One of NIGERIA’S greatest challenges is CORRUPTION – in Public and Private Institutions – which has greatly affected her development as well as how her Citizens are treated in other countries. This analysis takes an in-depth look TI CPI of Nigeria from 1998 till date.

1. TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL
PERCEPTION ABOUT
NIGERIA

2. In 1998, the Transparency International (TI) started the
Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) as a composite indicator
used to measure perceptions of corruption in the public
sector in different countries around the world.
Perceptions is how people see you which definitely affects
how they also relate with you. Perception is not easily
changed, it requires verifiable evidence that is against initial
indicators that led to the status quo.
One of NIGERIA’S greatest challenges is CORRUPTION – in
Public and Private Institutions – which has greatly affected
her development as well as how her Citizens are treated in
other countries. This analysis takes an in-depth look TI CPI
of Nigeria from 1998 till date.
Data used from this analysis is from TI

3. TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL VISION-MISSION
Vision: a world in which government, business, civil society and
the daily lives of people are free of corruption.
In 1993, a few individuals decided to take a stance against
corruption and created Transparency International. Now present
in more than 100 countries, the movement works relentlessly to
stir the world’s collective conscience and bring about change.
Much remains to be done to stop corruption, but much has also
been achieved, including:
 the creation of international anti-corruption conventions
 the prosecution of corrupt leaders and seizures of their illicitly
gained riches
 national elections won and lost on tackling corruption
 companies held accountable for their behaviour both at
home and abroad.

4. The CPI aggregates data from a number of different sources that
provide perceptions of business people and country experts of
the level of corruption in the public sector. 12 data sources were
used to construct the 2014 CPI:
TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL DATA SOURCES
African
Development
Bank
Governance
Ratings
Economist
Intelligence Unit
Country Risk
Ratings
IMD World
Competitiveness
Yearbook
World Bank -
Country Policy
and Institutional
Assessment
Bertelsmann
Foundation
Sustainable
Governance
Indicators
Freedom House
Nations in Transit
Political and
Economic Risk
Consultancy
Asian Intelligence
World Economic
Forum Executive
Opinion Survey
(EOS)
Bertelsmann
Foundation
Transformation
Index
Global Insight
Country Risk
Ratings
Political Risk
Services
International
Country Risk
Guide
World Justice
Project Rule of
Law Index

5. DATA SOURCES
C P I
1
2
3
4
9
10
11
12
7
6
5 8

6. DATA SOURCES DESCRIPTION
AFDB
The African Development
Bank (AFDB) is a
regional multilateral
development bank,
engaged in promoting the
economic development
and social progress of
countries on the
continent.
BF-SGI BF-TI EIU
The AfDB’s 2013
Governance Ratings are
part of the Country Policy
and Institutional
Assessment (CPIA)
Corruption Question(s)
Transparency,
Accountability and
Corruption in the
Public Sector
Bertelsmann
Foundation Sustainable
Governance Indicators
The Sustainable
Governance Indicators
(SGI) examine
governance and
policymaking in all OECD
and EU member states in
order to evaluate each
country's need for, and
ability to carry out, reform
To what extent are
public officeholders
prevented from
abusing their
position for private
interests?
Corruption Question(s)
Bertelsmann Foundation
Transformation Index
The Transformation
Index provides the
framework for an
exchange of good
practice among agents of
reform.
To what extent are
public officeholders
who abuse their
positions prosecuted
or penalized?”
Corruption Question(s)
Corruption Question(s)
To what extent does
the government
successfully contain
corruption?
Economist Intelligence
Unit Country Risk Ratings
Country Risk Ratings are
designed to provide in-
depth and timely analysis
of the risks of financial
exposure in more than
140 countries
Are there clear procedures and
accountability governing the allocation
and use of public funds?
Are public funds misappropriated by
ministers/public officials for private or
party political purposes?
Are there special funds for which
there is no accountability?
Are there general abuses of public
resources?
Is there a professional civil service or
are large numbers of officials directly
appointed by the government?
Is there an independent body
auditing the management of public
finances?
Is there an independent judiciary with
the power to try ministers/public
officials for abuses?
Is there a tradition of a payment of
bribes to secure contracts and gain
favours?

7. DATA SOURCES DESCRIPTION
FH-NIT
Freedom House Nations in
Transit. The Nations in
Transit (NIT) reports
measure democratisation
in 29 nations and
administrative areas
throughout Central Europe
and the Newly
Independent States (NIS).
BF-SGI IMD PERC
Corruption Question(s)
Global Insight Country
Risk Ratings
The Global Insight country
risk rating system provides
a six-factor analysis of the
risk environment in 204
countries/territories. The
six factors are political,
economic, legal, tax
operational and security
risk.
•Corruption, particularly as it
affects operational activities for
businesses. There is analytical
emphasis on the economic and
political drivers of the problem.
•From a business perspective,
corruption is a particular
concern in relation to obtaining
business permits and
favourable policy and planning
decisions. Analysts will closely
assess businesses’ experience
of these processes.
Corruption Question(s)
IMD World
Competitiveness Yearbook
The World
Competitiveness
Yearbook (WCY)
measures the
competitiveness of
nations and, in doing
so, both ranks and
examines how a
nation’s socio-political
and economic climate
affects corporate
competitiveness.
Bribing and
corruption: Exist or do
not exist
Corruption Question(s)
Corruption Question(s)
Political and Economic
Risk Consultancy
PERC publishes
fortnightly newsletters,
which are available to
subscribers, on a number
of issues. The data for the
CPI was gathered from
the corruption newsletter,
which gathers and
interprets data from an
executive opinion survey
of local and expatriate
businesspeople.
Has the government implemented
effective anti-corruption initiatives?
Is the government free from excessive
bureaucratic regulations, registration
requirements, and other controls that
increase opportunities for corruption?
Are there adequate laws requiring
financial disclosure and disallowing conflict
of interest?
Does the government advertise jobs and
contracts?
Does the state enforce an effective
legislative or administrative process—
particularly one that is free of prejudice
against one’s political opponents—to
prevent, investigate, and prosecute the
corruption of government officials and civil
servants?
Do whistleblowers, anti-corruption
activists, investigators, and journalists
enjoy legal protections that make them feel
secure about reporting cases of bribery and
corruption?
To what extent do you
perceive corruption to be
a problem in the following
positions?
To what extent do you
perceive corruption to be
a problem affecting the
following institutions

8. DATA SOURCES DESCRIPTION
PRS
Political Risk Services
International Country Risk
Guide. On a monthly basis
since 1980, their
International Country Risk
Guide (ICRG) has
produced political,
economic, and financial
risk ratings for
countries/territories
important to international
business.
WB-CPIA EOS PERC
Corruption Question(s)
World Bank Country
Policy and Institutional
Assessment
The CPIA rtes all IDA-
eligible countries against a
set of 16 criteria grouped in
four clusters: (a) economic
management; (b) structural
policies; (c) policies for
social inclusion and equity;
and (d) public sector
management and
institutions.
Transparency,
Accountability and
Corruption in the
Public Sector
Corruption Question(s)
World Economic Forum
Executive Opinion Survey
(EOS)
The Executive Opinion
Survey (EOS) is the World
Economic Forum's annual
survey of business
executives.
Corruption Question(s)
Corruption Question(s)
World Justice Project
Rule of Law Index
The WJP Rule of Law
Index is an assessment tool
designed by The World
Justice Project to offer a
detailed and
comprehensive picture of
the extent to which
countries/territories adhere
to the rule of law in
practice.
The measure is most
concerned with actual or
potential corruption in the
form of excessive
patronage, nepotism, job
reservations, exchange of
favours, secret party
funding, and suspiciously
close ties between politics
and business.
• Government officials in the
executive branch do not use
public office for private gain
• Government officials in the
judicial branch do not use
public office for private gain
• Government officials in the
police and the military do not
use public office for private
gain
• Government officials in the
legislature do not use public
office for private gain
In your country, how common is
it for firms to make
undocumented extra payments
or bribes connected with the
following:
a) Imports and exports;
b) Public Utilities;
c) Annual Tax Payments;
d) Awarding of public contracts
and licensing;
e) Obtaining favourable judicial
decisions
In your country, how
common is diversion of
public funds to companies,
individuals or groups due to
corruption?”

9. METHODOLOGY
The following steps are followed to calculate the CPI:
1. Selection of data sources
A. Reliable data collection and methodology from a credible institution
B. Data addresses corruption in the public sector
C. Quantitative granularity
D. Cross country comparability
E. Multi year data-set
2. Standardize data sources: Each source is then standardized to be
compatible with other available sources, for aggregation to the CPI scale. The
standardization converts all the data sources to a scale of 0-100 where a 0 = highest
level of perceived corruption, and 100 = lowest level of perceived corruption.
3. Aggregate the rescaled data
Each country’s CPI score is calculated as a simple average of all the available rescaled
scores for that country (note, we do not use any of the imputed values as a score for the
aggregated CPI). A country will only be given a score if there are at least three data
sources available from which to calculate this average.
4. Report a measure of uncertainty
The CPI score will be reported alongside a standard error and confidence interval which
reflects the variance in the value of the source data that comprises the CPI score.

10. HOW HAVE WE IMPROVED IN OUR
RATING SINCE 1998?

11. TI RATING OF NIGERIA (1998 – 2014)
YEAR RANK/TOTAL SCORE SD RANGE SURVEY
1998 81/85 1.9 0.5 5
1999 98/99 1.6 0.8 5
2000 90/90 1.2 0.6 0.6 - 2.1 4
2001 90/91 1.0 0.9 – 2.1 4
2002 101/102 1.6 0.6 0.9 – 2.5 6
2003 132/133 1.4 0.4 0.9 – 2.0 9
2004 144/146 1.6 1.4 – 1.8 9
2005 152/159 1.9 1.7 – 2.0 9
2006 142/163 2.2 2.0 – 2.3 7
2007 147/179 2.2 2.0 – 2.4 8
2008 121/180 2.7 2.3 – 3.0 7
2009 130/180 2.5 2.2 – 2.7 7
2010 134/178 2.4 0.4 2.0 – 3.3 7
2011 143/182 2.4 0.14 1.9 – 3.2 10
*2012 139/176 27 2.7 17 – 38 9
2013 144/177 25 3.1 14 – 40 9
2014 136/174 27 2.82 19 – 37 8
*Methodology updated from 2012 Report: CPI 2012 will henceforth be presented on a 0-100 scale

12. TI RATING OF NIGERIA (1998 – 2014)
YEAR RANK/TOTAL PERCENTILE
1998 81/85 95%
1999 98/99 99%
2000 90/90 100%
2001 90/91 99%
2002 101/102 99%
2003 132/133 99%
2004 144/146 99%
2005 152/159 96%
2006 142/163 87%
2007 147/179 82%
2008 121/180 67%
2009 130/180 72%
2010 134/178 75%
2011 143/182 79%
*2012 139/176 79%
2013 144/177 81%
2014 136/174 78%
While Nigeria was in Bottom 5%
most corrupt Nations in 1998,
we have gradually moved to a
better part of Bottom 22% as at
2014.
This basically mean Nigeria had
95% chance of appearing on
the list of most corrupt Nations
in 1998 but now have 78% in
2014.
This gives a differential of about
17% - IMPROVEMENT.
ALL TIME BEST WAS IN 2008

13. WHAT IS THE TREND BETWEEN
DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENTS?

14. TI RATING BETWEEN DEMOCRATIC GOVT.
YEAR RANK/TOTAL PERCENTILE
1998 81/85 95%
1999 98/99 99%
2000 90/90 100%
2001 90/91 99%
2002 101/102 99%
2003 132/133 99%
2004 144/146 99%
2005 152/159 96%
2006 142/163 87%
2007 147/179 82%
2008 121/180 67%
2009 130/180 72%
2010 134/178 75%
2011 143/182 79%
*2012 139/176 79%
2013 144/177 81%
2014 136/174 78%
OBJ
YAR
GEJ
95% to 82%
13% drop in
corruption
rating
67% to 75%
8% increase in
corruption rating
79% to 78%
1% increase in
corruption rating
+15%
-4%

15. NIGERIA RANK / SCORE
A country’s score indicates the perceived level of public sector corruption on a
scale of 0-100, where 0 means that a country is perceived as highly corrupt
and a 100 means that a country is perceived as very clean. A country's rank
indicates its position relative to the other countries/territories included in the
index. Ranks can change merely if the number of countries included in the
index changes.
THIS CLEARLY SHOWS THAT RANKING
IS NOT AS IMPORTANT AS SCORE!
IS NIGERIA
BETTER IN 2014
COMPARED TO
2013?
----------------------------->
YES!

16. NIGERIA RANK / SCORE
“Where 0 means that a country is perceived as
highly corrupt and a 100 means that a country is
perceived as very clean.”
0 10050 7525
VERY
CLEAN
PARTIALLY
CLEAN
HIGHLY
CORRUPT
CORRUPT CLEAN
In 2013, Nigeria CPI score was 25, in 2014 it is 27 (+2),
which shows that Nigeria is making slow progress from
CORRUPT to PARTIALLY CLEAN.
However, this comparison is not absolutely correct
considering the fact that different data sources make up
the CPI Score.

17. NIGERIA TI SCORE – 2012, 2013, 2014
Rank
CPIScore
Surveys
Standard
Error
95% Confidence
Interval
Range Data sources
Lower Upper MIN MAX
AFDB
BF
(BTI)
ICRG
WB
WEF
WJP
EIU
GI
TI
2012 139 27 9 2.7 22 31 17 38 32 36 21 35 23 17 38 22 19
2013 144 25 9 3.1 20 30 14 40 40 36 21 35 14 17 21 22 19
2014 136 27 8 2.82 22 32 19 37 37 36 21 35 22 19 21 22
While 2012 & 2013 had 9 Surveys, 2014 had 8; therefore it doesn’t
make much qualitative sense to compare 2013 rating with 2014.
Basically, the difference between 2013 & 2014 TI rating of Nigeria
is AFDB(-), WEF(+), and WJP(+). Therefore, in order to determine
qualitatively how exactly Nigeria can improve and become a
cleaner society, we must focus where we specifically got it wrong
as indicated in AFDB records between 2013 and 2014.
AFDB WEF WJP

18. Are you having
issues with making
sense of your data? Analysis by: Wale Micaiah
e: walegate@yahoo.com
m: 08078001800
w: www.statisense.com
w: www.walemicaiah.com
Freely share, freely use and freely
acknowledge the source – © Wale Micaiah