Afghanistan

The 3P Anti-trafficking Policy Index evaluates governmental anti-trafficking efforts in the three main policy dimensions (3Ps), based on the requirements prescribed by the United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children (2000).   The three main policy dimensions (3Ps) are:Prosecution of perpetrators of human traffickingPrevention of human traffickingProtection of the victims of human trafficking Each of the 3P areas is evaluated on a 5-point scale and each index is aggregated to the overall 3P Anti-trafficking Index as the  sum (score 3-15).Prosecution Index Score: 1 (no compliance) - 5 (full compliance)Prevention Index Score: 1 (no compliance) - 5 (full compliance)Protection Index Score: 1 (no compliance) - 5 (full compliance)3P Anti-trafficking Policy Index Score: 3 (no compliance for any of the three areas) - 15 (full compliance for all of the three areas) The 3P Anti-trafficking Policy Index is available for each country and each year and currently includes up to 189 countries for the preiod from 2000 to 2015.

The Bertelsmann Stiftung’s Transformation Index (BTI) analyzes and evaluates the quality of democracy, a market economy and political management in 128 developing and transition countries. It measures successes and setbacks on the path toward a democracy based on the rule of law and a market economy flanked by sociopolitical safeguards. Within this framework, the BTI publishes two rankings, the Status Index and the Management Index. Countries are further categorized on the basis of these status index and management rankings/scores. For instance, countries are categorized in to 5 groups – viz; 5 or failed, 4 or very limited, 3 or limited, 2 or advanced, and 1 or highly advanced—based on their status index score of 1 to 10. A country with a high score, 8.5 and above, is categorized as highly advanced. A country with a low score, below 4, is categorized as failed. A country is categorized as ‘very limited’ if it has a status index score between 4 and 5.5. A score between 5.5 and 7 means the country is categorized as ‘limited’ and a country is categorized as ‘advanced’ for a score between 7.1 and 8.5. On the basis of the democratic status ranking, countries are further categorized as 5 or ‘hard - line autocracies,’ 4 or ‘moderate autocracies,’ 3 or ‘highly defective democracies,’ 2 or ‘defective democracies,’ and 1 or ‘democracies in consolidation.’ A country with a democratic status ranking below 4 is categorized as a hard line autocracy. A democratic status score between 4 and 5 means that the country is part of the ‘moderate autocracy’ group. A country is grouped as a ‘highly defective democracy’ for a score between 5 and 6. A country is recognized as a ‘defective democracy’ for a score between 6 and 8, and a score of 8 and above earns a country the status of a ‘democracy in consolidation.’ Countries are also categorized in to 5 groups based on their market economy status ranking. The countries are categorized as ‘rudimentary’ or group 5, ‘poorly functioning’ or group 4, ‘functional flaws’ or group 3, ‘functioning’ or group 2, and ‘developed’ or group 1. A country is recognized as a member of the ‘developed’ group with a market economy status ranking/score of 8 and above. A country is grouped as ‘functioning’ if it has a score between 7 and 8. A market economy status ranking between 5 and 7 means the country is categorized to group 3 or the ‘functional flaws’ group. A score between 3 and 5 means that the country is ‘poorly functioning’ and a score below 3 means the country enjoys a ‘rudimentary’ status. Based on the management index ranking, countries are categorized as 5 or failed, 4 or weak, 3 or moderate, 2 or good, and1 or very good. A country is categorized as ‘very good’ for a score of 7 and above. It is categorized as ‘good’ for a score between 5.6 and 7, and as ‘moderate’ for a score between 4.4 and 5.5. A score between 3 and 4.3 means a country is categorized as ‘weak,’ and a score below 3 means the categorization of a country as ‘failed.’ Countries are ranked between 1 and 10 on the basis of the level of difficulty they face. The level of difficulty is further categorized as 5 or negligible, 4 or minor, 3 or moderate, 2 or substantial, and 1 or massive. A score of 8.5 and above means the categorization of the country’s level of difficulty as ‘massive, and a score below 2.5 means the categorization of the level of difficulty faced by the country as ‘negligible.’ The level of difficulty score of 2.5 to 4.4 means a country faces a ‘minor’ level of difficulty and a score between 4.5 and 6.4 means the level of difficulty faced by a country is ‘moderate.’ A country with a score of 6.5 to 8.4 faces a ‘substantial’ level of difficulty.

Data cited at https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2020/index/nzl by Transparency International is licensed under CC-BY-ND 4.0. Global Corruption Barometer is the largest world-wide public opinion survey on corruption. see more at https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2020/index/nzl Transparency International(TI) defines corruption as the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. This definition encompasses corrupt practices in both the public and private sectors. The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) ranks countries according to the perception of corruption in the public sector. The CPI is an aggregate indicator that combines different sources of information about corruption, making it possible to compare countries. The CPI ranks almost 200 countries by their perceived levels of corruption, as determined by expert assessments and opinion surveys.

Bloom Consulting was founded in 2003 as a Nation Branding consultancy. Our Headquarters are located in Madrid, with offices in Lisbon and São Paulo. Bloom Consulting has been interviewed by The Economist, Forbes and CNN . According to Country Branding Central www.countrybrandingwiki.org, our CEO José Filipe Torres, a recurrent lecturer in Universities such as Harvard, is considered one of the top 3 international experts in the field of Nation Branding, Region and City Branding, providing advisory for the OECD. In addition, Bloom Consulting publishes the Bloom Consulting Country Brand Ranking © annually for both Trade and Tourism, to extensively analyze the brand performance of 193 countries and territories worldwide and the Digital Country Index - Measuring the Brand appeal of countries and territories in the Digital World.

The World Bank's Country Policy and Institutional Assessment is done annually for all its borrowing countries. It has evolved into a set of criteria, which are grouped in four clusters: (a) economic management; (b) structural policies; (c) policies for social inclusion and equity; and (d) public sector management and institutions. The number of criteria, currently sixteen, reflect a balance between ensuring that all key factors that foster pro-poor growth and poverty alleviation are captured, without overly burdening the evaluation process. Ratings for each of the criteria reflect a variety of indicators, observations, and judgments. They focus on the quality of each country's current policies and institutions - which are the main determinant of present aid effectiveness prospects. To fully underscore the importance of the CPIA in the IDA Performance Based Allocations, the overall country score is referred to as the IDA Resource Allocation Index (IRAI)

Sources: The Global Health Security Index and The Center for Systems Science and Engineering at JHU

Data cited at: Numbeo Methodology: The Index has been calculated twice per year by considering the latest 36 months. A). Beginning of the Year and B). Mid Year Crime Index is an estimation of the overall level of crime in a given city or a country. We consider crime levels lower than 20 as very low, crime levels between 20 and 40 as being low, crime levels between 40 and 60 as being moderate, crime levels between 60 and 80 as being high and finally crime levels higher than 80 as being very high. Safety index is, on the other way, quite the opposite of crime index. If the city has a high safety index, it is considered very safe.

Data cited at:  Retrieved from-https://atlas.cid.harvard.edu/rankings/product

Data cited at:  Retrieved from-https://oec.world/en/rankings/eci/hs6/hs96

Calculated using Mean Years of Schooling and Expected Years of Schooling.

Data cited at: EF Education First Ltd. EF English Proficiency Index: EF EPI score, we used weighted components which include English tests and the EF EPI from 2019. Inclusion of the previous year’s Index helps to stabilize scores year over year, but test takers from the previous year are not counted in the total test taker count for the current year. Regional averages are weighted by population. For the first time this year we have moved to an 800 point scale aligned strictly to the CEFR. The aim of this new scale is to eliminate confusion between the EF EPI and the EF SET. The two have always been distinct but were both scored out of 100 until this year. In addition, the EF EPI was often misinterpreted as a percentage. The new scale clears up these ambiguities.Based on score thresholds, we assign countries, regions, and cities to proficiency bands. This allows recognition of clusters with similar English skill levels and comparisons within and between regions.  • The Very High Proficiency band corresponds to CEFR levels C1 and C2. • The High and Moderate Proficiency bands correspond to CEFR level B2, with each EF EPI band corresponding to half of the CEFR level. • The Low Proficiency band corresponds to the upper half of CEFR level B1. • The Very Low Proficiency band corresponds to the lower half of CEFR level B1 and A2.CEFREF EPI ScorePre-A11-199A1200-299A2300-399B1400-499B2500-599C1600-699C2700-800  

The 2021 Elite Quality Index (EQx2021) is a global ranking of countries built on the notion of ‘elite quality’. Elite quality is a macro-level feature of the political economy that measures the value creation aggregate of all elite business models. Elites are dominant coalitions with the strongest capacity for coordination in societies and operate the highest impact business models.  Rank 1-10 - Very High-Quality Elites Rank 11-25- High-Quality Elites Rank 26-75- Quality Elites Rank 76-124- Middle-Quality Elites Rank 125-151- Lagging Elites Data cited at: Foundation for Value Creation (FVC)-

Data cited at: Wendling, Z. A., Emerson, J. W., Esty, D. C., Levy, M. A., de Sherbinin, A., et al. (2018). 2018 Environmental Performance Index. New Haven, CT: Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy. https://epi.yale.edu/   The Environmental Performance Index (EPI) is constructed through the calculation and aggregation of 20 indicators reflecting national-level environmental data. These indicators are combined into nine issue categories, each of which fit under one of two overarching objectives. The two objectives that provide the overarching structure of the EPI are Environmental Health and Ecosystem Vitality. Environmental Health measures the protection of human health from environmental harm. Ecosystem Vitality measures ecosystem protection and resource management. These two objectives are further divided into nine issue categories that span high-priority environmental policy issues, including air quality, forests, fisheries, and climate and energy, among others. The issue categories are extensive but not comprehensive. Underlying the nine issue categories are 20 indicators calculated from country-level data and statistics. After more than 15 years of work on environmental performance measurement and six iterations of the EPI, global data are still lacking on a number of key environmental issues. These include: freshwater quality, toxic chemical exposures, municipal solid waste management, nuclear safety, wetlands loss, agricultural soil quality and degradation, recycling rates, adaptation, vulnerability, and resiliency to climate change, desertification.

The Financial Freedom Index is based on 15 indicators and sub-indicators. For this tabular overview of the entire index the 6 types of tax rates and 3 international taxation indicators have been combined as one "tax score." The other six main indicators are shown as they appear on the "By Indicator" pages. Due to lack of data for some countries, not all nations have been included in the ranking. A score of 1.00 is most favorable, i.e., a 1.00 "tax score" translates into low taxes, as a 1.00 "cost of living score" translates into low living costs.

Data cited at: Fragile States Index - https://fragilestatesindex.org/ The FSI focuses on the indicators of risk and is based on thousands of articles and reports that are processed by our CAST Software from electronically available sources. Measures of fragility, like Demographic Pressures,Refugees and IDPs and etc., have been scaled on 0 to 10 where 10 is highest fragility and 0 no fragility.

Freedom Status obtained by Combined Average of the Political Rights and Civil Liberties Ratings (Freedom Rating) Range 1-7; 1-2.5 Free; 3-5: Partly Free and 5.5-7: Not Free The score for the A. Electoral Process subcategory The score for the B. Political Pluralism and Participation subcategory The score for the C. Functioning of Government subcategory The score for the Political Rights category The score for the D. Freedom of Expression and Belief subcategory The score for the E. Associational and Organizational Rights subcategory The score for the F. Rule of Law subcategory The score for the G. Personal Autonomy and Individual Rights subcategory The score for the Civil Liberties category Total aggregate Score for all categories  

The GID-DB is a database providing researchers and policymakers with key data on gender-based discrimination in social institutions. This data helps analyse women’s empowerment and understand gender gaps in other key areas of development.Covering 180 countries and territories, the GID-DB contains comprehensive information on legal, cultural and traditional practices that discriminate against women and girls.

'The TRACE Matrix measures business bribery risk in all countries. Developed in collaboration with RAND Corporation, the TRACE Matrix provides the business community with a powerful new tool for anti-bribery risk assessment. It assesses countries across four domains - Business Interactions with Government, Anti-bribery Laws and Enforcement, Government and Civil Service Transparency, and the Capacity for Civil Society Oversight, including the role of the media - as well as nine sub-domains. Business interactions with government includes the sub-domains of “contact with government,” “expectation of paying bribes” and “regulatory burden.” These indicators capture aspects of the “keys with government” that TRACE identified as very important for business bribery through regulatory and business interviews they conducted. Anti-corruption laws enacted by a country and information about enforcement of those laws. Government and civil service transparency, which includes indicators concerning whether government budgets are publicly available and whether there are regulations addressing conflicts of interest for civil servants. Information concerning the extent of press freedom and social development, both of which serve as indicators of a robust civil society that can provide government oversight. The overall country risk score is a combined and weighted score of four domains . For each of these four "domains" (and related sub-domains), the TRACE Matrix aggregates relevant data obtained from leading public interest and international organizations, including the United Nations, the World Bank and the World Economic Forum. Based on statistical analysis of this information, each country is assigned not only an overall score between 1 and 100 — with 100 representing the greatest risk — but also scores for each of the four domains and nine sub-domains. '  TRANSLATE with xEnglishArabicHebrewPolishBulgarianHindiPortugueseCatalanHmong DawRomanianChinese SimplifiedHungarianRussianChinese TraditionalIndonesianSlovakCzechItalianSlovenianDanishJapaneseSpanishDutchKlingonSwedishEnglishKoreanThaiEstonianLatvianTurkishFinnishLithuanianUkrainianFrenchMalayUrduGermanMalteseVietnameseGreekNorwegianWelshHaitian CreolePersian  TRANSLATE with COPY THE URL BELOW BackEMBED THE SNIPPET BELOW IN YOUR SITEEnable collaborative features and customize widget: Bing Webmaster PortalBack

Data cited at: Germanwatch-https://www.germanwatch.org/en/cri 

The DHL Global Connectedness Index measures globalization based on international flows of trade, capital, information, and people. Predictably, people flows have suffered an unprecedented collapse in 2020. All other types of flows have held up surprisingly well, though. Trade and capital flows plunged at the onset of the pandemic but have already started to recover. And digital information flows have surged as people and companies have rushed to stay connected online. All in all, the DHL Global Connectedness Index is set to decline in 2020, but it is unlikely to fall below where it stood during the 2008-09 global financial crisis, based on our analysis of preliminary data and forecasts. Covid-19 has disrupted business and life around the world, but it has not severed the fundamental links that connect us across national borders. Our report shows a world of people, companies, and countries still prepared to join up and do business with each other. That’s good news because a more connected world still offers the best prospects to restore health and prosperity.

The Global Cybersecurity Index (GCI) was first launched in 2015 by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) to measure the commitment of 193 ITU Member States and the State of Palestine1 to cybersecurity to help them identify areas of improvement and encourage countries to take action, through raising awareness on the state of cybersecurity worldwide. As cybersecurity risks, priorities, and resources evolve, the GCI has also adapted to give a more accurate snapshot of cybersecurity measures taken by countries. This report aims to better understand countries’ commitments to cybersecurity, identify gaps, encourage the incorporation of good practices, and provide useful insights for countries to improve their cybersecurity postures.     Update on this version: Unlike previous iterations, which have a scale of 0 to 1, this iteration of the GCI is on a scale of 0 to 100, with each pillar weighted at 20 points. As a composite weighted index, each indicator, sub-indicator, and micro-indicator are assigned a weight given the relative importance to the indicator group. Weightage can have a significant impact on final scores, and different techniques will produce different rankings.

The average global index score stagnated in 2022. Despite expectations of a rebound after the lifting of pandemic-related restrictions, the score was almost unchanged, at 5.29 (on a 0-10 scale), compared with 5.28 in 2021. The positive effect of the restoration of individual freedoms was cancelled out by negative developments globally. The scores of more than half of the countries measured by the index either stagnated or declined. Western Europe was a positive outlier, being the only region whose score returned to pre-pandemic levels. 

Data cited at: The World Economic Forum https://www.weforum.org/ Topic: Global Gender Gap Report 2023 Publication URL: https://www.weforum.org/reports/global-gender-gap-report-2023 License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode   The Global Gender Gap Index annually benchmarks the current state and evolution of gender parity across four key dimensions (Economic Participation and Opportunity, Educational Attainment, Health and Survival, and Political Empowerment). It is the longest-standing index tracking the progress of numerous countries’ efforts towards closing these gaps over time since its inception in 2006. This year, the 17th edition of the Global Gender Gap Index benchmarks gender parity across 146 countries, providing a basis for robust cross country analysis.

Global Hunger Index, 2023 The 2023 Global Hunger Index shows that since 2015 little progress has been made in reducing hunger. The 2023 GHI score for the world is 18.3, considered moderate. This is less than one point below the world’s 2015 GHI score of 19.1, indicating that progress on reducing hunger has largely stalled. In contrast, between 2000, 2008, and 2015, the world made significant headway against hunger. There has been an increase in the prevalence of undernourishment, one of the indicators used in the calculation of GHI scores, rising from a low of 7.5 percent in 2017 to 9.2 percent in 2022.

Data cited at: International Telecommunication Union-https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/stat/default.aspx 

The Global Innovation Index 2023 captures the innovation ecosystem performance of 132 economies and tracks the most recent global innovation trends.  The GII 2023 tracks global innovation trends against a background of uncertainty caused by slow economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, high-interest rates, and geopolitical conflict, but with the promise of the Digital Age and Deep Science innovation waves and technological progress.  

Data cited at:  Knowledge4All, United Nations Development Program & Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum Knowledge Foundation.

The Global Opportunity Index (GOI) answers a pressing need for information that's vital to a thriving global economy like what policies can governments pursue to attract foreign direct investment (FDI), expand their economies, and accelerate job creation, everything multinational companies, other investors, and development agencies need to know before making large-scale, long-term capital commitments.   Methodology The GOI considers economic and financial factors that influence investment activities as well as key business, legal and regulatory policies that governments can modify to support and often drive investments. Overall, it tracks countries’ performance on more than 50 variables aggregated in five categories, each measuring an aspect of a country’s attractiveness for investors: (1) its economic performance; (2) the ability for investors to access financial services; (3) the cost of doing business; (4) the level of support its institutions provide to businesses; and (5) the extent to which its institutions, policies, and legal system facilitate international integration.

Data cited at: Institute for Economics and Peace retrieved from Vision of Humanity  The Global Peace Index 2022

Data Cited at: ITUC GLOBAL RIGHTS INDEX The 2020 ITUC Global Rights Index depicts the world’s worst countries for workers by rating 144 countries on a scale from 1-5+ based on the degree of respect for workers’ rights with 1 being the best rating and 5+ the worst rating. 5+ No guarantee of rights due to the breakdown of the rule of law 5 No guarantee of rights 4 Systematic violations of rights 3 Regular violations of rights 2 Repeated violations of rights 1 Sporadic violations of rights No data

Highlights of the  Global Sustainable Competiveness Report 2023:Scandinavia continues to top the Sustainable Competitiveness Index: of the top 6 spots, 5 are Scandinavian. Sweden keeps topping the Index.Only one country in the Top 20 is not European: Japan on 12 (South Korea 21).For the first time, China (ranked 30) overtakes the US on rank 32.Germany ranks 15, The UK 16, and France 18.Brazil ranks 65, India 121, and Nigeria – Africa’s most populous nation – 156.Some of the least developed nations have a considerable higher GSCI ranking than their GDP would suggest (e.g. Colombia, Peu, Nepal, Bhutan, Bolivia.

Data cited at:  Institute for Economics & Peace and available from http://visionofhumanity.org/reports Note: The Year of data has been considered as year of publication, for example 2020 report is considered as year 2020.   The Global Terrorism Index (GTI) is a comprehensive study which accounts for the direct and indirect impact of terrorism in 163 countries in terms of its effect on lives lost, injuries, property damage and the psychological aftereffects of terrorism. This study covers 99.6 per cent of the world's population. It aggregates the most authoritative data source on terrorism today, the Global Terrorism Database (GTD) collated by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) into a composite score in order to provide an ordinal ranking of nations on the negative impact of terrorism. The GTD is unique in that it consists of systematically and comprehensively coded data on domestic as well as international terrorist incidents and now includes more than 140,000 cases.  

Data cited at: Heritage Foundation   Economic freedom is the fundamental right of every human to control his or her own labor and property. In an economically free society, individuals are free to work, produce, consume, and invest in any way they please, with that freedom both protected by the state and unconstrained by the state. In economically free societies, governments allow labor, capital and goods to move freely, and refrain from coercion or constraint of liberty beyond the extent necessary to protect and maintain liberty itself. Economic Freedom Scores: Range and level of freedom 80–100:- Free 70–79.9:- Mostly Free 60–69.9:- Moderately Free 50–59.9:- Mostly Unfree 0–49.9:- Repressed

La collection primaire d'indicateurs de développement de la Banque mondiale, compilée à partir de sources internationales officiellement reconnues. Il présente les données les plus récentes et les plus précises sur le développement mondial et comprend des estimations nationales, régionales et mondiales.

The Index for Risk Management INFORM is a composite indicator developed by JRC as a tool for understanding the risk of humanitarian crisis and disasters.

The mission of the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) is to provide the public with a reliable and convenient reporting mechanism to submit information to the FBI concerning suspected Internet-facilitated criminal activity and to develop effective alliances with industry partners. Information is processed for investigative and intelligence purposes for law enforcement and public awareness.

Data cited at: Gygli, Savina, Florian Haelg, Niklas Potrafke and Jan-​Egbert Sturm (2019): The KOF Globalisation Index – Revisited, Review of International Organizations, 14(3), 543-​574 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-​019-09344-2   original contribution introducing the KOF Globalisation Index: Dreher, Axel (2006): Does Globalization Affect Growth? Evidence from a new Index of Globalization, Applied Economics 38, 10: 1091-​1110.

The Logistics Performance Index overall score reflects assessments of a country's logistics based on efficiency of the customs clearance process, quality of trade- and transport-related infrastructure, ease of arranging competitively priced shipments, quality of logistics services, ability to track and trace consignments, and frequency with which shipments reach the consignee within the scheduled time. The index ranges from 1 to 5, with a higher score representing better performance. Data are from Logistics Performance Index surveys conducted by the World Bank in partnership with academic and international institutions and private companies and individuals engaged in international logistics. 2011 round of surveys covered more than 6,000 country assessments by nearly 1,000 international freight forwarders. Respondents evaluated eight markets on six core dimensions using a scale from 1 (worst) to 5 (best). The markets are chosen based on the most important export and import markets of the respondent's country, random selection, and, for landlocked countries, neighboring countries that connect them with international markets. Scores for the six areas are averaged across all respondents and aggregated to a single score using principal components analysis. Details of the survey methodology and index construction methodology are in Connecting to Compete 2012: Trade Logistics in the Global Economy (2012).

This Dataset contains Indicators related to IC Development Index and Tables from "Measuring the Information Society Report 2018, Volume 1" For Indicators for other ICT Development data please refer: https://knoema.com/ITUKIICT2019/global-ict-developments

Data cited at: Open Data Watch https://opendatawatch.com/ Topic: Open Data Inventory (ODIN) data Publication: http://odin.opendatawatch.com/data/download License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/   Score Type Options: Three sets of scores are available: raw, weighted, or standardized. Raw scores have values between 0 and 1 as recorded in the original assessment; subscores are simple totals. Weighted scores use a predefined weighting matrix; subscores are simple totals. Standardized scores are scaled from 0 to 100; subscores are weighted averages.

Passport Index is an interactive tool, which collects, displays and ranks the passports of the world. You can discover the world’s passports on a map, by country name, by Passport Power Rank and even by the color of their cover. Visa Free Score Passports accumulate points for each visa free country that their holders can visit without a visa, or they can obtain a visa on arrival. Passport Power Rank Passports are ranked based on their Visa Free Score. The higher the Visa Free Score, the better the Passport Power Rank. Methodology The country list is based on the 193 UN member countries and 6 territories (Macao, Kosovo, etc.) for a total of 199. Territories annexed to other countries such as Norfolk Island, French Polynesia, etc. are excluded. Data is based on research from publicly available sources, as well as information shared by government agencies.

  Political Terror Scale Levels 1 - Coun­tries un­der a se­cure rule of law, people are not im­prisoned for their views, and tor­ture is rare or ex­cep­tion­al. Polit­ic­al murders are ex­tremely rare. 2 - There is a lim­ited amount of im­pris­on­ment for non­vi­ol­ent polit­ic­al activ­ity. However, few per­sons are af­fected, tor­ture and beat­ings are ex­cep­tion­al. Polit­ic­al murder is rare. 3 - There is ex­tens­ive polit­ic­al im­pris­on­ment, or a re­cent his­tory of such im­pris­on­ment. Ex­e­cu­tion or oth­er polit­ic­al murders and bru­tal­ity may be com­mon. Un­lim­ited de­ten­tion, with or without a tri­al, for polit­ic­al views is ac­cep­ted. 4 - Civil and polit­ic­al rights vi­ol­a­tions have ex­pan­ded to large num­bers of the pop­u­la­tion. Murders, dis­ap­pear­ances, and tor­ture are a com­mon part of life. In spite of its gen­er­al­ity, on this level ter­ror af­fects those who in­terest them­selves in polit­ics or ideas. 5 - Ter­ror has ex­pan­ded to the whole pop­u­la­tion. The lead­ers of these so­ci­et­ies place no lim­its on the means or thor­ough­ness with which they pur­sue per­son­al or ideo­lo­gic­al goals.   Note- NA_Status_A, NA_Status_H, and NA_Status_S corresponds to  PTS_A, PTS_H, and PTS_S respectively0= The value ‘0’ is assigned where the respective human rights report was available and has been coded66= The value ‘66’ is reserved for missing PTS scores due to missing reports 77=The value ‘77’ is assigned where reports no-longer exist, or do not exist yet88=The value ‘88’ is assigned for units that exist  but no report was published and thus no PTS score is assigned99= The value ‘99’ is assigned where human rights report was published but no PTS score was assigned  

PCI is calculated as a geometric average of eight domains or categories, namely, ICTs, structural change, natural capital, human capital, energy, transport, the private sector and institutions

The Public Investment Management index captures different ex ante and ex post dimensions of various stages of the investment process. It is a composite index of the efficiency of the public investment management process for 71 countries. It records the quality and efficiency of the investment process across four consecutive stages: project appraisal, selection, implementation and evaluation. The index allows for benchmarking against the performance of different country groups and across regions, and provides a new dataset that could be utilized for cross-country analysis.

The main objective of the research is to address the theoretical and empirical problems of how political institutions of high quality can be created and maintained. The second objective is to study the effects of Quality of Government on a number of policy areas, such as health, environment, social policy, and poverty. Data citation: Teorell, Jan, Aksel Sundström, Sören Holmberg, Bo Rothstein, Natalia Alvarado Pachon, Cem Mert Dalli, Rafael Lopez Valverde & Paula Nilsson. 2024. The Quality of Government Standard Dataset, version Jan24. University of Gothenburg: The Quality of Government Institute, https://www.gu.se/en/quality-government doi:10.18157/qogstdjan24

Data cited at:  The World Justice Project (WJP) The World Justice Project (WJP) Rule of Law Index® is a quantitative assessment tool designed by the World Justice Project to offer a detailed and comprehensive picture of the extent to which countries adhere to the rule of law in practice. Factors of the WJP Rule of Law Index include: 1. Constraints on Government Powers 2. Absence of Corruption 3. Open Government 4. Fundamental Rights 5. Order and Security 6. Regulatory Enforcement 7. Civil Justice 8. Criminal Justice (Data is collected for a 9th factor, Informal Justice, but it is not included in aggregated scores and rankings. This is due to the complexities of these systems and the difficulties in measuring their fairness and effectiveness in a matter that is both systematic and comparable across countries.) Every year WJP collects data from representative samples of the general public and legal professionals to compute the index scores. The data, once collected, are carefully processed to arrive at country-level scores. The respondent level data is first edited to exclude partially-completed surveys, suspicious data, and outliers. Individual answers are then mapped on to the 44 sub-factors of the index. Answers are coded so that all values ​​fall between 0 (least rule of law) and 1 (most rule of law), and aggregated at country level using the simple, or unweighted, average of all respondents. Note: 2012-2013 values ​​given for year 2013 and 2017-2018 given for year 2018.

Restrictions apply: https://www.scimagojr.com/aboutus.php   Citation: SCImago, (n.d.). SJR — SCImago Journal & Country Rank [Portal]. Retrieved Date you Retrieve, from http://www.scimagojr.com   SCImago Journal Rank: It expresses the average number of weighted citations received in the selected year by the documents published in the selected journal in the three previous years, --i.e. weighted citations received in year X to documents published in the journal in years X-1, X-2 and X-3. H Index: The h index expresses the journal's number of articles (h) that have received at least h citations. It quantifies both journal scientific productivity and scientific impact and it is also applicable to scientists, countries, etc. Total Documents: Output of the selected period. All types of documents are considered, including citable and non citable documents. Total Cites (3years): Number of citations received in the seleted year by a journal to the documents published in the three previous years, --i.e. citations received in year X to documents published in years X-1, X-2 and X-3. All types of documents are considered. Self Cites: Number of journal's self-citations in the selected year to its own documents published in the three previous years, --i.e. self-citations in year X to documents published in years X-1, X-2 and X-3. All types of documents are considered. Cited Documents: Number of documents cited at least once in the three previous years, --i.e. years X-1, X-2 and X-3 Cites per Document (2 years): Average citations per document in a 2 year period. It is computed considering the number of citations received by a journal in the current year to the documents published in the two previous years, --i.e. citations received in year X to documents published in years X-1 and X-2.

The SIGI is built on 27 innovative variables measuring discriminatory social institutions, which are grouped into 4 dimensions: discrimination in the family, restricted physical integrity, restricted access to productive and financial resources, and restricted civil liberties.Lower values indicate lower levels of discrimination in social institutions: the SIGI ranges from 0% for no discrimination to 100% for very high discrimination.

Data cited at:  "Annual Survey of Mining Companies: 2021"@ Fraser Institute   The Fraser Institute Annual Survey of Mining Companies was sent to approximately 4,100 exploration, development, and other mining-related companies around the world. Several mining publications and associations also helped publicize the survey. The survey, conducted from October 9, 2012, to January 6, 2013, represents responses from 742 of those companies. The companies participating in the survey reported exploration spending of US$6.2 billion in 2012 and US$ 5.4 billion in 2011.

Data Cited at - Sachs, J., Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Lafortune, G., Fuller, G. (2019): Sustainable Development Report 2019. New York: Bertelsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN). The Sustainable Development Report 2020 presents the SDG Index and Dashboards for all UN member states and frames the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in terms of six broad transformations. It was prepared by teams of independent experts at the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) and the Bertelsmann Stiftung.

The Chinn-Ito index (KAOPEN) is an index measuring a country's degree of capital account openness. The index was initially introduced in Chinn and Ito (Journal of Development Economics, 2006). KAOPEN is based on the binary dummy variables that codify the tabulation of restrictions on cross-border financial transactions reported in the IMF's Annual Report on Exchange Arrangements and Exchange Restrictions (AREAER).   Chinn, Menzie D. and Hiro Ito (2008). "A New Measure of Financial Openness". Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, Volume 10, Issue 3, p. 309 – 322 (September). Ito, Hiro (2006). "Financial Development in Asia: Thresholds, Institutions, and the Sequence of Liberalization". North American Journal of Economics and Finance, issue 17(3) (December). Chinn, Menzie D. and Hiro Ito (2006)."What Matters for Financial Development? Capital Controls, Institutions, and Interactions," Journal of Development Economics, Volume 81, Issue 1, Pages 163-192 (October). The longer version is available as NBER Working Paper No. 11370 (May 2005). The previous version is "Capital Account Liberalization, Institutions and Financial Development: Cross Country Evidence," (with Menzie Chinn) NBER Working Paper Series, #8967 (June 2002).  

Data cited at Global Health Security Index; October 2019 - https://www.ghsindex.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/2019-Global-Health-Security-Index.pdf

The Global Slavery Index, the flagship report of the Walk Free Foundation. The Global Slavery Index estimates the number of people in modern slavery in 167 countries. It is a tool for citizens, non government organisations, businesses and public officials to understand the size of the problem, existing responses and contributing factors, so they can build sound policies that will end modern slavery. The Global Slavery Index answers the following questions: What is the estimated prevalence of modern slavery country by country, and what is the absolute number by population? How are governments tackling modern slavery? What factors explain or predict the prevalence of modern slavery? Government Response Rating by Country A - 70 to 79.9 BBB - 60 to 69.9 BB - 50 to 59.9 B - 40 to 49.9 CCC - 30 to 39.9 DC - 20 to 29.9 C - 10 to 19.9 D - <0 to 9.9

To identify the healthiest countries in the world, Bloomberg Rankings created health scores and health-risk scores for countries with populations of at least 1 million. The risk score was subtracted from the health score to determine the country''s rank. Five-year averages, when available, were used to mitigate some of the short-term year-over-year swings.

Levels of restrictions on religion Government Restrictions Index Very high- 6.6 to 10.0 High- 4.5 to 6.5 Moderate - 2.4 to 4.4 Low- 0.0 to 2.3 Social Hostilities Index Very high- 7.2 to 10.0 High- 3.6 to 7.1 Moderate- 1.5 to 3.5 Low- 0.0 to 1.4

Data cited at: UN E-Government Knowledgebase - https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/ 1. The EGDI is based on a comprehensive Survey of the online presence of all 193 United Nations Member States, which assesses national websites and how e-government policies and strategies are applied in general and in specific sectors for delivery of essential services. The assessment rates the e-government performance of countries relative to one another as opposed to being an absolute measurement. The results are tabulated and combined with a set of indicators embodying a country’s capacity to participate in the information society, without which e-government development efforts are of limited immediate use. Although the basic model has remained consistent, the precise meaning of these values varies from one edition of the Survey to the next as understanding of the potential of e-government changes and the underlying technology evolves. This is an important distinction because it also implies that it is a comparative framework that seeks to encompass various approaches that may evolve over time instead of advocating a linear path with an absolute goal. 2. E-Government Development Index-EGDI Very High-EGDI (Greater than 0.75) High-EGDI (Between 0.50 and 0.75) Middle-EGDI (Between 0.25 and 0.50) Low-EGDI (Less than 0.25)

The ND-GAIN Country Index summarizes a country's vulnerability to climate change and other global challenges in combination with its readiness to improve resilience. It aims to help governments, businesses and communities better prioritize investments for a more efficient response to the immediate global challenges ahead.  View the ND-GAIN technical documentation for more information

  The WPS Index is a simple and transparent measure that captures women’s autonomy and empowerment at home, in the community, and in society. The index is structured around three basic dimensions of women’s well-being: inclusion (economic, social, political); justice (formal laws and informal discrimination); and security (at the individual, community, and societal levels. This second edition adds more than a dozen countries—including Libya and South Sudan—that meet the minimum requirements of recent and reliable data across the three dimensions. Those additions bring the total ranking to 167 countries, encompassing more than 98 percent of the world’s population.

The ease of doing business score helps assess the absolute level of regulatory performance over time. It captures the gap of each economy from the best regulatory performance observed on each of the indicators across all economies in the Doing Business sample since 2005. One can both see the gap between a particular economy’s performance and the best performance at any point in time and assess the absolute change in the economy’s regulatory environment over time as measured by Doing Business. An economy’s ease of doing business score is reflected on a scale from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the lowest and 100 represents the best performance. For example, an ease of doing business score of 75 in Doing Business 2019 means an economy was 25 percentage points away from the best regulatory performance constructed across all economies and across time. A score of 80 in Doing Business 2020 would indicate the economy is improving   NOTE- The source discontinued this dataset; Reference-Doing Business Legacy (worldbank.org)

Data cited at: Charities Aid Foundation   CAF World Giving Index 2019: For the 2019 edition, CAF included aggregate data for each country across the 10 years interview was conducted, namely 2009-2018. This data corresponds to the reports issued the year after interviewing took place (i.e. CAF World Giving Index 2010 refers to data collected in 2009). Due to the small variation in countries Gallup interview in each year, CAF has only included countries in this edition for which data was available for at least eight of the last 10 years. This means that this edition is based on 128 countries.   CAF World Giving Index ranking and scores: In order to establish a rounded measure of giving behavior across the world, the CAF World Giving Index relies on a simple averaging of the responses from the three key questions asked in each country. Each country is given a percentage score and countries are ranked on the basis of these scores. For this 10th edition, CAF has averaged the scores across the 10 years to give aggregate numbers.

The World Happiness Report is a landmark survey of the state of global happiness that ranks 156 countries by how happy their citizens perceive themselves to be. The World Happiness Report 2020 for the first time ranks cities around the world by their subjective well-being and digs more deeply into how the social, urban and natural environments combine to affect our happiness.

Data cited at: World Uncertainty Index (WUI), developed by Hites Ahir (International Monetary Fund), Nicholas Bloom (Stanford University) and Davide Furceri (International Monetary Fund).

The Range of Score to Access the Press Freedom. (New Scale) From 85 to 100 points: Good From 70 to 85 points: Satisfactory From 55 to 70 points: Problematic From 40 to 55 points: Difficult From 0 to 40 points: Very Serious   The Range of Score to Access the Press Freedom. (Old Scale) From 0 to 15 points: Good From 15.01 to 25 points: Fairly good From 25.01 to 35 points: Problematic From 35.01 to 55 points: Bad From 55.01 to 100 points: Very bad Note: Negative value is available for 2012 only and it represents the country in top* The press freedom index that Reporters Without Borders publishes every year measures the level of freedom of information in nearly 180 countries. It reflects the degree of freedom that journalists, news organizations and netizens enjoy in each country, and the efforts made by the authorities to respect and ensure respect for this freedom. It is based partly on a questionnaire that is sent to our partner organizations (18 freedom of expression NGOs located in all five continents), to our network of 150 correspondents, and to journalists, researchers, jurists and human rights activists. The 179 countries ranked in this year's index are those for which Reporters Without Borders received completed questionnaires from various sources. Some countries were not included because of a lack of reliable, confirmed data. A score and a position are assigned to each country in the final ranking. They are complementary indicators that together assess the state of press freedom. In order to make the index more informative and make it easier to compare different years, scores will henceforth range from 0 to 100, with 0 being the best possible score and 100 the worst. The index reflects the situation during a specific period. This year's index is based solely on events between the start of December 2012 and the end of November 2013. It does not look at human rights violations in general, just violations of freedom of information. The index should in no way be taken as an indication of the quality of the media in the countries concerned. In order to make the index more informative and make it easier to compare different years, scores will henceforth range from 0 to 100, with 0 being the best possible score and 100 the worst. The index reflects the situation during a specific period. This year's index is based solely on events between the start of December 2012 and the end of November 2013. It does not look at human rights violations in general, just violations of freedom of information. The index should in no way be taken as an indication of the quality of the media in the countries concerned. In order to make the index more informative and make it easier to compare different years, scores will henceforth range from 0 to 100, with 0 being the best possible score and 100 the worst. The index reflects the situation during a specific period. This year's index is based solely on events between the start of December 2012 and the end of November 2013. It does not look at human rights violations in general, just violations of freedom of information. The index should in no way be taken as an indication of the quality of the media in the countries concerned. This year's index is based solely on events between the start of December 2012 and the end of November 2013. It does not look at human rights violations in general, just violations of freedom of information. The index should in no way be taken as an indication of the quality of the media in the countries concerned. This year's index is based solely on events between the start of December 2012 and the end of November 2013. It does not look at human rights violations in general, just violations of freedom of information. The index should in no way be taken as an indication of the quality of the media in the countries concerned.   * In order to have a bigger spread in the scores and increase the differentiation between countries, this year's questionnaire had more answers assigning negative points. That is why countries at the top of the index have negative scores this year. Although the point system has produced a broader distribution of scores than in 2010, each country's evolution over the years can still be plotted by comparing its position in the index rather than its score. This is what the arrows in the table refer to – a country's change in position in the index compared with the preceding year.      

Data cited at: World Uncertainty Index (WUI), developed by Hites Ahir (International Monetary Fund), Nicholas Bloom (Stanford University) and Davide Furceri (International Monetary Fund).