Corruption and the Archaeological Lobby's Models

It's interesting to see where the archaeological lobby's models stack up on Transparency International's 2012 Corruption Perception Index:  Bulgaria-75; China-80; Cyprus-29; Egypt-118, Greece-94; Italy-72 and Turkey-54. 

The higher the number, the higher the perception of corruption.  Denmark is No. 1 as the least corrupt country while No.174, Somalia, is perceived as most corrupt.

While Cyprus' rank of 29 would seem at first blush to be fairly good, at least some commentators suggest that Cypriots themselves think their government is more corrupt than Transparency International's experts believe.  

It's interesting that these countries also have very restrictive export controls for cultural property.  One might suspect that such controls merely provide an opportunity for corrupt officials to profit from the system.

Why does the archaeological lobby continue to see such corrupt systems as models for cultural heritage protection?  Or are they somehow suggesting the cultural bureaucracies in these countries are far cleaner than government in general?  And, if so, what is their basis for any such claim?