WGI World Governance Index · 2016. 8. 24. · World Governance Index 6 foundations of governance.1 These proposals are derived from the big principles of governance set out in the

WGI World Governance Index

Why Should World Governance Be Evaluated, and for What Purpose?

Version 2.02011 Report

Pr

op

os

al

Pa

pe

rs

Ser

ies

Proposal Papers

The Forum for a new World Governance encourages the development and circulation of new ideas in several languages and in a large number of countries in the form of Proposal Papers. The papers present the most relevant proposals for generating the breakthroughs and changes needed to build a new, fairer and more sustainable world governance.

Published as a series, the Proposal Papers cover five broad categories of world governance:• Environment and management of the planet• The economy and globalization• Politics, state structures, and institutions• Peace, security, and armed conflicts• Knowledge, science, education, and the information and communication society

Forum for a new World Governance June 2010 www.world-governance.org

Translation: Marina UrquidiIllustrations: Dominique MonteauGraphic design: Patrick LescurePrinting: Causses et Cévenne

This Proposal Paper is available under a Creative Commons License allowing users to use, reproduce and circulate it on condition that they mention the title, authors and Forum for a new World Governance. This Proposals Paper cannot be modified or sold. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

Cover illustration: Carmen Piemonte, Lutrans I, 2010 (www.carlunelarte.cl)

World Governance Index

Why Should World Governance Be Evaluated, and for What Purpose?

Version 2.02011 Report

W o r l d G o v e r n a n c e I n d e x

4

Ta b l e o f C o n t e n t s

Overview 5

World Governance Index - WGI 5

Usefulness and Uses of the WGI 6

Part I: Developing the World Governance Index 9

Defining the World Governance Index 10

World-governance goals and fields 10

Establishing the conditions for sustainable development 11

Reducing inequalities 11

Establishing lasting peace while respecting diversity 11

World Governance Index 2011 – version 2 0 12

Methodology and Calculations 13

Part II: Results and Illustrations 14

2011 WGI Global Ranking in Descending Order (with rank in 2008) 15

WGI Regional Rankings 16

Recapitulation Table per Country for the Five WGI Indicators 17

EU / OECD Figures 19

Latin America / The Caribbean Figures 20

Africa Figures 21

Asia Pacific Figures 22

CIS / Central Asia / Balkans Figures 23

Arab States Figures 24

Conclusion 25

Copyright Appendix 27


5

P romoting, on a world scale, a legitimate, effective, and democratic gov-ernance, and forming a responsible, plural, and united community within which the system of governance holds an essential and vital position con-

stitute the main objectives of the Forum for a new World Governance (FnWG).

The challenge is ambitious. The idea is to overcome the many obstacles of a world in crisis: persisting tensions, conflicts and wars, paralysis or failure of regional and international organizations, helpless nation-states, and the obsolescence of an ide-ological model that appeared in the seventeenth century.

Reaching these objectives requires the active and constructive involvement of players who are able not only to contribute innovative thinking on world govern-ance but also to offer proposals that are socially and politically viable, in order to make it possible to get out of our current dead-end situation.

World Governance Index - WGI

It was in the framework of this thinking on the major challenges that global, or world governance would inevitably have to face that the forum launched, in 2008, the World Governance Index - WGI project. The idea is to develop a “tool” that should allow the players in charge of governance to become aware of the issues and problems arising and to think about what solutions to bring to them.

The paper “Rethinking Global Governance” defines the general objectives of this effort—to reduce inequalities, establish sustainable development, and build peace in a world of diversity—and frames some proposals for laying the new

5

Overview


6

foundations of governance.1 These proposals are derived from the big principles of governance set out in the Charter of the United Nations and in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

They are also directly aligned with more recent, but equally important, texts such as the Earth Summit Declaration (Rio, 1992), the Millennium Declaration (New York, 2000), and the findings of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Johannesburg, 2002).

A survey of these objectives and these basic texts has made it possible to determine and select five large fields, called indicators, which, aggregated, constitute the WGI:

•PeaceandSecurity

•RuleofLaw

•HumanRightsandParticipation

•SustainableDevelopment

•HumanDevelopment

Each of these indicators is broken down into several sub-indicators—a total of 13 sub-indicators are used—and each of these sub-indicators is the result of the aggre-gation of several indexes (41 in all). Finally, the data used to calculate the indexes and determine the WGI is taken from databases published annually by the main international organizations and by NGOs specializing in the area of governance.

The result of this work is an index that hopes to be as complete as possible and describes the state of world governance, not for theoretical, but for practical pur-poses.

Usefulness and Uses of the WGI

Both a photograph and a means to induce action/reaction, the WGI has a twofold dimension. An analytical dimension—it tries to provide as true a reflection as possible of the state of world governance—and an operational dimension—it must enable players to act or to react in the direction of a more efficient, more democratic world governance more in phase with the environment. The index was designed mainly to offer political decision mak-ers, whatever their level (national, regional or international), companies, and NGOs reliable, independent, and scrutinized information that will allow them:

•toevaluateastate’sdegreeofgovernance

•toidentifyitsgovernancestrengthsandweaknesses

•tomonitoritsevolutionsovertime

1/ Arnaud Blin and Gustavo Marin, “Rethinking Global Governance”, 2007, http://www.world-governance.org/spip.php?article15&lang=en


7

Recourse to a very large number of variables makes the WGI a complete, prag-matic, practical index that is also meant as an incentive.

Complete: The systems of currently developed indicators factor in only one of the fields, one of the aspects of world governance. For the WGI, the selec-tion and aggregation of the indexes making up the indicators make it possible to obtain a WGI that gives a vision that is global, exhaustive, and precise all at the same time.

Pragmatic: The WGI, an aggregation of several indexes and variables of different and measurable natures, to varying degrees—some rely on facts (number of inhabitants, for example) and others on perceptions (opinion-poll outcomes)—translates abstract and subjective concepts into observable and quantifiable data.

Practical: The WGI is presented here in the form of three tables.2 The first table presents the world ranking in descending order, the second table re-flects regional rankings, and the third table sums up, country by country, the results for each of the five WGI constituent indicators.3 They will be updated every year, making it possible to monitor evolutions closely (improvements or regressions) over the years.

An incentive: The WGI is not only a warning bell, its intention is also to be a means for action. It aims to provoke governance players to think and to ask the right questions in order to act and to react

Despite a rigorous methodology, the results are nonetheless constrained by the lim-itsinherenttoindicators.Likeallindicators,theWGIinforms,warns,andenablesaction and guidance. Although it is particularly useful for “taking the temperature” of world governance in the countries of the survey, its diagnosis is not, for all that, absolute, in the medical sense of the term, nor does it dictate action priorities. The process relies on a conscientious examination of multiple and varied data and on a combination of sources, data, and methods. In the end, the WGI points to a number of problems and shows possible leads, but the means to be implemented are left to the appreciation of world-governance players.

This 2011 Report presents the WGI, version 2.0. It establishes new world and re-gional rankings of the countries included in the survey, a ranking factoring in the changes that have occurred since the first 2008 version of the index. For practical reasons—availability and reliability of the data—it covers only 179 countries (of the 192 UN Member States). In the medium run, it should cover all the coun-tries.

2/ Many other detailed tables are available at the FnWG Web site: www.world-governance.org

3/ The categorization used for the regional rankings is inspired from the United Nations Development Program (UNDP)’s categorization.


8

The 2011 report, the first update of a series we hope will be long, is intended for the broadest possible audience of national, regional, and international governance players, civil-society representatives, researchers, academics, company leaders, NGOs, and the world of nonprofit organizations.


9

T he World Governance Index is an assessment tool aiming to offer a picture, both general and detailed, of the state of governance throughout

the world. The 2011 Report marks the outcome of considerations following the first version, completed in 2008 and updated in 2009. This new version, called version 2.0, has increased the number of in-dexes to 41 (there were 37 in 2008).

The number of countries surveyed, 179 in all, is iden-tical to that of version 1.0 and is warranted by an ob-vious problem of availability and reliability of data. Pleasenote,however,thattheWGIappliesuniform-ly to all countries, whatever the different political,

social, economic, and cultural systems that character-ize them.

Not one country in the world has succeeded to this day in showing a degree of total perfection where governance is concerned. Each is constantly facing the challenge of establishing and renewing the struc-tures, institutions, and standards that contribute to good governance and to its search for improvement. The WGI, as designed, reflects the efforts undertaken by the different countries in their quest for better governance and to illustrate observed evolutions.

Part I

Developing the World Governance Index

Ximena Mandiola, Mid-day, 2007 (www.ximenamandiola.com)


10

Defining the World Governance Index

Beyond the more-or-less complex definitions of what world governance might be, beyond the more-or-less subjective takes the concept cuts through, we prefer to consider world governance as simply “the collec-tive management of the planet.”

This definition may be broad, which can be con-strued as a weakness, but it facilitates exploring all the dimensions of what world governance could be. This concept goes beyond the restrictive setting of international relations, which, until recently, have constituted the one and only prism through which governance was perceived on a global level.

After having reviewed the voluminous literature on world governance, the FnWG team became aware of the numerous challenges that the WGI undertaking involved. Evaluating world governance addresses a twofold need. The idea is first to understand. Every-body agrees that the world is in bad shape, and that this is because world governance is in bad shape. Be-fore even defining a “treatment protocol,” it is there-foreoftheessencetoknowwhatthepatient’scondi-tion is exactly.

Indicators, or systems of indicators, in the sense that their role is to inform, seem to be the tools best adapt-ed to get a clear picture of what world governance is afflicted with and to understand what is happening. Second, such evaluation is also needed to enable ac-tion.

As a photograph at the service of world-governance players and as a tool put at their disposal, the WGI thus also has a twofold dimension: an analytical di-mension—it must provide as true a reflection as pos-sible of the state of world governance—and an opera-tional dimension—it must enable players, whatever their level, to act or to react in the direction of a more efficient, more democratic world governance more in phase with the environment. On first impression, the first dimension seems relatively easy to measure, but the operational dimension seems more delicate to quantify.

World-governance goals and fields

To get a precise picture of the goals of world govern-ance, its situation, and its evolution, all of the funda-mental domains in which it is exercised need to be taken into account.

These fundamental domains were originally writ-ten into the two texts considered as the basic texts of world governance: the Charter of the United Na-tions, signed on June 26, 1945, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of December 10, 1948.

To “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war . . . and to reaffirm faith in the fundamental hu-man rights, in the dignity and the worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations at large, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards in larger freedom”: these were, in the wake of World War II, the guidelines for world governance.

Three years later, the Universal Declaration of Hu-man Rights was to reinforce the Charter and con-stitute, in the minds of the leaders from all over the world who adopted it, the roadmap to ensuring every person’srights,inallplacesandatalltimes.

We would have to wait until 1992 for the Earth Sum-mit, held in Rio de Janeiro, to jump start awareness of the importance of the fundamental domains of world governance. As discussions developed, as the idea of interdependence in the global village took hold, the thinking expanded from considering only environ-mental assets (air, water, and forests) to including the wholeofhumankind’s commongoods:health, edu-cation, and human rights. This was the appearance of global common goods, which Riccardo Petrella,formerlyHeadoftheEuropeanCommission’sFASTprogram, was to define as: “the goods and services that should be seen as essential to the security of liv-ing together at the global level.”

Taking into account the geopolitical upheavals ensu-ing from the end of the Cold War, the Millennium Declaration, in 2000, confirmed the thinking on glo-bal governance and reinforced the view that the dif-ferent domains were all linked with one another. The goals ensuing from the Millennium Declaration con-stitute a blueprint for the advent of a world everyone hopes will be better.

Aware of the complexity of the challenges to meet and of the urgency to act, the heads of state and of government meeting in New York from September 6 to 8, 2000, acknowledged their “collective respon-sibility to uphold the principles of human dignity, equality and equity at the global level” and set out to defend them. They restated their determination “to support all efforts [for the] resolution of disputes by peaceful means and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, . . . respect for hu-man rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for the


11

equal rights of all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion and international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, so-cial, cultural or humanitarian character.” They com-mitted openly to “ensure that globalization becomes apositive force forall theworld’speople . . .”Thiswould be possible “only through broad and sustained efforts to create a shared future, based upon our com-mon humanity in all its diversity.”

The World Summit on Sustainable Development of Johannesburg in 2002 underscored the urgent need to take on the challenges of the twenty-first century in compliance with the fundamental principles of world governance, which were restated in the final declaration of the summit. Seeking the best road to follow for the principles of sustainable development to be respected and their implementation to lead to concrete results, state representatives confirmed dur-ing the summit the considerable progress achieved in the direction of a world consensus and the construc-tion of a partnership among all the populations of the planet. Sustainable development became the com-mon goal of all humankind and everything was to be put to work to achieve it.

The different concepts developed in the texts and at the above-mentioned conferences clearly reveal that the first goal of world governance is to define new relations among human beings, among societies, and between humankind and the biosphere.

Starting from this overall objective, the three main goals that international institutions should adopt as guidelines are:

Establishing the conditions for sustainable development

The first duty of governance is to preserve the long term. The imbalances generated by the cur-rent form of development between humankind and the biosphere have put the lives of our chil-dren and grandchildren at risk.

The first common objective is therefore to change the current development models to make them compatible with the limited resources of the bio-sphere in the long term. Material development must be subordinated to human development. The future of humankind cannot be guaranteed unless concern for the complete development of human beings—spiritual, intellectual, social, ar-tistic, etc.—becomes the primary development criterion.

Reducing inequalitiesSustainable development cannot be achieved by reserving the natural resources of the planet for a small minority that has the economic means to acquire them and the military means to hold onto them. Reducing inequalities is therefore not only a moral duty or an act of compassion; it is also a duty of justice and a condition for long-term peace. Finding ways to conciliate the freedom of all with respect of the dignity of all is the second objective assigned to world governance.

Establishing lasting peace while respecting diversity

Ecological diversity and cultural diversity are not only unbending realities of the current world. Theyconstitutehumankind’smajorwealth.Peacerequires the recognition of a common belonging, the search for a common good, and awareness of unity, from grassroots communities to the entire human family.

At every level of governance, both greater unity and greater diversity must be achieved. It is the ability to not oppose unity and diversity, but to consider them as the two sides of the same coin, that constitutes, from managing a district or a vil-lage to managing the planet, the art of govern-ance. This is the art that world governance needs to practice at the global scale and help to practice at all other levels.

These three objectives, as presented and stated here, are perfectly articulated with the big traditional prin-ciples of world governance: peace, security, democ-racy, freedom, and equity.

We have thus selected, directly in keeping with these major principles, the following domains, the detailed study of which, in the form of sub-indicators and com-posite indexes, make it possible to obtain the WGI:

•PeaceandSecurity

•RuleofLaw

•HumanRightsandParticipation

•SustainableDevelopment

•HumanDevelopment


12

World Governance Index 2011 – version 2.0

Indicator Sub-indicator Index

Peaceand Security

National Security Conflicts

Refugees and Asylum seekers

DisplacedPersons

PublicSecurity PoliticalClimate

Degree of Trust among Citizens

Violent Crime

Homicides per 100,000 inhabitants

RuleofLaw BodyofLaws Ratification of Treaties

PropertyRights

Judicial System Independence

Effectiveness

Settlement of Contractual Disputes

Corruption CorruptionPerceptionindex

Human Rights andParticipation

CivilandPoliticalRights

Respect of Civil Rights

RespectforPhysicalIntegrityRights

FreedomofthePress

ViolenceagainstthePress

Participation ParticipationinPoliticalLife

ElectoralProcessandPluralism

PoliticalCulture

Gender Discrimination / Inequality

Women’sPoliticalRights

Women’sSocialRights

Women’sEconomicRights

RateofRepresentationinNationalParliaments

Sustainable Development

Economic Sector GDPpercapita

GDPgrowthrate

Degree/level of Economic Openness

Cover Rate

Inflation rate

Ease in Starting a Business

Social Dimension GINI Coefficient (poverty and inequality)

Unemployment Rate

RatificationofInternationalLaborRightstexts

Environmental Dimension

Ecological Footprint and Biocapacity

Environmental Sustainability

CO2 Emission Rate per capita

EnvironmentalPerformance

Human Development

Development Human Development

Well-being and Happiness

Subjective Well-being

Happiness

QualityofLife

For each of the five above-mentioned selected fields, a detailed study has been conducted in order to determine the elements that constitute them (sub-indicators) and the data (indexes) that make it possible to produce a WGI. In all, the 2011 WGI – version 2.0 is made up of 5 indicators, 13 sub-indicators and 41 indexes.


Methodology and Calculations

The World Governance Index is a composite index aggregating nearly 8,500 data items taken from the databases or the yearly reports of about thirty differ-ent organizations.

The approach used to calculate the WGI is similar totheoneusedbytheUNDPtoestablishitsHumanDevelopment Index (HDI). For each of the indexes and sub-indicators, all the collected raw data was res-caled into a “closed” scale ranging from 0 to 1 (where 0 represent the worst result and 1 the best possible score).

Every sub-indicator is the mathematical average of the indexes composing it. This also applies to the indicatorsRule of Law,HumanRights andPartici-

pation, Sustainable Development, and Human De-velopment, which are the mathematical average of thesub-indicatorscomposingthem.OnlythePeaceand Security indicator was weighted. It is made up for two-thirds of it by the National Security sub-in-dicatorandforone-thirdofitbythePublicSecuritysub-indicator.

As a final result, the World Governance Index is the mathematical average of the 5 indicators that con-stitute it.

In some very rare cases, absence of data for one or several countries was compensated, as needed, by as-signing to them the reported regional average.

13

14

Part II

Results and Illustrations

T he first of the three tables below presents the WGI ranking for all countries in descending order with for each country its rank in 2008.

The second table presents the ranking in descending order at the regional level. The last table sums up, per country in alphabetical order, the results obtained for every indicator constituting the WGI.

Other tables, world ranking and regional ranking in descending order, for each of the indicators constitut-ing the WGI, are available on the Web site of the Forum for a new World Governance.

For each regional whole, we have also provided two figures illustrating the results obtained by the highest-ranking country and the lowest-ranking country, re-spectively. Their results (red pentagon) can be easily compared with the average world result (green pen-tagon).

Each figure is in the form of a pentagon. Each angle of the pentagon represents one of the five indicators that constitute the WGI. To the right of the figure, thecountry’sWGIisindicatedwitharedpointerandisalsoeasilycomparedwiththeworld’saverageWGI(green pointer).

Fed

eri

ca M

att

a,

Th

e W

orl

d’s

Eye

N°

6,

20

04

(w

ww

.fe

de

rica

ma

tta

.co

m)


15

2011

Ran

king

and

WG

I20

08

Rank

2011

Ran

king

and

WG

I20

08

Rank

2011

Ran

king

and

WG

I20

08

Rank

2011

Ran

king

and

WG

I20

08

Rank

2011

Ran

king

and

WG

I20

08

Rank

2011

Ran

king

and

WG

I20

08

Rank

1N

orw

ay0.

844

331

Mau

riti

us0.

720

2961

El S

alva

dor

0.64

965

91U

krai

ne0.

605

113

121

PapuaNewGuinea

0.56

913

315

1Tu

rkm

enis

tan

0.52

616

0

2Sw

eden

0.84

32

32U

nite

d St

ates

0.72

027

62G

uyan

a0.

648

5792

Bhu

tan

0.60

011

412

2Laos

0.56

813

015

2In

dia

0.52

514

2

3Fi

nlan

d0.

832

433

Lithuania

0.71

444

63Ec

uado

r0.

648

8793

Sene

gal

0.59

911

212

3B

urki

na F

aso

0.56

614

415

3H

aiti

0.52

216

4

4Ic

elan

d0.

830

134

Sout

h K

orea

0.71

440

64M

aced

onia

0.64

673

94Tu

rkey

0.59

910

312

4G

ambi

a0.

566

127

154

Swaz

iland

0.52

015

0

5D

enm

ark

0.82

65

35H

unga

ry0.

703

3965

Mon

tene

gro

0.64

310

495

Om

an0.

598

7812

5C

ambo

dia

0.56

216

615

5Sy

ria

0.51

814

3

6N

ew Z

eala

nd0.

825

836

Slov

akia

0.70

246

66M

exic

o0.

641

5896

Indo

nesi

a0.

596

9612

6B

enin

0.56

112

915

6G

uine

a B

issa

u0.

514

154

7N

ethe

rlan

ds0.

813

737

Poland

0.70

048

67M

alay

sia

0.64

155

97C

uba

0.59

552

127

Mal

i0.

561

115

157

Nig

eria

0.51

216

5

8Sw

itze

rlan

d0.

807

1238

Ital

y0.

699

3868

Sout

h A

frica

0.63

812

498

Alg

eria

0.59

511

912

8Sa

udi A

rabi

a0.

561

138

158

Ivor

y C

oast

0.50

916

3

9A

ustr

alia

0.80

611

39St

Vinc

ent &

Gren

adine

s0.

697

2569

Qat

ar0.

635

8199

Bru

nei

0.59

410

612

9M

adag

asca

r0.

560

101

159

Nig

er0.

508

148

10G

erm

any

0.80

110

40A

rgen

tina

0.69

243

70Paraguay

0.63

380

100

Hon

dura

s0.

594

7613

0SriLanka

0.56

012

516

0Eq

uato

rial G

uine

a0.

506

155

11A

ustr

ia0.

801

641

SaintLucia

0.68

734

71B

oliv

ia0.

632

9510

1G

uate

mal

a0.

594

100

131

Rw

anda

0.55

913

716

1A

ngol

a0.

505

166

12C

anad

a0.

796

1342

Panama

0.68

647

72Se

rbia

0.63

289

102

Kaz

akhs

tan

0.59

399

132Libya

0.55

813

216

2C

amer

oon

0.50

315

3

13Ir

elan

d0.

788

1543

Dom

inic

a0.

686

3673

Dom

inic

an R

ep.

0.63

266

103

East

Tim

or0.

592

157

133

Egyp

t0.

557

120

163

Bur

undi

0.49

616

2

14Luxemburg

0.77

89

44Latvia

0.68

551

74B

otsw

ana

0.62

884

104

Mal

dive

s0.

592

7713

4U

zbek

ista

n0.

557

126

164

Yem

en0.

490

141

15Fr

ance

0.75

821

45G

reec

e0.

679

4175

Mon

golia

0.62

761

105

Tong

a0.

589

9813

5Za

mbi

a0.

556

146

165

Ethi

opia

0.48

615

6

16B

elgi

um0.

758

1446

Cap

e V

erde

0.67

849

76Un

ited A

rab Em

irates

0.62

088

106Philippines

0.58

986

136

Uga

nda

0.55

617

016

6Pakistan

0.48

015

9

17Ja

pan

0.75

222

47G

rena

da0.

678

3577

Mol

davi

a0.

619

9110

7B

elar

us0.

587

121

137

Com

oros

0.55

511

816

7Ir

an0.

472

151

18U

nite

d K

ingd

om0.

750

1848

Bel

ize

0.67

445

78K

uwai

t0.

617

9410

8Ta

jikis

tan

0.58

697

138

Nep

al0.

554

145

168

Cent

ral A

frica

Rep

.0.

467

169

19Sp

ain

0.75

017

49Is

rael

0.67

154

79B

ahra

in0.

617

7510

9Jo

rdan

0.58

510

213

9M

auri

tani

a0.

551

122

169

Eryt

hrea

0.44

716

7

20C

osta

Ric

a0.

749

1950

Cro

atia

0.67

150

80G

hana

0.61

670

110

Mal

awi

0.58

513

614

0C

hina

0.54

910

917

0C

had

0.44

517

1

21Portugal

0.73

830

51C

ypru

s0.

668

2881

Nic

arag

ua0.

616

6411

1G

eorg

ia0.

584

110

141Lebanon

0.54

312

817

1G

aza /

Wes

t Ban

k0.

438

177

22C

zech

Rep

ublic

0.73

631

52B

razi

l0.

662

6982

Suri

nam

0.61

467

112

Arm

enia

0.58

310

514

2Liberia

0.54

216

817

2N

orth

Kor

ea0.

433

173

23M

alta

0.73

620

53Ja

mai

ca0.

662

7183

Tuni

sia

0.61

156

113

Mor

occo

0.58

282

143

Ban

glad

esh

0.54

114

017

3Zi

mba

bwe

0.43

217

2

24U

rugu

ay0.

733

3254

Trin

idad

and

Toba

go0.

660

5984

Fiji

0.60

953

114

Ven

ezue

la0.

578

111

144

Togo

0.53

914

717

4Ir

aq0.

425

178

25C

hile

0.73

324

55Peru

0.65

860

85T

haila

nd0.

609

9211

5A

zerb

aija

n0.

578

131

145

Djib

outi

0.53

615

217

5A

fgha

nist

an0.

424

161

26B

aham

as0.

733

2356

Bul

gari

a0.

658

6286

SãoToméandPríncipe

0.60

972

116

Moz

ambi

que

0.57

811

714

6C

ongo

0.53

613

417

6M

yanm

ar0.

413

174

27B

arba

dos

0.73

116

57A

lban

ia0.

653

7487

Gab

on0.

609

8311

7C

olom

bia

0.57

610

814

7K

enya

0.53

514

917

7Su

dan

0.40

817

5

28Si

ngap

ore

0.72

433

58Se

yche

lles

0.65

337

88Lesotho

0.60

710

711

8Sa

lom

on Is

land

s0.

575

9314

8R

ussi

a0.

534

135

178

DR

C0.

408

176

29Sl

oven

ia0.

723

2659

Rom

ania

0.65

163

89K

irgh

izst

an0.

607

7911

9Ta

nzan

ia0.

572

116

149

Gui

nea

0.53

213

917

9So

mal

ia0.

293

179

30Es

toni

a0.

723

4260

Nam

ibia

0.65

068

90Bo

snia

Her

zego

vina

0.60

690

120

Vie

t Nam

0.57

185

150SierraLeone

0.52

815

8A

VE

RA

GE

0.61

6

2011

WG

I Glo

bal R

anki

ng in

Des

cend

ing

Ord

er (

wit

h ra

nk in

200

8)


16

Afr

ica

EU O

ECD

Lati

n A

mer

ica

and

the

Cari

bbea

nA

sia

Paci

fic

Ara

b S

tate

sCI

S C

entr

al A

sia

Bal

kans

Mau

riti

us0.

720

Nor

way

0.84

4C

osta

Ric

a0.

749

Sing

apor

e0.

724

Qat

ar0.

635

Cro

atia

0.67

1C

ape

Ver

de0.

678

Swed

en0.

843

Uru

guay

0.73

3M

alay

sia

0.64

1U

nite

d A

rab

Emir

ates

0.62

0A

lban

ia0.

653

Seyc

helle

s0.

653

Finl

and

0.83

2C

hile

0.73

3M

ongo

lia0.

627

Kuw

ait

0.61

7M

aced

onia

0.64

6N

amib

ia0.

650

Icel

and

0.83

0B

aham

as0.

733

Fiji

0.60

9B

ahra

in0.

617

Mon

tene

gro

0.64

3So

uth

Afr

ica

0.63

8D

enm

ark

0.82

6B

arba

dos

0.73

1T

haila

nd0.

609

Tuni

sia

0.61

1Se

rbia

0.63

2B

otsw

ana

0.62

8N

ew Z

eala

nd0.

825

St V

ince

nt an

d the

Gre

nadi

nes

0.69

7B

huta

n0.

600

Om

an0.

598

Mol

davi

a0.

619

Gha

na0.

616

Net

herl

ands

0.81

3A

rgen

tina

0.69

2In

done

sia

0.59

6A

lger

ia0.

595

Kir

ghiz

stan

0.60

7SãoToméandPríncipe

0.60

9Sw

itze

rlan

d0.

807SaintLucia

0.68

7B

rune

i0.

594

Jord

an0.

585

Bos

nia

Her

zego

vina

0.60

6G

abon

0.60

9A

ustr

alia

0.80

6Panama

0.68

6Ea

st T

imor

0.59

2M

oroc

co0.

582

Ukr

aine

0.60

5Lesotho

0.60

7G

erm

any

0.80

1D

omin

ica

0.68

6M

aldi

ves

0.59

2Sa

udi A

rabi

a0.

561

Kaz

akhs

tan

0.59

3Se

nega

l0.

599

Aus

tria

0.80

1G

rena

da0.

678

Tong

a0.

589

Libya

0.55

8B

elar

us0.

587

Mal

awi

0.58

5C

anad

a0.

796

Bel

ize

0.67

4Philippines

0.58

9Eg

ypt

0.55

7Ta

jikis

tan

0.58

6M

ozam

biqu

e0.

578

Irel

and

0.78

8B

razi

l0.

662

Salo

mon

Isla

nds

0.57

5Lebanon

0.54

3G

eorg

ia0.

584

Tanz

ania

0.57

2Luxemburg

0.77

8Ja

mai

ca0.

662

Vie

t Nam

0.57

1D

jibou

ti0.

536

Arm

enia

0.58

3B

urki

na F

aso

0.56

6Fr

ance

0.75

8Tr

inid

ad a

nd T

obag

o0.

660

PapuaNewGuinea

0.56

9Sy

ria

0.51

8A

zerb

aija

n0.

578

Gam

bia

0.56

6B

elgi

um0.

758Peru

0.65

8Laos

0.56

8Ye

men

0.49

0U

zbek

ista

n0.

557

Ben

in0.

561

Japa

n0.

752

El S

alva

dor

0.64

9C

ambo

dia

0.56

2G

aza

/ Wes

t Ban

k0.

438

Rus

sia

0.53

4M

ali

0.56

1U

nite

d K

ingd

om0.

750

Guy

ana

0.64

8SriLanka

0.56

0Ir

aq0.

425

Turk

men

ista

n0.

526

Mad

agas

car

0.56

0Sp

ain

0.75

0Ec

uado

r0.

648

Nep

al0.

554

Suda

n0.

408

Rw

anda

0.55

9Portugal

0.73

8Paraguay

0.63

3C

hina

0.54

9So

mal

ia0.

293

Zam

bia

0.55

6C

zech

Rep

ublic

0.73

6B

oliv

ia0.

632

Ban

glad

esh

0.54

1U

gand

a0.

556

Mal

ta0.

736

Dom

inic

an R

epub

lic0.

632

Indi

a0.

525

Com

oros

0.55

5Sl

oven

ia0.

723

Nic

arag

ua0.

616

Pakistan

0.48

0M

auri

tani

a0.

551

Esto

nia

0.72

3Su

rina

m0.

614

Iran

0.47

2Liberia

0.54

2U

nite

d St

ates

0.72

0C

uba

0.59

5N

orth

Kor

ea0.

433

Togo

0.53

9Lithuania

0.71

4H

ondu

ras

0.59

4A

fgha

nist

an0.

424

Con

go0.

536

Sout

h K

orea

0.71

4G

uate

mal

a0.

594

Mya

nmar

0.41

3K

enya

0.53

5H

unga

ry0.

703

Ven

ezue

la0.

578

Gui

nea

0.53

2Sl

ovak

ia0.

702

Col

ombi

a0.

576

SierraLeone

0.52

8Poland

0.70

0H

aiti

0.52

2Sw

azila

nd0.

520

Ital

y0.

699

Gui

nea

Bis

sau

0.51

4Latvia

0.68

5N

iger

ia0.

512

Gre

ece

0.67

9Iv

ory

Coa

st0.

509

Isra

el0.

671

Nig

er0.

508

Cyp

rus

0.66

8Eq

uato

rial

Gui

nea

0.50

6B

ulga

ria

0.65

8A

ngol

a0.

505

Rom

ania

0.65

1C

amer

oon

0.50

3M

exic

o0.

641

Bur

undi

0.49

6Tu

rkey

0.59

9Et

hiop

ia0.

486

Cen

tral

Afr

ica

Rep

ublic

0.46

7Er

ythr

ea0.

447

Cha

d0.

445

Zim

babw

e0.

432

DR

C0.

408

Ave

rage

0.55

1A

vera

ge0.

744

Ave

rage

0.65

5A

vera

ge0.

561

Ave

rage

0.53

9A

vera

ge0.

601

WG

I Reg

iona

l Ran

king

s


17

Recapitulation Table per Country for the Five WGI IndicatorsA

fgha

nist

an0.

617

0.33

40.

350

0.49

60.

324

0.42

4Fr

ance

0.91

00.

784

0.73

50.

598

0.76

50.

758

Nig

eria

0.77

70.

464

0.36

80.

544

0.40

70.

512

Sout

h A

fric

a0.

818

0.60

20.

719

0.51

80.

532

0.63

8G

abon

0.87

60.

449

0.48

30.

664

0.57

10.

609

Nor

way

0.98

50.

828

0.93

60.

666

0.80

60.

844

Alb

ania

0.92

00.

544

0.59

20.

608

0.60

30.

653

Gam

bia

0.91

50.

463

0.45

50.

563

0.43

40.

566

New

Zea

land

0.97

40.

891

0.88

30.

595

0.78

20.

825

Alg

eria

0.86

50.

498

0.44

30.

579

0.58

90.

595

Gaz

a / W

est B

ank

0.76

20.

216

0.38

40.

484

0.34

40.

438

Om

an0.

957

0.53

70.

400

0.49

60.

600

0.59

8G

erm

any

0.94

70.

848

0.80

20.

609

0.80

10.

801

Geo

rgia

0.74

10.

558

0.49

70.

571

0.55

40.

584

Uga

nda

0.79

30.

456

0.57

70.

566

0.38

70.

556

Ang

ola

0.84

30.

284

0.48

00.

561

0.35

80.

505

Gha

na0.

921

0.60

80.

525

0.53

80.

487

0.61

6U

zbek

ista

n0.

866

0.41

00.

375

0.54

00.

593

0.55

7Sa

udi A

rabi

a0.

823

0.47

10.

293

0.50

80.

709

0.56

1G

reec

e0.

908

0.56

60.

664

0.54

50.

712

0.67

9Pakistan

0.70

40.

365

0.34

00.

524

0.46

70.

480

Arg

enti

na0.

887

0.50

30.

734

0.58

90.

749

0.69

2G

rena

da0.

927

0.50

30.

742

0.57

30.

645

0.67

8Panama

0.91

90.

524

0.65

10.

590

0.74

50.

686

Arm

enia

0.86

10.

507

0.43

40.

560

0.55

20.

583

Gua

tem

ala

0.80

10.

435

0.57

90.

506

0.65

00.

594

PapuaNewGuinea

0.89

30.

358

0.53

20.

582

0.48

00.

569

Aus

tral

ia0.

949

0.85

00.

836

0.59

90.

797

0.80

6G

uine

a0.

852

0.41

30.

483

0.56

60.

344

0.53

2Paraguay

0.85

90.

465

0.60

00.

615

0.62

50.

633

Aus

tria

0.94

70.

822

0.82

20.

620

0.79

50.

801

Gui

nea

Bis

sau

0.89

10.

341

0.43

40.

550

0.35

20.

514

Net

herl

ands

0.95

80.

812

0.87

70.

604

0.81

30.

813

Aze

rbai

jan

0.80

30.

489

0.38

90.

639

0.57

10.

578

Equa

tori

al G

uine

a0.

856

0.34

30.

345

0.55

40.

433

0.50

6Peru

0.84

60.

539

0.63

80.

618

0.65

10.

658

Bah

amas

0.90

50.

700

0.74

50.

585

0.72

80.

733

Guy

ana

0.88

80.

481

0.67

50.

582

0.61

70.

648

Philippines

0.79

30.

439

0.49

70.

577

0.63

80.

589

Bah

rain

0.89

40.

576

0.46

30.

478

0.67

50.

617

Hai

ti0.

839

0.34

80.

497

0.47

60.

449

0.52

2Poland

0.95

70.

645

0.65

10.

565

0.68

30.

700

Ban

glad

esh

0.79

40.

359

0.48

20.

562

0.51

00.

541

Hon

dura

s0.

808

0.45

90.

525

0.51

80.

661

0.59

4Portugal

0.94

60.

717

0.76

70.

585

0.67

70.

738

Bar

bado

s0.

913

0.72

80.

697

0.57

80.

738

0.73

1H

unga

ry0.

929

0.67

00.

651

0.58

90.

675

0.70

3Q

atar

0.94

50.

665

0.36

90.

556

0.64

10.

635

Bel

arus

0.87

20.

439

0.50

30.

578

0.54

10.

587

Salo

mon

Isla

nds

0.91

80.

428

0.46

80.

481

0.57

70.

575

DR

C0.

607

0.31

90.

325

0.55

50.

234

0.40

8B

elgi

um0.

869

0.75

70.

813

0.56

80.

782

0.75

8In

dia

0.65

30.

442

0.49

30.

502

0.53

50.

525

Dom

inic

an R

epub

lic0.

838

0.47

40.

574

0.55

70.

716

0.63

2B

eliz

e0.

912

0.53

20.

678

0.56

40.

683

0.67

4In

done

sia

0.80

60.

462

0.53

30.

558

0.62

10.

596

Cze

ch R

epub

lic0.

962

0.65

50.

757

0.59

20.

712

0.73

6B

enin

0.91

30.

409

0.54

70.

536

0.40

20.

561

Iraq

0.54

50.

327

0.41

70.

486

0.35

00.

425

Rom

ania

0.89

90.

582

0.56

90.

564

0.63

90.

651

Bhu

tan

0.68

50.

540

0.56

60.

550

0.66

00.

600

Iran

0.77

40.

374

0.10

40.

507

0.60

00.

472

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom

0.89

60.

804

0.71

60.

584

0.75

30.

750

Bol

ivia

0.86

60.

443

0.64

60.

606

0.60

00.

632

Irel

and

0.98

30.

810

0.76

00.

611

0.77

50.

788

Rus

sia

0.67

50.

448

0.43

10.

575

0.54

10.

534

Bos

nia

Her

zego

vina

0.81

20.

500

0.57

00.

543

0.60

70.

606

Icel

and

0.97

10.

835

0.93

50.

648

0.76

10.

830

Rw

anda

0.84

70.

522

0.50

90.

569

0.35

10.

559

Bot

swan

a0.

895

0.61

20.

640

0.48

70.

506

0.62

8Is

rael

0.78

50.

655

0.60

90.

564

0.74

40.

671

SaintLucia

0.88

50.

642

0.67

10.

552

0.68

60.

687

Bra

zil

0.83

30.

585

0.61

30.

583

0.69

70.

662

Ital

y0.

928

0.54

40.

695

0.57

40.

757

0.69

9SãoToméandPríncipe

0.94

40.

394

0.59

70.

538

0.57

20.

609

Bru

nei

0.93

80.

461

0.34

40.

512

0.71

70.

594

Jam

aica

0.82

50.

567

0.65

60.

539

0.72

20.

662

Sene

gal

0.89

80.

540

0.58

30.

539

0.43

60.

599

Bul

gari

a0.

935

0.54

90.

639

0.56

80.

599

0.65

8Ja

pan

0.94

90.

797

0.70

10.

579

0.73

70.

752

Serb

ia0.

774

0.55

30.

650

0.56

30.

618

0.63

2B

urki

na F

aso

0.89

70.

514

0.52

80.

594

0.29

70.

566

Jord

an0.

862

0.53

90.

388

0.53

00.

606

0.58

5Se

yche

lles

0.91

70.

569

0.58

30.

625

0.57

00.

653

Bur

undi

0.74

20.

363

0.57

50.

571

0.22

90.

496

Kaz

akhs

tan

0.88

70.

507

0.39

00.

592

0.58

80.

593

SierraLeone

0.88

40.

419

0.51

60.

516

0.30

50.

528

Cam

bodi

a0.

856

0.43

00.

502

0.53

60.

484

0.56

2K

enya

0.79

50.

436

0.47

40.

536

0.43

50.

535

Sing

apor

e0.

959

0.75

50.

577

0.59

20.

738

0.72

4C

amer

oon

0.85

00.

343

0.36

50.

553

0.40

20.

503

Kir

ghiz

stan

0.90

60.

455

0.53

50.

556

0.58

50.

607

Slov

akia

0.93

80.

639

0.64

20.

614

0.67

60.

702

Can

ada

0.94

70.

813

0.85

20.

583

0.78

40.

796

Kuw

ait

0.93

30.

571

0.39

90.

543

0.64

10.

617

Slov

enia

0.97

10.

656

0.66

60.

595

0.72

80.

723

Cap

e V

erde

0.91

70.

653

0.73

50.

546

0.54

00.

678

Laos

0.89

70.

422

0.46

30.

542

0.51

50.

568

Som

alia

0.41

90.

224

0.13

00.

421

0.27

20.

293

Cen

tral A

frica

Rep

ublic

0.69

90.

351

0.38

80.

589

0.30

80.

467

Lesotho

0.86

40.

564

0.67

70.

568

0.36

50.

607

Suda

n0.

566

0.33

70.

340

0.50

10.

297

0.40

8C

hile

0.89

70.

803

0.66

50.

583

0.71

50.

733

Latvia

0.92

70.

637

0.65

20.

599

0.61

20.

685

SriLanka

0.71

30.

443

0.44

40.

570

0.62

80.

560

Chi

na0.

791

0.49

20.

287

0.52

90.

644

0.54

9Lebanon

0.73

60.

410

0.50

50.

533

0.53

20.

543

St V

ince

nt a

nd th

e G

rena

dine

s0.

855

0.76

90.

742

0.58

30.

536

0.69

7C

ypru

s0.

680

0.71

40.

671

0.55

00.

726

0.66

8Liberia

0.85

20.

359

0.63

40.

583

0.28

00.

542

Swed

en0.

951

0.86

40.

937

0.66

40.

800

0.84

3C

olom

bia

0.60

00.

479

0.47

70.

597

0.72

50.

576

Libya

0.89

20.

357

0.37

00.

559

0.61

10.

558

Swit

zerl

and

0.95

40.

810

0.79

80.

645

0.82

70.

807

Com

oros

0.87

60.

400

0.44

50.

555

0.49

80.

555

Lithuania

0.95

80.

690

0.69

60.

592

0.63

60.

714

Suri

nam

0.90

90.

404

0.61

90.

473

0.66

80.

614

Con

go0.

850

0.32

50.

433

0.62

10.

452

0.53

6Luxemburg

0.95

10.

802

0.81

80.

583

0.73

70.

778

Swaz

iland

0.82

20.

433

0.40

90.

552

0.38

30.

520

Nor

th K

orea

0.80

10.

321

0.25

10.

367

0.42

60.

433

Mac

edon

ia0.

895

0.56

30.

667

0.53

10.

574

0.64

6Sy

ria

0.81

60.

399

0.28

40.

544

0.54

70.

518

Sout

h K

orea

0.93

90.

698

0.68

70.

525

0.72

10.

714

Mad

agas

car

0.88

90.

413

0.48

60.

573

0.43

70.

560

Tajik

ista

n0.

897

0.44

80.

459

0.55

00.

578

0.58

6C

osta

Ric

a0.

913

0.63

30.

811

0.59

40.

792

0.74

9M

alay

sia

0.88

90.

508

0.53

00.

562

0.71

50.

641

Tanz

ania

0.89

10.

458

0.59

20.

554

0.36

60.

572

Ivor

y C

oast

0.82

80.

412

0.40

90.

545

0.35

10.

509

Mal

awi

0.87

50.

543

0.54

10.

582

0.38

40.

585

Cha

d0.

732

0.31

40.

301

0.57

40.

302

0.44

5C

roat

ia0.

916

0.57

00.

612

0.57

90.

679

0.67

1M

aldi

ves

0.90

30.

452

0.46

80.

521

0.61

30.

592

Tha

iland

0.80

90.

520

0.52

90.

563

0.62

60.

609

Cub

a0.

880

0.36

60.

509

0.54

60.

677

0.59

5M

ali

0.88

10.

460

0.58

10.

550

0.33

40.

561

East

Tim

or0.

866

0.35

20.

694

0.52

60.

524

0.59

2D

enm

ark

0.95

70.

856

0.92

10.

616

0.77

90.

826

Mal

ta0.

952

0.68

10.

715

0.55

70.

773

0.73

6To

go0.

882

0.41

60.

476

0.54

70.

372

0.53

9D

jibou

ti0.

916

0.35

70.

463

0.55

40.

392

0.53

6M

oroc

co0.

865

0.50

80.

418

0.54

80.

570

0.58

2To

nga

0.90

20.

440

0.41

90.

521

0.66

50.

589

Dom

inic

a0.

867

0.60

90.

653

0.58

10.

718

0.68

6M

auri

tius

0.96

30.

632

0.70

80.

584

0.71

20.

720

Trin

idad

and

Tob

ago

0.85

60.

477

0.74

10.

534

0.69

40.

660

Egyp

t0.

840

0.49

70.

326

0.54

70.

575

0.55

7M

auri

tani

a0.

830

0.45

20.

500

0.55

00.

426

0.55

1Tu

nisi

a0.

905

0.54

50.

392

0.56

00.

654

0.61

1El

Sal

vado

r0.

831

0.56

60.

619

0.56

00.

668

0.64

9M

exic

o0.

794

0.58

10.

563

0.54

40.

723

0.64

1Tu

rkm

enis

tan

0.90

70.

376

0.34

70.

536

0.46

40.

526

Uni

ted

Ara

b Em

irate

s0.

940

0.54

00.

459

0.49

80.

665

0.62

0M

olda

via

0.87

30.

539

0.58

70.

556

0.54

10.

619

Turk

ey0.

795

0.59

50.

460

0.55

70.

586

0.59

9Ec

uado

r0.

878

0.48

90.

643

0.57

30.

657

0.64

8M

ongo

lia0.

895

0.53

60.

562

0.56

40.

576

0.62

7U

krai

ne0.

886

0.51

40.

523

0.56

20.

538

0.60

5Er

ythr

ea0.

778

0.30

60.

278

0.49

70.

378

0.44

7M

onte

negr

o0.

913

0.52

20.

617

0.54

80.

612

0.64

3U

rugu

ay0.

949

0.72

50.

720

0.59

90.

671

0.73

3Sp

ain

0.87

80.

741

0.80

00.

569

0.76

10.

750

Moz

ambi

que

0.90

30.

449

0.62

50.

589

0.32

30.

578

Ven

ezue

la0.

798

0.34

50.

542

0.52

00.

687

0.57

8Es

toni

a0.

924

0.74

10.

741

0.58

90.

619

0.72

3M

yanm

ar0.

704

0.29

70.

129

0.48

00.

455

0.41

3V

iet N

am0.

882

0.42

00.

390

0.54

90.

613

0.57

1U

nite

d St

ates

0.85

60.

729

0.76

90.

483

0.76

20.

720

Nam

ibia

0.91

20.

618

0.66

90.

520

0.53

30.

650

Yem

en0.

787

0.39

20.

272

0.53

50.

466

0.49

0Et

hiop

ia0.

765

0.40

90.

348

0.57

90.

328

0.48

6N

epal

0.80

40.

438

0.53

00.

517

0.48

00.

554

Zam

bia

0.90

20.

466

0.51

50.

521

0.37

80.

556

Fiji

0.91

10.

505

0.42

10.

563

0.64

70.

609

Nic

arag

ua0.

863

0.49

50.

605

0.50

50.

611

0.61

6Zi

mba

bwe

0.71

00.

366

0.38

40.

551

0.15

10.

432

Finl

and

0.96

50.

866

0.89

10.

641

0.79

70.

832

Nig

er0.

820

0.41

90.

477

0.54

20.

281

0.50

8A

vera

ges

0.85

90.

528

0.55

70.

558

0.57

70.

616

Peace and

SecurityRule

of Law

Human Rights

Sustainable

Development Human

Development WGI

Peace and

SecurityRule

of Law

Human Rights

Sustainable

Development Human

Development WGI

Peace and

SecurityRule

of Law

Human Rights

Sustainable

Development Human

DevelopmentWGI


18

Patrick Cabin, The Queue, 2007 © ADAGP, Banque d’images, Paris 2011


19

EU / OECD Figures


20

Latin America / The Caribbean Figures


21

Africa Figures


22

Asia Pacific Figures


23

CIS / Central Asia / Balkans Figures


24

Arab States Figures


25

CONCLUSION

O ne of the perverse effects of indicators is that often their purpose is eclipsed by a final ranking that for some can become obsessive,

whereas for others, it seems to have no value. The point is not, once this survey is completed, to use the results to hand out good or bad points. It is in fact essential to look beyond the rankings shown in these different tables. What is most important is to show the state of world governance through the selected survey criteria as well through the indicators, the sub-indicators, and indexes that constitute them.

This survey does not claim to be exhaustive. Our choices led to selecting only five areas of survey and to limiting their field of application to nation-states as players. Nation-states constitute a legal framework and a form of political and social organization inher-

ited from a history and culture sometimes thousands of years old. It is hence in this capacity that they are among the most important players in world govern-ance, and it is for this reason that the result of the present survey provides a good indication of the cur-rent state of world governance.

A number of other players will have to be taken into consideration in the future. Identifying these players is not a problem in itself: they are Intergovernmen-tal Organizations (IGOs), NGOs and enterprises of global dimension. A more delicate aspect will be to determine what criteria to use. From the simple point of view of nation-states, it is relatively easy to define a number of general criteria common to all nation-states. Given their general and common character, there is plenty of easily exploitable data.

Vassily Kandinsky, The Fat and the Thin © ADAGP/BPK, Berlin, Dist.RMN/ image BStGS


26

The challenge will be different when it comes to oth-er players. In France, the recent and significant mal-functioning of a French NGO accused of trafficking children early in 2008, amply conveyed by the me-dia, has contributed to rekindling the debate on the governance of non-state actors. It is therefore natural to raise the question of governance within this fuzzy mass of organizations.

In the same way that the five indicators of this survey make it possible to assess the performance of nation-states in the area of governance, other indicators should be able to make it possible to evaluate the impact of IGOs, NGOs and enterprises of global di-mension. Evaluating the “responsibility and account-ability” of these players should not stop at theory. The idea is to assess the way in which these players com-mit to factoring theirbeneficiaries’needs into theirdecisions, and the way in which they fulfill this com-mitment.

As long as we are not able to find the ways and the means to implement general and enlightened partici-pation of the beneficiaries of their actions, any an-swertotheworld’schallengesisboundtofail.

The ultimate goal of the WGI is therefore part of a long-term process. On the basis of the situation it de-scribes and of its diagnosis, it must enable actors in charge of governance to raise the right questions in order to consider solutions. In the end, it is about giv-ing body to a world governance that can address the world’schallengesintheyearstocome.

The team that has worked on this WGI hopes to have made a modest contribution to a better perception of world governance. In its current version, the WGI is certainly not perfect. All the same, it has the virtue of existing. The remarks that it will call forth, the questions that it will raise, the suggestions that it will inspire are all obviously welcome.

You are free:

to Share – to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work

to Remix – to make derivative works

Under the following conditions:

Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).

Noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes.

Si Share Alike. If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.

• For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work.

• Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.

• Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author’s moral rights.

This is a human-readable summary of the Legal Code. See the full license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/fr/legalcode.

COPYRIGHT APPENDIX


28

After the 1648 Westphalian revolution that placed the modern state at the heart of international relations and planted the first seeds of international law, contemporary times have witnessed the emergence of a form of world governance that transcends the state and is putting other players on stage: NGOs, corporations, and civil society. It has now become vital, no longer to secure bal-ance of power by reaching a compromise among different national interests, but to manage the planet collectively, including in its environmental dimension.

This evolution, both rapid and chaotic—a passing of the baton, asitwere,fromyesterday’sconventionalinternationalrelationstotomorrow’sworldgovernance—iscomplicatedtoperceiveandtograsp. The World Governance Index (WGI) constitutes a first at-tempt to measure these transformations. It is intended first to offer a clearer view of the changes taking place, but it is also designed as a reliable tool to help define the better course for tomorrow and to provide a greater understanding of what “world governance” is.Likeanyindex,theWGIisnotperfectgiventhatitreliesonavailable data, most of which is provided by states. Nonetheless, the WGI and its various constituent indicators open an interesting window on the new world that is coming into view in a thick fog of uncertainty.

The World Governance Index was designed and developed by a Forum for a new World Governance research team directed by Renaud François and advised by Gustavo Marin and Arnaud Blin.

This Proposals Paper is published with the support of the Charles Léopold Mayer Foundation

WGI World Governance Index

www.world-governance.org

Pr

op

os

al

Pa

pe

rs

Ser

ies

WGI World Governance Index · 2016. 8. 24. · World Governance Index 6 foundations of governance.1 These proposals are derived from the big principles of governance set out in the

Documents