Leading the ranking of the 2022 Social Progress Index was Norway with a total index score of 90.74. Two other Nordic countries, Denmark and Finland, are second and third in the ranking.The Social Progress Index measures the extent of which countries provide for the social and environmental needs of their citizens. The index consists of 53 indicators in total.

This statistic shows the state ranking of each state in the United States in the 2018 Social Progress Index. Leading the ranking was Massachusetts with a total index score of 64.82.The Social Progress index measures the extent to which states provide for the social and environmental needs of their citizens. The index consists of 52 indicators in total.

This statistic describes the ranking on the Social Progress Index of countries in the Middle East and North Africa in 2016, by country. During this time period, Yemen ranked 127 out of 130 countries on the Social Progress Index, making it the the lowest ranked country in the MENA region.

As urbanization speeds up, the concept of healthy cities is receiving more focus. This article compares Chongzuo and Nanning in Guangxi with Beijing to assess the development gaps in cities in Guangxi. An indicator system for healthy cities was designed from six dimensions—healthy economy, healthy population, healthy healthcare, healthy environment, healthy facilities, and healthy transportation—and 26 secondary indicators, which were selected from 2005 to 2022, and an improved factor analysis was used to synthesize a healthy city index (HCI). The number of factors was determined by combining characteristic roots and the variance contribution rate, and the HCI was weighted using the entropy-weighted Topsis method. A comprehensive evaluation of the urban health status of these cities was conducted. The results showed that extracting six common factors had the greatest effect, with a cumulative variance contribution rate of 93.83%. Chongzuo city scored higher in the field of healthcare. The healthy environment score of Nanning was relatively high, which may be related to continuous increases in green measures. In terms of the healthy economy dimension, Beijing was far ahead. However, in recent years, the healthy economy level in Chongzuo has increased, and the GDP growth rate has ranked among the highest in Guangxi. In addition, the growth rate of healthy facilities in Nanning was relatively fast and has been greater than that in Chongzuo in recent years, which indicates that the Nanning Municipal Government believes urban construction and municipal supporting facilities are highly important. In terms of healthy transportation, Chongzuo and Nanning scored higher than Beijing. This may be because the transportation in these two cities is convenient and the traffic density is more balanced than that in Beijing, thereby reducing traffic congestion. Chongzuo had the highest score for a healthy population, and a steadily growing population provides the city with stable human resources, which helps promote urban economic and social development. Finally, relevant policy recommendations were put forwards to enhance the health level of the cities.

In 2020, Uruguay was estimated to be the country which best promoted equal opportunities for social advancement in Latin America. According to the Global Social Mobility Index (GSMI), Uruguay was awarded 67.1 points out of 100 in the area of social mobility, the highest score among all the Latin American countries surveyed, and in the 35th position among 82 nations studied worldwide. This index is an aggregate of several indicators regarding health, education, and working conditions. The higher the score, the more that particular economy provides equal opportunities for social advancement. Uruguay was also the Latin American country with the best score in corruption perception.

This presents value-added data by grouping multiple indicators by programs and creating key performance index.

In 2020, the average social mobility score in Brazil reached 52.1 points, out of a maximum of 100. The higher the score, the more a particular economy provides equal opportunities for social advancement. Among the different areas analyzed to construct this index, Brazil scored best in technology access, where it was awarded 67.8 points out of 100. However, this score was relatively lower than that received in the same area by other thriving Latin American economies such as Costa Rica or Uruguay. As one of the most unequal Latin American countries, fair wage distribution was the social mobility area in which Brazil received the lowest score, at only 35.9 points.

The update of the 2010 Social Urban Development Monitoring presented here evaluates socio-structural data for the observation period from December 31, 2008 to December 31, 2009 at the level of the 447 planning areas (smallest level of living environment-oriented areas / LOR). With the update of the Monitoring Social Urban Development 2010, the statistical procedure of the graded index calculation is continued. The 12 indicators from the 2009 monitoring will be retained. Since 2007, a distinction has been made in the data between indicators that describe the social situation in a district ("status") and indicators that are intended to characterize the change in the population of the area in the past year ("dynamics"). The status indicators include data on unemployment, benefit receipt and migration background; on the dynamic indicators Data on mobility (selective migration) and changes in individual status indicators. From the six status and six dynamic indicators, a status index and a dynamic index are formed in a graduated calculation process. In a next step, the development index is calculated from the status and dynamic index in a ratio of 3:2. The development index reflects the social problems in the area as a value: the higher the value, the greater the social problems. According to the determined ranking of the areas, deciles (each 10%) are formed and combined into four groups of the development index: high (top 20%), medium (60%), low (penultimate 10%) and very low development index (bottom 10%). . According to these - quantitative - findings, there is a need for urban development policy intervention in areas with a very low development index, and in areas with a low development index there is a need for intervention and prevention. In addition to the quantitative analysis, in-depth and, in particular, qualitative considerations are required for the concrete definition of measures in the individual areas. The results of the 2010 monitoring are similar - in terms of group affiliation - to those of the 2009 monitoring: The development index shows a strong spatial concentration of the planning areas with a "very low development index". As in the past, the western inner city areas represent the most problematic types of area in Berlin. Spatial concentrations are found in Neukölln-Nord, Wedding, Moabit and Kreuzberg-Nord. On the outskirts of the city, negative development tendencies (Marzahn-Hellersdorf, Spandau) have become established in individual large settlement areas. These five large, contiguous areas with the highest concentration of the most problematic areas, which were already named in the 2008 and 2009 monitoring, form the core of the "Action spaces plus" decided by the Senate in June 2010.

Summary of the top 10 countries in international infocomm/digital benchmarking reports based on latest available rankings. Reports included are: (i) International Institute for Management Development World Digital Competitiveness Ranking (IMD WDCR); (ii) World Economic Forum Global Information Technology Report – Networked Readiness Index (WEF GITR NRI); (iii) International Telecommunication Union ICT Development Index (ITU IDI); (iv) International Institute for Management Development World Competitiveness Yearbook (IMD WCY); (v) World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report (WEF GCR).

Note: WEF GCR ICT Adoption Pillar is a new revision introduced in the 2018 GCR. It was previously called the Technological Readiness pillar. Rankings for WEF GITR NRI are from 2016 and ITU IDI are from 2017.

Designed and produced by the World Wide Web Foundation, the Web Index is the world’s first measure of the World Wide Web’s contribution to social, economic and political progress in countries across the world. http://thewebindex.org/about/ Scores are given in the areas of universal access; freedom and openness; relevant content; and empowerment. First released in 2012, the 2014-15 Index has been expanded and refined to include a total of 86 countries and features an enhanced data set, particularly in the areas of gender, Open Data, privacy rights and censorship. The Index combines existing secondary data with new primary data derived from an evidence-based expert assessment survey. The Web Index provides an objective and robust evidence base to inform public dialogue on the steps needed for societies to leverage greater value from the Web. It is published annually and resources permitting, it will continue to be expanded to cover more countries in the coming years. It will eventually allow for comparisons of trends over time and the benchmarking of performance across countries, continuously improving our understanding of the Web’s value for humanity.

Investments in infrastructure have been on the development agenda of Latin American and Caribbean (LCR) countries as they move towards economic and social progress. Investing in infrastructure is investing in human welfare by providing access to and quality basic infrastructure services. Improving the performance of the electricity sector is one such major infrastructure initiative and the focus of this benchmarking data. A key initiative for both public and private owned distribution utilities has been to upgrade their efficiency as well as to increase the coverage and quality of service. In order to accomplish this goal, this initiative serves as a clearing house for information regarding the country and utility level performance of electricity distribution sector. This initiative allows countries and utilities to benchmark their performance in relation to other comparator utilities and countries. In doing so, this benchmarking data contributes to the improvement of the electricity sector by filling in knowledge gaps for the identification of the best performers (and practices) of the region. This benchmarking database consists of detailed information of 25 countries and 249 utilities in the region. The data collected for this benchmarking project is representative of 88 percent of the electrification in the region. Through in-house and field data collection, consultants compiled data based on accomplishments in output, coverage, input, labor productivity, operating performance, the quality of service, prices, and ownership. By serving as a mirror of good performance, the report allows for a comparative analysis and the ranking of utilities and countries according to the indicators used to measure performance. Although significant efforts have been made to ensure data comparability and consistency across time and utilities, the World Bank and the ESMAP do not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. Acknowledgement: This benchmarking database was prepared by a core team consisting of Luis Alberto Andres (Co-Task Team Leader), Jose Luis Guasch (Co-Task Team Leader), Julio A. Gonzalez, Georgeta Dragoiu, and Natalie Giannelli. The team was benefited by data contributions from Jordan Z. Schwartz (Senior Infrastructure Specialist, LCSTR), Lucio Monari (Lead Energy Economist, LCSEG), Katharina B. Gassner (Senior Economist, FEU), and Martin Rossi (consultant). Funding was provided by the Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP) and the World Bank. Comments and suggestion are welcome by contacting Luis Andres (landres@worldbank.org)

The SCImago Institutions Rankings (SIR) is a classification of academic and research-related institutions ranked by a composite indicator that combines three different sets of indicators based on research performance, innovation outputs and societal impact measured by their web visibility. It provides a friendly interface that allows the visualization of any customized ranking from the combination of these three sets of indicators. Additionally, it is possible to compare the trends for individual indicators of up to six institutions. For each large sector it is also possible to obtain distribution charts of the different indicators. For comparative purposes, the value of the composite indicator has been set on a scale of 0 to 100. However the line graphs and bar graphs always represent ranks (lower is better, so the highest values are the worst).

El Salvador is one of the Latin American countries with the worst social mobility scores. In 2020, the average social mobility score in El Salvador reached 47.4 points, out of a maximum of 100. The higher the score, the more a particular economy provides equal opportunities for social advancement. Among the different areas analyzed to construct this index, El Salvador scored best in work opportunities, where it was awarded 69.5 points out of 100, but it only received 33 points in education quality and equity, a key area for social mobility improvement.

Over recent years, online government services have become increasingly common. In 2024, Denmark was ranked first with a near-perfect E-Government Development Index (EGDI) rating of 0.9847. The EGDI assesses e-government development at a national level based on three components: the online service index, the telecommunication infrastructure index, and the human capital index. E-government development and the persisting digital divideAccording to the UN, e-government is a pivotal factor in advancing the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals. Public services should be accessible to all, and e-government has to harness existing and new technologies to ensure that. There is a risk of a new digital divide, as low-income countries with insufficient infrastructure are lagging, leaving already vulnerable people even more at risk of not being able to gain any advantage from new technologies. Despite some investments and developmental gains, many countries are still unable to benefit from ICTs because of poor connectivity, high cost of access and lack of necessary skills. These factors have a detrimental effect on the further development of e-government in low EGDI-ranked regions such as Africa as the pace of technological progress intensifies. E-government servicesTransactional services are among the most common features offered by e-government websites worldwide. In 2018, it was found that 139 countries enabled their citizens to submit income taxes via national websites. The majority of countries allow citizens to access downloadable forms, receive updates or access archived information about a wide range of sectors such as education, employment, environment, health, and social protection.

NITI Aayog has constructed the SDG India Index spanning across the 17 SDGs. The Index tracks the progress of all the States and UTs on a set of Priority Indicators, measuring their progress on the outcomes of the interventions and schemes of the Government of India. The SDG India Index is intended to provide a holistic view on the social, economic and environmental status of the country and its States and UT. In this dataset, the overall score of states out of 100 has been compiled.

Country scientific indicators developed from the information contained in the Scopus® database (Elsevier B.V.). These indicators can be used to assess and analyze scientific domains. Country rankings may be compared or analysed separately. Indicators offered for each country: H Index, Documents, Citations, Citation per Document and Citable Documents.

Representation of the temporal development of the health and social index (GESIx Trend) of the Health and Social Structure Atlas Berlin 2022 at the level of the planning areas. For the calculation, ranks are first formed for the GESIx 2022 and the GESIx 2013 (last calculation). The difference between these values ​​results in the GESIx trend, which can be interpreted as a change in the rank of the respective room in the period between the last and the current calculation (GESIx trend = rank GESIx 2013 - rank GESIx 2022).

In 2020, the average social mobility score in Costa Rica reached 61.6 points, out of a maximum of 100. The higher the score, the more a particular economy provides equal opportunities for social advancement. Among the different areas analyzed to construct this index, Costa Rica scored best in technology access, where it was awarded 74.8 points out of 100. Fair wage distribution, a key factor in social mobility, was the area in which Costa Rica received the lowest score, at only 40 points. Uruguay, Costa Rica and Chile were some of the Latin American countries with the best social mobility scores.

Measuring disaster resilience is a key component of successful disaster risk management and climate change adaptation. Quantitative, indicator-based assessments are typically applied to evaluate resilience by combining various indicators of performance into a single composite index. Building upon extensive research on social vulnerability and coping/adaptive capacity, we first develop an original, comprehensive disaster resilience index (CDRI) at municipal level across Italy, to support the implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. As next, we perform extensive sensitivity and robustness analysis to assess how various methodological choices, especially the normalisation and aggregation methods applied, influence the ensuing rankings. The results show patterns of social vulnerability and resilience with sizeable variability across the northern and southern regions. We propose several statistical methods to allow decision makers to explore the territorial, social and economic disparities, and choose aggregation methods best suitable for the various policy purposes. These methods are based on linear and non-liner normalization approaches combining the OWA and LSP aggregators. Robust resilience rankings are determined by relative dominance across multiple methods. The dominance measures can be used as a decision-making benchmark for climate change adaptation and disaster risk management strategies and plans.

In 2020, the average social mobility score in Argentina reached 57.3 points, out of a maximum of 100. The higher the score, the more a particular economy provides equal opportunities for social advancement. Among the different areas analyzed to construct this index, Argentina scored best in technology access, where it was awarded 70.8 points out of 100. Compared to other regional counterparts, this country also ranked particularly high in education access, at 69.2 points, though it ranked worst at education quality and equity, area in which it only received 38.4 points. Uruguay, Costa Rica and Chile were some of the Latin American countries with the best social mobility scores.