Pretoria, Monday 9 December 2024 – Today, the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) is releasing the findings of its multi-year study entitled, ‘Corruption and Behaviour Change: Tracking Social Norms and Values in South Africa’. The study is supported by the German Agency for International Cooperation (GIZ). The primary aim of the study is to support the goals of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy (NACS) 2020–2030 by trying to understand how we can create a culture of zero-tolerance for corruption amongst all South Africans. To achieve this aim, the study focused on the social norms and values that inform both anti-corruption and corruption attitudes and behaviours in South Africa.
The NACS 2020–2030 is a whole-of-society plan to eliminate corruption in South Africa. It promotes and encourages active citizenry and transparency in all spheres of society. The vision of the NACS is a South Africa where most citizens uphold ethical values, including integrity, honesty and fairness. Such values are at the centre of the whole-of-society approach envisioned by the NACS. The NACS calls on all South Africans to refuse to participate in corruption and to report it if they witness it. The overall objective of a zero-tolerance culture is a just and equitable society for everyone in the country.
The NACS is only a technical framework, and it is necessary to develop more detailed anti-corruption programmes. As we commemorate International Anti-Corruption Day, this media release presents a brief overview of some of the more important findings from the study. Before we present this summary, we will briefly explain the study’s methodological approach.
Methodology
A nationally representative public opinion survey was conducted to identify the social norms and values that inform attitudes to corruption in South Africa. The sample was restricted to persons aged 16 years and older living in private residences. The fieldwork period started in August and ended in October of 2023 and 3,112 persons were interviewed as part of this process. The HSRC used its South African Social Attitudes (SASAS) research architecture to conduct the survey. The public opinion survey was supplemented by a survey of sixty-seven experts from a wide range of disciplines (including political science, law, social policy, governance and public administration). These surveys were complemented by sixteen key informant qualitative engagements with experts whose work focuses on areas of special interest related to the research topic.
Behind closed doors: Public encounters with corruption
We examined the experiences of corruption among South Africa’s adult population, revealing that a majority have encountered public sector corruption recently. Our research data showed that a significant quotient of the general populace lived in communities where corrupt practices were common. Comparing prior and current survey data, we found that bribe solicitation by public officials had intensified between 2006 and 2023. Certain groups (such as Gauteng and the Western Cape residents) were more likely than others to have experienced this kind of corruption. Additionally, a clear majority of the population felt that corruption had a very large impact on their personal lives (Figure 1). This sentiment was especially evident amongst residents of KwaZulu-Natal, Northern Cape and Gauteng.
Figure 1. Public responses to the question: “Do you think that corruption has had a small or large impact on you and your family?”
Sexual corruption (extortion)
Survey respondents were asked: “How often have you heard about an official making requests of a sexual nature from someone you know in exchange for a government service or benefit in the last 5 years?” Our results revealed that a significant segment of the population reported indirect experiences of sexual extortion by public officials (Figure 2). A noteworthy minority said that they had heard about this happening to someone they know either quite often (13%) or very often (5%) in the five years before the interview. Residents from the Free State and Limpopo had the highest rates of indirect experience with this kind of corruption.
Figure 2. Public responses to the question: “How often have you heard about an official making requests of a sexual nature from someone you know in exchange for a government service or benefit in the last 5 years?”
Many of the experts interviewed for this study viewed South Africa as exhibiting a patriarchal culture (one where male dominance and the control of women are viewed as ‘good’). Vanja Karth, Director of the Democratic Governance and Rights Unit at the University of Cape Town, in particular, expressed concern about the patriarchal nature of South African society. A sizeable proportion of surveyed experts agreed with her and described the country as a patriarchal society to either a great or a considerable extent. Experts interviewed for this study argued that patriarchal values and norms were related to the high level of sexual extortion reported by the general public.
Beneath the surface: The perceived depth of corruption
Our research showed that a substantial proportion of the general public thought that corruption was a big problem in South Africa. Data revealed a widespread belief amongst the populace that corruption had a large societal impact. More than three-quarters (79%) of the adult population believed that the impact of corruption on the general economy was large. Given these findings, it was not surprising to observe widespread concern amongst the general public about the level of corruption amongst different elite groups in South Africa.
Drivers of corruption
Experts surveyed for our study were asked what factors drive corruption in South Africa. In general, experts tended to use psychological (i.e., internal) factors (such as greed and dishonesty) to explain why elites participate in corruption. Several experts felt that elite corruption was driven by entitlement, materialism and opportunism. However, when asked about non-elites, experts tended to view environmental (i.e., external) factors as more significant. Environmental factors included institutional dysfunction and poor law enforcement. Experts were also more likely to highlight survivalist pressures, the need to navigate dishonest state systems, and structural economic exclusion, as drivers of corruption amongst non-elites.
Deciphering public tolerance of corruption
Many experts interviewed for the study were worried about the tolerance of corruption (ToC) in South Africa. Respondents interviewed for our expert survey were divided about whether people in the country value the rule of law. Gareth Newham, Head of Justice and Violence Prevention at the Institute for Security Studies, for example, stated that only a minority of the national population respected and valued the law. In fact, many experts surveyed were quite pessimistic about the state of South African society and described the country as ‘lawless’ and ‘violent’.
As part of our public opinion survey, fieldworkers asked participants about the acceptability of a range of dishonest and corrupt behaviours. Using answers to these questions, we created a 0 to 100 index to measure ToC in the country and labelled it the Social Acceptability of Corruption (SAoC) Index. A high score on the index signifies a high tolerance for corrupt behaviour. The average SAoC Index score was 27; only a minority (25%) of the general public had a zero-tolerance view of corruption. Further data analysis revealed that a majority of the adult population denounced corrupt behaviour as unjustifiable to at least some extent. We found that a minority (8%) scored 70 on the SAoC Index and above. This suggests that a sizeable fraction of the public viewed corruption as highly permissible.
Our data analysis revealed major drivers of the SAoC Index, and this data can help inform anti-corruption interventions. Research showed that civic values (such as responsibility and altruism) were linked to zero tolerance for corruption. Encouraging reflective and discerning civic patriotic values (e.g., loyalty to constitutional principles), which acknowledge both the strengths and shortcomings of the country, would be effective in cultivating a culture of zero tolerance. In addition, we found that exposure to bribe solicitation by public officials made people more tolerant of corruption. Efforts, therefore, to curb bribe-seeking behaviour among public officials will be crucial to decreasing ToC.
We also recommend that messaging aimed at reducing ToC amongst the populace should emphasise the detrimental impact of corruption. However, caution must be exercised to avoid inadvertently normalising corrupt practices by unnecessarily emphasising their prevalence. Raising awareness of the harm caused by corruption should be accompanied by reports of success in promoting integrity and preventing and combating corruption.
Public support for codes of silence norms
We found widespread Codes of Silence (CoS) social norms in South Africa. These norms refer to the perceived ‘immorality’ of reporting the criminal behaviour of people you know personally to the authorities. This finding presents a challenge to the NACS goal of promoting integrity, societal transparency and accountability. Failing to report on the unethical or criminal activities of others not only hampers law enforcement’s ability to uncover and prosecute wrongdoing but also perpetuates unethical and illegal behaviour. CoS norms, in other words, help normalise corrupt practices.
To measure CoS social norms, we constructed a Support for Codes of Silence (SfCoS) Index. The Index ranged from 0 to 100 with a higher value indicating a greater level of support for CoS norms. The average SfCoS Index score was 69 and we found that support for CoS norms cuts across traditional class and race lines in South Africa. Average SfCoS Index scores were high for most socio-demographic groups in South Africa.
Our data analysis identified major predictors of the SfCoS Index, and this data can be used to design communication interventions to reduce CoS social norms. Our analysis showed that encouraging civic nationalism (i.e., loyalty to constitutional supremacy and the non-discriminatory application of its values and principles) may effectively combat CoS norms. We also found that recent experiences of public sector corruption were positively related to stronger CoS norms. We postulate that this could be because these experiences drive pessimism about the state’s capacity to deliver services equitably. Lowering levels of bribe solicitation by public officials will, therefore, help reduce CoS norms.
The perceived culture of impunity
Survey data revealed a majority of the general public did not trust law enforcement to respond to corruption. Only a minority (36%) of the populace thought that action would be taken if they went to a government office or the police to report corrupt behaviour (Figure 3). Perceptions of reporting ineffectiveness especially high amongst Mpumalanga and Limpopo residents. We discovered that a large segment of the general public perceived a culture of impunity for corrupt practices. About half the populace thought that ordinary individuals would not be held accountable for engaging in corruption (Figure 4). Moreover, a majority of the population perceived a significant accountability gap between elites and non-elites. The bulk of the public believed that the law favoured the rich and powerful; 63% of the public said that elites would not be punished for engaging in corruption.
Figure 3. Public responses to the question: “How likely is it that action would be taken if you went to a government office or the police to report corrupt behaviour?”
Figure 4. Public responses to the question: “How likely is it that an ordinary person in South Africa will be punished by the authorities for giving or receiving a bribe, gift or favour in return for public service?”
A majority of the population did not think it was safe to report corruption in their community. Roughly three-fifths (62%) of the general public said that they lived in a community where people were afraid to speak out against corruption (Figure 5). This finding highlights the failure of law enforcement to provide a safe reporting environment in many communities. Experts were interviewed about whistleblowers and asked if the South African public had a favourable view of them. Expert views were mixed. Some stated that the public saw whistleblowers as brave and heroic figures, while others thought the populace viewed them with scepticism or even hostility. Many experts agreed that whistleblowers faced significant barriers (including weak legal protections, cultural resistance and a lack of action by authorities), which often discouraged individuals from coming forward. Our results demonstrate the need to safeguard whistleblowers and improve law enforcement-community relations.
Figure 5. Public agreement and disagreement with the statement: “In this community, people risk revenge if they speak out against corruption?”
Source: South African Social Attitudes Survey (SASAS) 2023
Popular reluctance to report corruption
We can create, and maintain, a culture of zero tolerance for corruption through encouraging reporting of corrupt behaviour. However, our research revealed that the general public was polarised on whether they would report corrupt practices if they encountered them. Only about half expressed an intention to alert authorities if they witnessed corruption. We found that residents of certain provinces (e.g., Mpumalanga and Limpopo) demonstrated lower willingness than others to report.
Expert opinion on why people were reluctant to report corruption highlighted fear of retaliation and a lack of trust in authorities as significant deterrents. Some experts also mentioned cultural factors (such as the apartheid-era stigma attached to whistleblowing) that undermined willingness to report. In addition, experts mentioned the socio-economic dependence of the poor and vulnerable on their social networks and communities. For example, one expert, Sekoetlane Phamodi, a member of the National Anti-Corruption Advisory Council, asked rhetorically, “Why would I want to visit ruin on the person who showed me ubuntu yesterday [and who might show me ubuntu tomorrow, when I really need help]?”
We identified major drivers of public willingness to report corruption in South Africa. Perceived effectiveness of the legal system emerged as the primary driver of reporting intention, emphasising the need for campaigns to highlight system efficacy and the willingness of authorities to take action. This could come from strengthening and promoting anonymity in reporting structures and enhancing protections for whistleblowers.
We also need to restore public confidence in the integrity and effectiveness of law enforcement. Publicising proactive and successful law enforcement that holds elites and non-elites equally accountable for corrupt practices will be essential to fostering a reporting-friendly environment. We also discovered that exposure to bribe solicitation by public officials made people less willing to report witnessed corruption. This result again suggests that reducing public sector corruption will encourage people to participate in the fight against corruption.
Conclusion
As South Africa commemorates International Anti-Corruption Day, we are reminded of the importance of engaging citizens, institutions and policymakers in a shared commitment to combat corruption. Fostering a culture of zero-tolerance for corruption is fundamental to achieving a just and equitable South Africa. However, our research study reveals significant barriers to this goal, including widespread perceptions of law enforcement ineffectiveness, fear of retaliation, cultural resistance and socio-economic dependencies. The data provided in this media brief can help us understand how to overcome these challenges.
One of the most critical areas of focus is rebuilding public trust in the legal system and law enforcement agencies. Perceptions of ineffectiveness in responding to corruption and safeguarding whistleblowers diminish public confidence and discourage citizen participation in the fight against corruption. Enhancing whistleblower protections, publicising successful anti-corruption actions, encouraging civic nationalism and creating accessible, anonymous reporting mechanisms can help alleviate these concerns. Strengthening accountability, particularly by ensuring that both elites and non-elites face equal consequences for corrupt behaviour, will also play a pivotal role. By addressing the structural and cultural drivers of corruption, strengthening legal and institutional frameworks, and promoting active citizenship, South Africa can move closer to realising our shared vision of a just society.
Ends.
For media enquiries:
| Dr Lucky Ditaunyane, Cell: +27 83 227 6074 Email: lditaunyane@hsrc.ac.za | Adziliwi Nematandani Cell: +27 82 765 9191 Email: anematandani@hsrc.ac.za |
Notes to the editor
About the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC)
The HSRC was established in 1968 as South Africa’s statutory research agency and has grown to become the largest dedicated research institute in the social sciences and humanities on the African continent, doing cutting-edge public research in areas that are crucial to development.
Our mandate is to inform the effective formulation and monitoring of government policy; to evaluate policy implementation; to stimulate public debate through the effective dissemination of research-based data and fact-based research results; to foster research collaboration; and to help build research capacity and infrastructure for the human sciences.
The Council conducts large-scale, policy-relevant, social-scientific research for public sector users, non-governmental organisations and international development agencies. Research activities and structures are closely aligned with South Africa’s national development priorities.
Click here to search the HSRC Research Output Repository