ClujManifest 2016 - Numarul 14

18
I N T E R N A I O N A L
Apare săptămânal, Miercuri
Pre ‐ 1 leu
THE TRUE ECONOMIC
COST OF CORRUPTION
IN EUROPE: UP TO €990
BILLION ANNUALLY
Pentru a înelege adevăratul cost economic al corupiei
din Europa, Comisia europeană a comandat RAND
Europe o analiză economică asupra impactului generat
de corupie în statele UE. Rand Europe este un ONG,
institut de cercetare a cărui misiune este de peste 20
de ani a ajuta la implementarea politicilor și
a mecanismelor de luare a deciziilor
Pentru a înelege adevăratul cost economic
al corupiei din Europa,
Comisia europeană a comandat
RAND Europe o analiză economică
asupra impactului generat de corupie
în statele UE. Rand Europe este un
ONG, institut de cercetare a cărui misiune
este de peste 20 de ani a ajuta la
implementarea politicilor și a mecanismelor
de luare a deciziilor prin
analiză și cercetare.
Iată un text referitor la această analiză
a celor de la RAND Europe.
The True Economic Cost of Corruption
in Europe: Up to €990 Billion Annually
by Marco Hafner and Jirka Taylor
To fully understand the true economic
costs of corruption within the European
Union, the European Parliament
commissioned RAND Europe to conduct
an econometric analysis to estimate
the potential harm of corruption
on the EU and its member states.
Our analysis resulted in a new estimate
of up to €990 billion in GDP
terms being lost annually, demonstrating
the significant economic impact
of corruption on the EU and its
member states. Thatʹs more than eight
times existing estimates.
Prior to our ʹCost of non‐Europe Corruptionʹ
study, the best estimates on
the cost of corruption within the EU
was at least €120 billion, which was
provided by the European Commission
in 2014. At the time, the former
EU Home Affairs Commissioner Cecilia
Malmström described the scale of
corruption as “breathtaking” and
even stated that the true cost was
prin analiză și cercetare.
“probably much higher” than €120
billion.
Our study also found that there are
measures that can be put in place to
claw back the financial losses happening
each year, including monitoring of
more member states, establishing a
new office to assist in investigations,
and implementing an EU‐wide procurement
system. Together, these
steps could retrieve up to €70 billion
in losses annually.
Corruption comes in many forms,
from paying and receiving bribes, to
exerting influence to provide privileged
access to public services, goods
or contracts. There are even examples
of corruption during procurement,
with contracts wrien to suit only one
bidder or tenders not giving organisations
enough time to respond. It is
well known that corruption is associated
with many societal disadvantages,
from national governments
having weaker rule of law to an increase
in organised crime.
Corruption across Europe appears to
be a bigger problem than previously
thought.
Our new estimates considered both
the indirect effects of corruption, such
as disincentives of firms to invest due
to corruption in EU member states,
and the direct effects of corruption,
such as money lost on tax revenues
and public procurement.
When looking at averages of three internationally
recognised corruption
indices, there were variations in levels
of corruption across the 28 EU member
states, with room for improvement
everywhere, but especially in
member states in Southern and Eastern
Europe. A range of policy measures
will be required to address this
EU‐wide corruption and help to retrieve
some of the money lost each
year.
One of these measures is applying the
updated Cooperation and Verification
Mechanism (CVM), which was applied
to Bulgaria and Romania before
they joined the EU in 2007, to other EU
member states. Under CVM, both
countries are subject to regular
progress monitoring according to
agreed benchmarks across a number
of policy areas, with a particular focus
on the fight against corruption. Failing
to act in these policy areas can lead to
a loss of privileges associated with EU
membership.
By contrast, the mechanism was not
applied to other new member states
that had joined the EU previously,
such as Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia,
Slovakia, Czech Republic, Hungary
and Poland. These member states
were all found to have higher than average
corruption levels. Seing aside
practical and political considerations
about its feasibility, our study showed
that by applying a similar regime to
additional member states, the EU
could reduce corruption costs by up to
€70 billion annually.
Another option to help reduce the potential
costs of corruption is the establishment
of the European Public
Prosecutorsʹ Office (EPPO). Its aim
would be to help tackle corruption affecting
the EUʹs financial interests, especially
in areas where action by
member states themselves may not be
very effective. Our study showed that
the establishment of the EPPO could
help reduce corruption costs by €200
million annually.
The final measure focuses specifically
on corruption involving public procurement
since it is estimated to cost
the EU up to €5 billion a year. To address
this issue, the EU has recently
adopted a set of regulations seing
new rules for public procurement in
Europe. The implementation of a
transparent EU‐wide procurement
system across all the member states
could reduce corruption costs by
nearly a fifth, up to €920 million annually.
It would be fair to say that corruption
across Europe appears to be a bigger
problem than previously thought.
Looking beyond the economics, tackling
corruption also leads to many societal
benefits: lower levels of
organised crime, stronger rule of law
and, as a result, more trust in public
institutions.
To have a properly functioning EU
and member states that adhere to its
values, the high levels of corruption
urgently need to be addressed.
_________________________________
_______
Marco Hafner is a research leader and
senior economist at RAND Europe.
Jirka Taylor is an analyst at RAND Europe.
This commentary originally appeared
on E!Sharp on March 22, 2016.