Governance spending fixation as a tool for reform to improve institutions

Figures & data

Figure 1. Corruption-growth interrelation. Source: Authors own illustration.

Table 1. Results of governance spending evaluation variables matching with governance quality evaluation criteria exercise.

	Research 1^a			Research 2^b
Governance spending evaluation variable:	A	B	C	A	B	C
Percentage of matches green to green^c	75.0%	83.2%	81.3%	69.2%	79.6%	81.3%
Percentage of matches red to red^c	61.3%	82.1%	73.0%	53.8%	89.3%	74.8%
Percentage of matches (total)	68.2%	82.7%	77.1%	61.5%	84.4%	78.0%
Percentage of mismatches (total)	17.2%	2.2%	9.3%	47.8%	1.8%	9.7%

Note: ^aResearch 1 uses HDI and CPI as governance evaluation criteria for matching exercise with each of governance spending evaluation variables (A, B, and C).

^b Research 2 uses productivity and corruption control indexes as governance evaluation criteria for matching exercise with each of governance spending evaluation variables (A, B, and C) and is carried out in exactly the same fashion as research 1.

^c Green and red refers to top five governance evaluation criteria values (of both welfare and corruption measure) being colored in green, while bottom five – in red. Similarly, highest five values of governance spending evaluation are colored in red and five with lowest values – in green. This is done to all three governance spending evaluation variables (A, B, and C) used for the matching exercise as described in the methodology section.

Source: Authors’ calculation. See Results section in Data file.

Table 2. Statistics describing collection of averages of variable B for every year of both researches of best governance countries.

Min value	Max value	Median	Average	Coef. of variation	SD
0.86	1.09	0.99	0.99	5.26%	0.052

Source: Authors’ calculation. See Results section in Data file.