КНДР

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.

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.

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.

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 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

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.

The 2016 Global Peace Index overall score deteriorated slightly compared with 2015, and at a faster rate than the previous year. Once again, the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) was the region that saw its levels of peace deteriorate the most. Four regions scored worse than the previous year, while three other regions improved and two remained the same.

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 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.

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.

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.

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).

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 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.'

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 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