The average for 2023 based on 193 countries was -0.07 points. The highest value was in Liechtenstein: 1.61 points and the lowest value was in Syria: -2.75 points. The indicator is available from 1996 to 2023. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

The British Crown Dependency of Jersey was ranked as the most politically stable country worldwide in 2023, ahead of the Cayman Islands and Liechtenstein. The Caribbean Islands are known for their favorable conditions for large international companies and wealthy individuals, with no income and fortune tax. Lowest stability in Syria On the other end of the scale, Syria had the lowest political stability. The Middle Eastern-country suffered from a civil war between 2012 and 2024, with the Syrian government battling a range of military groups, including the terrorist organization Islamic State. Fragile State Index Another way of measuring political stability is the Fragile States Index, compiled annually by the Fund for Peace. In 2024, Somalia was ranked as the most fragile state ahead of Sudan. The index measures state fragility on a range of economic, social, and political indicators.

The average for 2023 based on 20 countries was -0.17 points. The highest value was in Costa Rica: 0.98 points and the lowest value was in Haiti: -1.43 points. The indicator is available from 1996 to 2023. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

In 2024, Norway was considered the world's least fragile state with an index score of **** on a scale from zero to ***, where a higher score suggests the state is more fragile. Finland was ranked as the second most stable country globally, followed by Iceland. Meanwhile, Somalia was ranked as the most fragile state. The Fragile States Index assigns each country a score based on a range of social, economic, and political indicators.

The average for 2023 based on 24 countries was 0.47 points. The highest value was in Aruba: 1.43 points and the lowest value was in Haiti: -1.43 points. The indicator is available from 1996 to 2023. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

Political stability in North Africa remains a significant challenge, with all countries in the region recording negative index values in the political stability and absence of violence/terrorism index. As of 2023, Sudan recorded the lowest stability score in the region at -2.47. The country has seen a sharp and sustained decline in stability since 2020. This was in the aftermath of the 2019 protests, which led to the ousting of President Omar al-Bashir. The political situation worsened further in April 2023 as a result of the conflict between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), triggering widespread displacement and insecurity. Corruption, repression, and media control A lack of political freedoms and press freedom plays a significant role in shaping perceptions of instability. According to the World Press Freedom Index in 2024, countries like Egypt and Algeria fall into the categories of a “very serious” or “difficult” situation for media freedom, scoring 25.1 and 41.98 out of 100, respectively. Even relatively higher scorers such as Tunisia and Morocco remain in the “difficult” range. Limited press freedom and government control over information reduce transparency and restrict public oversight. This environment facilitates systemic corruption, as independent media are unable to investigate or report on abuses of power. Repressive state measures, including censorship and legal threats against journalists, further undermine institutional checks and balances. Combined with weak governance and the influence of organized crime, these dynamics contribute to persistent political instability across the region. Organized criminal networks The consequences of restricted transparency are reflected in high levels of perceived corruption and deeply embedded criminal networks. According to the 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index, Libya scored just 13 out of 100, while Egypt, Algeria, Morocco, and Tunisia all scored below 40, indicating high public concern about government corruption. These concerns align with findings from the ENACT Organized Crime Index, which highlights the dominance of state-embedded actors and criminal networks in the region. With scores of 7.67 and 5.67 respectively, the data suggests that criminal activities are often closely tied to political and institutional power structures. This interconnection between corrupt governance and organized crime further erodes public trust and reinforces the perception, and reality, of chronic instability across North Africa.

Syria, with a score of minus 2.75, was ranked as the politically least stable country worldwide in 2023 ahead of Iraq and Somalia. The country has been riddled by civil war since 2012, with the Syrian government battling a range of different factions. Syrian Civil War has resulted in large number of refugees The ongoing fighting and resulting instability in Syria has led to 6.2 million people fleeing the country, making it the largest source country of refugees worldwide. Over half of the Syrian refugees today live in neighboring Turkey. Fragile State Index Another way of measuring political stability is the Fragile States Index compiled annually by the Fund for Peace. In 2024, Somalia was ranked as the most fragile state ahead of Sudan. The index measures state fragility on a range of economic, social, and political indicators.

The average for 2023 based on 11 countries was -0.02 points. The highest value was in Singapore: 1.42 points and the lowest value was in Burma (Myanmar): -2.13 points. The indicator is available from 1996 to 2023. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

Country Risk Assessment helps businesses to confidently evaluate global markets by incorporating country evaluation into strategic planning. Analysing trends over time to forecast and proactively plan for potential market shifts.

Country Risk Assessment is an estimate of the average credit risk of a country’s businesses. It is drawn up based on macroeconomic, financial and political data. It offers: - An indication of a country’s potential influence on businesses’ financial commitments. - Insight into the economic and political environment that could impact credit risk.

Dataset Structure and Content: Assessment Coverage: 20 sample companies with country risk evaluations Geographic Diversity: Multiple countries represented via ISO-3166 alpha2 country codes.

Risk Classification System: The dataset employs a standardized A-E rating scale to categorize country risk levels: A1: Very good macroeconomic outlook with stable political context and quality business climate (lowest default probability) A2: Good macroeconomic outlook with generally stable political environment A3: Satisfactory outlook with some potential shortcomings A4: Reasonable default probability with potential economic weaknesses B: Uncertain economic outlook with potential political tensions C: Very uncertain outlook with potential political instability D: Highly uncertain outlook with very unstable political context E: Extremely uncertain outlook with extremely difficult business conditions (highest default probability)

Application Context: This sample demonstrates how country risk assessments can be systematically documented and tracked over time. Each assessment includes comprehensive evaluations of the macroeconomic environment, political stability, and business climate factors that directly influence payment behavior and default probabilities. The dataset structure allows for both current and historical tracking, enabling trend analysis and comparative risk evaluation across different national markets. It serves as a representative example of how comprehensive country risk data can be organized and utilized for strategic business decision-making. Note: This is sample data intended to demonstrate the structure and capabilities of a country risk assessment system.

Learn More For a complete demonstration of our Country Risk Assessment capabilities or to discuss how our system can be integrated with your existing processes, please visit https://business-information.coface.com/economic-insights to request additional information.

According to the 2023 Infrastructure Index, ********* had the best overall political stability of the 40 countries ranked in the index. The three Nordic countries *************************** followed behind. The index ranks the attractiveness in countries based on nine different criteria, including economic status, political stability, and private participation. Germany topped the index in 2023.

The average for 2023 based on 47 countries was -0.66 points. The highest value was in Botswana: 1.04 points and the lowest value was in Mali: -2.73 points. The indicator is available from 1996 to 2023. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

Iceland was the most peaceful country in the world in 2025 with an index value of 1.1. Ireland, New Zealand, and Austria followed behind.What is the Global Peace Index? The Global Peace Index is an effort by the Institute for Economics and Peace to measure the degree of peacefulness in countries across the world and rank them accordingly. The first list was created in 2007 and has since then been published annually. The index includes a number of indicators relating to both domestic and international peacefulness. International indicators In regards to international affairs the majority of indicators relate to involvement in military conflict or the efforts of the state in question to resolve conflict and ensure the safety of those affected. For example those states that give more financial support to UN peacekeeping missions are considered to be more peaceful while those who have a higher military expenditure as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) are considered to be less peaceful. The United States never reached the top 20 of the list, in part due to it having a high level of military spending as a percentage of GDP. Domestic factors Domestic indicators focus on both the amount of violence and crime in addition to incarceration rates. Again, the United States fails to reach levels akin to other countries. The country’s incarceration rates are significantly higher than in other OEDC countries. Moreover, the number of deaths from gun violence also contributes to the relatively low peacefulness ranking of the United States.

Annual ranking of countries based on crime rates, political stability, health safety, and environmental safety

Context

This dataset compiles valuable information on how different countries worldwide rank concerning conditions and opportunities for women. It aims to shed light on the status of women's rights and gender equality across the globe, making it a valuable resource for researchers, policymakers, and organizations advocating for gender equality.

Content

This dataset contains three main columns:

1.**Rank:** This column provides the ranking of countries based on their performance or score in terms of conditions and opportunities for women. Rankings range from 1 (indicating the best country for women) to the total number of countries included in the dataset.

2.**Country:** This column lists the names of the countries under evaluation. Each row corresponds to a specific country, allowing users to identify which country the data pertains to. Examples of entries in this column include "United States," "Sweden," "India," and more.

3.**Score:** The "Score" column comprises numerical values or scores reflecting the overall assessment of each country's performance regarding conditions and opportunities for women. These scores are likely calculated based on factors such as gender equality in education, employment, healthcare, political representation, and legal rights. Higher scores generally indicate better conditions for women, while lower scores suggest room for improvement.

Use Cases:

• Researchers can analyze this dataset to identify global trends in gender equality, allowing for cross-country comparisons and the identification of areas where countries excel or need improvement.

• Policymakers can utilize this data to make informed decisions and track progress in achieving gender equality goals.

• Advocacy groups and organizations working on women's rights can leverage this dataset to support their initiatives and promote gender equality on a global scale.

• Data enthusiasts on Kaggle can explore this dataset for data visualization, machine learning, and statistical analysis projects aimed at uncovering insights and trends related to women's well-being and opportunities.

Data Source:

https://ceoworld.biz/2021/06/11/the-worlds-best-countries-for-women-2021/

Acknowledgments:

If applicable, acknowledge any individuals or organizations that contributed to collecting or compiling this dataset.

By publishing this dataset on Kaggle, you are contributing to the open data community and providing a valuable resource for data-driven insights into gender equality worldwide.

According to the Democracy Index, ****** was deemed the most democratic country in 2024. Countries are given a score from 0 to 10 with scores closer to 10 meaning the country is more democratic. In 2024, ****** scored **** points. New Zealand and Sweden followed behind. On the other hand, *********** was ranked as the least democratic country in the world with an index score of ****. Shrinking democratic space The world saw an increase in the number of democracies during the latter half of the previous century, but the trend has turned since the early 2010s. Democratically elected leaders in countries such as India and Hungary use their power to limit the space for political opposition. However, it is not only recently established democracies that experience democratic decline, but also long-standing democracies. Democratic decline in the U.S. The United States, seen by many as the oldest democracy worldwide, has seen decreasing levels of democracy in recent years. Increasing political polarization, limiting of voting rights, and a lack of trust in political institutions have put the American democracy to a test, and in 2016, the country was degraded from a liberal democracy to a flawed democracy on the Democracy Index.

Context

This ranking was created by aggregating data from 14 websites and counting how many times each country was mentioned in the top 3, top 5, and top 10 places. There is no official measures or rankings for a countries education system.

Content

The 14 web sources are as follows: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/education-rankings-by-country https://worldtop20.org/worldbesteducationsystem https://www.currentschoolnews.com/education-news/best-educational-system-in-the-world/ https://www.edsys.in/best-education-system-in-the-world/ https://www.indiaeducation.net/studyabroad/articles/countries-with-the-best-higher-education-system.html http://blog.mpanchang.com/10-best-education-systems-in-the-world/ https://admission.buddy4study.com/study-abroad/best-education-systems-in-world https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/best-education https://www.theedadvocate.org/the-edvocates-list-of-the-20-best-education-systems-in-the-world/ https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/10-countries-with-the-best-education-systems.html https://ceoworld.biz/2020/05/10/ranked-worlds-best-countries-for-education-system-2020/ https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/11-best-school-systems-world-a7425391.html https://naijaquest.com/best-education-system-in-the-world/ https://mintbook.com/blog/best-educational-systems-in-the-world/

Acknowledgements

Created for BAD 52 - Human Relations in Organizations from the Santa Rosa Junior College in Fall 2020.

About Dataset

Description This dataset contains detailed rankings and indicators from the 2023 Legatum Prosperity Index, assessing and ranking countries based on various dimensions of prosperity and development. The indicators cover aspects such as:

• Country: The name of the country.
• AveragScore: The overall average score of the country across all indicators.
• SafetySecurity: Freedom from conflict, terrorism, and crime.
• PersonelFreedom: Rights to speech, assembly, and individual autonomy.
• Governance: Quality of democracy, rule of law, and government effectiveness.
• SocialCapital: Strength of personal relationships and civic engagement.
• InvestmentEnvironment: Conditions for private investment and credit access.
• EnterpriseConditions: Business environment and market competition.
• MarketAccessInfrastructure: Ease of trade and quality of infrastructure.
• EconomicQuality: Macroeconomic stability and employment quality.
• LivingConditions: Standard of living and access to basic services.
• Health: Population health and healthcare access.
• Education: Quality and accessibility of education.
• NaturalEnvironment: Environmental quality and sustainability.

Source

The data is sourced from the 2023 Legatum Prosperity Index available at prosperity.com/rankings.

License

This dataset is shared under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0). You are free to use, share, and adapt the data, provided that you attribute the source and share any derived works under the same license.

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the Legatum Institute for compiling and providing the data used in this dataset. For more information on the methodology and detailed country reports, please visit the Legatum Prosperity Index website.

Usage

This dataset can be used for research, analysis, and educational purposes to understand the different dimensions of prosperity and development across countries in 2023. It is a valuable resource for policymakers, researchers, and anyone interested in global development metrics. Additionally, clustering analysis can be performed to group countries based on their development levels, providing insights into regional similarities and differences.

Keywords

Global Prosperity, Country Development, Safety, Governance, Health, Education, Economic Quality, 2023 Rankings, Legatum Prosperity Index, Clustering, Tabular, Social Science, Economics, Advanced

Since 2016, the global edition of the Sustainable Development Report (SDR) has provided the most up-to-date data to track and rank the performance of all UN member states on the SDGs. This year’s edition was written by a group of independent experts at the SDG Transformation Center, an initiative of the SDSN. It focuses on the UN Summit of the Future, with an opening chapter endorsed by 100+ global scientists and practitioners. The report also includes two thematic chapters, related to SDG 17 (Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development) and SDG 2 (End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture).This year’s SDR highlights five key findings:On average, globally, only 16% of the SDG targets are on track to be achieved by 2030, with the remaining 84% demonstrating limited or a reversal of progress. At the global level, SDG progress has been stagnant since 2020, with SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), SDG14 (Life Below Water), SDG15 (Life on Land) and SDG16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions) particularly off-track. Globally, the five SDG targets on which the highest proportion of countries show a reversal of progress since 2015 include: obesity rate (under SDG 2), press freedom (under SDG 16), the red list index (under SDG 15), sustainable nitrogen management (under SDG 2), and – due in a large part to the COVID-19 pandemic and other factors that may vary across countries – life expectancy at birth (under SDG 3). Goals and targets related to basic access to infrastructure and services, including SDG9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), show slightly more positive trends, although progress remains too slow and uneven across countries.The pace of SDG progress varies significantly across country groups. Nordic countries continue to lead on SDG achievement, with BRICS demonstrating strong progress and poor and vulnerable nations lagging far behind. Similar to past years, European countries – notably Nordic countries – top the 2024 SDG Index. Finland ranks number 1 on the SDG Index, followed by Sweden (#2), Denmark (#3), Germany (#4), and France (#5). Yet, even these countries face significant challenges in achieving several SDGs. Average SDG progress in BRICS (Brazil, the Russian Federation, India, China, and South Africa) and BRICS+ (Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates) since 2015 has been faster than the world average. In addition, East and South Asia has emerged as the region that has made the most SDG progress since 2015. By contrast, the gap between the world average SDG Index and the performance of the poorest and most vulnerable countries, including Small Island Developing States (SIDS), has widened since 2015.Sustainable development remains a long-term investment challenge. Reforming the Global Financial Architecture is more urgent than ever. The world requires many essential public goods that far transcend the nation-state. Low-income countries (LICs) and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) urgently need to gain access to affordable long-term capital so that they can invest at scale to achieve their sustainable development objectives. Mobilizing the necessary levels of finance will require new institutions, new forms of global financing — including global taxation —, and new priorities for global financing, such as investing in quality education for all. The report presents five complementary strategies to reform the Global Financial Architecture.Global challenges require global cooperation. Barbados ranks the highest in its commitment to UN-based multilateralism; the United States ranks last. As with the challenge of SDGs, strengthening multilateralism requires metrics and monitoring. The report’s new Index of countries’ support to UN-based multilateralism (UN-Mi) ranks countries based on their engagement with the UN system including treaty ratification, votes at the UN General Assembly, membership in UN organizations, participation in conflicts and militarization, use of unilateral sanctions and financial contributions to the UN. The five countries most committed to UN-based multilateralism are: Barbados (#1), Antigua and Barbuda (#2), Uruguay (#3), Mauritius (#4), and the Maldives (#5). By contrast, the United States (#193), Somalia (#192), South Sudan (#191), Israel (#190), and the Democratic Republic of Korea (#189) rank the lowest on the UN-Mi.SDG targets related to food and land systems are particularly off-track. The SDR presents new FABLE pathways to support sustainable food and land systems. Globally, 600 million people will still suffer from hunger by 2030, obesity is increasing globally, and greenhouse gas emissions from Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use (AFOLU) represent almost a quarter of annual global GHG emissions. The new FABLE pathways brought together more than 80 local researchers across 22 countries to assess how 16 targets related to food security, climate mitigation, biodiversity conservation, and water quality could be achieved by 2030 and 2050. The continuation of current trends widens the gap with targets related to climate mitigation, biodiversity, and water quality. Pursuing commitments that have been already taken by countries would improve the situation, but they are still largely insufficient. Significant progress is possible but requires several dramatic changes: 1) avoid overconsumption beyond recommended levels and limit animal-based protein consumption with dietary shifts compatible with cultural preferences; 2) invest to foster productivity, particularly for products and areas with strong demand growth; and 3) implement inclusive, robust, and transparent monitoring systems to halt deforestation. Our sustainable pathway avoids up to 100 million hectares of deforestation by 2030 and 100 Gt CO2 emissions by 2050. Additional measures would be needed to avoid trade-offs with on-farm employment and water pollution due to excessive fertilizer application and ensure that no one is left behind, particularly to end hunger.About the AuthorsProf. Jeffrey SachsDirector, SDSN; Project Director of the SDG IndexJeffrey D. Sachs is a world-renowned professor of economics, leader in sustainable development, senior UN advisor, bestselling author, and syndicated columnist whose monthly newspaper columns appear in more than 100 countries. He is the co-recipient of the 2015 Blue Planet Prize, the leading global prize for environmental leadership, and many other international awards and honors. He has twice been named among Time magazine’s 100 most influential world leaders. He was called by the New York Times, “probably the most important economist in the world,” and by Time magazine, “the world’s best known economist.” A survey by The Economist in 2011 ranked Professor Sachs as amongst the world’s three most influential living economists of the first decade of the 21st century.Professor Sachs serves as the Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University. He is University Professor at Columbia University, the university’s highest academic rank. During 2002 to 2016 he served as the Director of the Earth Institute. Sachs is Special Advisor to United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres on the Sustainable Development Goals, and previously advised UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on both the Sustainable Development Goals and Millennium Development Goals and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan on the Millennium Development Goals.Guillaume LafortuneDirector, SDSN Paris; Scientific Co-Director of the SDG IndexGuillaume Lafortune took up his duties as Director of SDSN Paris in January 2021. He joined SDSN in 2017 to coordinate the production of the Sustainable Development Report and other projects on SDG data and statistics.Previously, he has served as an economist at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) working on public governance reforms and statistics. He was one of the lead advisors for the production of the 2015 and 2017 flagship statistical report Government at a Glance. He also contributed to analytical work related to public sector efficiency, open government data and citizens’ satisfaction with public services. Earlier, Guillaume worked as an economist at the Ministry of Economic Development in the Government of Quebec (Canada). Guillaume holds a M.Sc in public administration from the National School of Public Administration (ENAP) in Montreal and a B.Sc in international economics from the University of Montreal.Contact: EmailGrayson FullerManager, SDG Index & Data team, SDSNGrayson Fuller is the manager of the SDG Index and of the team working on SDG data and statistics at SDSN. He is co-author of the Sustainable Development Report, for which he manages the data, coding, and statistical analyses. He also coordinates the production of regional and subnational editions of the SDG Index, in addition to other statistical reports, in collaboration with national governments, NGOs and international organizations such as the WHO, UNDP and the European Commission. Grayson received his Masters degree in Economic Development at Sciences Po Paris. He holds a Bachelors in Romance Languages and Latin American Studies from Harvard University, where he graduated cum laude. Grayson has lived in several Latin American countries and speaks English, Spanish, French, Portuguese and Italian. He enjoys playing the violin, rock-climbing and taking care of his numerous plants in his free time.Contact: EmailAbout the PublishersDublin University PressDublin University Press is Ireland’s oldest printing and publishing house with its origins in Trinity College Dublin in 1734. The mission of Dublin University Press is to benefit society through scholarly communication, education, research and discourse. To further this goal, the Press

The average for 2024 based on 175 countries was 5.42 index points. The highest value was in Iran: 10 index points and the lowest value was in Iceland: 0.2 index points. The indicator is available from 2007 to 2024. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

Countries with the highest speeds demonstrate examples of efficient infrastructure and investment in digital technologies, providing their citizens with fast and stable internet. In contrast, countries with low speeds face numerous challenges, especially economic ones.