In a recent publication entitled "How Corrupt are Our Politics" the author states that corruption is "the most pressing problem" of the current era in their nation's political life, something that is a "real threat" where "everyone agrees it is a problem, but few agree on how to define it, much less fight it effectively".

The author, however, is not referring to China where there has been a recent, high profile anti-graft crackdown, but to the United States. The article was carried in the Sept 25 edition of the New York Review of Books. Corruption, the article states, "broadly understood as placing private interests over the public good in public office, is at the root of what ails American democracy". In particular, unrestricted campaign spending has proved particularly corrosive and worrying. It has become more apparent in the last few years - particularly since the Supreme Court's US Citizens United versus Federal Election Commission 2010 decision. This invalidated a century-old restriction on corporate expenditure in federal elections.

Since this decision the amounts channeled by the super wealthy in the US, into campaigns to support their preferred candidates, have been staggering. One individual alone donated $122 million in the 2012 election campaign. At a time when there is so much inequality and sluggish growth - even in the US economy - spending this amount of money on what boils down to the pursuit of vested interests, comes close to being obscene.

As the situation in the US now shows, perhaps the reason why it has been hard to settle on a universally accepted definition of corruption itself, is that as a practice it is culturally-specific. Different systems breed different sorts of malfeasance. But it is also something based more on perception than on hard benchmarks. The Transparency International (TI) annual listing of corrupt practices across the world is careful in making it clear that it is measuring perceptions. That can be highly subjective.

Nevertheless, the common concern surrounding different kinds of corruption does unify political cultures as diverse as the US, China, the EU, and Australia, amongst others. In an age of less buoyant growth where there is more of an onus on efficiency and sustainability, the wastefulness of corruption is what really grabs the attention of both the public and their leaders.

And this is one area where Hong Kong does have an international edge. On almost every level it is seen as a city with a clean business environment and strong regulatory and legal safeguards. In the TI rankings it is categorized in the top 15 globally, in terms of perceptions of corruption. This, together with its excellent rankings for openness and transparency, is part of the trinity of qualities that continue to make Hong Kong successful as a global finance and services hub.

This status was hard won. Before 1974, there were plenty who felt that officials and businesses in Hong Kong were corrupt. The problem was so acute that it led to the establishment of the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) that year. In 1978, the ICAC undertook an extensive investigation into officials accused of taking bribes and kickbacks, and as a result of this over 120 were removed from office, and some prosecuted.

ICAC continued its work into the 1980s, and exists to this day. But its greatest contribution was creating and sustaining a culture of accountability and transparency in governance in Hong Kong. It did not go for short-term solutions but actually helped construct an environment where anti-corruption was internalized and became a fundamental part of people's mindsets. The public expected officials to act according to rules and standards, and officials knew this. It was a sort of harmonious compact. Those who failed suffered not only punishment but the humiliation of knowing they had let down the people they lived among and for whom they were meant to be working.

For all the current concern about Hong Kong, and the complaints about its governance, this anti-corruption ethic is still strong. It was a major factor in Chief Executive candidate Henry Tang's defeat to Leung Chun-ying following the discovery of a sizable unauthorized basement extension in Tang's basement. It is also perhaps the reason why the leadership of Hong Kong is such a tough job - standards of behavior are high, the benchmark is challenging, and even slight transgressions are harshly viewed. The current trial of former chief secretary Rafael Hui for corruption is another object lesson.

Corruption is a concern everywhere now. Every country is wrestling with how to ensure public life is not infected by self-serving networks of vested interest. Hong Kong's record in the last few decades has been a good one, and something worth celebrating. Of the intangible things that give a place competitive edge and distinct advantage, this is perhaps one of the most precious. It is something extremely hard to win and very easy to throw away. On this aspect of life in Hong Kong therefore all its citizens need to be vigilant, because its culture and management of corruption has been special, and that needs to continue.

The author is executive director of China Studies Center and professor of Chinese Politics at University of Sydney; team leader of the Europe China Research and Advice Network (ECRAN) funded by the European Union; and associate fellow at Chatham House, London.

(HK Edition 10/29/2014 page10)