CPI 2025: Findings and insights

The global order is under strain from rivalry between major powers, and dangerous disregard for international norms. Armed conflicts and the climate crisis are having a deadly impact. Societies are also becoming more polarised. To meet these challenges, the world needs principled leaders and strong, independent institutions that act with integrity to protect the public interest. Yet, too often, we are seeing a failure of good governance and accountable leadership.

In many places, leaders point to security, economic or geopolitical issues as reasons to centralise power, sideline checks and balances and roll back commitments to internationally agreed standards – including anti-corruption measures. Too often, they treat transparency, independent scrutiny and accountability to the public as optional.

Transparency International’s 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) measures perceived levels of public-sector corruption in 182 countries and territories, drawing on 13 independent data sources and using a scale from 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean). This year, the global CPI average has dropped for the first time in more than a decade to just 42 out of 100. The vast majority of countries are failing to keep corruption under control: 122 out of 182 score under 50 in the index.

At the same time, the number of countries scoring above 80 has shrunk from 12 a decade ago to just five this year. In particular, there is a worrying trend of democracies seeing worsening perceived corruption – from the United States (64), Canada (75) and New Zealand (81), to various parts of Europe, like the United Kingdom (70), France (66) and Sweden (80).

Our research shows that corruption is not inevitable. Countries with long-term improvements in CPI scores have largely seen sustained effort from political leaders and regulators to implement broad legal and institutional reforms. Persistently low or declining CPI scores usually go hand in hand with limited or eroding democratic checks and balances, the politicisation of justice systems, undue influence over political processes, and a failure to safeguard civic space.

It is not a surprise that countries with full democracies tend to score highly on the CPI, while non-democratic regimes largely perform the worst. In most of the world’s full autocracies, such as Venezuela (10) and Azerbaijan (30), corruption is systemic and manifests at every level.

In almost two thirds of countries whose CPI scores have significantly declined since 2012, there has been a worrying pattern of restriction on freedoms of expression, association and assembly. In the last decade, politicised interference with the operations of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in countries such as Georgia (50), Indonesia (34), Peru (30) and Tunisia (39) has seen governments take actions such as introducing new laws to limit access to funding, or even disband organisations that scrutinise and criticise them. Such laws are often paired with smear campaigns and intimidation. In these contexts, it is harder for independent journalists, civil society organisations and whistleblowers to speak out against corruption freely. It is also more likely that corrupt officials can continue misusing their power.

The result is often poor-quality services and fiscal crises, as public funds are mismanaged, contributing to enduring poverty, rising inequality and worsening living standards for millions of people.

In 2025, we saw a surge of Gen Z–led protests, as young people in countries that score poorly on the CPI – such as Serbia (33) and Peru (30) – took to the streets to demand action and accountability from their governments. In Nepal (34) and Madagascar (25), these popular protest movements brought down the governments of the day. Uniting these diverse groups of protestors was a sense that those in charge were abusing their power for their own interests, while failing to deliver decent public services, a stable economy and opportunity for everyone else.

Some powerful nations have an indirect impact on corruption levels that extends well beyond their borders. The Russian (22) state has been accused of interfering in other countries’ elections by spreading disinformation and buying votes with the intention to influence voters and drive instability, democratic backsliding and narrowing of civic space.

The United States (64) government’s decision to temporarily freeze and then degrade enforcement of its Foreign Corrupt Practices Act – a key anti-corruption law that prohibits corporate bribery of foreign officials – sends a dangerous signal that bribery and other corrupt practices are acceptable. At the same time, US aid cuts to funding for overseas civil society groups that scrutinise their governments has undermined anti-corruption efforts around the world. Political leaders in various countries have also taken this as a cue to further target and restrict independent voices, such as NGOs and journalists.

From our research and on-the-ground experience as a global movement fighting corruption, we see there is a clear blueprint for how to hold power to account for the common good. Transparency International is calling on governments and leaders across the world to take action to strengthen justice systems, ensure independent oversight of decision making and public spending, guarantee transparency about how political parties and election campaigns are funded, and protect civic space, democracy and media freedom. At the same time, they should collaborate to tackle shared challenges – for example, closing the cross-border channels that enable transnational corruption, such as laundering and hiding stolen funds.

As we saw this year, governments who fail to address their citizens’ concerns may find themselves toppled by popular protest movements. What’s more, businesses may look elsewhere to invest, costing countries economic opportunities and jobs. By choosing to act for the public interest, not private gain, governments and leaders can live up to their responsibilities to shape and nurture safe, fair and healthy societies where everyone can thrive.

This year, the highest ranked nation was Denmark (89), for the eighth time in a row, with a score of 89. Only a small group of 15 countries, mainly in Western Europe and Asia-Pacific, manage to get scores above 75. Of these, just five reach scores above 80.

Meanwhile, over two thirds of countries (68 per cent) fall below 50, indicating serious corruption problems in most parts of the planet. At the bottom of the index, the countries scoring below 25 are mostly conflict-affected and highly repressive countries, such as Venezuela (10) and the lowest scorers, Somalia and South Sudan, which both score nine.

Countries where civic space is guaranteed and protected tend to control corruption better. Those where the freedoms of expression, assembly and association are duly safeguarded are generally more resilient against corruption and score better on the CPI. However, countries where these freedoms are lacking are more likely to lose control of corruption: 36 of the 50 countries where the CPI scores have significantly declined have also seen a reduction in civic space.

When journalists are attacked or killed for investigating corruption, power cannot be held to account effectively and corruption tends to worsen. Since 2012, in non-conflict zones worldwide, 829 journalists have been murdered. One hundred and fifty were killed while covering corruption-related stories, five of them in 2025. These include Turki al-Jasser, who was executed by the Saudi Arabian (57) authorities after seven years in detention, and Gastón Medina, who was shot outside his house in Peru (30).

Over 90 per cent of these killings happened in countries with a CPI score lower than 50, including in Brazil (35), India (39), Mexico (27), Pakistan (28) and Iraq (28), which are particularly dangerous for journalists reporting on corruption.

_{Almost all of the 150 murders of journalists covering corruption-related stories in non-conflict zones since 2012 happened in countries with high corruption levels. (Source: Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index.)}

A closer look at countries with significant changes in their CPI scores reveals clear trends that drive improvement and decline.

Two patterns stand out among countries whose CPI scores have fallen. The first is a set of sustained declines since 2012, where deterioration has been substantial and prolonged. This group includes Venezuela (10), Syria (15), Hungary (40) and South Sudan (9). Despite different contexts, these countries show long-term, structural erosion of integrity systems driven by democratic backsliding, institutional weakening and/or entrenched patronage networks. This has been accelerated by conflict in some cases. Their declines are steep, persistent and hard to reverse because corruption becomes systemic and deeply ingrained in both political and administrative systems.

The second pattern is more recent and concentrated among higher-scoring countries. While many of these nations still rank near the top of the index, they have slipped noticeably from their initial baselines. This group includes countries like the United States (64), Canada (75), the United Kingdom (70), France (66), Sweden (80), New Zealand (81) and Chile (63). In many of these countries, corruption risks have increased because independent checks and balances have been weakened, key gaps in anti-corruption legislation have not been addressed, and enforcement has been scaled back. Several have also experienced strains to their democracies, including political polarisation and the growing influence of private money on decision making. This trend shows that even robust systems can be vulnerable to integrity risks.

_{Number of countries that improved or declined in each region since 2012 plus average CPI 2025 scores.}

On the positive side, two models of progress emerge. One is long-term gains from lower starting scores, where countries have climbed from the bottom toward the middle of the CPI ranking. This group includes Albania (39), Angola (32), Cote d’Ivoire (43), Laos (34), Senegal (46), Ukraine (36) and Uzbekistan (31). Their progress is driven by long-term efforts from political leaders and regulators, whether through broad legal and institutional reforms in more open settings or narrow state-led control campaigns in more restricted ones.

However, these narrow, top-down anti-corruption efforts are intrinsically fragile. Strong, free civil society organisations have also maintained and protected the paths to good governance reforms that many of these countries have taken. In Ukraine, for example, civil society mobilisation helped protect strong anti-corruption institutions as they came under pressure in 2025 so that they could continue to work independently.

The second pattern of improvement is long-term gains in countries that started with mid-to-high CPI scores. A persistent consolidation of anti-corruption efforts has driven progress in countries like Estonia (76), South Korea (63), Bhutan (71) and Seychelles (68). The long-term improvements in these democratic countries reflect sustained momentum with reforms, strengthened oversight institutions and broad political consensus in favour of clean governance. This has often been supported by digitalisation of public services, professionalisation of the civil service, and integration of regional and global governance standards and frameworks.

In short, the improvements and declines on the CPI tell various stories. Some declines come from stress to democratic integrity at high levels, while others reflect deep institutional breakdown. Similarly, some improvements can be linked to broader democratic, rights-based reforms that strengthen civic space, media freedom, transparency and access to information. Other increases in score are the product of authoritarian leaders’ control campaigns in environments that have limited freedoms and rights. These might be effective against some types of corruption, such as bribery, but without independent courts, free media or space for critical voices, these gains are fragile and vulnerable to reversal and selective enforcement.

To build a safer, fairer and more stable world for the benefit of all, decision-makers must urgently:

• Ensure independent, transparent and accessible justice institutions.
• Give people harmed by corruption access to justice.
• Tackle undue influence on political decision making.
• Foster civic space and anti-corruption reporting.
• Enhance transparency and oversight in public services and public financial management.
• Prevent, detect and punish large-scale corruption and illicit financial flows.