Comoros

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

Data cited at: The African Development Bank: The Africa Infrastructure Development Index (AIDI): https://infrastructureafrica.opendataforafrica.org/pbuerhd https://dataportal.opendataforafrica.org/AIDI The Africa Infrastructure Development Index (AIDI) is produced by the African Development Bank. The AIDI serves a number of key objectives, principally: (i) to monitor and evaluate the status and progress of infrastructure development across the continent; (ii) to assist in resource allocation within the framework of ADF replenishments; and (iii) to contribute to policy dialogue within the Bank and between the Bank, RMCs and other development organizations.

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

Data cited at:  The African Development Bank: Dataset name: Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (CPIA) - https://cpia.afdb.org/?page=data

Data cited at: International Lesbian, Gay, Trans and Intersex Association-ILGA World 

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

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

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

DHL Global Connectedness Report, released in partnership with New York University’s Stern School of Business, unveils a remarkable finding: Globalization reached a record high in 2022 and has remained near that level in 2023

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

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

Global Hunger Index, 2024 The 2024 Global Hunger Index (GHI) score for the world is 18.3, considered moderate, down only slightly from the 2016 score of 18.8. This global score obscures wide variations in hunger by region. The situation is most severe in Africa South of the Sahara and South Asia, where hunger remains serious. Africa South of the Sahara’s high GHI score is driven by the highest undernourishment and child mortality rates of any region by far. In South Asia, serious hunger reflects rising undernourishment and persistently high child undernutrition, driven by poor diet quality, economic challenges, and the increasing impact of natural disasters.

The Global Innovation Index 2024 captures the innovation ecosystem performance of 133 economies and tracks the most recent global innovation trends. The Global Innovation Tracker 2024 provides a comprehensive analysis of the current state of global innovation. Findings highlight progress as well as challenges across four key stages of the innovation cycle: science and innovation investment, technological progress, technology adoption, and the socioeconomic impact of innovation.

Highlights of the  Global Sustainable Competitiveness Report 2024:The GSCI is now based on a new calculation methodology incorporating 216 quantitative indicators that uses (but is not based upon) AI tools to clean data, and analyse trends and correlations • Scandinavia continues to make its mark on the Sustainable Competitiveness Index: of the top 5 spots, 4 are Scandinavian. Sweden keeps topping the Index, followed by Finland and Denmark; • Northern European countries dominate the top 20 rankings; • Only two countries in the Top 20 are not European: Japan on 10, and South on 16; • China is ranked 28, exceling in Intellectual Capital but lags in Natural Capital and Resource Efficiency, albeit with encouraging signs of efficiency improvements; • The USA is ranked 35, performing comparatively poor in resource efficiency and social capital, reflecting a decline that could potentially undermine the global status of the US in the future; • Germany ranks 9, France 8, and the UK 14; • Brazil ranks 52, India 90, and Nigeria – Africa’s most populous nation – 145; • Some of the least developed nations have a considerable higher GSCI ranking than their GDP would suggest (e.g. Vietnam, Colombia, Peu, Nepal, Bhutan, Bolivia, …) • Asian nations (South Korea, Japan, Singapore, and China) lead the Intellectual Capital Index – the basis of innovation. • The Social Capital Index ranking is headed by Northern European (Scandinavian) countries, the result of economic growth combined with a commonly accepted social consensus • Countries savaged by violent conflicts (Sudan, Yemen, Eritrea, Libya, Somalia, Afghanistan) are at the bottom of the GSCI

Data Cited at: UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME, Human Development Data Center 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.

Data Cited at: Cato Institute-https://www.cato.org/human-freedom-index-new Note:- Each indicator is rated on a 0–10 scale, with 10-representing the most freedom.

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

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).

The main objective of the research is to address the theoretical and empirical problems of how political institutions of high quality can be created and maintained. The second objective is to study the effects of Quality of Government on a number of policy areas, such as health, environment, social policy, and poverty. While Quality of Government is the common intellectual focal point of the research institute, a variety of theoretical and methodological perspectives are applied. Data citation:  Teorell, Jan, Aksel Sundström, Sören Holmberg, Bo Rothstein, Natalia Alvarado Pachon, Cem Mert Dalli, Rafael Lopez Valverde, Victor Saidi Phiri & Lauren Gerber. 2025. The Quality of Government Standard Dataset, version Jan25. University of Gothenburg: The Quality of Government Institute, https://www.gu.se/en/quality-government doi:10.18157/qogstdjan25

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

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

The primary World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially-recognized international sources. It presents the most current and accurate global development data available, and includes national, regional and global estimates

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