Corruption and Behaviour Change: Tracking Social Norms and Values in South Africa

Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC)

Press Release

Pretoria, Thursday, 4 December 2025 — The Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) today unveils results from its longitudinal research project, Corruption and Behaviour Change: Tracking Social Norms and Values in South Africa, funded by the German Agency for International Cooperation (GIZ). This study aims to support the objectives of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy (NACS) 2020–2030 by investigating pathways to foster zero-tolerance attitudes toward corruption across South African society. It focuses on how South Africans can be encouraged to adopt an anti-corruption mindset and work with the authorities to fight corruption.

Drawing on data from the 2025 South African Social Attitudes Survey (SASAS), this study demonstrates the dire state of corruption in our nation. Many adults reported living in communities where public officials engage in bribery, nepotism and sexual extortion. These issues disproportionately affect economically disadvantaged communities and warrant far greater scrutiny than they typically receive in national headlines. Workplace corruption also looms large, with nearly half of employed adults indicating that bribery occurs within their professions. The data shows that reform is needed to promote a culture of zero-tolerance for corruption in the country. Yet there is some hope for the future, as our results show a growing public appetite to confront and combat corruption.

Methodology

The study drew on two nationally representative public opinion surveys to identify the social norms and values that are informing attitudes to corruption in South Africa. The survey samples consisted of persons aged 16 years and older living in private residences. Both surveys used a multi-stage, probability sampling approach, ensuring that every eligible person had a known and fair chance of selection. The first round of fieldwork was conducted between August and October 2023, while the second round took place from February to March 2025. Interviews were conducted face-to-face using computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI). The realised sample size for the first survey was 3,112, and the second survey had a sample of 3,095 respondents. The HSRC used its SASAS research infrastructure to conduct the survey. All results were weighted to reflect the national population using StatsSA mid-year population estimates as a benchmark. All protocols and instruments were reviewed and approved by the HSRC Research Ethics Committee. For samples of this size, the margin of error is approximately ±2 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. Participation was voluntary, with informed consent obtained and confidentiality strictly maintained.

Public Encounters with Localised Corruption

Corruption by local public officials is a serious problem in South Africa that only rarely receives the national media attention it deserves. Yet at street level, people talk about this problem all the time. It appears regularly in local newspapers, community WhatsApp groups and other online platforms, as well as in public gatherings and dialogues. To gain better insight into this issue, the 2025 survey asked participants about their experience with public officials and civil servants in their area. Here, ‘area’ was defined as the local neighbourhood or village where they lived.

First, respondents were asked the following question: “How often do you think people in your area have to pay a bribe or give a gift to, or do a favour for, public officials and civil servants?” Respondents were then asked how often public officials in their area gave jobs and contracts to unqualified friends and family. As a follow-up question, they were also asked how often they had heard of public officials in their neighbourhood making requests of a sexual nature in exchange for a government service or benefit. Responses to these three questions are provided in Figure 1, with the results showing a significant societal divide on the issue of localised public sector corruption.

The findings indicate that a majority of adults live in communities where they believe public sector corruption takes place at least sometimes (Figure 1). About a tenth of the public reported living in communities where such corruption is said to be a very common occurrence. Economic disadvantage significantly increased the likelihood of living in a community characterised by public sector corruption. In other words, poor and working-class South Africans are more likely than middle-class adults to report living in neighbourhoods or villages characterised by corruption in the public sector. This represents a stark indictment of local governance in South Africa and illustrates how economically disadvantaged citizens are disproportionately affected by public corruption.

Figure 1: Perceived normality of different types of public sector corruption in local areas, 2025

Source: South African Social Attitudes Survey (SASAS) 2025

Professions Under Pressure

Occupational culture refers to the shared values, beliefs, attitudes, norms and behaviours that characterise members of a particular profession or occupational group. An ethical occupational culture discourages dishonest and corrupt practices by promoting principles such as integrity, transparency and accountability. When an occupational culture is grounded in ethical principles, individuals are more likely to internalise them, leading to more consistent ethical conduct and greater efforts to prevent corrupt practices. Our research suggests that many South Africans do not work in such ethical occupational environments. Instead, they often find themselves in toxic occupational cultures where people engage in corrupt practices for private gain.

In the 2025 survey, participants were asked to reflect on their most recent occupation. After providing a brief definition of an occupation, respondents were asked to say, from their own experience, how often four types of corrupt behaviour occurred in their profession. These ranged from relatively mild forms (e.g., bending the rules) to more severe types (e.g., demanding bribes). Responses to the four questions from individuals who were currently or previously employed are shown in Figure 2. They reveal a notable degree of diversity in how people perceived (and no doubt experienced) corruption within their occupational environments.

Figure 2: Perceived frequency of different types of corrupt occupational behaviour among the currently or previously employed, 2025

Note: Responses are restricted to those who were employed or self-employed.

Source: South African Social Attitudes Survey (SASAS) 2025

Socio-economic status again plays a role, with economically advantaged individuals tending to report lower levels of workplace corruption. We found that many people, including those currently working, believed that their profession was characterised by corrupt behaviour. Nearly half of employed adults reported instances of rule-bending to benefit friends or family, and over half observed corruption related to financial gain or bribery within their work environment. Public sector workers reported higher levels of corrupt practices than their private-sector counterparts.

The Perceived Culture of Impunity

A culture of zero tolerance for corruption can only be created and maintained by encouraging people to report corrupt behaviour. However, our research shows that the public remains divided on whether they would report corrupt practices if they encountered them.

In both the 2023 and 2025 surveys, respondents were asked to imagine that they had experienced or witnessed corrupt behaviour (like the misuse of funds or requests for bribes). They were then asked how likely it would be that they would report it. The proportion of adults who expressed an appetite for taking action in the fight against corruption increased between 2023 and 2025 (Figure 3). The share of the public who said they would report corruption if they experienced or witnessed it grew by 7 percentage points over this period. In 2025, roughly three-fifths of adults said they would be either likely (33%) or very likely (26%) to report.

Figure 3: Perceived willingness of the public to report corrupt behaviour if they experienced or witnessed it, 2023 and 2025

Source: South African Social Attitudes Survey (SASAS) 2023 and 2024/25

Ideally, those who report cases of corruption to South African law enforcement should be confident that the authorities will act. Yet one of the main reasons why people do not want to report corruption is a lack of trust in the legal system and law enforcement agencies. When asked why people did not report corruption, the most common reasons included the lack of punishment for offenders, inadequate protection for whistleblowers, and corruption within reporting structures themselves. It is clear from our data that perceptions of weak enforcement and poor whistleblower protection undermine public confidence and discourage reporting, both of which are essential for meaningful citizen participation in the fight against corruption.

Figure 4: Perceived likelihood that authorities would act if corruption was reported to a government office or the police, 2023 and 2025

Source: South African Social Attitudes Survey (SASAS) 2023 and 2024/25

As part of our research, we examined whether adults believed that anti-corruption reporting structures were effective. The 2025 data suggest that a majority of the public did not expect the authorities to act if they reported a case of corruption. One-fifth said that such action was “not at all likely”, while 31% stated that it was “not very likely” (Figure 4). These findings draw our attention to a persistent legitimacy challenge for law enforcement. It represents a broader failure of the justice system to convince the public of its effectiveness and represents a major obstacle to the creation of a zero-tolerance environment for corruption, which is a key aim of the NACS. Nonetheless, there is some cause for optimism. Between 2023 and 2025, there was a 10 percentage-point increase in the share of the public who believed that action would be taken if they were to report corruption to the authorities.

Public Support for Codes of Silence

Some people do not want to report the corrupt practices of their family, friends, neighbours or work colleagues. They often use colloquial terms (such as ‘snitching’) that carry strong negative connotations to describe such behaviour. We refer to this aversion as ‘codes of silence’. This concept addresses the perceived ‘immorality’ of reporting the criminal behaviour of people you know personally to the authorities. Such codes pose a challenge to the NACS goal of promoting integrity, societal transparency and accountability. Failing to report the unethical or criminal activities of people you personally know not only hampers law enforcement’s ability to uncover and prosecute wrongdoing, but it also perpetuates unethical and illegal behaviour. In other words, ‘codes of silence’ help normalise corrupt practices, enabling them to take root.

Figure 5: Perceived morality of reporting the corrupt behaviour of different acquaintances or relatives to the authorities, 2025

Source: South African Social Attitudes Survey (SASAS) 2025

In the 2025 survey, participants were asked to imagine that someone they knew personally had engaged in corrupt behaviour (like the misuse of funds or requesting bribes). They were then asked whether it would be wrong or not wrong to report that person to the authorities if they were: (i) a family member; (ii) a friend; (iii) a neighbour; or (iv) a work colleague. Responses to these four questions are presented in Figure 5. There was a slight tendency for people to view reporting family members to the authorities as more objectionable than reporting work colleagues or neighbours. However, the level of variation was not as large as some may have anticipated. Overall, the public is clearly divided into two broad camps on this issue. The first camp holds a strong aversion to reporting on people they know for corruption, and the other rejects this view entirely and does not regard such reporting as wrong.

Conclusion

As South Africa prepares to commemorate International Anti-Corruption Day, we are reminded of the need for citizens, institutions and policymakers to work together 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 and the persistence of so-called codes of silence. The nationally representative survey evidence provided in this media brief helps us understand where the challenges lie and how we can overcome them.

What can be done to empower people in South Africa to fight corruption? Strengthening protections for whistleblowers, publicising successful anti-corruption actions and promoting user-friendly, anonymous tip-off channels are potentially important steps. Enhancing enforcement mechanisms, especially by ensuring uniform consequences for corrupt acts regardless of an individual’s status, is also crucial. Policymakers must also recognise the role played by economic disadvantage, and design interventions that take these inequalities into account.

For media enquiries, please contact 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.

Join the conversation at:

www.hsrc.ac.za