Measuring corruption through business surveys: Methodological quality versus results

Comparative research on business corruption relies heavily on survey data, yet the effect of survey quality on results remains underexplored. This paper examines whether methodological quality influences the stability and comparability of corruption measures. Using fourteen national and international business surveys—including Enterprise Surveys, Eurobarometer, and UNODC-supported national surveys—we assess quality with the Mugellini et al. (2021) framework and test two hypotheses: (H1) higher-quality surveys yield more consistent results across surveys, and (H2) higher-quality surveys yield more stable results over time. Our findings show that surveys of higher methodological quality produce results that are more stable across countries and years, and that surveys with similar quality scores tend to converge in their estimates. These results suggest that business surveys can be a reliable tool for cross-country and longitudinal comparisons, provided methodological standards are met. The study contributes to corruption measurement by identifying strengths and shortcomings across surveys, supporting SDG monitoring (Target 16.5), and offering guidance for policymakers seeking more consistent and comparable data.