ميكرونيزيا (ولايات ميكرونيزيا الموحدة)

The 3P Anti-trafficking Policy Index evaluates governmental anti-trafficking efforts in the three main policy dimensions (3Ps), based on the requirements prescribed by the United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children (2000).   The three main policy dimensions (3Ps) are:Prosecution of perpetrators of human traffickingPrevention of human traffickingProtection of the victims of human trafficking Each of the 3P areas is evaluated on a 5-point scale and each index is aggregated to the overall 3P Anti-trafficking Index as the  sum (score 3-15).Prosecution Index Score: 1 (no compliance) - 5 (full compliance)Prevention Index Score: 1 (no compliance) - 5 (full compliance)Protection Index Score: 1 (no compliance) - 5 (full compliance)3P Anti-trafficking Policy Index Score: 3 (no compliance for any of the three areas) - 15 (full compliance for all of the three areas) The 3P Anti-trafficking Policy Index is available for each country and each year and currently includes up to 189 countries for the preiod from 2000 to 2015.

The World Bank's Country Policy and Institutional Assessment is done annually for all its borrowing countries. It has evolved into a set of criteria, which are grouped in four clusters: (a) economic management; (b) structural policies; (c) policies for social inclusion and equity; and (d) public sector management and institutions. The number of criteria, currently sixteen, reflect a balance between ensuring that all key factors that foster pro-poor growth and poverty alleviation are captured, without overly burdening the evaluation process. Ratings for each of the criteria reflect a variety of indicators, observations, and judgments. They focus on the quality of each country's current policies and institutions - which are the main determinant of present aid effectiveness prospects. To fully underscore the importance of the CPIA in the IDA Performance Based Allocations, the overall country score is referred to as the IDA Resource Allocation Index (IRAI)

Data cited at: Fragile States Index - https://fragilestatesindex.org/ The FSI focuses on the indicators of risk and is based on thousands of articles and reports that are processed by our CAST Software from electronically available sources. Measures of fragility, like Demographic Pressures,Refugees and IDPs and etc., have been scaled on 0 to 10 where 10 is highest fragility and 0 no fragility.

Freedom Status obtained by Combined Average of the Political Rights and Civil Liberties Ratings (Freedom Rating) Range 1-7; 1-2.5 Free; 3-5: Partly Free and 5.5-7: Not Free The score for the A. Electoral Process subcategory The score for the B. Political Pluralism and Participation subcategory The score for the C. Functioning of Government subcategory The score for the Political Rights category The score for the D. Freedom of Expression and Belief subcategory The score for the E. Associational and Organizational Rights subcategory The score for the F. Rule of Law subcategory The score for the G. Personal Autonomy and Individual Rights subcategory The score for the Civil Liberties category Total aggregate Score for all categories  

Data cited at: Germanwatch-https://www.germanwatch.org/en/cri 

The Global Innovation Index 2024 captures the innovation ecosystem performance of 133 economies and tracks the most recent global innovation trends. The Global Innovation Tracker 2024 provides a comprehensive analysis of the current state of global innovation. Findings highlight progress as well as challenges across four key stages of the innovation cycle: science and innovation investment, technological progress, technology adoption, and the socioeconomic impact of innovation.

Highlights of the  Global Sustainable Competitiveness Report 2024:The GSCI is now based on a new calculation methodology incorporating 216 quantitative indicators that uses (but is not based upon) AI tools to clean data, and analyse trends and correlations • Scandinavia continues to make its mark on the Sustainable Competitiveness Index: of the top 5 spots, 4 are Scandinavian. Sweden keeps topping the Index, followed by Finland and Denmark; • Northern European countries dominate the top 20 rankings; • Only two countries in the Top 20 are not European: Japan on 10, and South on 16; • China is ranked 28, exceling in Intellectual Capital but lags in Natural Capital and Resource Efficiency, albeit with encouraging signs of efficiency improvements; • The USA is ranked 35, performing comparatively poor in resource efficiency and social capital, reflecting a decline that could potentially undermine the global status of the US in the future; • Germany ranks 9, France 8, and the UK 14; • Brazil ranks 52, India 90, and Nigeria – Africa’s most populous nation – 145; • Some of the least developed nations have a considerable higher GSCI ranking than their GDP would suggest (e.g. Vietnam, Colombia, Peu, Nepal, Bhutan, Bolivia, …) • Asian nations (South Korea, Japan, Singapore, and China) lead the Intellectual Capital Index – the basis of innovation. • The Social Capital Index ranking is headed by Northern European (Scandinavian) countries, the result of economic growth combined with a commonly accepted social consensus • Countries savaged by violent conflicts (Sudan, Yemen, Eritrea, Libya, Somalia, Afghanistan) are at the bottom of the GSCI

Data Cited at: UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME, Human Development Data Center The Human Development Index (HDI) is a summary measure of achievements in three key dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, access to knowledge and a decent standard of living. The HDI is the geometric mean of normalized indices for each of the the three dimensions.

Data cited at: Heritage Foundation   Economic freedom is the fundamental right of every human to control his or her own labor and property. In an economically free society, individuals are free to work, produce, consume, and invest in any way they please, with that freedom both protected by the state and unconstrained by the state. In economically free societies, governments allow labor, capital and goods to move freely, and refrain from coercion or constraint of liberty beyond the extent necessary to protect and maintain liberty itself. Economic Freedom Scores: Range and level of freedom 80–100:- Free 70–79.9:- Mostly Free 60–69.9:- Moderately Free 50–59.9:- Mostly Unfree 0–49.9:- Repressed

Data cited at: Open Data Watch https://opendatawatch.com/ Topic: Open Data Inventory (ODIN) data Publication: http://odin.opendatawatch.com/data/download License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/   Score Type Options: Three sets of scores are available: raw, weighted, or standardized. Raw scores have values between 0 and 1 as recorded in the original assessment; subscores are simple totals. Weighted scores use a predefined weighting matrix; subscores are simple totals. Standardized scores are scaled from 0 to 100; subscores are weighted averages.

  Political Terror Scale Levels 1 - Coun­tries un­der a se­cure rule of law, people are not im­prisoned for their views, and tor­ture is rare or ex­cep­tion­al. Polit­ic­al murders are ex­tremely rare. 2 - There is a lim­ited amount of im­pris­on­ment for non­vi­ol­ent polit­ic­al activ­ity. However, few per­sons are af­fected, tor­ture and beat­ings are ex­cep­tion­al. Polit­ic­al murder is rare. 3 - There is ex­tens­ive polit­ic­al im­pris­on­ment, or a re­cent his­tory of such im­pris­on­ment. Ex­e­cu­tion or oth­er polit­ic­al murders and bru­tal­ity may be com­mon. Un­lim­ited de­ten­tion, with or without a tri­al, for polit­ic­al views is ac­cep­ted. 4 - Civil and polit­ic­al rights vi­ol­a­tions have ex­pan­ded to large num­bers of the pop­u­la­tion. Murders, dis­ap­pear­ances, and tor­ture are a com­mon part of life. In spite of its gen­er­al­ity, on this level ter­ror af­fects those who in­terest them­selves in polit­ics or ideas. 5 - Ter­ror has ex­pan­ded to the whole pop­u­la­tion. The lead­ers of these so­ci­et­ies place no lim­its on the means or thor­ough­ness with which they pur­sue per­son­al or ideo­lo­gic­al goals.   Note- NA_Status_A, NA_Status_H, and NA_Status_S corresponds to  PTS_A, PTS_H, and PTS_S respectively0= The value ‘0’ is assigned where the respective human rights report was available and has been coded66= The value ‘66’ is reserved for missing PTS scores due to missing reports 77=The value ‘77’ is assigned where reports no-longer exist, or do not exist yet88=The value ‘88’ is assigned for units that exist  but no report was published and thus no PTS score is assigned99= The value ‘99’ is assigned where human rights report was published but no PTS score was assigned  

The main objective of the research is to address the theoretical and empirical problems of how political institutions of high quality can be created and maintained. The second objective is to study the effects of Quality of Government on a number of policy areas, such as health, environment, social policy, and poverty. While Quality of Government is the common intellectual focal point of the research institute, a variety of theoretical and methodological perspectives are applied. Data citation:  Teorell, Jan, Aksel Sundström, Sören Holmberg, Bo Rothstein, Natalia Alvarado Pachon, Cem Mert Dalli, Rafael Lopez Valverde, Victor Saidi Phiri & Lauren Gerber. 2025. The Quality of Government Standard Dataset, version Jan25. University of Gothenburg: The Quality of Government Institute, https://www.gu.se/en/quality-government doi:10.18157/qogstdjan25

Data Cited at - Sachs, J., Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Lafortune, G., Fuller, G. (2019): Sustainable Development Report 2019. New York: Bertelsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN). The Sustainable Development Report 2020 presents the SDG Index and Dashboards for all UN member states and frames the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in terms of six broad transformations. It was prepared by teams of independent experts at the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) and the Bertelsmann Stiftung.

The Chinn-Ito index (KAOPEN) is an index measuring a country's degree of capital account openness. The index was initially introduced in Chinn and Ito (Journal of Development Economics, 2006). KAOPEN is based on the binary dummy variables that codify the tabulation of restrictions on cross-border financial transactions reported in the IMF's Annual Report on Exchange Arrangements and Exchange Restrictions (AREAER).   Chinn, Menzie D. and Hiro Ito (2008). "A New Measure of Financial Openness". Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, Volume 10, Issue 3, p. 309 – 322 (September). Ito, Hiro (2006). "Financial Development in Asia: Thresholds, Institutions, and the Sequence of Liberalization". North American Journal of Economics and Finance, issue 17(3) (December). Chinn, Menzie D. and Hiro Ito (2006)."What Matters for Financial Development? Capital Controls, Institutions, and Interactions," Journal of Development Economics, Volume 81, Issue 1, Pages 163-192 (October). The longer version is available as NBER Working Paper No. 11370 (May 2005). The previous version is "Capital Account Liberalization, Institutions and Financial Development: Cross Country Evidence," (with Menzie Chinn) NBER Working Paper Series, #8967 (June 2002).  

Data cited at: UN E-Government Knowledgebase - https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/ 1. The EGDI is based on a comprehensive Survey of the online presence of all 193 United Nations Member States, which assesses national websites and how e-government policies and strategies are applied in general and in specific sectors for delivery of essential services. The assessment rates the e-government performance of countries relative to one another as opposed to being an absolute measurement. The results are tabulated and combined with a set of indicators embodying a country’s capacity to participate in the information society, without which e-government development efforts are of limited immediate use. Although the basic model has remained consistent, the precise meaning of these values varies from one edition of the Survey to the next as understanding of the potential of e-government changes and the underlying technology evolves. This is an important distinction because it also implies that it is a comparative framework that seeks to encompass various approaches that may evolve over time instead of advocating a linear path with an absolute goal. 2. E-Government Development Index-EGDI Very High-EGDI (Greater than 0.75) High-EGDI (Between 0.50 and 0.75) Middle-EGDI (Between 0.25 and 0.50) Low-EGDI (Less than 0.25)

The primary World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially-recognized international sources. It presents the most current and accurate global development data available, and includes national, regional and global estimates