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 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.

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.

In 2024, Mexico ranked as the country with the second-best economic performance amongst the seven Latin American nations included in the ranking, with a index score of ***** in a scale from * to 100, only behind Puerto Rico. Venezuela obtained the worst score in this macro-economic evaluation of the domestic economy, at ***** index points.

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.

About the Project The project explores alternative methods of measuring economic diversification and investigating its associated impacts on the Saudi Arabian economy and other GCC countries. By utilizing a financial portfolio framework reconciled with economic growth theory, the economy is viewed as a portfolio of economic sectors, each contributing to the overall output growth. Results demonstrated that diversification policies have been effective, as the economy moves towards higher growth with lower instability. Key Points Evidence confirms that there is a positive correlation between the economic growth rate and its volatility/risk in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region. In other words, there is a trade-off between the benefits of oil and gas activity and the volatility resulting from unpredictable commodity price swings in such resource dependent economies. Our analysis uses a financial portfolio framework approach (and more specifically an efficient frontier analysis), treating economic sectors as individual investments. We calculate a relative risk measure termed the ‘beta coefficient’ and assemble a portfolio of sectors with varying weights to find the efficient frontier. If the beta of the portfolio representing the economy is above global average, the economy will generally grow faster than the global average but with greater volatility – the upturns will be higher and the downturns deeper. We aim to shed light on diversification policy from this novel, if not yet widely accepted, perspective. The GCC economies exhibit ‘high beta,’ particularly Qatar. Saudi Arabia sits in the middle of the group, but above the global average, while Oman has the lowest coefficient of the group. Saudi Arabia’s National Transformation Plan to 2020 and economic Vision 2030 envisage an economy that is still invested in oil and gas activity at 45 percent of total output. While diversification policies in these plans promote economic growth, it still leaves the economy exposed to the volatility of energy markets. In comparison, the optimal mix of economic sectors could increase the growth rate by more than 1 percent annually and nearly halve the expected volatility (to less than 60 percent of growth rate). Saudi Arabia’s historical economic policies were effective in achieving some diversification. However, their benefits could be increased by policies that balance productive efficiency with diversification of economic activity. The difference between policy-optimized portfolio and non-constrained optimization can be used to estimate the size of the fiscal stabilization fund needed to protect the economy from stop/go risks to diversification objectives.

With a Gross Domestic Product of over 4.3 trillion Euros, the German economy was by far the largest in Europe in 2024. The similarly sized economies of the United Kingdom and France were the second and third largest economies in Europe during this year, followed by Italy and Spain. The smallest economy in this statistic is that of the small Balkan nation of Montenegro, which had a GDP of 7.4 billion Euros. In this year, the combined GDP of the 27 member states that compose the European Union amounted to approximately 17.95 trillion Euros. The big five Germany’s economy has consistently had the largest economy in Europe since 1980, even before the reunification of West and East Germany. The United Kingdom, by contrast, has had mixed fortunes during the same period and had a smaller economy than Italy in the late 1980s. The UK also suffered more than the other major economies during the recession of the late 2000s, meaning the French economy was the second largest on the continent for some time afterward. The Spanish economy was continually the fifth-largest in Europe in this 38-year period, and from 2004 onwards, has been worth more than one trillion Euros. The smallest GDP, the highest economic growth in Europe Despite having the smallerst GDP of Europe, Montenegro emerged as the fastest growing economy in the continent, achieving an impressive annual growth rate of 4.5 percent, surpassing Turkey's growth rate of 4 percent. Overall,this Balkan nation has shown a remarkable economic recovery since the 2010 financial crisis, with its GDP projected to grow by 28.71 percent between 2024 and 2029. Contributing to this positive trend are successful tourism seasons in recent years, along with increased private consumption and rising imports. Europe's economic stagnation Malta, Albania, Iceland, and Croatia were among the countries reporting some of the highest growth rates this year. However, Europe's overall performance reflected a general slowdown in growth compared to the trend seen in 2021, during the post-pandemic recovery. Estonia experienced the sharpest negative growth in 2023, with its economy shrinking by 2.3% compared to 2022, primarily due to the negative impact of sanctions placed on its large neighbor, Russia. Other nations, including Sweden, Germany, and Finland, also recorded slight negative growth.

In 2020, ***** and *********** had the highest ranking according to the sustainable trade index (STI). The countries showcased a great balance between economic, social, and environmental priorities during their trading activities, and have vowed to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.

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.

Singapore led the Index of Economic Freedom in 2024, with an index score of 83.5 out of 100. Switzerland, Ireland, Taiwan, and Luxembourg rounded out the top five. Economic Freedom Index In order to calculate the Economic Freedom Index, the source takes 12 different factors into account, including the rule of law, government size, regulatory efficiency, and open markets. All 12 factors are rated on a scale of zero to 100 and are weighted equally. Every country is rated within the Index in order to provide insight into the health and freedom of the global economy. Singapore's economy Singapore is one of the four so-called Asian Tigers, a term used to describe four countries in Asia that saw a booming economic development from the 1950s to the early 1990. Today, the City-State is known for its many skyscrapers, and its economy continue to boom. It has one of the lowest tax-rates in the Asia-Pacific region, and continues to be open towards foreign direct investment (FDI). Moreover, Singapore has one of the highest trade-to-GDP ratios worldwide, underlining its export-oriented economy. Finally, its geographic location has given it a strategic position as a center connecting other countries in the region with the outside world. However, the economic boom has come at a cost, with the city now ranked among the world's most expensive.

This study examines the determinants influencing the likelihood of Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries seeking assistance from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF, as a global institution, aims to promote sustainable growth and prosperity among its member countries by supporting economic strategies that foster financial stability and collaboration in monetary affairs. Utilising panel-probit regression, this study analyses data from thirty-nine SSA countries spanning from 2000 to 2022, focusing on twelve factors: Current Account Balance (CAB), inflation, corruption, General Government Net Lending and Borrowing (GGNLB), General Government Gross Debt (GGGD), Gross Domestic Product Growth (GDPG), United Nations Security Council (UNSC) involvement, regime types (Closed Autocracy, Electoral Democracy, Electoral Autocracy, Liberal Democracy) and China Loan. The results indicate that corruption and GDP growth rate have the most significant influence on the likelihood of SSA countries seeking IMF assistance. Conversely, factors such as CAB, UNSC involvement, LD and inflation show inconsequential effects. Notable, countries like Sudan, Burundi, and Guinea consistently rank high in seeking IMF assistance over various time frames within the observed period. Sudan emerges with a probability of more than 44% in seeking IMF assistance, holding the highest ranking. Study emphasises the importance of understanding SSA region rankings and the variability of variables for policymakers, investors, and international organisations to effectively address economic challenges and provide financial assistance.

Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all : Overall, economic trends in the Pacific region have been positive, yet inconsistent. The restricted economic bases of Pacific Island countries are highly sensitive to external economic shocks (including commodity price fluctuations, supply chain disruptions and financial stress), natural events (such as cyclones, floods and droughts) and costs of adaptation to climate change; nternal employment factors in the Pacific compound these external factors. The size of the informal economy; gender gaps and imbalances; and high youth unemployment/underemployment are issues that can be monitored under Goal 8; Tourism is an important sector of growth and development in the Pacific, providing foreign exchange earnings, employment and income earning opportunities for many Pacifc islanders. Tourism is one of the region’s few economically viable sectors, and its share in national GDPs is monitored in this goal.

Find more Pacific data on PDH.stat.

Questions concerning the European Union. Effects of globalisation. European integration. Construction of Europe, European Parliament and Elections. International conflicts: Georgia. Mobility. EU budget. Representation of the levels of public authorities in the EU.

Topics: 1. Frequency of political discussions with friends and own opinion leadership; life satisfaction; assessment of the current economic situation in the own country, in Europe, and in the world, assessment of the personal job situation, the financial situation of the own household, the employment situation, and the situation of the environment in the own country; assessment of the current situation in the own country regarding: residential area, health care, pensions, unemployment benefits, cost of living, relations between migrants, dealing with inequalities and poverty, affordability of energy and housing, as well as the way the public administration runs; future expectations concerning: the own life, the national economic and employment situation, the situation of the environment in the own country, the personal job situation, the economic situation in the EU, and in the world; comparison of economic and employment situation, cost of living, energy prices, quality of life, and environmental situation in the own country with the average of the European countries; most important problems in the own country; most important problems facing the respondent; existing or future membership of the own country in the EU as a good thing; benefits from the country’s membership in the EU; development of the own country and the European Union in the right direction; trust in institutions (justice, political parties, public authorities, national government, national parliament, EU, UN, NATO); assessment of the EU; importance of the EU for the respondent: more stable economy through the EU membership of the country; only in EU 27 countries in the euro area: more stable economy through the affiliation of the country to the euro area; EU 27, Macedonia, Croatia, Turkey, and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus: attitude towards the following statements: own political efficacy in the EU as well as in the own country, and political efficacy of the own country in the EU, understanding how the EU works, EU imposes its views on the own country, national government is sensitive to concerns of the own citizens, national government cares about the concerns of European citizens; knowledge of the selected bodies of the EU (European Parliament, European Commission, Council of the European Union, European Central Bank); assessment of the importance of these institutions as well as confidence in these institutions; assessment of the current speed of building Europe, and desired speed (card, figures); changes in the purchasing power of the own household in the past five years; financial difficulties at the end of the month; assessment of the prospects for the lives of today’s children compared with the own generation; expected improvement of the prospects for living in the own country; knowledge test about the EU (member states, presidency); only EU 27: preferred level of political decision-making: national government or jointly within the EU regarding selected issues (fighting crime, unemployment and terrorism, taxation, defence and foreign affairs, immigration, educational system, pensions, environment protection, health, social welfare, agriculture and fishery, consumer protection, research, support of structurally weak regions, energy, competition, transports, economy, and combating inflation); again all: attitude towards selected propositions: European monetary union with the euro as the common currency, common foreign and defence policy of the EU member states, EU enlargement, higher speed of building Europe in some countries; preferred issues to be emphasized to strengthen the EU; awareness of the current presidency of France and the future presidency of the Czech Republic in the EU Council.

1. Effects of globalisation: attitudes towards globalisation (good opportunities for national companies versus threat to employment and companies in the own country); attitude towards the statement: EU protects its citizens from the negative effects of globalisation (Split A), or enables European citizens to better benefit from the positive effects of globalisation (Split B); European Union or national government as the most appropriate institution to protect from negative effects...

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 2016 Recycling Economic Information (REI) Report aims to increase the understanding of the economic implications of material reuse and recycling. The report shows that recycling and reuse of materials creates jobs, while also generating local and state tax revenues. The 2016 REI Report covers the economic activities of nine sectors: ferrous metals, nonferrous metals (aluminum), glass, paper, plastics, rubber, construction and demolition, electronics and organics (including food and yard trimmings). The 2016 REI Report builds on work from a 2001 REI study. In 2001, to encourage the development of an economic market for recycling, EPA supported the creation of a national Recycling Economic Information (REI) Project and the related REI report, based upon the work of several states and regions. The REI report was a ground breaking national study demonstrating the economic value of recycling and reuse to the U.S. economy. Compiled through a cooperative agreement with the National Recycling Coalition, the study confirmed what many have known for decades: there are significant economic benefits in recycling. The 2016 report focuses on the economic impacts of recycling rather than the environmental benefits, as the environmental benefits have been researched in detail. Accurately estimating the impact that recycling has on jobs, wages and taxes is important because the results can influence policy decisions and provide a more robust picture of recycling by adding an economic layer on top of the more heavily researched environmental impacts of recycling. For more information, please visit https://www.epa.gov/smm/recycling-economic-information-rei-report. The REI Report is part of EPA's larger SMM program (https://www.epa.gov/smm). Sustainable Materials Management (SMM) is a systemic approach to using and reusing materials more productively over their entire lifecycles. It represents a change in how our society thinks about the use of natural resources and environmental protection. By looking at a product's entire lifecycle we can find new opportunities to reduce environmental impacts, conserve resources and reduce costs. There are multiple challenge programs available as part of the SMM program, including the Food Recovery Challenge, the Electronics Challenge, the Federal Green Challenge and the WasteWise program.

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.

this graph was created in Loocker Studio, PowerBi and Tableau :

https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F16731800%2F583d83f62f4841647b87b8cb0112a75d%2Ffoto1.png?generation=1737239219872323&alt=media" alt=""> https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F16731800%2Fee59c5c68d6e9d1a8f399914486abe90%2Ffoto2.jpg?generation=1737239227960305&alt=media" alt="">

Having reliable and consistent data on long-term national economic performance is crucial to understanding patterns of global economic development and to developing and testing theories of economic growth. The gross domestic product (GDP) is one of the most important indicators measuring economic performance, and is a central driver of broad well-being across nations (OECD, 2021). The measurement of national incomes has its roots in attempts by William Petty to construct aggerate estimates of England's economy in 1665. Since then, the field of (historical) national accounting has developed immensely, but the pioneering research on the systematic international comparisons of national income and product only started in the 1930s with the works of Clark and Kuznets (Clark, 1940; Kuznets, 1941). Angus Maddison was one of the first economist to build a global dataset of consistent GDP (pc) estimates, allowing for comparisons of incomes across countries and over time, focusing especially on the per-1950 period (Maddison, 1995, 2001, 2007). After his passing, the Maddison Project was established as an ongoing research project aimed at standardizing and updating academic work in the field of historical national accounting, in the tradition of Maddison's syntheses of long-term economic growth.

Central to global comparisons of long-run GDP per capita estimates are the conversions of national income estimates from a national currency basis to a common currency using purchasing power parities (PPPs). PPPs measure price differences between countries and represent what a dollar of income buys in one country relative to another. Because relative price levels are lower in less advanced economies, exchange rates—the alternative to transform national currencies into a common currency—typically understate the real (or cross-country comparable) GDP level of such economies relative to the richer ones. But while the principle of using PPP-converted income levels for cross-country comparisons is clear, the choice of method in estimating PPPs is more difficult to make; yet it is of first-order importance to debates on historical living standards.

A common conundrum discussed in economic research revolves around the fact that nations endowed with plentiful natural resources often exhibit a lower gross domestic product (GDP). This conundrum is commonly called the "resource curse", where most empirical studies about the effects primarily focused on developed economies. At the same time, limited data is available regarding a burgeoning oil-exporting nation like the Republic of Yemen. This research endeavor aims to investigate the relationship between oil price Changes and Yemen’s economic growth. Utilizing annual data spanning from 1990 to 2019, the study employs the auto-regressive distributed lag (ARDL) model to establish the long-term connection between oil price volatility and economic growth over both short and long timeframes. This study’s outcomes indicate that oil price Changes have a significant positive relationship with Yemen’s economic growth in both the long and short run. Oil rents show a significant negative relationship with economic growth in both the long and short run. The results of GLM, RLS, and GMM robustness checks are consistent with our model results. Based on these findings, we suggest that Yemen should diversify its economy by investing in agriculture and tourism, and focus on human capital, education, and research and development. These steps could reduce the economy’s dependence on oil and enhance sustainable economic growth. These empirical insights and suggestions are particularly useful for policymakers as they help build sound external and economic policies to sustain long-term economic growth.

This statistic depicts the 20 healthiest countries globally as of 2019. According to the data, Spain is the healthiest country with a health grade of 92.75, followed by Italy, Iceland, and Japan.

In recent years, with the continuous evolution of the global economy and the adjustment of industrial structures, the understanding of the role played by human capital in the process of economic development has become particularly important. However, existing research on the impact of human capital on economic growth often adopts traditional regression methods, failing to comprehensively consider the heterogeneity and nonlinear relationships in the data. Therefore, to more accurately understand the influence of human capital on economic growth at different stages, this study employs Bayesian quantile regression method (BQRM). By incorporating BQRM, a better capture of the dynamic effects of human capital in the process of industrial structure upgrading is achieved, offering policymakers more targeted and effective policy recommendations to drive the economy towards a more sustainable direction. Additionally, the experiment also examines the impact of other key factors such as technological progress, capital investment, and labor market conditions on economic growth. These factors, combined with human capital, collectively promote the upgrading of industrial structure and the sustainable development of the economy. This study, by introducing BQRM, aims to fill the research gap regarding the impact of human capital on economic development during the industrial structural upgrading process. In the backdrop of the ongoing evolution of the global economy and adjustments in industrial structure, understanding the role of human capital in economic development becomes particularly crucial. To better comprehend the direct impact of human capital, the experiment collected macroeconomic data, including GDP, industrial structure, labor skills, and human capital, from different regions over the past 20 years. By establishing a dynamic panel data model, this study delves into the trends in the impact of human capital at various stages of industrial structure upgrading. The research findings indicate that during the high-speed growth phase, the contribution of human capital to GDP growth is 15.2% ± 2.1%, rising to 23.8% ± 3.4% during the period of industrial structure adjustment. Technological progress, capital investment, and labor market conditions also significantly influence economic growth at different stages. In terms of innovation improvement, this study pioneers the use of BQRM to gain a deeper understanding of the role of human capital in economic development, providing more targeted and effective policy recommendations. Ultimately, to promote sustainable economic development, the experiment proposes concrete and targeted policy recommendations, emphasizing government support in training and skill development. This study not only fills a research gap in the relevant field but also provides substantive references for decision-makers, driving the economy towards a more sustainable direction.