The Sustainable Governance Indicators (SGI), first published in spring 2009 and updated in 2011, analyze and compare the need for reform in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member countries, as well as each country's ability to respond to current social and political challenges. The project is designed to create a comprehensive data pool on government-related activities in the countries considered the world's most developed free-marketdemocracies. In addition, it uses international comparisons to provide evidence-based input for reform-related public discourse taking place in these countries. The SGI are updated every two or three years.[1]
The Bertelsmann Foundation is an operational think tank that encourages social change and aims to foster sustainability by identifying nascent challenges early on and by developing strategies to face these issues.[2]
Method
Three scholars with established country expertise are involved in the analysis of each OECD state under review. In an attempt to identify and reduce subjective bias, the SGI project selects experts representing both domestic and external views as well as the viewpoints of political scientists and economists. Comparative political scientists with area expertise then integrate the two expert reports into a single country report, and select information according to certain validity and objectivity criteria.
SGI and the Transformation Index
The SGI concept is inspired by the Bertelsmann Foundation’s Transformation Index (BTI).[3] The Transformation Index focuses on 128 countries—all of which are transitioning to a market-based democracy or potentially headed in that direction—and assesses the extent to which political management fulfils criteria regarding sustainability, democracy founded on the rule of law, social integration and welfare. Since 2002, the BTI has been documenting the progress 128 transformation countries have been making toward democracy and a market economy.[4] Using a similar approach to BTI, the SGI evaluate the extent to which OECD member states are in a position, given changing domestic and international conditions, to implement the reforms necessary for ensuring their future viability. By measuring the need for reform along with the effectiveness of existing initiatives, the SGI aims to identify the best policy solutions for promoting democracy and a market economy.
Infrastructure of the SGI
The need for reform within a country is analyzed in the Sustainable Governance Indicators in the Status Index, while the capacity for reform is analyzed in the Management Index.
Status Index
Construction of the SGI Status Index
Status Index scores are composite measures, based on numerous quantitative and qualitative assessments. The democracy category counts for half of the index score, while the four policy-specific categories collectively provide the remainder.
The Status Index analyzes the need for reform through two principle dimensions:
The first dimension of the Status Index maps the quality of democracy within a country and examines four criteria: "Electoral Process," "Access to Information," "Civil Rights," and "Rule of Law."
The second dimension of the Status Index corresponds to the OECD states' competencies in policy fields that are highly relevant for future viability. The index examines fields such as "Economy and Employment," "Social Affairs," "Security," and "Resources," which include 15 different policy areas.[5]
Management Index
Construction of the SGI Management Index
Management Index scores are composite measures, based on numerous quantitative and qualitative assessments. The three categories "Steering Capability," "Policy Implementation" and "Institutional Learning" collectively count for half of the index score, while the Executive Accountability dimension provides the remaining half. The Management Index considers, in relative terms, how capable governments and societies are of effective reform.
The Management Index examines government performance and analyzes a country's reform capacity through two dimensions:
The first dimension, Executive Capacity, measures the strategic steering and problem solving capabilities of the respective OECD states. Thus, Executive Capacity analyzes a government's organizational structures and processes. The main analytical categories used were "Steering Capability," "Policy Implementation" and "Institutional Learning."
The second dimension, Executive Accountability, looks at how the government interacts with external state and non-state actors (Citizens, parliaments, political parties, trade associations and media) and measures to what extent these actors positively influence the executive branch.[6]
Results
Status Index 2011
Status Index results 2011; results displayed on a scale from 1 (worst) to 10 (best)
Score < 4
Score > 4
Score > 5
Score > 6
Score > 7
Score > 8
The top rankings of the Status Index are dominated by northern European countries. At the same time, the leading group also includes New Zealand, with its British heritage, and continental European Switzerland, two nations with different political and state welfare traditions.
The group of mid-range scorers (Canada, Australia, Germany, Iceland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, United States, Ireland, United Kingdom, Belgium, Austria, Czech Republic, France, Portugal, Japan, Chile, Spain, and Poland) and the lowest-ranking group (South Korea, Italy, Slovakia, Mexico, Greece, and Turkey) are geographically and culturally just as heterogeneous as the top group. Standard typologies in comparative political science are insufficient to explain the Status Index ranking of the OECD nations. For example, majoritarian democracies do not systematically score better or worse than consensus democracies. Classifying the countries as federalist and centralist states also fails to help explain the differences in reform capacity. The top group includes, above all, social democraticwelfare states such as the Scandinavian countries. However, liberal welfare states also achieve high scores, with New Zealand, Switzerland and Canada in the upper mid-range. In general, the findings of the Status Index reveal higher scores among long-term, established OECD members – although there are exceptions: Chile, a new member, places in the lower midrange, while Italy and Greece rank significantly lower than some Eastern European countries. This suggests that the smaller, more open national economies tend to pursue especially sustainable policies.
Management Index 2011
Management Index results 2011; results displayed on a scale from 1 (worst) to 10 (best)
Score < 4
Score > 4
Score > 5
Score > 6
Score > 7
Score > 8
At the highest level of aggregation in the Management Index, the overview provides important initial indications of which countries exhibit the best performance of governance overall and which countries show deficiencies. Background information in greater depth on the performance of a given country can be found in the country reports on the SGI website.[7] These include substantiated, qualitative information right down to the level of individual indicators.
The SGI Management Indicators are clearly led by Sweden and Norway, each with average scores exceeded 8 points. Next come Denmark, Finland, New Zealand and Australia. While the overall ranking of northern European countries is again outstanding, as observed in the Status Index, this sequence also underscores the fact that no particular system type is favored in the Management Index. This top group is followed by a broad mid-range in which the changes in index scores are incremental, leaving no discernible clusters. Clearly bringing up the rear of the survey are Greece and Slovakia. Both countries trail Italy, which is 29th in the ranking, by nearly an entire point. The new OECD member Chile stands out positively, already scoring higher than some established, longstanding OECD states.
Summary of results
The central finding of the SGI is that the quality of governance is most important in ensuring sustainable policy outcomes. Countries with "good executive management performance, a sound democratic order and an effective inclusion of societal actors into policymaking processes are more successful in terms of sustainability and also in terms of social justice."[8]
A failed state is a state that has lost its ability to fulfill fundamental security and development functions, lacking effective control over its territory and borders. Common characteristics of a failed state include a government incapable of tax collection, law enforcement, security assurance, territorial control, political or civil office staffing, and infrastructure maintenance. When this happens, widespread corruption and criminality, the intervention of state and non-state actors, the appearance of refugees and the involuntary movement of populations, sharp economic decline, and military intervention from both within and without the state are much more likely to occur.
Governance is the process of making and enforcing decisions within an organization or society. It encompasses decision-making, rule-setting, and enforcement mechanisms to guide the functioning of an organization or society. Effective governance is essential for maintaining order, achieving objectives, and addressing the needs of the community or members within the organization. Furthermore, effective governance promotes transparency, fosters trust among stakeholders, and adapts to changing circumstances, ensuring the organization or society remains responsive and resilient in achieving its goals. It is the process of interactions through the laws, social norms, power or language as structured in communication of an organized society over a social system. It is done by the government of a state, by a market, or by a network. It is the process of choosing the right course among the actors involved in a collective problem that leads to the creation, reinforcement, or reproduction of acceptable conduct and social order". In lay terms, it could be described as the processes that exist in and between formal institutions.
Gross National Happiness, sometimes called Gross Domestic Happiness (GDH), is a philosophy that guides the government of Bhutan. It includes an index which is used to measure the collective happiness and well-being of a population. Gross National Happiness Index is instituted as the goal of the government of Bhutan in the Constitution of Bhutan, enacted on 18 July 2008.
Capacity building is the improvement in an individual's or organization's facility "to produce, perform or deploy". The terms capacity building and capacity development have often been used interchangeably, although a publication by OECD-DAC stated in 2006 that capacity development was the preferable term. Since the 1950s, international organizations, governments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and communities use the concept of capacity building as part of "social and economic development" in national and subnational plans. The United Nations Development Programme defines itself by "capacity development" in the sense of "'how UNDP works" to fulfill its mission. The UN system applies it in almost every sector, including several of the Sustainable Development Goals to be achieved by 2030. For example, the Sustainable Development Goal 17 advocates for enhanced international support for capacity building in developing countries to support national plans to implement the 2030 Agenda.
Aart Jan de Geus is a retired Dutch politician of the Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA) party and businessman. He served as Minister of Labor and Social Affairs from 2002 to 2007. Then he worked as Deputy Secretary-General for the OECD. From 2012 to 2019, De Geus was Chairman and CEO of the Bertelsmann Stiftung. Since January 2020, he has been Chairman of the Goldschmeding Foundation.
The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance is an intergovernmental organization that works to support and strengthen democratic institutions and processes around the world, to develop sustainable, effective and legitimate democracies. It has regional offices in Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia and the Pacific, Africa and West Asia, and North America. The organization is headquartered in Stockholm, Sweden.
The Bertelsmann Stiftung is an independent foundation under private law, based in Gütersloh, Germany. It was founded in 1977 by Reinhard Mohn as the result of social, corporate and fiscal considerations. As the Bertelsmann Stiftung itself has put it, the foundation promotes "reform processes" and "the principles of entrepreneurial activity" to build a "future-oriented society."
The Fragile States Index is an annual report mainly published and supported by the United States think tank the Fund for Peace. The FSI is also published by the American magazine Foreign Policy from 2005 to 2018, then by The New Humanitarian since 2019. The list aims to assess states' vulnerability to conflict or collapse, ranking all sovereign states with membership in the United Nations where there is enough data available for analysis. Taiwan, Northern Cyprus, Kosovo and Western Sahara are not ranked, despite being recognized as sovereign by one or more other nations. The Palestinian Territories were ranked together with Israel until 2021. Ranking is based on the sum of scores for 12 indicators. Each indicator is scored on a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 being the lowest intensity and 10 being the highest intensity, creating a scale spanning 0−120.
The Legatum Prosperity Index is an annual ranking developed by the Legatum Institute, an independent educational charity founded and part-funded by the private investment firm Legatum. The ranking is based on a variety of factors including wealth, economic growth, education, health, personal well-being, and quality of life.
The Ibrahim Index of African Governance (IIAG), established in 2007, provides an assessment of the quality of governance in African countries. The IIAG is compiled by 81 indicators and 265 variables from 54 data projects, coming from 47 independent African and international data sources. Published every two years, the IIAG is one of the world’s most comprehensive collections of data on African governance.
The Democracy Ranking is an index compiled by the Association for Development and Advancement of the Democracy Award, an Austria-based non-partisan organization. Democracy Ranking produces an annual global ranking of liberal democracies. The applied conceptual formula, which measures the quality of democracy, integrates democracy and other characteristics of the political system with the performance of non-political dimensions. Democracy Ranking has emphasized a broader understanding of democracy, creating a conceptual link between politics and the output and performance of society. The Democracy Ranking has compared several-year intervals, delivering ranking results, which show how ranking positions and score levels have developed recently. Referring to that information, a Democracy Improvement Ranking has been regularly released.
Canada ranks among the highest in international measurements of government transparency, civil liberties, quality of life, economic freedom, education levels, gender equality, public services, public security and environmental sustainability. It ranks among the lowest of the most developed countries for housing affordability, healthcare services and foreign direct investment.
The development of the European Lifelong Learning Indicators (ELLI) is an initiative of the non-profit Bertelsmann Stiftung to monitor the state of lifelong learning in Europe. The main focus of the ELLI project is the ELLI Index. The ELLI index is an annually updated composite indicator summarizing the state of lifelong learning for European countries. The ELLI IT platform is an online portal that provides access to regional data related to learning and socio-economic outcomes in Europe.
The Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) is a project that reports both aggregate and individual governance indicators for over 200 countries and territories covering the period from 1996 to 2021. It considers six dimensions of governance:
The OECD Better Life Index, created in May 2011 by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, is an initiative pioneering the development of economic indicators which better capture multiple dimensions of economic and social progress.
The International Non-Profit Credit Rating Agency was a project to reform the assessment of states' creditworthiness. It was intended to serve as a non-profit alternative to the commercially oriented rating agencies. To improve the quality of the ratings, socio-economic indicators were taken into account in addition to macroeconomic factors. INCRA was presented in 2012 by the Bertelsmann Foundation and the Bertelsmann Stiftung.
Julio Cabral Teehankee is a Filipino political scientist. He is Full Professor of Political Science and International Studies at De La Salle University (DLSU) where he served as Chair of the Political Science Department (1994–2007); Chair of the International Studies Department (2008–2013); and Dean of the College of Liberal Arts (2013–2017).
Government competitiveness is a state capacity concept created by Tobin Im, a scholar of public administration and a professor at the Graduate School of Public Administration at Seoul National University. Since 2011, Center for Government Competitiveness (CGC) at Seoul National University has developed the Government Competitiveness (GC) index which evaluates government achievements in the various fields and furthermore provides policy recommendations to increase competitiveness of government in the future.
The Bertelsmann Transformation Index (BTI) is a measure of the development status and governance of political and economic transformation processes in developing and transition countries around the world. The BTI has been published biennially by the Bertelsmann Stiftung since 2005, most recently in 2022 on 137 countries. The index measures and compares the quality of government action in a ranking list based on self-recorded data and analyzes successes and setbacks on the path to constitutional democracy and a market economy accompanied by sociopolitical support. For this purpose, the "Status Index" is calculated on the general level of development with regard to democratic and market-economy characteristics and the "Management Index" on the political management of decision-makers.
Democracy indices are quantitative and comparative assessments of the state of democracy for different countries according to various definitions of democracy.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
