Full Indicators List

This Indicator represents the mean value of several questions from the Open Budget Survey, measuring transparency in the Executive’s Budget Proposal

A composite indicator derived from the T-Index assessing the online availability of public expenditure information.

This indicator consists of the standardized sum of individual scores for relevant items in the de facto Transparency Index

A composite indicator derived from the T-Index assessing the online availability of national legislation, Supreme Court decisions, and hearing schedules.

This score captures the existence of online portals to access relevant government information. It evaluates 14 different categories ranging from supreme court rulings, government expenditures and registers of commerce, to procurement information, mining concessions and financial disclosure of politicians.

A composite indicator derived from the T-Index assessing the availability of financial disclosures and conflict of interest disclosures of public officials

The T-Index provides a score that measures the real (de facto) and legal (de jure) transparency of governments. It evaluates the availability, accessibility, and comprehensiveness of key public information required to deter corruption.

The Transparency Index score represented as a percentage.

Perceived levels of corruption in the public sector

Share of public tenders that received more than one bid

The IPI is based on 6 proxy indicators associated with constraints and opportunities of corruption

Share of wealth (the total value of non-financial and financial assets( owned by the richest 1% of the population

A score out of 100 assessing the degree of freedom enjoyed by journalists

This score captures the government's commitment to transparency as per the country's legislation and international agreements. It looks at 6 different categories including the country's ratification of the United Nations convention against Corruption, the existence of a freedom of information law, and participation in initiatives such as the Open Government Partnership.

Strength of the legal framework on campaign and political financing

This indicator captures whether the existing legislation contemplates bans on private donations, including from foreign interests, corporations, trade unions, and anonymous sources.

This indicator captures whether the existing legislation incorporates provisions to determine eligibility for public funding to political parties and how public funding is allocated. Additionally, the indicator considers whether public funding to political parties incorporates provisions to foster gender equality among political parties and candidates.

This indicator captures whether the existing legislation incorporates limits on spending and bans certain expenditures including vote-buying or the use of state resources to favor or disadvantage specific political parties or candidates.

This indicator captures whether the existing legislation defines specific reporting standards for political parties and campaign expenditures, as well as the existence of an adequate institutional framework to examine financial reports, investigate violations, and sanction political parties in case of infractions.

Strength of the legal framework on financial disclosure for politicians

This indicator evaluates various aspects of financial disclosure for Heads of State, including the items required to be disclosed, the frequency of filing, the sanctions for non-compliance, the mechanisms for monitoring and oversight, and public access to the declarations

This indicator evaluates various aspects of financial disclosure for Ministers, including the items required to be disclosed, the frequency of filing, the sanctions for non-compliance, the mechanisms for monitoring and oversight, and public access to the declarations

This indicator evaluates various aspects of financial disclosure for members of Parliament, including the items required to be disclosed, the frequency of filing, the sanctions for non-compliance, the mechanisms for monitoring and oversight, and public access to the declarations

This indicator evaluates various aspects of financial disclosure for civil servants, including the items required to be disclosed, the frequency of filing, the sanctions for non-compliance, the mechanisms for monitoring and oversight, and public access to the declarations

Strength of the legal framework on conflict of interest

This indicator captures whether the existing legislation restricts specific variations of conflict of interest such as accepting gifts, private firm/stock ownership, holding government contracts, etc.

This indicator captures whether the existing legislation stipulates fines, penal sanctions, or administrative sanctions for violations of COI regulations restricting behavior

This indicator captures whether the existing legislation incorporates designates specific monitoring and enforcement bodies for matters of conflict of interest.

Strength of the legal framework on access to information

This indicator assesses the scope of public information disclosure, including the coverage of both public and private sectors, and the access to specific documents, whether subject to reactive and/or proactive disclosure

This indicator evaluates existing procedures to access public information and the deadlines for its release

This indicator assesses exemptions to disclosure and the availability of appeals processes

This indicator assesses the presence of specified sanctions for violations of disclosure requirements, including administrative sanctions, fines, and criminal sanctions

This indicator evaluates the existence of institutional mechanisms to support the implementation of disclosure requirements, including the mandatory appointment of information officers in public agencies, the designation of a public body responsible for applying sanctions, the presence of a public body dedicated to public outreach, the establishment of a nodal agency for RTI implementation support and compliance, the legal specification of the Ombudsman's involvement in implementation, and the requirement for reporting data and/or implementation.

Strength of the legal framework on public procurement

This indicator captures mainly the existing thresholds above which the public procurement regulation applies in different sectors and types of products.

This indicator captures the amount of information available online to trace the different stages of the procurement process, from tendering to contracting.

This indicator captures whether the existing legislation establishes specific criteria to evaluate the bids received and avoid preferential treatment. This includes, among others, reasons for exclusion, clauses that favour national companies over international ones.

This indicator captures the extent to which the existing legal framework in a country helps guarantee open and competitive procurement procedures by ensuring the publication of the terms of reference, requiring a minimum number of bidders, and defining the minimum number of days that bidding processes remain open.

This indicator captures whether the existing legislation in a country establishes an institutional framework to regulate public procurement and process complaints.

The score is based on the Online Services Index, integrated in the UN E-Government Development Index, which measures the scope and quality of online services

Simple mean of standardized values of the percentage in populations of fixed broadband subscriptions, Internet users , and Facebook users

This indicator captures judicial independence in a country, based on responses from the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Dataset

The number of cross-border initiated cases involving firms and foreign public officials by country. The dataset compiles cases from sources like TRACE Compendium, DOJ, SEC, and others. The data is an aggregate value of all years until 2022.

The number of cross-border initiated cases involving firms and foreign public officials by country. The dataset compiles cases from sources like TRACE Compendium, DOJ, SEC, and others. The data is an aggregate value of all years until 2022.

convictions of political leaders who served as heads of government, between 1946 and 2020. To be included, leaders must have been convicted by a domestic civil court after holding office. The dataset excludes convictions by foreign, international, or military courts, as well as impeachments and removals from office.