 respondents by region for each of 16 questions • Using PCA, 3 groups (’pillars’) identified: corruption, impartialtiy and quality – 16 indicators aggreated to 3 pillars • 3 pillars aggregated to Regional Qo. G Index 2. Normalization of Data • Standardized indicators (z-distribution) 3. Weights • Equal Weighting

Regional and National Qo. G • Combine regional data with national level WGI data Regional and National Qo. G • Combine regional data with national level WGI data • Set each country’s EQI mean to WGI average of 4 Qo. G pillars • Aggregate regional scores (population weighted), around which regional scores show within-country variation Why? • Regional Qo. G embedded in National Context • Include countries with no NUTS 2 regions • Can retroactively adjust when new regions/countries added in future

The EQI: 2010 • A composite index based on 16 Qo. G survey questions The EQI: 2010 • A composite index based on 16 Qo. G survey questions from 20092010. • Round 2 in 2013

EQI 2013, w/ cluster groups EQI 2013, w/ cluster groups

Robustness of Data • 2010: Extensive sensitivity testing (both WGI data and regional data), Robustness of Data • 2010: Extensive sensitivity testing (both WGI data and regional data), • Alternative aggregation, weighting, normalization method, exluding certain individual charactoristics by gender, income, education and age. • Constructed 95% confidence intervals around each regional estimate

EQI 2010 and Margins of Error -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 EQI 2010 EQI 2010 and Margins of Error -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 EQI 2010 0 50 100 150 EQI by Rank order EQI 2010 95% c. i. 200 250

Within country variation: 2010 Within country variation: 2010

How closely do perceptions match experiences? How closely do perceptions match experiences?

Perceptions vs. Experiences 2013 by sector and total Perceptions vs. Experiences 2013 by sector and total

Perceptions vs. Experiences: Residuals 2 RS 21 - Šumadija and Western Serbia RS 22 Perceptions vs. Experiences: Residuals 2 RS 21 - Šumadija and Western Serbia RS 22 - Southern and Eastern Serbia - Jadranska Hrvatska PT 11 - Norte HR 03 rs 12 - vojvodina rs 11 - belgrade PT 16 - Centro (P) HR 04 - Kontinentalna Hrvatska PT 30 - -Região Autónoma da Madeira Number 25 - Crimea PT 17 Lisboa 'over-perceive' corruption -1 0 1 SK 04 gr 1 Stredne Vychodne Slovensko Number 15 - Zakarpattia oblast (region) SK 03 -- voreia ellada BG 31 Slovensko - Severozapaden FR 91 PT 15 - Algarve - Guadeloupe gr 3 - attiki SK 02 - Zapadne Slovensko FR 92 - Martinique gr 4 ES 70 - Canarias CZ 04 - Severozapad- nisia aigaiou, kriti SK 01 --kentriki gr 2 Bratislavsky kraj ES 61 - tr 3 - Nord Number 7 - Lviv oblast (region) - Kiev ob BG 32 Severen tsentralen ellada Number 4 ES 52 CZ 02 -- ege - Pas-de-Calais - Andalucía Cechy ES 53 - Illes. FR 30 Stredni. Valenciana-dos Açores ES 51 Principado de. Réunion -be 3 Comunidad Praha Cataluña - Galicia PT 20 --Picardie - Guyane Região ES 12 -FR 21 Balears- wallonne FR 22 FR 94 Asturias CZ 01 ES 11 région - Autónoma FR 93 Number 13 21 - Odessa oblast (region) Number - Kharkov oblast (region) Champagne-Ardenne ES 24 Comunidad Aragón - Stredni Morava ES 41 -País --Castilla-La Mancha - istanbul CZ 07 ES 21 -ES 42 Vasco de. CZ 08 - Moravskoslezsko ES 30 - Castilla y León Madrid Navarra ES 22 - Comunidad Foral de tr 1 CZ 05 FR 82 - Provence-Alpes-Côtehoofdstedelijk gewest be 1 Extremadura région --Severovychod CZ 03 Murcia ES 43 - ---Región de. Jihozapad ES 62 Alentejo bruxelles-capitale / brussels d'Azur PT 18 ES 13 --Cantabria - Lorraine FR 41 ES 23 La Rioja - Languedoc-Roussillon FR 26 dee. FR 72 - FR 81 FR 83 - Corse -FR 63 Auvergne. Wien sachsen-anhalt. Bourgogne - Limousin - Jihovychod tr 5 - bati anadolu RS 23 - Kosovo and Metohija CZ 06 AT 13 gewest be 2 -- Oberösterreich vlaams - - Haute-Normandie AT 31 FR 23 FR 25 - Basse-Normandie BG 34 ITF 4 - Puglia FR 71 Rhône-Alpes deg FR 24 - Centre- Vorarlberg - thüringen- - dogutrb - ortadogu anadolu - Yugoiztochen AT 34 tr 4 marmara FR 42 - Alsace - Poitou-Charentes FR 61 tr 7 - orta de - Pays anadolu de 4 -FR 53 FR 51 FR 43 --Franche-Comté de 2 brandenburg- Midi-Pyrénées - bayern- Aquitaine la Loire ITF 3 - Campania ded mecklenburg-vorpommern sachsen FR 10 Île de France FR 62 de 9 ---FR 52 kuzeydogu anadolu niedersachsen de 8 - rheinland-pfalz PL 33 Swietokrzyskie AT 12 Bretagne deb - bremen Niederösterreich tra AT 21 - - - RO 42 - Vest de 5 de 7 Kärnten. Tirol PL 11 - Lodzkie - Umbria ITF 6 - Calabria dec de 6 AT 33 -dea hessen saarland - nordrhein-westfalen ITE 2 de 1 AT 22 ---hamburg PL 51 Dolnoslaskie baden-württemberg - Podkarpackie Steiermark tr 6 PL 34 Podlaskie ITC 4 akdeniz de 3 -Lubuskie RO 11 - Nord-Vest AT 11 -PL 43 - -berlin- PL 32 - Marche - Lombardia - Sicilia RO 31 - Sud - Muntenia Burgenland (A)ITE 3 PL 42 Zachodniopomorskie def - schleswig-holstein ukg - west. AT 32 -Salzburg midlands (england) Wielkopolskie ITG 1 PL 12 ITC 1 PL 41 ukf Södra Sverige Warminsko-Mazurskie - Piemonte. ITF 2 - Molise RO 21 - Nord-Est Oltenia - east midlands (england)- Mazowieckie RO 41 - Sud-Vest SE 2 - Norra PL 62 SE 3 - - north holland ITE 4 Lazio nl 32 - south west - Pomorskie --Malopolskie ITF 5 -- Basilicata Centru PL 21 Lubelskie PL 63 RO 12 PL 31 ukn nl 22Östra Sverige (england) - -ukk gelderland northern ireland ITC 3 ukm nl 33 --north PL 52 (england) ukc scotland trc guneydogu PL 22 - Slaskie- Liguria east SE 1 -south holland. Opolskie uklyorkshire karadeniz wales uke- north - bati (england) PL 61 ukdukh-limburg and -the-humber anadolu - Emilia-Romagna nl 42 - -tr 8 west england Kujawsko-Pomorskie ITG 2 - Sardegna ITD 5 east dogu karadeniz of RO 22 - Sud-Est flevoland ITF 1 ukj nl 23 ukidrenthe marmara -nl 34 ---tr 9 london ITC 2 - Valle d'Aosta/Vallée d'Aoste. Abruzzo south east - bati nl 13 --tr 2 (england) ITD 3 - Veneto nl 31 nl 11 zeeland - utrecht BG 41 - Yugozapaden groningen nl 21 nl 41 friesland overijssel ie 02 --nl 12 - -north brabant southern and eastern BG 42 ITE 1 - Toscana Yuzhen tsentralen fi 19 - west finland hu 2 - dunantul ie 01 - north finland Provincia Autonoma Trento fi 1 a east finland ITD 1 - Provincia - Friuli-Venezia Giulia hu 3 ITD 4 fi 18 south midland fi 13 - - borderfinland ITD 2 - western Autonoma Bolzano/Bozen - alfold es eszak DK 02 --Sjælland DK 05 Nordjylland hu 1 - kozep-magyarorszag DK 03 - Syddanmark DK 04 - Midtjylland DK 01 - Hovedstaden RO 32 - Bucuresti - Ilf 'under-perceive' corruption -2 fi 20 - aland BG 33 - Severoiztochen 0 10 20 30 40 % of respondents paying a bribe in the last 12 months

Perception vs. Experience: country & regional level: 2010 Perception vs. Experience: country & regional level: 2010

Examples of other plans with WP 5 data • Continue to build EQI/ undergo Examples of other plans with WP 5 data • Continue to build EQI/ undergo extensive robustness checks • Explore reasons why within country variation of Qo. G varies • Explore relationship between entreprenuership and quality of regional institutions • Explore relationship between gender equality and regional Qo. G