wgi world governance index · 2016. 8. 24. · world governance index 6 foundations of governance.1...
Post on 18-Dec-2020
4 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
WGI World Governance Index
Why Should World Governance Be Evaluated, and for What Purpose?
Version 2.02011 Report
Pr
op
os
al
Pa
pe
rs
Ser
ies
Proposal Papers
The Forum for a new World Governance encourages the development and circulation of new ideas in several languages and in a large number of countries in the form of Proposal Papers. The papers present the most relevant proposals for generating the breakthroughs and changes needed to build a new, fairer and more sustainable world governance.
Published as a series, the Proposal Papers cover five broad categories of world governance:• Environment and management of the planet• The economy and globalization• Politics, state structures, and institutions• Peace, security, and armed conflicts• Knowledge, science, education, and the information and communication society
Forum for a new World Governance June 2010 www.world-governance.org
Translation: Marina UrquidiIllustrations: Dominique MonteauGraphic design: Patrick LescurePrinting: Causses et Cévenne
This Proposal Paper is available under a Creative Commons License allowing users to use, reproduce and circulate it on condition that they mention the title, authors and Forum for a new World Governance. This Proposals Paper cannot be modified or sold. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
Cover illustration: Carmen Piemonte, Lutrans I, 2010 (www.carlunelarte.cl)
World Governance Index
Why Should World Governance Be Evaluated, and for What Purpose?
Version 2.02011 Report
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
4
Ta b l e o f C o n t e n t s
Overview 5
World Governance Index - WGI 5
Usefulness and Uses of the WGI 6
Part I: Developing the World Governance Index 9
Defining the World Governance Index 10
World-governance goals and fields 10
Establishing the conditions for sustainable development 11
Reducing inequalities 11
Establishing lasting peace while respecting diversity 11
World Governance Index 2011 – version 2 0 12
Methodology and Calculations 13
Part II: Results and Illustrations 14
2011 WGI Global Ranking in Descending Order (with rank in 2008) 15
WGI Regional Rankings 16
Recapitulation Table per Country for the Five WGI Indicators 17
EU / OECD Figures 19
Latin America / The Caribbean Figures 20
Africa Figures 21
Asia Pacific Figures 22
CIS / Central Asia / Balkans Figures 23
Arab States Figures 24
Conclusion 25
Copyright Appendix 27
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
5
P romoting, on a world scale, a legitimate, effective, and democratic gov-ernance, and forming a responsible, plural, and united community within which the system of governance holds an essential and vital position con-
stitute the main objectives of the Forum for a new World Governance (FnWG).
The challenge is ambitious. The idea is to overcome the many obstacles of a world in crisis: persisting tensions, conflicts and wars, paralysis or failure of regional and international organizations, helpless nation-states, and the obsolescence of an ide-ological model that appeared in the seventeenth century.
Reaching these objectives requires the active and constructive involvement of players who are able not only to contribute innovative thinking on world govern-ance but also to offer proposals that are socially and politically viable, in order to make it possible to get out of our current dead-end situation.
World Governance Index - WGI
It was in the framework of this thinking on the major challenges that global, or world governance would inevitably have to face that the forum launched, in 2008, the World Governance Index - WGI project. The idea is to develop a “tool” that should allow the players in charge of governance to become aware of the issues and problems arising and to think about what solutions to bring to them.
The paper “Rethinking Global Governance” defines the general objectives of this effort—to reduce inequalities, establish sustainable development, and build peace in a world of diversity—and frames some proposals for laying the new
5
Overview
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
6
foundations of governance.1 These proposals are derived from the big principles of governance set out in the Charter of the United Nations and in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
They are also directly aligned with more recent, but equally important, texts such as the Earth Summit Declaration (Rio, 1992), the Millennium Declaration (New York, 2000), and the findings of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Johannesburg, 2002).
A survey of these objectives and these basic texts has made it possible to determine and select five large fields, called indicators, which, aggregated, constitute the WGI:
•PeaceandSecurity
•RuleofLaw
•HumanRightsandParticipation
•SustainableDevelopment
•HumanDevelopment
Each of these indicators is broken down into several sub-indicators—a total of 13 sub-indicators are used—and each of these sub-indicators is the result of the aggre-gation of several indexes (41 in all). Finally, the data used to calculate the indexes and determine the WGI is taken from databases published annually by the main international organizations and by NGOs specializing in the area of governance.
The result of this work is an index that hopes to be as complete as possible and describes the state of world governance, not for theoretical, but for practical pur-poses.
Usefulness and Uses of the WGI
Both a photograph and a means to induce action/reaction, the WGI has a twofold dimension. An analytical dimension—it tries to provide as true a reflection as possible of the state of world governance—and an operational dimension—it must enable players to act or to react in the direction of a more efficient, more democratic world governance more in phase with the environment. The index was designed mainly to offer political decision mak-ers, whatever their level (national, regional or international), companies, and NGOs reliable, independent, and scrutinized information that will allow them:
•toevaluateastate’sdegreeofgovernance
•toidentifyitsgovernancestrengthsandweaknesses
•tomonitoritsevolutionsovertime
1/ Arnaud Blin and Gustavo Marin, “Rethinking Global Governance”, 2007, http://www.world-governance.org/spip.php?article15&lang=en
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
7
Recourse to a very large number of variables makes the WGI a complete, prag-matic, practical index that is also meant as an incentive.
Complete: The systems of currently developed indicators factor in only one of the fields, one of the aspects of world governance. For the WGI, the selec-tion and aggregation of the indexes making up the indicators make it possible to obtain a WGI that gives a vision that is global, exhaustive, and precise all at the same time.
Pragmatic: The WGI, an aggregation of several indexes and variables of different and measurable natures, to varying degrees—some rely on facts (number of inhabitants, for example) and others on perceptions (opinion-poll outcomes)—translates abstract and subjective concepts into observable and quantifiable data.
Practical: The WGI is presented here in the form of three tables.2 The first table presents the world ranking in descending order, the second table re-flects regional rankings, and the third table sums up, country by country, the results for each of the five WGI constituent indicators.3 They will be updated every year, making it possible to monitor evolutions closely (improvements or regressions) over the years.
An incentive: The WGI is not only a warning bell, its intention is also to be a means for action. It aims to provoke governance players to think and to ask the right questions in order to act and to react
Despite a rigorous methodology, the results are nonetheless constrained by the lim-itsinherenttoindicators.Likeallindicators,theWGIinforms,warns,andenablesaction and guidance. Although it is particularly useful for “taking the temperature” of world governance in the countries of the survey, its diagnosis is not, for all that, absolute, in the medical sense of the term, nor does it dictate action priorities. The process relies on a conscientious examination of multiple and varied data and on a combination of sources, data, and methods. In the end, the WGI points to a number of problems and shows possible leads, but the means to be implemented are left to the appreciation of world-governance players.
This 2011 Report presents the WGI, version 2.0. It establishes new world and re-gional rankings of the countries included in the survey, a ranking factoring in the changes that have occurred since the first 2008 version of the index. For practical reasons—availability and reliability of the data—it covers only 179 countries (of the 192 UN Member States). In the medium run, it should cover all the coun-tries.
2/ Many other detailed tables are available at the FnWG Web site: www.world-governance.org
3/ The categorization used for the regional rankings is inspired from the United Nations Development Program (UNDP)’s categorization.
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
8
The 2011 report, the first update of a series we hope will be long, is intended for the broadest possible audience of national, regional, and international governance players, civil-society representatives, researchers, academics, company leaders, NGOs, and the world of nonprofit organizations.
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
9
T he World Governance Index is an assessment tool aiming to offer a picture, both general and detailed, of the state of governance throughout
the world. The 2011 Report marks the outcome of considerations following the first version, completed in 2008 and updated in 2009. This new version, called version 2.0, has increased the number of in-dexes to 41 (there were 37 in 2008).
The number of countries surveyed, 179 in all, is iden-tical to that of version 1.0 and is warranted by an ob-vious problem of availability and reliability of data. Pleasenote,however,thattheWGIappliesuniform-ly to all countries, whatever the different political,
social, economic, and cultural systems that character-ize them.
Not one country in the world has succeeded to this day in showing a degree of total perfection where governance is concerned. Each is constantly facing the challenge of establishing and renewing the struc-tures, institutions, and standards that contribute to good governance and to its search for improvement. The WGI, as designed, reflects the efforts undertaken by the different countries in their quest for better governance and to illustrate observed evolutions.
Part I
Developing the World Governance Index
Ximena Mandiola, Mid-day, 2007 (www.ximenamandiola.com)
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
10
Defining the World Governance Index
Beyond the more-or-less complex definitions of what world governance might be, beyond the more-or-less subjective takes the concept cuts through, we prefer to consider world governance as simply “the collec-tive management of the planet.”
This definition may be broad, which can be con-strued as a weakness, but it facilitates exploring all the dimensions of what world governance could be. This concept goes beyond the restrictive setting of international relations, which, until recently, have constituted the one and only prism through which governance was perceived on a global level.
After having reviewed the voluminous literature on world governance, the FnWG team became aware of the numerous challenges that the WGI undertaking involved. Evaluating world governance addresses a twofold need. The idea is first to understand. Every-body agrees that the world is in bad shape, and that this is because world governance is in bad shape. Be-fore even defining a “treatment protocol,” it is there-foreoftheessencetoknowwhatthepatient’scondi-tion is exactly.
Indicators, or systems of indicators, in the sense that their role is to inform, seem to be the tools best adapt-ed to get a clear picture of what world governance is afflicted with and to understand what is happening. Second, such evaluation is also needed to enable ac-tion.
As a photograph at the service of world-governance players and as a tool put at their disposal, the WGI thus also has a twofold dimension: an analytical di-mension—it must provide as true a reflection as pos-sible of the state of world governance—and an opera-tional dimension—it must enable players, whatever their level, to act or to react in the direction of a more efficient, more democratic world governance more in phase with the environment. On first impression, the first dimension seems relatively easy to measure, but the operational dimension seems more delicate to quantify.
World-governance goals and fields
To get a precise picture of the goals of world govern-ance, its situation, and its evolution, all of the funda-mental domains in which it is exercised need to be taken into account.
These fundamental domains were originally writ-ten into the two texts considered as the basic texts of world governance: the Charter of the United Na-tions, signed on June 26, 1945, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of December 10, 1948.
To “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war . . . and to reaffirm faith in the fundamental hu-man rights, in the dignity and the worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations at large, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards in larger freedom”: these were, in the wake of World War II, the guidelines for world governance.
Three years later, the Universal Declaration of Hu-man Rights was to reinforce the Charter and con-stitute, in the minds of the leaders from all over the world who adopted it, the roadmap to ensuring every person’srights,inallplacesandatalltimes.
We would have to wait until 1992 for the Earth Sum-mit, held in Rio de Janeiro, to jump start awareness of the importance of the fundamental domains of world governance. As discussions developed, as the idea of interdependence in the global village took hold, the thinking expanded from considering only environ-mental assets (air, water, and forests) to including the wholeofhumankind’s commongoods:health, edu-cation, and human rights. This was the appearance of global common goods, which Riccardo Petrella,formerlyHeadoftheEuropeanCommission’sFASTprogram, was to define as: “the goods and services that should be seen as essential to the security of liv-ing together at the global level.”
Taking into account the geopolitical upheavals ensu-ing from the end of the Cold War, the Millennium Declaration, in 2000, confirmed the thinking on glo-bal governance and reinforced the view that the dif-ferent domains were all linked with one another. The goals ensuing from the Millennium Declaration con-stitute a blueprint for the advent of a world everyone hopes will be better.
Aware of the complexity of the challenges to meet and of the urgency to act, the heads of state and of government meeting in New York from September 6 to 8, 2000, acknowledged their “collective respon-sibility to uphold the principles of human dignity, equality and equity at the global level” and set out to defend them. They restated their determination “to support all efforts [for the] resolution of disputes by peaceful means and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, . . . respect for hu-man rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for the
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
11
equal rights of all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion and international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, so-cial, cultural or humanitarian character.” They com-mitted openly to “ensure that globalization becomes apositive force forall theworld’speople . . .”Thiswould be possible “only through broad and sustained efforts to create a shared future, based upon our com-mon humanity in all its diversity.”
The World Summit on Sustainable Development of Johannesburg in 2002 underscored the urgent need to take on the challenges of the twenty-first century in compliance with the fundamental principles of world governance, which were restated in the final declaration of the summit. Seeking the best road to follow for the principles of sustainable development to be respected and their implementation to lead to concrete results, state representatives confirmed dur-ing the summit the considerable progress achieved in the direction of a world consensus and the construc-tion of a partnership among all the populations of the planet. Sustainable development became the com-mon goal of all humankind and everything was to be put to work to achieve it.
The different concepts developed in the texts and at the above-mentioned conferences clearly reveal that the first goal of world governance is to define new relations among human beings, among societies, and between humankind and the biosphere.
Starting from this overall objective, the three main goals that international institutions should adopt as guidelines are:
Establishing the conditions for sustainable development
The first duty of governance is to preserve the long term. The imbalances generated by the cur-rent form of development between humankind and the biosphere have put the lives of our chil-dren and grandchildren at risk.
The first common objective is therefore to change the current development models to make them compatible with the limited resources of the bio-sphere in the long term. Material development must be subordinated to human development. The future of humankind cannot be guaranteed unless concern for the complete development of human beings—spiritual, intellectual, social, ar-tistic, etc.—becomes the primary development criterion.
Reducing inequalitiesSustainable development cannot be achieved by reserving the natural resources of the planet for a small minority that has the economic means to acquire them and the military means to hold onto them. Reducing inequalities is therefore not only a moral duty or an act of compassion; it is also a duty of justice and a condition for long-term peace. Finding ways to conciliate the freedom of all with respect of the dignity of all is the second objective assigned to world governance.
Establishing lasting peace while respecting diversity
Ecological diversity and cultural diversity are not only unbending realities of the current world. Theyconstitutehumankind’smajorwealth.Peacerequires the recognition of a common belonging, the search for a common good, and awareness of unity, from grassroots communities to the entire human family.
At every level of governance, both greater unity and greater diversity must be achieved. It is the ability to not oppose unity and diversity, but to consider them as the two sides of the same coin, that constitutes, from managing a district or a vil-lage to managing the planet, the art of govern-ance. This is the art that world governance needs to practice at the global scale and help to practice at all other levels.
These three objectives, as presented and stated here, are perfectly articulated with the big traditional prin-ciples of world governance: peace, security, democ-racy, freedom, and equity.
We have thus selected, directly in keeping with these major principles, the following domains, the detailed study of which, in the form of sub-indicators and com-posite indexes, make it possible to obtain the WGI:
•PeaceandSecurity
•RuleofLaw
•HumanRightsandParticipation
•SustainableDevelopment
•HumanDevelopment
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
12
World Governance Index 2011 – version 2.0
Indicator Sub-indicator Index
Peaceand Security
National Security Conflicts
Refugees and Asylum seekers
DisplacedPersons
PublicSecurity PoliticalClimate
Degree of Trust among Citizens
Violent Crime
Homicides per 100,000 inhabitants
RuleofLaw BodyofLaws Ratification of Treaties
PropertyRights
Judicial System Independence
Effectiveness
Settlement of Contractual Disputes
Corruption CorruptionPerceptionindex
Human Rights andParticipation
CivilandPoliticalRights
Respect of Civil Rights
RespectforPhysicalIntegrityRights
FreedomofthePress
ViolenceagainstthePress
Participation ParticipationinPoliticalLife
ElectoralProcessandPluralism
PoliticalCulture
Gender Discrimination / Inequality
Women’sPoliticalRights
Women’sSocialRights
Women’sEconomicRights
RateofRepresentationinNationalParliaments
Sustainable Development
Economic Sector GDPpercapita
GDPgrowthrate
Degree/level of Economic Openness
Cover Rate
Inflation rate
Ease in Starting a Business
Social Dimension GINI Coefficient (poverty and inequality)
Unemployment Rate
RatificationofInternationalLaborRightstexts
Environmental Dimension
Ecological Footprint and Biocapacity
Environmental Sustainability
CO2 Emission Rate per capita
EnvironmentalPerformance
Human Development
Development Human Development
Well-being and Happiness
Subjective Well-being
Happiness
QualityofLife
For each of the five above-mentioned selected fields, a detailed study has been conducted in order to determine the elements that constitute them (sub-indicators) and the data (indexes) that make it possible to produce a WGI. In all, the 2011 WGI – version 2.0 is made up of 5 indicators, 13 sub-indicators and 41 indexes.
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
Methodology and Calculations
The World Governance Index is a composite index aggregating nearly 8,500 data items taken from the databases or the yearly reports of about thirty differ-ent organizations.
The approach used to calculate the WGI is similar totheoneusedbytheUNDPtoestablishitsHumanDevelopment Index (HDI). For each of the indexes and sub-indicators, all the collected raw data was res-caled into a “closed” scale ranging from 0 to 1 (where 0 represent the worst result and 1 the best possible score).
Every sub-indicator is the mathematical average of the indexes composing it. This also applies to the indicatorsRule of Law,HumanRights andPartici-
pation, Sustainable Development, and Human De-velopment, which are the mathematical average of thesub-indicatorscomposingthem.OnlythePeaceand Security indicator was weighted. It is made up for two-thirds of it by the National Security sub-in-dicatorandforone-thirdofitbythePublicSecuritysub-indicator.
As a final result, the World Governance Index is the mathematical average of the 5 indicators that con-stitute it.
In some very rare cases, absence of data for one or several countries was compensated, as needed, by as-signing to them the reported regional average.
13
14
Part II
Results and Illustrations
T he first of the three tables below presents the WGI ranking for all countries in descending order with for each country its rank in 2008.
The second table presents the ranking in descending order at the regional level. The last table sums up, per country in alphabetical order, the results obtained for every indicator constituting the WGI.
Other tables, world ranking and regional ranking in descending order, for each of the indicators constitut-ing the WGI, are available on the Web site of the Forum for a new World Governance.
For each regional whole, we have also provided two figures illustrating the results obtained by the highest-ranking country and the lowest-ranking country, re-spectively. Their results (red pentagon) can be easily compared with the average world result (green pen-tagon).
Each figure is in the form of a pentagon. Each angle of the pentagon represents one of the five indicators that constitute the WGI. To the right of the figure, thecountry’sWGIisindicatedwitharedpointerandisalsoeasilycomparedwiththeworld’saverageWGI(green pointer).
Fed
eri
ca M
att
a,
Th
e W
orl
d’s
Eye
N°
6,
20
04
(w
ww
.fe
de
rica
ma
tta
.co
m)
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
15
2011
Ran
king
and
WG
I20
08
Rank
2011
Ran
king
and
WG
I20
08
Rank
2011
Ran
king
and
WG
I20
08
Rank
2011
Ran
king
and
WG
I20
08
Rank
2011
Ran
king
and
WG
I20
08
Rank
2011
Ran
king
and
WG
I20
08
Rank
1N
orw
ay0.
844
331
Mau
riti
us0.
720
2961
El S
alva
dor
0.64
965
91U
krai
ne0.
605
113
121
PapuaNewGuinea
0.56
913
315
1Tu
rkm
enis
tan
0.52
616
0
2Sw
eden
0.84
32
32U
nite
d St
ates
0.72
027
62G
uyan
a0.
648
5792
Bhu
tan
0.60
011
412
2Laos
0.56
813
015
2In
dia
0.52
514
2
3Fi
nlan
d0.
832
433
Lithuania
0.71
444
63Ec
uado
r0.
648
8793
Sene
gal
0.59
911
212
3B
urki
na F
aso
0.56
614
415
3H
aiti
0.52
216
4
4Ic
elan
d0.
830
134
Sout
h K
orea
0.71
440
64M
aced
onia
0.64
673
94Tu
rkey
0.59
910
312
4G
ambi
a0.
566
127
154
Swaz
iland
0.52
015
0
5D
enm
ark
0.82
65
35H
unga
ry0.
703
3965
Mon
tene
gro
0.64
310
495
Om
an0.
598
7812
5C
ambo
dia
0.56
216
615
5Sy
ria
0.51
814
3
6N
ew Z
eala
nd0.
825
836
Slov
akia
0.70
246
66M
exic
o0.
641
5896
Indo
nesi
a0.
596
9612
6B
enin
0.56
112
915
6G
uine
a B
issa
u0.
514
154
7N
ethe
rlan
ds0.
813
737
Poland
0.70
048
67M
alay
sia
0.64
155
97C
uba
0.59
552
127
Mal
i0.
561
115
157
Nig
eria
0.51
216
5
8Sw
itze
rlan
d0.
807
1238
Ital
y0.
699
3868
Sout
h A
frica
0.63
812
498
Alg
eria
0.59
511
912
8Sa
udi A
rabi
a0.
561
138
158
Ivor
y C
oast
0.50
916
3
9A
ustr
alia
0.80
611
39St
Vinc
ent &
Gren
adine
s0.
697
2569
Qat
ar0.
635
8199
Bru
nei
0.59
410
612
9M
adag
asca
r0.
560
101
159
Nig
er0.
508
148
10G
erm
any
0.80
110
40A
rgen
tina
0.69
243
70Paraguay
0.63
380
100
Hon
dura
s0.
594
7613
0SriLanka
0.56
012
516
0Eq
uato
rial G
uine
a0.
506
155
11A
ustr
ia0.
801
641
SaintLucia
0.68
734
71B
oliv
ia0.
632
9510
1G
uate
mal
a0.
594
100
131
Rw
anda
0.55
913
716
1A
ngol
a0.
505
166
12C
anad
a0.
796
1342
Panama
0.68
647
72Se
rbia
0.63
289
102
Kaz
akhs
tan
0.59
399
132Libya
0.55
813
216
2C
amer
oon
0.50
315
3
13Ir
elan
d0.
788
1543
Dom
inic
a0.
686
3673
Dom
inic
an R
ep.
0.63
266
103
East
Tim
or0.
592
157
133
Egyp
t0.
557
120
163
Bur
undi
0.49
616
2
14Luxemburg
0.77
89
44Latvia
0.68
551
74B
otsw
ana
0.62
884
104
Mal
dive
s0.
592
7713
4U
zbek
ista
n0.
557
126
164
Yem
en0.
490
141
15Fr
ance
0.75
821
45G
reec
e0.
679
4175
Mon
golia
0.62
761
105
Tong
a0.
589
9813
5Za
mbi
a0.
556
146
165
Ethi
opia
0.48
615
6
16B
elgi
um0.
758
1446
Cap
e V
erde
0.67
849
76Un
ited A
rab Em
irates
0.62
088
106Philippines
0.58
986
136
Uga
nda
0.55
617
016
6Pakistan
0.48
015
9
17Ja
pan
0.75
222
47G
rena
da0.
678
3577
Mol
davi
a0.
619
9110
7B
elar
us0.
587
121
137
Com
oros
0.55
511
816
7Ir
an0.
472
151
18U
nite
d K
ingd
om0.
750
1848
Bel
ize
0.67
445
78K
uwai
t0.
617
9410
8Ta
jikis
tan
0.58
697
138
Nep
al0.
554
145
168
Cent
ral A
frica
Rep
.0.
467
169
19Sp
ain
0.75
017
49Is
rael
0.67
154
79B
ahra
in0.
617
7510
9Jo
rdan
0.58
510
213
9M
auri
tani
a0.
551
122
169
Eryt
hrea
0.44
716
7
20C
osta
Ric
a0.
749
1950
Cro
atia
0.67
150
80G
hana
0.61
670
110
Mal
awi
0.58
513
614
0C
hina
0.54
910
917
0C
had
0.44
517
1
21Portugal
0.73
830
51C
ypru
s0.
668
2881
Nic
arag
ua0.
616
6411
1G
eorg
ia0.
584
110
141Lebanon
0.54
312
817
1G
aza /
Wes
t Ban
k0.
438
177
22C
zech
Rep
ublic
0.73
631
52B
razi
l0.
662
6982
Suri
nam
0.61
467
112
Arm
enia
0.58
310
514
2Liberia
0.54
216
817
2N
orth
Kor
ea0.
433
173
23M
alta
0.73
620
53Ja
mai
ca0.
662
7183
Tuni
sia
0.61
156
113
Mor
occo
0.58
282
143
Ban
glad
esh
0.54
114
017
3Zi
mba
bwe
0.43
217
2
24U
rugu
ay0.
733
3254
Trin
idad
and
Toba
go0.
660
5984
Fiji
0.60
953
114
Ven
ezue
la0.
578
111
144
Togo
0.53
914
717
4Ir
aq0.
425
178
25C
hile
0.73
324
55Peru
0.65
860
85T
haila
nd0.
609
9211
5A
zerb
aija
n0.
578
131
145
Djib
outi
0.53
615
217
5A
fgha
nist
an0.
424
161
26B
aham
as0.
733
2356
Bul
gari
a0.
658
6286
SãoToméandPríncipe
0.60
972
116
Moz
ambi
que
0.57
811
714
6C
ongo
0.53
613
417
6M
yanm
ar0.
413
174
27B
arba
dos
0.73
116
57A
lban
ia0.
653
7487
Gab
on0.
609
8311
7C
olom
bia
0.57
610
814
7K
enya
0.53
514
917
7Su
dan
0.40
817
5
28Si
ngap
ore
0.72
433
58Se
yche
lles
0.65
337
88Lesotho
0.60
710
711
8Sa
lom
on Is
land
s0.
575
9314
8R
ussi
a0.
534
135
178
DR
C0.
408
176
29Sl
oven
ia0.
723
2659
Rom
ania
0.65
163
89K
irgh
izst
an0.
607
7911
9Ta
nzan
ia0.
572
116
149
Gui
nea
0.53
213
917
9So
mal
ia0.
293
179
30Es
toni
a0.
723
4260
Nam
ibia
0.65
068
90Bo
snia
Her
zego
vina
0.60
690
120
Vie
t Nam
0.57
185
150SierraLeone
0.52
815
8A
VE
RA
GE
0.61
6
2011
WG
I Glo
bal R
anki
ng in
Des
cend
ing
Ord
er (
wit
h ra
nk in
200
8)
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
16
Afr
ica
EU O
ECD
Lati
n A
mer
ica
and
the
Cari
bbea
nA
sia
Paci
fic
Ara
b S
tate
sCI
S C
entr
al A
sia
Bal
kans
Mau
riti
us0.
720
Nor
way
0.84
4C
osta
Ric
a0.
749
Sing
apor
e0.
724
Qat
ar0.
635
Cro
atia
0.67
1C
ape
Ver
de0.
678
Swed
en0.
843
Uru
guay
0.73
3M
alay
sia
0.64
1U
nite
d A
rab
Emir
ates
0.62
0A
lban
ia0.
653
Seyc
helle
s0.
653
Finl
and
0.83
2C
hile
0.73
3M
ongo
lia0.
627
Kuw
ait
0.61
7M
aced
onia
0.64
6N
amib
ia0.
650
Icel
and
0.83
0B
aham
as0.
733
Fiji
0.60
9B
ahra
in0.
617
Mon
tene
gro
0.64
3So
uth
Afr
ica
0.63
8D
enm
ark
0.82
6B
arba
dos
0.73
1T
haila
nd0.
609
Tuni
sia
0.61
1Se
rbia
0.63
2B
otsw
ana
0.62
8N
ew Z
eala
nd0.
825
St V
ince
nt an
d the
Gre
nadi
nes
0.69
7B
huta
n0.
600
Om
an0.
598
Mol
davi
a0.
619
Gha
na0.
616
Net
herl
ands
0.81
3A
rgen
tina
0.69
2In
done
sia
0.59
6A
lger
ia0.
595
Kir
ghiz
stan
0.60
7SãoToméandPríncipe
0.60
9Sw
itze
rlan
d0.
807SaintLucia
0.68
7B
rune
i0.
594
Jord
an0.
585
Bos
nia
Her
zego
vina
0.60
6G
abon
0.60
9A
ustr
alia
0.80
6Panama
0.68
6Ea
st T
imor
0.59
2M
oroc
co0.
582
Ukr
aine
0.60
5Lesotho
0.60
7G
erm
any
0.80
1D
omin
ica
0.68
6M
aldi
ves
0.59
2Sa
udi A
rabi
a0.
561
Kaz
akhs
tan
0.59
3Se
nega
l0.
599
Aus
tria
0.80
1G
rena
da0.
678
Tong
a0.
589
Libya
0.55
8B
elar
us0.
587
Mal
awi
0.58
5C
anad
a0.
796
Bel
ize
0.67
4Philippines
0.58
9Eg
ypt
0.55
7Ta
jikis
tan
0.58
6M
ozam
biqu
e0.
578
Irel
and
0.78
8B
razi
l0.
662
Salo
mon
Isla
nds
0.57
5Lebanon
0.54
3G
eorg
ia0.
584
Tanz
ania
0.57
2Luxemburg
0.77
8Ja
mai
ca0.
662
Vie
t Nam
0.57
1D
jibou
ti0.
536
Arm
enia
0.58
3B
urki
na F
aso
0.56
6Fr
ance
0.75
8Tr
inid
ad a
nd T
obag
o0.
660
PapuaNewGuinea
0.56
9Sy
ria
0.51
8A
zerb
aija
n0.
578
Gam
bia
0.56
6B
elgi
um0.
758Peru
0.65
8Laos
0.56
8Ye
men
0.49
0U
zbek
ista
n0.
557
Ben
in0.
561
Japa
n0.
752
El S
alva
dor
0.64
9C
ambo
dia
0.56
2G
aza
/ Wes
t Ban
k0.
438
Rus
sia
0.53
4M
ali
0.56
1U
nite
d K
ingd
om0.
750
Guy
ana
0.64
8SriLanka
0.56
0Ir
aq0.
425
Turk
men
ista
n0.
526
Mad
agas
car
0.56
0Sp
ain
0.75
0Ec
uado
r0.
648
Nep
al0.
554
Suda
n0.
408
Rw
anda
0.55
9Portugal
0.73
8Paraguay
0.63
3C
hina
0.54
9So
mal
ia0.
293
Zam
bia
0.55
6C
zech
Rep
ublic
0.73
6B
oliv
ia0.
632
Ban
glad
esh
0.54
1U
gand
a0.
556
Mal
ta0.
736
Dom
inic
an R
epub
lic0.
632
Indi
a0.
525
Com
oros
0.55
5Sl
oven
ia0.
723
Nic
arag
ua0.
616
Pakistan
0.48
0M
auri
tani
a0.
551
Esto
nia
0.72
3Su
rina
m0.
614
Iran
0.47
2Liberia
0.54
2U
nite
d St
ates
0.72
0C
uba
0.59
5N
orth
Kor
ea0.
433
Togo
0.53
9Lithuania
0.71
4H
ondu
ras
0.59
4A
fgha
nist
an0.
424
Con
go0.
536
Sout
h K
orea
0.71
4G
uate
mal
a0.
594
Mya
nmar
0.41
3K
enya
0.53
5H
unga
ry0.
703
Ven
ezue
la0.
578
Gui
nea
0.53
2Sl
ovak
ia0.
702
Col
ombi
a0.
576
SierraLeone
0.52
8Poland
0.70
0H
aiti
0.52
2Sw
azila
nd0.
520
Ital
y0.
699
Gui
nea
Bis
sau
0.51
4Latvia
0.68
5N
iger
ia0.
512
Gre
ece
0.67
9Iv
ory
Coa
st0.
509
Isra
el0.
671
Nig
er0.
508
Cyp
rus
0.66
8Eq
uato
rial
Gui
nea
0.50
6B
ulga
ria
0.65
8A
ngol
a0.
505
Rom
ania
0.65
1C
amer
oon
0.50
3M
exic
o0.
641
Bur
undi
0.49
6Tu
rkey
0.59
9Et
hiop
ia0.
486
Cen
tral
Afr
ica
Rep
ublic
0.46
7Er
ythr
ea0.
447
Cha
d0.
445
Zim
babw
e0.
432
DR
C0.
408
Ave
rage
0.55
1A
vera
ge0.
744
Ave
rage
0.65
5A
vera
ge0.
561
Ave
rage
0.53
9A
vera
ge0.
601
WG
I Reg
iona
l Ran
king
s
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
17
Recapitulation Table per Country for the Five WGI IndicatorsA
fgha
nist
an0.
617
0.33
40.
350
0.49
60.
324
0.42
4Fr
ance
0.91
00.
784
0.73
50.
598
0.76
50.
758
Nig
eria
0.77
70.
464
0.36
80.
544
0.40
70.
512
Sout
h A
fric
a0.
818
0.60
20.
719
0.51
80.
532
0.63
8G
abon
0.87
60.
449
0.48
30.
664
0.57
10.
609
Nor
way
0.98
50.
828
0.93
60.
666
0.80
60.
844
Alb
ania
0.92
00.
544
0.59
20.
608
0.60
30.
653
Gam
bia
0.91
50.
463
0.45
50.
563
0.43
40.
566
New
Zea
land
0.97
40.
891
0.88
30.
595
0.78
20.
825
Alg
eria
0.86
50.
498
0.44
30.
579
0.58
90.
595
Gaz
a / W
est B
ank
0.76
20.
216
0.38
40.
484
0.34
40.
438
Om
an0.
957
0.53
70.
400
0.49
60.
600
0.59
8G
erm
any
0.94
70.
848
0.80
20.
609
0.80
10.
801
Geo
rgia
0.74
10.
558
0.49
70.
571
0.55
40.
584
Uga
nda
0.79
30.
456
0.57
70.
566
0.38
70.
556
Ang
ola
0.84
30.
284
0.48
00.
561
0.35
80.
505
Gha
na0.
921
0.60
80.
525
0.53
80.
487
0.61
6U
zbek
ista
n0.
866
0.41
00.
375
0.54
00.
593
0.55
7Sa
udi A
rabi
a0.
823
0.47
10.
293
0.50
80.
709
0.56
1G
reec
e0.
908
0.56
60.
664
0.54
50.
712
0.67
9Pakistan
0.70
40.
365
0.34
00.
524
0.46
70.
480
Arg
enti
na0.
887
0.50
30.
734
0.58
90.
749
0.69
2G
rena
da0.
927
0.50
30.
742
0.57
30.
645
0.67
8Panama
0.91
90.
524
0.65
10.
590
0.74
50.
686
Arm
enia
0.86
10.
507
0.43
40.
560
0.55
20.
583
Gua
tem
ala
0.80
10.
435
0.57
90.
506
0.65
00.
594
PapuaNewGuinea
0.89
30.
358
0.53
20.
582
0.48
00.
569
Aus
tral
ia0.
949
0.85
00.
836
0.59
90.
797
0.80
6G
uine
a0.
852
0.41
30.
483
0.56
60.
344
0.53
2Paraguay
0.85
90.
465
0.60
00.
615
0.62
50.
633
Aus
tria
0.94
70.
822
0.82
20.
620
0.79
50.
801
Gui
nea
Bis
sau
0.89
10.
341
0.43
40.
550
0.35
20.
514
Net
herl
ands
0.95
80.
812
0.87
70.
604
0.81
30.
813
Aze
rbai
jan
0.80
30.
489
0.38
90.
639
0.57
10.
578
Equa
tori
al G
uine
a0.
856
0.34
30.
345
0.55
40.
433
0.50
6Peru
0.84
60.
539
0.63
80.
618
0.65
10.
658
Bah
amas
0.90
50.
700
0.74
50.
585
0.72
80.
733
Guy
ana
0.88
80.
481
0.67
50.
582
0.61
70.
648
Philippines
0.79
30.
439
0.49
70.
577
0.63
80.
589
Bah
rain
0.89
40.
576
0.46
30.
478
0.67
50.
617
Hai
ti0.
839
0.34
80.
497
0.47
60.
449
0.52
2Poland
0.95
70.
645
0.65
10.
565
0.68
30.
700
Ban
glad
esh
0.79
40.
359
0.48
20.
562
0.51
00.
541
Hon
dura
s0.
808
0.45
90.
525
0.51
80.
661
0.59
4Portugal
0.94
60.
717
0.76
70.
585
0.67
70.
738
Bar
bado
s0.
913
0.72
80.
697
0.57
80.
738
0.73
1H
unga
ry0.
929
0.67
00.
651
0.58
90.
675
0.70
3Q
atar
0.94
50.
665
0.36
90.
556
0.64
10.
635
Bel
arus
0.87
20.
439
0.50
30.
578
0.54
10.
587
Salo
mon
Isla
nds
0.91
80.
428
0.46
80.
481
0.57
70.
575
DR
C0.
607
0.31
90.
325
0.55
50.
234
0.40
8B
elgi
um0.
869
0.75
70.
813
0.56
80.
782
0.75
8In
dia
0.65
30.
442
0.49
30.
502
0.53
50.
525
Dom
inic
an R
epub
lic0.
838
0.47
40.
574
0.55
70.
716
0.63
2B
eliz
e0.
912
0.53
20.
678
0.56
40.
683
0.67
4In
done
sia
0.80
60.
462
0.53
30.
558
0.62
10.
596
Cze
ch R
epub
lic0.
962
0.65
50.
757
0.59
20.
712
0.73
6B
enin
0.91
30.
409
0.54
70.
536
0.40
20.
561
Iraq
0.54
50.
327
0.41
70.
486
0.35
00.
425
Rom
ania
0.89
90.
582
0.56
90.
564
0.63
90.
651
Bhu
tan
0.68
50.
540
0.56
60.
550
0.66
00.
600
Iran
0.77
40.
374
0.10
40.
507
0.60
00.
472
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
0.89
60.
804
0.71
60.
584
0.75
30.
750
Bol
ivia
0.86
60.
443
0.64
60.
606
0.60
00.
632
Irel
and
0.98
30.
810
0.76
00.
611
0.77
50.
788
Rus
sia
0.67
50.
448
0.43
10.
575
0.54
10.
534
Bos
nia
Her
zego
vina
0.81
20.
500
0.57
00.
543
0.60
70.
606
Icel
and
0.97
10.
835
0.93
50.
648
0.76
10.
830
Rw
anda
0.84
70.
522
0.50
90.
569
0.35
10.
559
Bot
swan
a0.
895
0.61
20.
640
0.48
70.
506
0.62
8Is
rael
0.78
50.
655
0.60
90.
564
0.74
40.
671
SaintLucia
0.88
50.
642
0.67
10.
552
0.68
60.
687
Bra
zil
0.83
30.
585
0.61
30.
583
0.69
70.
662
Ital
y0.
928
0.54
40.
695
0.57
40.
757
0.69
9SãoToméandPríncipe
0.94
40.
394
0.59
70.
538
0.57
20.
609
Bru
nei
0.93
80.
461
0.34
40.
512
0.71
70.
594
Jam
aica
0.82
50.
567
0.65
60.
539
0.72
20.
662
Sene
gal
0.89
80.
540
0.58
30.
539
0.43
60.
599
Bul
gari
a0.
935
0.54
90.
639
0.56
80.
599
0.65
8Ja
pan
0.94
90.
797
0.70
10.
579
0.73
70.
752
Serb
ia0.
774
0.55
30.
650
0.56
30.
618
0.63
2B
urki
na F
aso
0.89
70.
514
0.52
80.
594
0.29
70.
566
Jord
an0.
862
0.53
90.
388
0.53
00.
606
0.58
5Se
yche
lles
0.91
70.
569
0.58
30.
625
0.57
00.
653
Bur
undi
0.74
20.
363
0.57
50.
571
0.22
90.
496
Kaz
akhs
tan
0.88
70.
507
0.39
00.
592
0.58
80.
593
SierraLeone
0.88
40.
419
0.51
60.
516
0.30
50.
528
Cam
bodi
a0.
856
0.43
00.
502
0.53
60.
484
0.56
2K
enya
0.79
50.
436
0.47
40.
536
0.43
50.
535
Sing
apor
e0.
959
0.75
50.
577
0.59
20.
738
0.72
4C
amer
oon
0.85
00.
343
0.36
50.
553
0.40
20.
503
Kir
ghiz
stan
0.90
60.
455
0.53
50.
556
0.58
50.
607
Slov
akia
0.93
80.
639
0.64
20.
614
0.67
60.
702
Can
ada
0.94
70.
813
0.85
20.
583
0.78
40.
796
Kuw
ait
0.93
30.
571
0.39
90.
543
0.64
10.
617
Slov
enia
0.97
10.
656
0.66
60.
595
0.72
80.
723
Cap
e V
erde
0.91
70.
653
0.73
50.
546
0.54
00.
678
Laos
0.89
70.
422
0.46
30.
542
0.51
50.
568
Som
alia
0.41
90.
224
0.13
00.
421
0.27
20.
293
Cen
tral A
frica
Rep
ublic
0.69
90.
351
0.38
80.
589
0.30
80.
467
Lesotho
0.86
40.
564
0.67
70.
568
0.36
50.
607
Suda
n0.
566
0.33
70.
340
0.50
10.
297
0.40
8C
hile
0.89
70.
803
0.66
50.
583
0.71
50.
733
Latvia
0.92
70.
637
0.65
20.
599
0.61
20.
685
SriLanka
0.71
30.
443
0.44
40.
570
0.62
80.
560
Chi
na0.
791
0.49
20.
287
0.52
90.
644
0.54
9Lebanon
0.73
60.
410
0.50
50.
533
0.53
20.
543
St V
ince
nt a
nd th
e G
rena
dine
s0.
855
0.76
90.
742
0.58
30.
536
0.69
7C
ypru
s0.
680
0.71
40.
671
0.55
00.
726
0.66
8Liberia
0.85
20.
359
0.63
40.
583
0.28
00.
542
Swed
en0.
951
0.86
40.
937
0.66
40.
800
0.84
3C
olom
bia
0.60
00.
479
0.47
70.
597
0.72
50.
576
Libya
0.89
20.
357
0.37
00.
559
0.61
10.
558
Swit
zerl
and
0.95
40.
810
0.79
80.
645
0.82
70.
807
Com
oros
0.87
60.
400
0.44
50.
555
0.49
80.
555
Lithuania
0.95
80.
690
0.69
60.
592
0.63
60.
714
Suri
nam
0.90
90.
404
0.61
90.
473
0.66
80.
614
Con
go0.
850
0.32
50.
433
0.62
10.
452
0.53
6Luxemburg
0.95
10.
802
0.81
80.
583
0.73
70.
778
Swaz
iland
0.82
20.
433
0.40
90.
552
0.38
30.
520
Nor
th K
orea
0.80
10.
321
0.25
10.
367
0.42
60.
433
Mac
edon
ia0.
895
0.56
30.
667
0.53
10.
574
0.64
6Sy
ria
0.81
60.
399
0.28
40.
544
0.54
70.
518
Sout
h K
orea
0.93
90.
698
0.68
70.
525
0.72
10.
714
Mad
agas
car
0.88
90.
413
0.48
60.
573
0.43
70.
560
Tajik
ista
n0.
897
0.44
80.
459
0.55
00.
578
0.58
6C
osta
Ric
a0.
913
0.63
30.
811
0.59
40.
792
0.74
9M
alay
sia
0.88
90.
508
0.53
00.
562
0.71
50.
641
Tanz
ania
0.89
10.
458
0.59
20.
554
0.36
60.
572
Ivor
y C
oast
0.82
80.
412
0.40
90.
545
0.35
10.
509
Mal
awi
0.87
50.
543
0.54
10.
582
0.38
40.
585
Cha
d0.
732
0.31
40.
301
0.57
40.
302
0.44
5C
roat
ia0.
916
0.57
00.
612
0.57
90.
679
0.67
1M
aldi
ves
0.90
30.
452
0.46
80.
521
0.61
30.
592
Tha
iland
0.80
90.
520
0.52
90.
563
0.62
60.
609
Cub
a0.
880
0.36
60.
509
0.54
60.
677
0.59
5M
ali
0.88
10.
460
0.58
10.
550
0.33
40.
561
East
Tim
or0.
866
0.35
20.
694
0.52
60.
524
0.59
2D
enm
ark
0.95
70.
856
0.92
10.
616
0.77
90.
826
Mal
ta0.
952
0.68
10.
715
0.55
70.
773
0.73
6To
go0.
882
0.41
60.
476
0.54
70.
372
0.53
9D
jibou
ti0.
916
0.35
70.
463
0.55
40.
392
0.53
6M
oroc
co0.
865
0.50
80.
418
0.54
80.
570
0.58
2To
nga
0.90
20.
440
0.41
90.
521
0.66
50.
589
Dom
inic
a0.
867
0.60
90.
653
0.58
10.
718
0.68
6M
auri
tius
0.96
30.
632
0.70
80.
584
0.71
20.
720
Trin
idad
and
Tob
ago
0.85
60.
477
0.74
10.
534
0.69
40.
660
Egyp
t0.
840
0.49
70.
326
0.54
70.
575
0.55
7M
auri
tani
a0.
830
0.45
20.
500
0.55
00.
426
0.55
1Tu
nisi
a0.
905
0.54
50.
392
0.56
00.
654
0.61
1El
Sal
vado
r0.
831
0.56
60.
619
0.56
00.
668
0.64
9M
exic
o0.
794
0.58
10.
563
0.54
40.
723
0.64
1Tu
rkm
enis
tan
0.90
70.
376
0.34
70.
536
0.46
40.
526
Uni
ted
Ara
b Em
irate
s0.
940
0.54
00.
459
0.49
80.
665
0.62
0M
olda
via
0.87
30.
539
0.58
70.
556
0.54
10.
619
Turk
ey0.
795
0.59
50.
460
0.55
70.
586
0.59
9Ec
uado
r0.
878
0.48
90.
643
0.57
30.
657
0.64
8M
ongo
lia0.
895
0.53
60.
562
0.56
40.
576
0.62
7U
krai
ne0.
886
0.51
40.
523
0.56
20.
538
0.60
5Er
ythr
ea0.
778
0.30
60.
278
0.49
70.
378
0.44
7M
onte
negr
o0.
913
0.52
20.
617
0.54
80.
612
0.64
3U
rugu
ay0.
949
0.72
50.
720
0.59
90.
671
0.73
3Sp
ain
0.87
80.
741
0.80
00.
569
0.76
10.
750
Moz
ambi
que
0.90
30.
449
0.62
50.
589
0.32
30.
578
Ven
ezue
la0.
798
0.34
50.
542
0.52
00.
687
0.57
8Es
toni
a0.
924
0.74
10.
741
0.58
90.
619
0.72
3M
yanm
ar0.
704
0.29
70.
129
0.48
00.
455
0.41
3V
iet N
am0.
882
0.42
00.
390
0.54
90.
613
0.57
1U
nite
d St
ates
0.85
60.
729
0.76
90.
483
0.76
20.
720
Nam
ibia
0.91
20.
618
0.66
90.
520
0.53
30.
650
Yem
en0.
787
0.39
20.
272
0.53
50.
466
0.49
0Et
hiop
ia0.
765
0.40
90.
348
0.57
90.
328
0.48
6N
epal
0.80
40.
438
0.53
00.
517
0.48
00.
554
Zam
bia
0.90
20.
466
0.51
50.
521
0.37
80.
556
Fiji
0.91
10.
505
0.42
10.
563
0.64
70.
609
Nic
arag
ua0.
863
0.49
50.
605
0.50
50.
611
0.61
6Zi
mba
bwe
0.71
00.
366
0.38
40.
551
0.15
10.
432
Finl
and
0.96
50.
866
0.89
10.
641
0.79
70.
832
Nig
er0.
820
0.41
90.
477
0.54
20.
281
0.50
8A
vera
ges
0.85
90.
528
0.55
70.
558
0.57
70.
616
Peace and
SecurityRule
of Law
Human Rights
Sustainable
Development Human
Development WGI
Peace and
SecurityRule
of Law
Human Rights
Sustainable
Development Human
Development WGI
Peace and
SecurityRule
of Law
Human Rights
Sustainable
Development Human
DevelopmentWGI
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
18
Patrick Cabin, The Queue, 2007 © ADAGP, Banque d’images, Paris 2011
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
19
EU / OECD Figures
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
20
Latin America / The Caribbean Figures
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
21
Africa Figures
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
22
Asia Pacific Figures
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
23
CIS / Central Asia / Balkans Figures
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
24
Arab States Figures
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
25
CONCLUSION
O ne of the perverse effects of indicators is that often their purpose is eclipsed by a final ranking that for some can become obsessive,
whereas for others, it seems to have no value. The point is not, once this survey is completed, to use the results to hand out good or bad points. It is in fact essential to look beyond the rankings shown in these different tables. What is most important is to show the state of world governance through the selected survey criteria as well through the indicators, the sub-indicators, and indexes that constitute them.
This survey does not claim to be exhaustive. Our choices led to selecting only five areas of survey and to limiting their field of application to nation-states as players. Nation-states constitute a legal framework and a form of political and social organization inher-
ited from a history and culture sometimes thousands of years old. It is hence in this capacity that they are among the most important players in world govern-ance, and it is for this reason that the result of the present survey provides a good indication of the cur-rent state of world governance.
A number of other players will have to be taken into consideration in the future. Identifying these players is not a problem in itself: they are Intergovernmen-tal Organizations (IGOs), NGOs and enterprises of global dimension. A more delicate aspect will be to determine what criteria to use. From the simple point of view of nation-states, it is relatively easy to define a number of general criteria common to all nation-states. Given their general and common character, there is plenty of easily exploitable data.
Vassily Kandinsky, The Fat and the Thin © ADAGP/BPK, Berlin, Dist.RMN/ image BStGS
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
26
The challenge will be different when it comes to oth-er players. In France, the recent and significant mal-functioning of a French NGO accused of trafficking children early in 2008, amply conveyed by the me-dia, has contributed to rekindling the debate on the governance of non-state actors. It is therefore natural to raise the question of governance within this fuzzy mass of organizations.
In the same way that the five indicators of this survey make it possible to assess the performance of nation-states in the area of governance, other indicators should be able to make it possible to evaluate the impact of IGOs, NGOs and enterprises of global di-mension. Evaluating the “responsibility and account-ability” of these players should not stop at theory. The idea is to assess the way in which these players com-mit to factoring theirbeneficiaries’needs into theirdecisions, and the way in which they fulfill this com-mitment.
As long as we are not able to find the ways and the means to implement general and enlightened partici-pation of the beneficiaries of their actions, any an-swertotheworld’schallengesisboundtofail.
The ultimate goal of the WGI is therefore part of a long-term process. On the basis of the situation it de-scribes and of its diagnosis, it must enable actors in charge of governance to raise the right questions in order to consider solutions. In the end, it is about giv-ing body to a world governance that can address the world’schallengesintheyearstocome.
The team that has worked on this WGI hopes to have made a modest contribution to a better perception of world governance. In its current version, the WGI is certainly not perfect. All the same, it has the virtue of existing. The remarks that it will call forth, the questions that it will raise, the suggestions that it will inspire are all obviously welcome.
You are free:
to Share – to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work
to Remix – to make derivative works
Under the following conditions:
Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
Noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
Si Share Alike. If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.
• For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work.
• Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.
• Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author’s moral rights.
This is a human-readable summary of the Legal Code. See the full license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/fr/legalcode.
COPYRIGHT APPENDIX
W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x
28
After the 1648 Westphalian revolution that placed the modern state at the heart of international relations and planted the first seeds of international law, contemporary times have witnessed the emergence of a form of world governance that transcends the state and is putting other players on stage: NGOs, corporations, and civil society. It has now become vital, no longer to secure bal-ance of power by reaching a compromise among different national interests, but to manage the planet collectively, including in its environmental dimension.
This evolution, both rapid and chaotic—a passing of the baton, asitwere,fromyesterday’sconventionalinternationalrelationstotomorrow’sworldgovernance—iscomplicatedtoperceiveandtograsp. The World Governance Index (WGI) constitutes a first at-tempt to measure these transformations. It is intended first to offer a clearer view of the changes taking place, but it is also designed as a reliable tool to help define the better course for tomorrow and to provide a greater understanding of what “world governance” is.Likeanyindex,theWGIisnotperfectgiventhatitreliesonavailable data, most of which is provided by states. Nonetheless, the WGI and its various constituent indicators open an interesting window on the new world that is coming into view in a thick fog of uncertainty.
The World Governance Index was designed and developed by a Forum for a new World Governance research team directed by Renaud François and advised by Gustavo Marin and Arnaud Blin.
This Proposals Paper is published with the support of the Charles Léopold Mayer Foundation
WGI World Governance Index
www.world-governance.org
Pr
op
os
al
Pa
pe
rs
Ser
ies
top related