A Methodology for Comparing Governance Database, Institutional Profiles Database Robustness
Université Montesquieu-Bordeaux IV: Groupe d’Economie du Développement Working Paper No. DT/171/2012
35 Pages Posted: 13 Jan 2012
Date Written: January 12, 2012
As suggested by Arndt and Oman (2006), Governance indicators have recently blossomed to the extent that it is no longer hyperbolizing to qualify governance assessment field as a “jungle”.
The question of the choice of relevant indicators thereby arouses for researchers studying institutions. While governance indicators guides have already been produced [Arndt, C., Oman, C., (2006); UNDP,(2006)], we were not able to get hold of a comprehensive and actionable methodology to compare rigorously the different institutional measures currently available.
In this paper, aiming to assess the robustness of AFD ’s Institutional Profiles Database - developed in partnership with CEPII and the Maastricht Graduate School of Governance - we propose different tools from simple graphic representation to advance econometrics methods to question any governance indicator relatively to its counterparts, population’s experience and as far as possible objective data.
We show that IPD’s evaluations, for instance, regarding the extent of corruption, appears much consistent with Transparency International’s CPI and World Bank’s WGI. However, we also highlight this database specificity, and report a few outliers. This singularity might result from differentiated perceptions, potentially illustrating a “French bias” that, conversely, might as well reflect an “Anglo-Saxon bias”, nested in World Bank’s and TI’s famous indicators.
Keywords: Corruption, Institutional Profiles Database, AFD, Global Corruption Barometer, Governance, CPI, Transparency International, Corruption measurement, Perception indicators, Econometrics, Panel Data
JEL Classification: O11, O17, O19
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation