From leadership research to district action: Corruption perceptions in the Schengen Zone and their relation to education, economic performance, and governance

AI-assisted editorial implementation guide. Proposed district actions are separate from the original authors’ findings and recommendations. Independent peer review of this guide is not asserted.

Read source Search paper agent CC BY 4.0

Evidence and transfer

Education-related source: verify which participants, institutions and outcomes were actually studied before district adoption. Source publication type: research-article. License and identity checks do not establish study quality or causality.

Original authors’ abstract, reproduced under the source license:

Abstract In the quest for integrity and transparency, the perception of corruption within a state not only undermines trust in governance but also hinders sustainable progress. This study investigates the relationship between education, economic performance, and governance and their impact on the assessment of corruption in the context of sustainable development goals. The research framework included data from 14 European countries, members of the Schengen zone, using panel data for the period 2003–2022. The analysis of the sample indicators guided us to apply further advanced research methods. Principal Components Analysis was applied to reduce dimensionality. Under various assumptions related to heterogeneity, stationarity and exogeneity, panel Fixed Effects (FE) and Dynamic Panel with Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) were applied to link the drivers and the perception of corruption. The results are twofold: (i) on the one hand, the diachronic evolution of corruption, education index, economic performance or governance perceptions reveals different patterns for the countries of the Schengen zone; (ii) on the other hand, the composite index for education and governance assessment had a significant impact on corruption perceptions, while economic performance showed no apparent link to corruption. Incorporating the effects of economic and political shocks, the study will explore the resilience of the Schengen Zone’s governance against corruption, particularly by examining the effectiveness of crisis management and education’s role in reinforcing integrity. It will also conduct a longitudinal analysis to assess how these shocks influence corruption perceptions over time, offering insights into the adaptability of policy responses and their lasting impact on public trust. The findings establish new research pathways for academics and provide valuable incentives to policymakers and professional trainers to improve mechanisms for combating corruption.

Study methods

Data matrix is formed from N = 14 countries and the follow-up period are 2003–2022, thus T = 20 years. The selection of countries accounted for European countries included in the Schengen area, for which reliable and comparable data could be gathered: Austria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden. The Schengen area is a zone where member countries set common judicial policies, abolished their internal borders for free movement of people and implemented common rules for mitigating fraud risks and fighting criminality. Acknowledging that such member countries rely on common policy safeguarding values, we observed that the public’s perception on fraud and corruption differed, thus decided to deepen the understanding on probable factors or causes.

Limitations

In assessing the complex landscape of corruption perceptions within the Schengen Zone, this study has clarified several important patterns and relationships. However, it is crucial to acknowledge the inherent limitations that accompany our findings, as they provide context for the study’s contributions and directions for future research.

A 90-day district inquiry

Days 1–15 · Appraise. Read the source methods, recruitment, comparator, outcomes and limitations. Record how the study setting differs from your district and which claim the design can support.
Days 16–30 · Design. Select one recurring district decision. Publish the decision owner, evidence requirements, consultation process and appeal route; test the process on a bounded low-risk decision. Agree participation, privacy protections, baseline and stopping rules before starting.
Days 31–60 · Observe. Collect the pre-agreed measures, keep a log of implementation changes and invite confidential voluntary feedback. Preserve existing support for staff and learners.
Days 61–90 · Decide. Track decision time, unresolved objections, documented reasons, appeals and access differences. Review whether the process changes who can participate and who carries the burden. Make a dated decision to stop, revise or extend the inquiry.

Board decision brief

Present the local problem, source setting, evidence limits, intervention, responsible owner, total cost, measured changes and uncertainty. Separate staff perceptions, implementation measures and student learning outcomes.

Attribution and reuse

Ionela Munteanu; Bogdan-Vasile Ileanu; Iulia Oana Florea; Kamer-Ainur Aivaz. Corruption perceptions in the Schengen Zone and their relation to education, economic performance, and governance. PLOS ONE (2024-07-24). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301424

Prepared 2026-11-07. Source authorship and DOI are preserved. The abstract and source passages are attributed extracts; this editorial guide is offered under the same CC BY 4.0 license.