b1854
Corruption, Good Governance and Economic Development: Contemporary Analysis and Case Studies
M. A. B. Siddique US$
95 Score out of 10
600
3
500
2.5
400
2
300
1.5
200
1
100
0.5
GDP per capita
0
CPI Score
0 2001
Figure 6.1
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Comparison of Bangladesh’s CPI score and GDP per capita (2001–2009)i
Source: Transparency International <http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/ cpi>, accessed 30 May 2011. World Bank, 2010a, <http://data.worldbank.org/indicator>, accessed 30 May 2011.
get around bureaucratic impediments. As suggested by Huntington (1968), Leff (1964) and Nye (1967) this is especially the case of cumbersome regulations, excessive bureaucracy and market restrictions. One line of research, as described by Lambsdorff (2007), argues that corruption is in fact a factor of production and so does not affect the growth of GDP. Despite the magnitude of corruption in Bangladesh, the country has been experiencing a steady improvement in score in the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). As shown in Figure 6.1, the CPI score of Bangladesh has risen steadily since the country joined the index in 2001. One of the larger increases in ranking occurred in 2009 when CPI rose from 2.1 in 2008 to 2.4. This relatively large increase can be attributed to the introduction of institutional and legal reforms in the period of 2007– 2008 which gives the government a greater capacity to tackle corruption (Transparency International, 2009). In the past 49 or 50 years, Bangladesh has experienced a high level of economic growth. Between 1960 and 2009 GDP increased from US$4,274,893,910 to US$89,359,767,442, that is, a growth rate of approximately 1990.34%. Exports have also experienced a drastic increase over the same period, rising from US$427,347,689.70
b1854_Ch-06.indd 95
12/2/2014 11:40:48 AM
