Introduction. Corruption remains a critical socio-economic challenge that affects governance, economic stability, and public trust. This study examines the corruption levels in Ukraine compared to global trends, using key indices and international benchmarks. A comprehensive analysis of corruption indicators provides insights into the effectiveness of anti-corruption policies and strategies. The research aims to contribute to the ongoing discourse on improving transparency and accountability.
The study aims to analyze the corruption landscape in Ukraine compared to global indices, identifying key factors influencing corruption levels. It seeks to evaluate existing anti-corruption policies and propose effective strategies based on international best practices. The research also explores the role of digital technologies in mitigating corruption.
Methods. The study employs a mixed-methods approach, incorporating comparative analysis, statistical data processing, and case studies. Key sources include Transparency International reports, the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), and other international indices. Analytical techniques such as synthesis, modeling, and observation help assess corruption trends and policy effectiveness.
Results. The findings highlight Ukraine’s progress in combating corruption while identifying persistent challenges. The study reveals correlations between corruption levels and factors such as government transparency, judicial independence, and digital governance. Comparative analysis with other countries provides recommendations for improving Ukraine’s anti-corruption framework.
In conclusion, Despite ongoing reforms, corruption remains a significant issue in Ukraine, necessitating more effective governance measures. The study underscores the importance of digitalization, civil society engagement, and legal reforms in reducing corruption risks. Adopting international best practices can further strengthen Ukraine’s anti-corruption policies.
Practical Implications. The research offers policymakers practical insights into effective anti-corruption strategies, highlighting the role of transparency and digital tools. It provides recommendations for improving regulatory frameworks and public oversight mechanisms. The study also serves as a resource for civil society organizations advocating for accountability.
Originality and Value. This study provides a comprehensive comparative analysis of corruption levels in Ukraine and globally, integrating multiple indices and data sources. Exploring innovative anti-corruption measures, such as blockchain and AI, contributes to the evolving discourse on governance and transparency. The findings offer valuable insights for both academia and policymakers.
1. Varnaliy, Z. S. (2020). Economic and financial security of Ukraine in the context of globalization. Kyiv: Knowledge of Ukraine. Retrieved from https://odnb.odessa.ua/vnn/book/7919
2. Korotkikh, A. A., & Tokar, A. A. (2020). Foreign experience in combating corruption in the context of globalization of society. In Materials of the II International Scientific and Practical Conference “Debatable Issues of Anti-Corruption Legislation Application”. Dnipro: DDUVS. P. 260–261. Retrieved from https://er.dduvs.edu.ua/handle/123456789/5479
3. Transparency International. (2024). Corruption Perceptions Index 2024. Retrieved from https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2024 (Accessed November 2024)
4. World Justice Project. (2021). Rule of Law Index. Retrieved from https://worldjusticeproject.org/sites/default/files/documents/WJP-INDEX-...
5. Transparency International. (2022). Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index. Retrieved from https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2022/index/ukr
6. Bobonis, G. J., Cámara-Fuertes, L. R & R. Schwabe (2009). “Does Exposing Corrupt Politicians Reduce Corruption?” Duke University mimeo.
7. Ferraz, C. & Finan, F. (2008) “Exposing Corrupt Politicians: The Effects of Brazil’s Publicly Released Audits on Electoral Outcomes”. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123(2): 703745.
8. Transparency International. (2016). People and corruption: Europe and Central Asia. Retrieved from https://www.transparency.org/en/gcb/europe-and-central-asia/europe-centr...
9. International Budget Partnership. (2021). Open Budget Index. Retrieved from https://internationalbudget.org/open-budget-survey/country-results/2021/...
10. TRACE International. (2024). TRACE Matrix. Retrieved from https://www.traceinternational.org/trace-matrix#matrix-results (Accessed November 2024)
11. Country Risk. (2024). Corruption Risk Index. Retrieved from https://www.countryrisk.io/ (Accessed December 2024)
12. European Data Portal. (2022). Open Data Maturity Report 2022. Retrieved from https://data.europa.eu/en/news-events/news/open-data-maturity-report-202...
13. Basel Governance. (2024). Basel AML Index. Retrieved from https://index.baselgovernance.org/map (Accessed November 2024)
14. Global Financial Integrity. (2024). Global Financial Integrity. Retrieved from https://gfintegrity.org/ (Accessed December 2024)
15. Tax Justice Network. (2024). Financial Secrecy Index. Retrieved from https://fsi.taxjustice.net/ (Accessed September 2024)
16. Varnaliy, Z. S. (2006). Shadow economy: Essence, features, and paths of legalization: Monograph. Kyiv: NISD.
17. Vovchak, O., & Yendorenko, L. (2021). Institutional-legal aspects of the formation and development of the financial monitoring system in Ukraine. Socio-Economic Relations in the Digital Society, 1(40), 19–24.
18. Varnaliy, Z. S. (2006). Shadow economy: Essence, features, and paths of legalization: Monograph. Kyiv: NISD.
19. State Financial Monitoring Service of Ukraine. (2024). Official page. Retrieved from https://fiu.gov.ua (Accessed December 2024)
20. International Monetary Fund. IMF Policy Paper: The Bali Fintech Agenda, URL: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/PolicyPapers/Issues/ 2018/10/11/ pp101118-bali-fintech-agenda