Российская Федерация

The economic freedom index measures the degree of economic freedom present in five major areas: [1] Size of Government; [2] Legal System and Security of Property Rights; [3] Sound Money; [4] Freedom to Trade Internationally; [5] Regulation. Within the five major areas, there are 24 components (area) in economic freedom index. Each component and sub-component is placed on a scale from 0 to 10.

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

A “proximity-to-target methodology” is used to assess how close each country is to an identified policy target. Country scores are determined by how close or far countries are to targets. Scores are standardized (i.e., on a scale of 0 to 100) for comparability, weighting, and aggregation. 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.

Most innovation rankings are popularity contests based on past performance or editorial whims. We set out to create something very different with the World’s Most Innovative Companies list, using the wisdom of the crowd. Our method relies on investors’ ability to identify firms they expect to be innovative now and in the future.

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 in the World is Freedom House’s flagship annual report, assessing the condition of political rights and civil liberties around the world. It is composed of numerical ratings and supporting descriptive texts for 195 countries and 15 territories. Freedom in the World has been published since 1973, allowing Freedom House to track global trends in freedom over more than 40 years. It has become the most widely read and cited report of its kind, used on a regular basis by policymakers, journalists, academics, activists, and many others.

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 economic empowerment and understand gender gaps in other key areas of development. Covering 160 countries, the GID-DB contains comprehensive information on legal, cultural and traditional practices that discriminate against women and girls.

Note: Countries are ranked according to 12-month price growth. The Knight Frank Global House Price Index established in 2006 allows investors and developers to monitor and compare the performance of mainstream residential markets across the world. The index is compiled on a quarterly basis using official government statistics or central bank data where available. The index’s overall performance is weighted by GDP and the latest quarter’s data is provisional pending the release of all the countries’ results.

The aim of the Index is both to capture the multidimensional nature of the quality of life and wellbeing of older people, and to provide a means by which to measure performance and promote improvements. We have chosen 13 different indicators for the four key domains of Income security, Health status, Capability, and Enabling environment. Domain 1: Income security The income security domain assesses people's access to a sufficient amount of income, and the capacity to use it independently, in order to meet basic needs in older age. Domain 2: Health status The three indicators used for the health domain provide information about physical and psychological wellbeing. Domain 3: Capability The employment and education indicators in this domain look at different aspects of the empowerment of older people. Domain 4: Enabling environment This domain uses data from Gallup World View to assess older people's perception of social connectedness, safety, civic freedom and access to public transport - issues older people have singled out as particularly important.

With the release of the 2016 Global Manufacturing Competitiveness Index (GMCI), Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited (Deloitte Global) and the Council on Competitiveness (the Council) in the US build upon the GMCI research, with prior studies published in 2010 and 2013. The results of the 2016 study clearly show the ongoing influence manufacturing has on driving global economies. From its influence on infrastructure development, job creation, and contribution to gross domestic product (GDP) on both an overall and per capita basis, a strong manufacturing sector creates a clear path toward economic prosperity.

DHL released the third edition of its Global Connectedness Index (GCI), a detailed analysis of the state of globalization around the world. The latest report, authored by internationally acclaimed globalization expert Professor Pankaj Ghemawat together with Steven A. Altman, shows that global connectedness, measured by cross-border flows of trade, capital, information and people, has recovered most of its losses incurred during the financial crisis. Especially the depth of international interactions – the proportion of interactions that cross national borders – gained momentum in 2013 after its recovery had stalled in the previous year. Nonetheless, trade depth, as a distinct dimension of globalization, continues to stagnate and the overall level of global connectedness remains quite limited, implying that there could be gains of trillions of US dollars if boosted in future years.

The aim of this data set is to provide a snapshot of where countries stand in their cybersecurity engagement at the national level. The visions as seen by ABI Research and ITU is to promote cybersecurity awareness and the important role governments have to play in integrating appropriate mechanisms to both support and promote this crucial discipline. Safeguarding the integrity of cyberspace must involve the development of cybersecurity.

The Democracy Ranking is an annual ranking of all democracies (country-based democracies) in the world by focusing on the Quality of Democracy in an international perspective. The Democracy Ranking publishes the ranking scores and displays ranking score increases or decreases over time. The Democracy Ranking is a ranking of the Quality of Democracy in the sense that the ranking scores should reflect a ranking of democracies according to their differing qualities; and the Democracy Ranking is a ranking for the Quality of Democracy, because it wants to contribute conceptually to how democracy quality may be measured as well as wants to support the awareness how important democracy quality is for the further development, reform and enhancement of democracies.

The Grant Thornton Global Dynamism Index (GDI) ranks 60 leading economies on their dynamism in five key areas – business operating environment, economics & growth, science & technology, labour & human capital and financing environment. The GDI analyses 22 indicators across these five categories to assess the dynamism of business growth environments around the world, where dynamism refers to the changes in an economy over the past 12 months which are likely to lead to a faster future rate of growth.

The Energy Architecture Performance Index (EAPI) uses a set of indicators to highlight the performance of various countries across each facet of their energy architecture, determining to what extent nations have been able to create affordable, sustainable and secure energy systems   1)Economic growth and development: The extent to which energy architecture supports, rather than detracts from, economic growth and development2) Environmental sustainability: The extent to which energy architecture has been constructed to minimize negative environmental externalities3) Energy access and security: The extent to which energy architecture is at risk of an energy security impact, and whether adequate access to energy is provided to all parts of the population   Note: For detail methodology please visit:"http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GlobalEnergyArchitecturePerformance_Index_2017.pdf"

Global Entrepreneurship Index provides information about global entrepreneurship subIndex ranks and scoring of all countries.It also provides information about certain indicators like attitudes,abilities and aspirations with their ranks and scores

The GEM Adult Population Survey (APS) measures the level and nature of entrepreneurial activity around the world. It is administered to a representative national sample of at least 2000 respondents.The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor is the world's foremost study of entrepreneurship. Through a vast, centrally coordinated, internationally executed data collection effort, GEM is able to provide high quality information, comprehensive reports and interesting stories, to enhance the understanding of the entrepreneurial phenomenon.  

The GEM National Expert Survey (NES) monitors the factors that are believed to have a significant impact on entrepreneurship, known as the Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions (EFCs). It is administered to a minimum of 36 carefully chosen 'experts' in each country. The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor is the world's foremost study of entrepreneurship. Through a vast, centrally coordinated, internationally executed data collection effort, GEM is able to provide high quality information, comprehensive reports and interesting stories, to enhance the understanding of the entrepreneurial phenomenon.

The Global Food Security Index 2016: An annual measure of the state of global food security, is the second edition of an Economist Intelligence Unit study, commissioned by DuPont.

This data set provides the Index benchmarks national gender gaps on economic, political, education and health criteria, and provides country rankings that allow for effective comparisons across regions and income groups. The rankings are designed to create greater awareness among a global audience of the challenges posed by gender gaps and the opportunities created by reducing them. The methodology and quantitative analysis behind the rankings are intended to serve as a basis for designing effective measures for reducing gender gaps. Score,1=No inequality, 0=Maximum inequality. Rank,1=Minimum inequality

This 5th edition of the Global Green Economy Index (GGEI) is a data-driven analysis of how 80 countries perform in the global green economy, as well as how expert practitioners rank this performance. Since its launch in 2010, the GGEI has signaled which countries are making progress towards greener economies, and which ones are not. The comparison of national green performance and perceptions of it revealed through the GGEI framework is more important than ever today. This is because while there is far greater public and political focus on climate change and green growth now than when the GGEI was first published, often the commitments and targets communicated by leaders do not match the reality. This report will provide an overview of the newest GGEI results from the 5th edition, as well as more detail on how our research and data can enrich the work of others in this space.

The Global Hunger Index (GHI) is a tool designed to comprehensively measure and track hunger globally, regionally, and by country. Each year, the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) calculates GHI scores in order to assess progress, or the lack thereof, in decreasing hunger. The GHI is designed to raise awareness and understanding of regional and country differences in the struggle against hunger. Since 2015, GHI scores have been calculated using a revised and improved formula. The revision replaces child underweight, previously the sole indicator of child undernutrition, with two indicators of child undernutrition—child wasting and child stunting—which are equally weighted in the GHI calculation. The revised formula also standardizes each of the component indicators to balance their contribution to the overall index and to changes in the GHI scores over time. The 2016 GHI has been calculated for 118 countries for which data on the four component indicators are available and where measuring hunger is considered most relevant. GHI scores are not calculated for some higher income countries where the prevalence of hunger is very low. The GHI is only as current as the data for its four component indicators. This year's GHI reflects the most recent available country-level data and projections available between 2011 and 2016. It therefore reflects the hunger levels during this period rather than solely capturing conditions in 2016. The 1992, 2000, 2008, and 2016 GHI scores reflect the latest revised data for the four component indicators of the GHI. Where original source data were not available, the estimates of the GHI component indicators were based on the most recent data available. The four component indicators used to calculate the GHI scores draw upon data from the following sources: 1. Undernourishment: Updated data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) were used for the 1992, 2000, 2008, and 2016 GHI scores. Undernourishment data and projections for the 2016 GHI are for. 2. Child wasting and stunting: The child undernutrition indicators of the GHI—child wasting and child stunting—include data from the joint database of United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the World Bank, and additional data from WHO's continuously updated Global Database on Child Growth and Malnutrition; the most recent Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) reports; and statistical tables from UNICEF. For the 2016 GHI, data on child wasting and child stunting are for the latest year for which data are available in the period. 3. Child mortality: Updated data from the UN Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation were used for the 1992, 2000, 2008, and 2016 GHI scores. For the 2016 GHI, data on child mortality are from 2015.   Note: Values for the years are taken as per below table.1Global Hunger Index Scores2Proportion of Undernourished in the Population (%)3Prevalence of Stunting in Children Under Five Years (%)4Prevalence of Wasting in Children Under Five Years(%)5Prevalence of underweight in children under five years (%)6Under-five Mortality  Rate(%)                                                                                    Indicators12345DateRangeDateRangeDateRangeDateRangeDateRange19941990-199419931991-199319941990-199419941990-199419921988-199219981994-199819921990-199219921988-199219921988-199219971993-199720021998-200219961994-199619971993-199719971993-199719981994-199820031999-200319971995-199720021998-200220021998-200220021998-200220072002-200720011999-200120072003-200720072003-200720031999-200320082003-200820022000-200220102006-201020102006-201020052000-200520092004-200920032001-200320142010-201420142010-201420062001-200620102006-201020042002-200420152011-201520152011-201520072003-200720132009-201320052003-2005    20082003-200820162011-201620062004-2006    20102005-2010  20082006-2008    20132009-2013  20092007-2009        20132011-2013        20162014-2016       * 6. "Under-five Mortality  Rate(%)" year range has not been specified in source. GHI Severity Scale≤ 9.9 low10.0–19.9 moderate20.0–34.9 serious35.0–49.9 alarming50.0 ≤ extremely alarming

This Dataset contains proprietary and non-proprietary data used in the computation of the World Economic's Forum Networked Readiness Index. By making this data available, the Forum aims to inform multi-stakeholder dialogue, foster evidence-based, data-driven decisions, allow measuring progress, and support research by academia, journalists and others.

The Global Innovation Index (The overall GII score is the simple average of the Input and Output Sub-Index scores) aims to capture the multi-dimensional facets of innovation and provide the tools that can assist in tailoring policies to promote long-term output growth, improved productivity, and job growth. The GII helps to create an environment in which innovation factors are continually evaluated. It provides a key tool and a rich database of detailed metrics for 141 economies this year, which represent 95.1% of the world’s population and 98.6% of global GDP. The Innovation Efficiency Ratio is calculated as the ratio of the Output Sub-Index score over the Input Sub-Index score. It is designed to assess the effectiveness of innovation systems and policies. The countries with the highest Innovation Efficiency Ratios are countries that combine certain levels of innovation inputs with more robust output.

Global Opportunity Index provides information that is vital to investors and policymakers. It helps government to pursue policies which can be helpful to attract foreign direct investment (FDI), expand their economies and accelerate job creation. It also help companies to explore FDI opportunities. Moreover, the index provides a baseline assessment for countries seeking to improve their business environments and attract foreign investors, the kind that commit capital to strategic projects rather than move it around as a fleeting portfolio tactic. Note: Composite Score (CS) is an average score of following indicators:a). Economic Fundamentals (EF)b). Ease of Doing Business (ED)c). Quality of Regulations (QR)d). Rule of Law (RL)Calculation of CS=( EF+ ED+ QR+ RL)/4Countries are ranked on basis of composite score (CS). For 2015, countries are also ranked on the basis of scores of individual indicators (EF, ED, QR and RL).Weighted Rank (WR) is average rank of following indicators:a). Financial Services (FS)b). Institutional Framework (IF)c). Economic Fundamental (EF)d). International Standard and Policy (IS)e). Business Perception (BP)Calculation of WR=( FS+ IF+ EF+ IS+ BP)/5

The GPI covers 99.7 per cent of the world’s population, using 23 qualitative and quantitative indicators from highly respected sources and measures the state of peace using three thematic domains: the level of Societal Safety and Security; the extent of Ongoing Domestic and International Conflict; and the degree of Militarization. In addition to presenting the findings from the 2017 GPI, this report includes analysis of the Positive Peace factors that are most important for transitioning to higher levels of peace and how deterioration in Positive Peace are linked to the rise of populism in Europe. The report also assesses the trends in peacekeeping and militarization, including a cost/benefit analysis highlighting the positive economic benefits from early peace building interventions.

The Global Retail Development Index™ is an annual study that ranks the top 30 developing countries for retail expansion worldwide. The Index analyzes 25 macroeconomic and retail-specific variables to help retailers devise successful global strategies and to identify developing market investment opportunities. The GRDI is unique because it identifies today's most successful markets and those that offer the most potential for the future.

55This data presents high-level way of mapping individual countries in terms of talent competitiveness consists of comparing their GTCI scores to their GDP per capita for the selected indicators.In its first year, the GTCI model covers 103 countries,representing 86.3% of the world’s population and 96.7% of the world’s GDP (in current US dollars).It is a simplified manner of acquiring a first assessment about the ways in which competitiveness relates to overall level of economic development of a nation.

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. Note: "Change in score values" have been calculated for 2015 by score in 2015 minus score in 2014 (Score_2015-Score_2014). For rest of the years according to source.

The Web has changed our lives. But to harness its full benefit, we need to understand how countries and people use it, and its impact on on development and human rights. The Web Index, by the World Wide Web Foundation, tracks the Web’s contribution to social, economic and political progress across 86 countries. It ranks these nations across four pillars: Universal Access, Freedom and Openness, Empowerment and Relevant Content.

The Global Youth Wellbeing Index details the performance and provides comparative analysis of 30 countries in terms of overall youth wellbeing and within six domains. The Index is designed to facilitate both thought and action by elevating youth needs and opportunities and young people’s participation on national and global agendas. It also provides public and private sector decision-makers an easier way to understand the big picture, guide actions and investments, and drive progress over time.

Over the past decade or more, there have been several efforts to find out which are the world’s best-performing healthcare systems. The pioneer was the World Health Organisation (WHO), which used its annual World Health Report in 2000 to perform a systematic global analysis. The work that The Economist Intelligence Unit has previously carried out in the area of value-based healthcare has made it clear that value is a vexed term

The Human Development Index (HDI) is a summary measure of achievements in three key dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, access to knowledge and a decent standard of living. The HDI is the geometric mean of normalized indices for each of the the three dimensions.

The IMD World Competitiveness Center is delighted to present its IMD World Talent Report 2016, which includes a talent ranking for all countries that are part of the IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook (61 countries as of 2016). The data are gathered from the Center’s extensive database, which encompasses 20 years of competitiveness-related data. In some sections of this report, we present a detailed discussion of the data (at the indicator level) from 2005 to 2016. In the indicator tables, however, we only present the 2016 data. All criteria employed in the development of this report can be accessed through the World Competitiveness Online website. The objective of the IMD World Talent Ranking is to assess the extent to which countries develop, attract and retain talent to sustain the talent pool available for enterprises operating in those economies. While the hard data used in this report have been gathered from various sources (see Appendix), the survey data were obtained from the Center’s executive opinion survey, designed for the World Competitiveness Yearbook.

The Global Index of Cognitive Skills and Educational Attainment compares the performance of 39 countries and one region (Hong Kong) on two categories of education: Cognitive Skills and Educational Attainment. The Index provides a snapshot of the relative performance of countries based on their education outputs.List of indicators   Main sourceMain year1. Cognitive Skills  1.1  Grade 8  1.1.1  Reading Literacy - PISAOECD - PISA report20091.1.2  Mathematics Literacy - PISA and TIMSSEIU based on IEA and OECD data 1.1.2.1  PISA - Mathematics LiteracyOECD - PISA report20091.1.2.2  TIMSS - Mathematics AchievementIEA - TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Center20071.1.3  Science Literacy - PISA and TIMSSEIU based on IEA and OECD data 1.1.3.1  PISA - Science LiteracyOECD - PISA report20091.1.3.2  TIMSS - Science  AchievementIEA - TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Center20071.2  Grade 4  1.2.1  PIRLS - Reading Literacy AchievementIEA - TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Center20061.2.2  TIMSS - Mathematics  AchievementIEA - TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Center20071.2.3  TIMSS - Science  AchievementIEA - TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Center20072. Educational Attainment  2.1  Literacy rate  2.1.1  Literacy rate (15 and over), %UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS)20102.2  Graduation rate  2.2.1  Graduation rate at upper secondary level OECD 20102.2.2  Graduation rate at tertiary level OECD 2010

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.

International patent protection: 1960–2005 Walter G. Park ∗ Department of Economics, American University, 4400 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20016, USA Received 24 October 2007; received in revised form 14 December 2007; accepted 29 January 2008 Available online 10 March 2008 http://fs2.american.edu/wgp/www/res_policy08.pdf

In order to make it possible to defend both physical and intellectual property rights of people, the Property Rights Alliance developed an instrument allowing comparison between the nations by relative strengths of property rights they provide for their citizens. This instrument, the International Property Rights Index, is published since 2007 helping policymakers to make better decisions. The Index comprises 130 countries, comparing them by three core variables, that affect the resulting index, namely country's legal and political environment, recognition and enforcement of physical and intellectual property rights.The overall grading scale of the IPRI ranges from 0 to 10, where 10 is the highest value for a property rights system and 0 is the lowest value (i.e. most negative) for a property rights system within a country..

The World Bank’s Knowledge Assessment Methodology (KAM: www.worldbank.org/kam) is an online interactive tool that produces the Knowledge Economy Index (KEI)–an aggregate index representing a country’s or region’s overall preparedness to compete in the Knowledge Economy (KE). The KEI is based on a simple average of four subindexes, which represent the four pillars of the knowledge economy:  Economic Incentive and Institutional Regime (EIR)  Innovation and Technological Adoption  Education and Training  Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) Infrastructure The EIR comprises incentives that promote the efficient use of existing and new knowledge and the flourishing of entrepreneurship. An efficient innovation system made up of firms, research centers, universities, think tanks, consultants, and other organizations can tap into the growing stock of global knowledge, adapt it to local needs, and create new technological solutions. An educated and appropriately trained population is capable of creating, sharing, and using knowledge. A modern and accessible ICT infrastructure serves to facilitate the effective communication, dissemination, and processing of information.

The Prosperity Index is the only global measurement of national success based on both income and wellbeing. Our econometric analysis has identified 89 variables, which are spread across eight sub-indices. By measuring prosperity holistically we are able to identify and analyse the specific factors that contribute to the success of a country.

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).

Measuring the information society report presents a global overview of the latest developments in information and communication technologies (ICTs), based on internationally comparable data and agreed methodologies. It aims to stimulate the ICT policy debate in ITU Member States by providing an objective assessment of countries’ performance in the field of ICT and by highlighting areas that need further improvement. The ICT Development Index (IDI) is a composite index that combines 11 indicators into one benchmark measure. It is used to monitor and compare developments in information and communication technology (ICT) between countries and over time. The IDI is divided into the following three sub-indices, and a total of 11 indicators: Access sub-index: This sub-index captures ICT readiness, and includes five infrastructure and access indicators (fixed-telephone subscriptions, mobile-cellular telephone subscriptions, international Internet bandwidth per Internet user, households with a computer, and households with Internet access). Use sub-index: This sub-index captures ICT intensity, and includes three intensity and usage indicators (individuals using the Internet, fixed broadband subscriptions, and mobile-broadband subscriptions). Skills sub-index: This sub-index seeks to capture capabilities or skills which are important for ICTs. It includes three proxy indicators (mean years of schooling, gross secondary enrolment, and gross tertiary enrolment). As these are proxy indicators, rather than indicators directly measuring ICT-related skills, the skills sub-index is given less weight in the computation of the IDI than the other two sub-indices. The data has been normalized to ensure that the data set uses the same unit of measurement. The values for the indicators selected to construct the IDI are converted into the same unit of measurement, since some indicators have maximum value as 100 whereas for other indicators the maximum value exceeds 100 After normalizing the data, the individual series were all rescaled to identical ranges, from 1 to 10.

Note: The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. Nations in Transit is Freedom House’s research project on democracy in the 29 formerly communist countries from Central Europe to Central Asia. The flagship of the project is an annual survey of democratic reform that has been published since 1995, and with the same methodology since 2003. Nations in Transit also publishes briefs on topics relevant to democratic reform in the region. The Nations in Transit annual report researchers score the countries on a scale of 1 to 7 in seven categories: National Democratic Governance, Local Democratic Governance, Electoral Process, Independent Media, Civil Society, Judicial Framework and Independence, and Corruption. Category scores are based on a detailed list of questions available here. These category scores are straight-averaged to create a country’s “Democracy Score” on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 being the most democratic, and 7 the least. Freedom House contracts independent researchers from academia, journalism, and civil society for each country to draft the country reports and make the initial scoring. These draft country reports and score proposals are sent to between three and six reviewers per country per year for comments. After researchers have a chance to respond to the comments, Nations in Transit and its advisors meet to finalize scores for each country. Where possible, scores reflect the consensus of researchers, reviewers, advisors, and Freedom House, but Freedom House has the final vote on all score changes. The annual report is currently funded through a grant from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). USAID has no say in the methodology or conclusions of the report.

Ocean Health Index, 2016

This dataset shows the sub-index and overall rankings given to countries in the Open Data Barometer Study, a multi-dimensional measure of open data context, implementation and impacts across 77 countries. More information on the study methodology and variable definitions can be found in the Open Data Barometer 2013 Global Report

Peer-reviewed numerical scores assigned to each primary data variable collected for the Open Data Barometer.

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 ScorePassports 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 RankPassports are ranked based on their Visa Free Score. The higher the Visa Free Score, the better the Passport Power Rank.MethodologyThe 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.

The SIR reports are not league tables. The ranking parameter –the scientific output of institutions- should be understood as a default rank, not our ranking proposal. The only goal of this report is to characterize research outcomes of organizations so as to provide useful scientometric information to institutions, policymakers and research manager so they are able to analyze, evaluate and improve their research results. If someone uses this report to rank institutions or to build a league table with any purpose, he/she will do it under his/her own responsibility. Output - Total number of documents published in scholarly journals indexed in Scopus (Romo-Fernández, et al., 2011). International Collaboration - Institution's output ratio produced in collaboration with foreign institutions. The values are computed by analyzing an institution's output whose affiliations include more than one country address (Guerrero-Bote, Olmeda-Gómez and Moya-Anegón, 2013; Lancho-Barrantes, Guerrero-Bote and Moya-Anegón, 2013; Lancho-Barrantes, et al., 2013; Chinchilla-Rodríguez, et al., 2012) Normalized Impact - Normalized Impact is computed using the methodology established by the Karolinska Intitutet in Sweden where it is named "Item oriented field normalized citation score average". The normalization of the citation values is done on an individual article level. The values (in %) show the relationship between an institution's average scientific impact and the world average set to a score of 1, --i.e. a NI score of 0.8 means the institution is cited 20% below world average and 1.3 means the institution is cited 30% above average (Rehn and Kronman, 2008; González-Pereira, Guerrero-Bote and Moya- Anegón, 2011). High Quality Publications - Ratio of publications that an institution publishes in the most influential scholarly journals of the world, those ranked in the first quartile (25%) in their categories as ordered by SCImago Journal Rank (SJRII) indicator (Miguel, Chinchilla-Rodríguez and Moya-Anegón, 2011). Specialization Index - The Specialization Index indicates the extent of thematic concentration /dispersion of an institution’s scientific output. Values range between 0 and 1, indicating generalist vs. specialized institutions respectively. This indicator is computed according to the Gini Index used in Economy (Moed, et. al., 2011; López-Illescas, Moya-Anegón and Moed, 2011; Arencibia-Jorge et al., 2012). In this indicator, when the value is 0 it means that the data are not sufficient to calculate. Excellence Rate - Excellence rate indicates the amount (in %) of an institution’s scientific output that is included into the set of the 10% of the most cited papers in their respective scientific fields. It is a measure of high quality output of research institutions (SCImago Lab, 2011; Bornmann, Moya-Anegón and Leydesdorff, 2012; Guerrero-Bote and Moya-Anegón, 2012). Scientific Leadership - Leadership indicates an institution’s “output as main contributor”, that is the number of papers in which the corresponding author belongs to the institution (Moya-Anegón, 2012; Moya-Anegón et. al, 2013; Moya-Anegón, et al., forthcoming) Excellence with Leadership - Excellence with Leadership indicates the amount of documents in the Excellence rate in which the institution is the main contributor (Moya-Anegón, et al., 2013).

The Social Progress Index is the result of a two-year process guided by a team of scholars and policy experts. It synthesizes a huge body of research to identify the dimensions of social and environmental performance of societies. The Index incorporates four key design principles: 1. Exclusively social and environmental indicators: our aim is to measure social progress directly, rather than utilize economic proxies. By excluding economic indicators, we can, for the first time, analyze the relationship between economic development (measured for example by GDP per capita) and social development rigorously and systematically. Prior efforts to move “beyond GDP” have commingled social and economic indicators, making it more difficult to disentangle cause and effect. 2. Outcomes not inputs: our aim is to measure the outcomes that matter to the lives of real people. For example, we want to measure the health and wellness achieved by a country, not how much effort is expended nor how much the country spends on healthcare. 3. Actionability: the Index aims to be a practical tool that will help leaders and practitioners in government, business and civil society to implement policies and programs that will drive faster social progress. To achieve that goal, we measure outcomes in a granular way that links to practice. The Index has been structured around 12 components and 54 distinct indicators. The framework allows us to not only provide an aggregate country score and ranking, but also supports granular analyses of specific areas of strength and weakness. Transparency of measurement using a comprehensive framework helps change-makers identify and act upon the most pressing issues in their societies. 4. Relevance to all countries: our aim is to create a holistic measure of social progress that encompasses the health of societies. Most previous efforts have focused on the poorest countries, for understandable reasons. But knowing what constitutes a healthy society for higher-income countries is indispensable in charting a course to get there. These design principles are the foundation for our conceptual framework that defines social progress in an inclusive and comprehensive way. We define social progress as the capacity of a society to meet the basic human needs of its citizens, establish the building blocks that allow citizens and communities to enhance and sustain the quality of their lives, and create the conditions for all individuals to reach their full potential. This definition reflects an extensive and critical review and synthesis of both academic and practitioner literature in a wide range of development topics.

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.

The Enabling Trade Index (ETI) was developed within the context of the World Economic Forum’s Transportation Industry Partnership program, and was first published in The Global Enabling Trade Report 2008. The ETI measures the extent to which individual economies have developed institutions, policies, and services facilitating the free flow of goods over borders and to destination. The structure of the Index reflects the main enablers of trade, breaking them into four overall issue areas, captured in the subindexes: 1) The market access subindex measures the extent to which the policy framework of the country welcomes foreign goods into the economy and enables access to foreign markets for its exporters. 2) The border administration subindex assesses the extent to which the administration at the border facilitates the entry and exit of goods. 3) Infrastructure subindex takes into account whether the country has in place the transport and communications infrastructure necessary to facilitate the movement of goods within the country and across the border. 4) The business environment subindex looks at the quality of governance as well as at the overarching regulatory and security environment impacting the business of importers and exporters active in the country. Each of these four subindexes is composed in turn of a number of pillars of enabling trade, of which there are seven in all. These are: 1) Domestic market access; 2) Foreign market access; 3) Efficiency and transparency of border administration; 4) Availability and quality of transport infrastructure; 5) Availability and quality of transport services; 6) Availability and use of ICTs; 7) Operating environment. Each indicator and sub-indicator is given a score on a scale of 1 to 7 that corresponds to the worst and best possible outcome, respectively.

This is the second edition of 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?

The Human Capital Index seeks to serve as a tool for capturing the complexity of education, employment and workforce dynamics so that various stakeholders are able to make better-informed decisions. Last year’s edition of the World Economic Forum’s Human Capital Report explored the factors contributing to the development of an educated, productive and healthy workforce. This year’s edition deepens the analysis by focusing on a number of key issues that can support better design of education policy and future workforce planning.

Normative ScaleExcellent/Top Tier: 80+Strong/Robust: 70-79Avg./Moderate: 60-69Weak/Vulnerable: 40-59Poor/Lowest: <40

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 Powers2. Absence of Corruption3. Open Government4. Fundamental Rights5. Order and Security6. Regulatory Enforcement7. Civil Justice8. 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.For elaborations on the factors included in the index please visit: http://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index/

This water poverty index is a first pass at trying to establish an international measure comparing performance in the water sector across countries in a holistic way that brings in the diverse aspects and issues that are relevant. It does seem to give some sensible results but it does not pretend to be definitive nor offer a totally accurate measure of the situation.

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.

'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 “touches 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.'

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

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 rise of travel and tourism has shown significant resilience globally. Despite slow economic growth in advanced economies and geopolitical tensions in some regions, the T&T sector still accounts for a large part of the global economy (estimated to be approximately 9% of global GDP or US$ 7 trillion) and employment,while the number of international travellers continues to increase. According to the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC), the T&T sector is forecast to continue growing at 4% annually—faster than financial services,transport and manufacturing

Domestic ivory market score: Scores range from –4, indicating no or very small, highly-regulated domestic ivory markets and carving industries, to 20, indicating extremely large, completely unregulated domestic ivory markets and carving industries. As described in CoP13 Doc.29,2 Annex, this component is based upon a cumulative scoring system which tracks the relative scale of the retail-level trade, the degree of control over such trade, and the status of ivory carving.Law enforcement effort ratio: Number of in-country seizures divided by total number of seizures linked to that country 1999-2010. Total weight of recent ivory seizures: Total weight of ivory seizures linked to that country 1999-2010.Organized crime indicator: Percentage of seizure cases linked to that country 1999-2010 of more than 1,000 kg in weight, indicative of involvement of organized crime in the movement of ivory.

Doing Business 2017: Equal Opportunity for All, a World Bank Group flagship publication, is the 14th in a series of annual reports measuring the regulations that enhance business activity and those that constrain it. Doing Business presents quantitative indicators on business regulations and the protection of property rights that can be compared across 190 economies—from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe—and over time. Doing Business measures regulations affecting 11 areas of the life of a business. Ten of these areas are included in this year’s ranking on the ease of doing business: starting a business, dealing with construction permits, getting electricity, registering property, getting credit, protecting minority investors, paying taxes, trading across borders, enforcing contracts and resolving insolvency. Doing Business also measures labor market regulation, which is not included in this year’s ranking. Data in Doing Business 2017 are current as of June 1, 2016. The indicators are used to analyze economic outcomes and identify what reforms of business regulation have worked, where and why.

The IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook analyzes and ranks the ability of a country to facilitate an environment in which enterprises can generate sustainable value.

The World Energy Council’s Energy Trilemma Index tool, produced in partnership with Oliver Wyman, ranks countries on their ability to provide sustainable energy through 3 dimensions: Energy security, Energy equity (accessibility and affordability), Environmental sustainability. The ranking measures overall performance in achieving a sustainable mix of policies and the balance score highlights how well a country manages the trade-offs of the Trilemma with "A" being the best.

The World Happiness Report 2013 is a study conducted by Columbia University's Earth Institute and published in September 2013 by the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN). It reveals trends in the data judging just how happy countries really are on a scale running from 0 to 10. The report uses data from people in over 150 countries, surveyed by Gallup over the period 2010-12. Six key variables explain three-quarters of the variation in annual national average scores over time and among countries. These six factors include: real GDP per capita, healthy life expectancy, having someone to count on, perceived freedom to make life choices, freedom from corruption, and generosity. Note: datapoints for 2012 and 2007 refer to national averages in 2010-12 and 2005-07 correspondingly; changes from 2005-07 to 2010-12 are presented for the 130 countries with data in both periods; positive affect in 2005-07 does not include happiness (yesterday) since happiness data were not collected in the period. Reference: World Happiness Report 2013, Appendix material for Chapter 2 "World Happiness:  Trends, Explanations and Distribution", John F. Helliwell & Shun Wang.

The World Happiness Report is a landmark survey of the state of global happiness. The first report was published in 2012, the second in 2013, and the third on April 23, 2015. Leading experts across fields – economics, psychology, survey analysis, national statistics, health, public policy and more – describe how measurements of well-being can be used effectively to assess the progress of nations. The reports review the state of happiness in the world today and show how the new science of happiness explains personal and national variations in happiness. They reflect a new worldwide demand for more attention to happiness as a criteria for government policy.The report is published by the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN). It is edited by Professor John F. Helliwell, of the University of British Columbia and the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research; Lord Richard Layard, Director of the Well-Being Programme at LSE’s Centre for Economic Performance; and Professor Jeffrey D. Sachs, Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, Director of the SDSN, and Special Advisor to UN Secretary General Ban ki-Moon.

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. The range of score to access the press freedom.  From 0 to 15 points: Good From 15.01 to 25 points: Fairly good From 25.01 to 35 points: ProblematicFrom 35.01 to 55 points: BadFrom 55.01 to 100 points: Very bad  

Score Range:ADVANCED (70.1-100), PROGRESSING (50.1-70), EMERGING (30.1-50), NASCENT (0-30)