Survey Research (한국조사연구학회지:조사연구)
- Volume 6 Issue 1
- /
- Pages.1-38
- /
- 2005
- /
- 1229-9219(pISSN)
A Comparative Study on the Measurement Model of Anti-Corruption Index : Anti-Corruption Index and CCEJ's Corruption Index
부패지수 측정모형에 대한 비교연구 : 서울시 시정청렴성지수 측정모형과 경실련 부패지수 측정모형을 중심으로
Abstract
Considering the importance of corruption index measurement model and the diffusion of popular awareness about the importance of anti-corruption, this research compared and analyzed existing corruption index measurement models. This paper has selected "Anti-Corruption Index model(ACI model)" that was developed by Seoul Development Institute and "CCEJ's Corruption Index model" which is under use by the Citizens' Coaltion for Economic Justice. These two models were analyzed in terms of appropriateness of 'the indicator and index choice method', 'the research design' and 'the use of statistical data'. This analysis shows that two models have some problems. First, at the level of indicator and index choice method, the indicators of CCEJ's corruption index model is too atomized and redundant. As not putting weight of indicator, it did not consider importance of each indicator. Citizens who evaluated the level of corruption didn't participate in the weight evaluation team, which results in failure of the model to reflect the citizens' opinion. Also, because the question about Seoul Metropolis' corruption level is not included, it is not detected difference between real corruption level and perceptive corruption level. Second, in terms of appropriateness of research design, the sample of the CCEJ' corruption index model is too small to get credibility. The objectivity of research method seems to be low because survey was performed by exit interview. In addition, 38 items are overfull in the questionnire of CCEJ's corruption index model compare to 13 items in ACI model. Also, in making up questions, the terms are redundant and unobvious. Third, in regarding with feasibility of the statistical data, the CCEJ's corruption index model uses regulation data for disciplinary punishment of 25 local governments in Seoul from 1995 to 1999. But, it is common ideas of scholars that statistical data indicates the tip of an iceberg in corruption. So for using a statistical data, it needs a data of enough quantity and has a high level credibility. In addition, objective method of giving weight is not developed. In this point of view, the use of statistical data has some limits. To solve this problem, ① objective data should be included in the indicators, ② various indicators should be developed and ③ a method of giving weight should be improved.
본 논문은 부패문제의 중요성에 대한 대중적 인식의 확산과 부패를 측정하는 연구모형의 중요성을 고려하여 기존의 부패지수 측정모형들을 비교
Keywords
- corruption;
- transparency;
- corruption index;
- corruption index measurement model;
- Anti-Corruption Index(ACI);
- CCEJ's Corruption Index
- 부패;
- 청렴성;
- 부패지수 측정모형;
- 시정청렴성지수(ACI);
- 경실련 부패지수;