The Zambia Bribe Payers Index (ZBPI) is a corruption measurement tool based on a countrywide household survey. The tool measures the probability of public service seekers experiencing a bribe seeking behaviour from a public officer in a public sector institution.
In 2019, the ZBPI also provides insights into bribery experiences on specific public services sought in Zambia Police Service, Road Transport and Safety Agency (RTSA), Local Authorities (Councils), Ministry of General Education (MoGE), and Ministry of Higher Education (MoHE).
It is important to note that the 2019 ZBPI introduces new methodological terms so as to provide more information that helps identify specific areas of concern. These are Bribe Seeking Incident (BSI) which is a bribery experience where a bribe was asked for when seeking a public service; institution-based bribery experience which is an individual’s bribery experience with an institution or sector; service-based bribery experience that is, an individual’s bribery experience specific to a public service that was sought within an institution; and Service Seeking Interaction (SSI), an individual’s visit to or interaction with a public or private sector institution when seeking a public service that the institution provides.
The 2019 ZBPI also provides observations on the public’s perceptions of good governance indicators that are critical to anti-corruption; governance factors that are perceived to promote corruption; public participation; and, the dichotomy of bribery incidences.
The findings of the 2019 ZBPI Survey shows that the probability of paying a bribe sought or inducement of any kind to a public officer(s) when seeking a public service is 10.9%. The likelihood of an individual paying a bribe sought increased by 0.9% in 2019, when compared to 2017.
The ZBPI trends based on comparative sixteen (16) public sector institutions shows a moderate consistent increase in the probability of paying a bribe in the reporting years 2009 (13.6), 2012 (9.8), 2014 (11.9), 2017 (13.5) and 2019 (15.0).
Comparison of the Zambia Briber Payers Index (ZBPI) to Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) over each Index’s respective reporting years also shows minimal differences in the trajectory of the country’s corruption problem, as both indices show a consistent increase in the problem of corruption.
At an institution level, no probabilities of paying a bribe sought are observed in Ministry of Works and Supply, National Pension Scheme Authority (NAPSA), Public Service Pensions Fund (PSPF) and Zambia Telecommunications Company Limited (ZAMTEL). Lower probabilities are evidenced in Immigration Department (0.6%), Ministry of Finance (0.2%), and Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA) (0.2%). Higher probabilities are observed in Zambia Police Service, excluding Traffic section (59.5%) and Traffic section (40.7%), Road Transport and Safety Agency (RTSA) (38.7%), Local Authorities, (22.9%), and Ministries for Education, (21.1) %.
Compared to 2017 ZBPI, considerable decreases in the likelihood of an individual seeking a public service paying a bribe sought are observed in Zambia Police Service (Traffic section) (23.2%), Local Authorities (Councils) (14.1%) and, Ministries for Education (6.4%). Increases are observed in Zambia Police Service (excluding Traffic) (40.5%), and Road Transport and Safety Agency (RTSA) (18.9%).
Notwithstanding the foregoing, in an individual’s Service Seeking Interaction (SSI) with the public sector, bribe seeking was experienced in 73.9% of the 23 institutions, and that 28.6% individuals had a Bribe Seeking Incident (BSI).
The Report shows that, for instance, in Zambia Police Service, Bribe Seeking Incident (BSI) as a percent of Service Seeking Interaction (SSI) is observed to be highest in other services (employment or recruitment into the Service) and traffic related services, and lowest in criminal investigations and Victim Support Services. Road Transport and Safety Agency (RTSA) bribe seeking is most experienced in other services and licensing of public service vehicles, and lower in licensing of driving schools. Local Authorities (Councils), Bribe Seeking Incidents (BSI) are more prevalent in firearm licensing and property rates services, and less in trading licensing and business permits.
The reasons for paying a bribe in service-based bribery experiences are predominantly to avoid delays in getting a service. And that, with respect to actual service sought, in Zambia Police Service bribes are paid more to avoid penalties or sanctions in traffic related services. In Road Transport and Safety Agency (RTSA), Local Authorities (Councils), Ministry of General Education (MoGE) and Ministry of Higher Education (MoHE), paying a bribe to avoid delays is most common.
Thereof, the 2019 ZBPI Survey Report evidences that since the trajectory of the probability of public service seekers experiencing bribe seeking is consistently showing no significant improvement in general, there is need for development of service-specific anti-corruption interventions and scaling up “voicing out” and reporting.
For instance, the Report observes that contact with persons or officials from institutions engaged in combating corruption is very low (8.5% of 1,897 respondents), and that contact is mostly with individuals that are formally employed in the public and private sectors.
Anti-corruption participation and leadership with respect to “voicing out” on corruption and, reporting when a demand for a bribe is made are also very low, 8.3% and 4.2% respectively.
Lastly, the Report observes that the dominant “two faces” or dichotomy of bribery incidences are, first, that knowledge of what constitutes corruption can likely be associated with one’s bribe offering behaviours, as only 12.1% of those that know what constitutes corruption offered a bribe, and only 6.5% of individuals that had contact with persons or officials from institutions engaged in combating corruption offered a bribe. Second, that “voicing out” on corruption is not seemingly associated with bribe paying when a demand is made. Twenty-five point one (25.1) percent of individuals that “voiced out” on corruption are shown to have paid the bribe that was asked for by a public officer; and, a considerable number that report bribery incidences also do actually pay the bribe demanded.
