Quick viewing(Text Mode)

Social Progress Index

2020 Social Index

1 | socialprogress.org The asks universally important questions about the success of our

SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX

BASIC NEEDS FOUNDATIONS OF WELLBEING OPPORTUNITY

Nutrition & Basic Medical Care Access to Knowledge Personal Rights Do people have enough food to eat and Do people have access to an Are people’s rights as individuals are they receiving basic medical care? educational foundation? protected?

Water & Sanitation Access to Information & Communications Personal Freedom & Choice Can people drink water and keep Can people freely access ideas and Are people free to make their own life themselves clen without getting sick? information from anywhere in the world? choices?

Shelter Do people have adequate housing with Health & Wellness Inclusiveness basic utilities? Do people live long and healthy lives? Is no one excluded from the opportunity to be a contributing member of ?

Personal Safety Do people feel safe? Enviromental Quality Is this society using its resources so they will Access to Advanced Education be available for future generations? Do people have access to the world’s most advanced knowledge?

www.socialprogress.org 2 | socialprogress.org The 2020 Social Progress Index aggregates 50 social and environmental outcome indicators from 163 countries

SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX

BASIC HUMAN NEEDS FOUNDATIONS OF WELLBEING OPPORTUNITY

Nutrition & Basic Medical Care Access to Knowledge Personal Rights Undernourishment Women with no schooling Political rights Maternal mortality rate Primary school enrollment Freedom of expression Child mortality rate Secondary school attainment Freedom of religion Child stunting Gender parity in secondary attainment Access to Deaths from infectious diseases Access to quality education Property rights for women

Water & Sanitation Access to Information & Communications Personal Freedom & Choice Deaths attributable to unsafe water, sanitation and hygiene Mobile telephone subscriptions Vulnerable employment Populations using unsafe or unimproved water sources Internet users Early marriage Populations using unsafe or unimproved sanitation (%) Access to online governance Satisfied demand for contraception Media censorship

Shelter Access to electricity Health & Wellness Inclusiveness air pollution attributable deaths Life expectancy at 60 Acceptance of gays and lesbians Usage of clean fuels and technology for cooking Premature deaths from non-communicable diseases Discrimination and violence against minorities Access to essential services Equality of political power by gender Access to quality healthcare Equality of political power by socioeconomic position Personal Safety Equality of political power by social group Homicide rate Enviromental Quality Perceived criminality Outdoor air pollution attributable deaths Political killings and torture Access to Advanced Education Greenhouse gas emissions Tra!c deaths Expected years of tertiary education Particulate matter Women with advanced education Biome protection Quality weighted universities Citable documents

www.socialprogress.org 3 | socialprogress.org 2020 Social2020 Progress Social IndexProgress results Index

Tier 1

Tier 2

Tier 3

Tier 4

Tier 5

Tier 6

Data unavailable

4 | Tiersocialprogress.org 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Tier 6 Data Unavailable 2020 Social Progress Index rankings (1) Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Rank Country Score Rank Country Score Rank Country Score Rank Country Score 1 92.73 14 89.56 39 81.92 66 72.74 2 92.11 15 89.50 40 81.02 67 72.66 3 91.89 16 89.46 41 80.66 68 72.58 4 91.64 17 Korea, Republic of 89.06 42 80.50 69 72.56 5 91.62 18 88.78 43 79.86 70 72.48 6 91.42 19 88.71 44 78.96 71 Cabo Verde 72.05 7 91.40 20 88.54 45 78.35 8 91.29 21 87.79 46 77.47 9 91.09 22 87.71 47 77.00 10 91.06 23 87.36 48 76.96 11 90.56 24 87.26 49 76.55 12 Ireland 90.35 25 Czechia 86.69 50 76.46 13 90.14 26 86.64 51 76.33 27 85.78 52 75.54 28 85.71 53 75.45 29 85.46 54 75.41 30 84.89 55 75.02 31 84.32 56 74.85 32 83.97 57 74.75 33 83.62 58 74.42 34 83.34 59 74.22 35 83.19 60 74.00 36 83.15 61 73.91 37 83.01 62 73.52 38 82.99 63 73.38 64 73.20 65 Republic of 73.16

5 | socialprogress.org 2020 Social Progress Index rankings (2) Tier 4 Tier 5 Tier 6 Rank Country Score Rank Country Score Rank Country Score Rank Country Score 72 71.52 99 66.60 108 62.41 138 Equatorial 50.08 73 71.50 100 66.12 109 61.67 139 Korea, Democratic Republic of 50.01 74 71.41 101 65.06 110 Timor-Leste 61.08 140 49.87 75 71.12 102 64.98 111 60.04 141 49.25 76 71.07 103 64.86 112 59.98 142 49.00 77 71.05 104 64.11 113 58.35 143 48.95 78 70.81 105 64.02 114 57.60 144 48.79 79 70.72 106 63.93 115 57.10 145 48.59 80 70.60 107 63.52 116 56.99 146 48.53 81 70.58 117 56.80 147 48.51 82 70.26 118 56.27 148 48.46 83 69.92 119 56.20 149 Congo, Republic of 48.45 84 69.49 120 55.99 150 48.29 85 69.37 121 55.56 151 48.16 86 69.36 122 55.34 152 Guinea-Bissau 46.69 87 69.23 123 55.23 153 44.91 88 68.85 124 Gambia, The 55.10 154 Guinea 43.41 89 68.65 125 54.13 155 42.29 90 68.42 126 54.07 156 Congo, Democratic Republic of 42.25 91 68.34 127 53.80 157 42.21 92 68.27 128 Côte d'Ivoire 53.59 158 41.20 93 67.49 129 53.05 159 35.58 94 67.25 130 52.98 160 35.20 95 67.14 131 52.92 161 31.62 96 66.95 132 52.26 162 31.29 97 66.90 133 51.80 163 31.06 98 66.62 134 51.74 135 51.37 136 51.31 137 51.29

6 | socialprogress.org On average, the world is improving…but progress is slow and uneven

Since 2011, the population-weighted world average score has improved by 3.61 points.

2011: 60.63 2020: 64.24

Since 2011, 155 countries (95% of those measured) have improved by one point or more. Three countries (2%) have declined. Of the 155 countries that improved, 69 countries (42%) have improved by five or more points.

7 | socialprogress.org On average, the world is improving…but progress is slow and uneven

8 | socialprogress.org From 2011 to 2020 the world improved Since 2011, the world has on 8 of 12 components improved most on Access to Information and Communications, Access to Advanced Education, Shelter and Water and Sanitation.

World progress has been uneven, with declines in Personal Rights and Inclusiveness, and stagnation on Personal Safety and Environmental Quality.

9 | socialprogress.org GDP is not destiny Across the spectrum, we see how some countries are much better at turning their economic growth into social progress than others. Social Progress Index Score

GDP PPP per capita (in USD)

10 | socialprogress.org Comparing national performance

§ The Social Progress Index disentangles the social and economic aspects of countries’ performance, making it possible to compare a state’s to that of its economic peers.

§ We define a country’s economic peers as the 15 countries closest in GDP per capita PPP.

§ By analyzing a country’s performance relative to its economic peers, we can uncover which countries are best at turning each dollar of income into better social outcomes.

§ We can also analyze the world’s performance relative to its by comparing its scores to the 15 countries closest in GDP to the global average.

11 | socialprogress.org Just 13 countries over-perform on social progress relative to their incomes, while 35 countries are underperformers.

Kyrgyzstan and Ghana over-perform by the greatest margin, while Saudi Arabia and are the biggest underperformers.

12 | socialprogress.org Over- and underperformers on social progress

13 | socialprogress.org Score/Value Strength/Weakness Social Progress Index 64.24/100 WORLD GDP per Capita PPP $ 16,523.04

Score/ Strength/ Score/ Strength/ Score/ Strength/ BASIC HUMAN NEEDS Value Weakness FOUNDATIONS OF WELLBEING Value Weakness OPPORTUNITY Value Weakness 74.65 60.82 57.25

Nutrition & Basic Access to Basic Knowledge 75.18 Personal Rights 60.09 Medical Care 84.63 Women with no schooling 0.11 Political rights (0=no rights; 40=full rights) 19.87 Undernourishment (% of pop.) 9.10 Primary school enrollment Child mortality rate (% of children) 93.94 Freedom of expression (deaths/1,000 live births) 27.99 Secondary school attainment (0=no freedom; 1=full freedom) 0.51 Maternal mortality rate (% of population) 61.97 Freedom of religion 99.37 (0=no freedom; 4=full freedom) 2.32 (deaths/100,000 live births) Gender parity in secondary Access to justice Child stunting (% of children) 21.88 attainment (distance from parity) 0.19 (0=non-existent; 1=observed) 0.58 Deaths from infectious diseases Access to quality education Property rights for women (deaths/100,000) 134.02 (0=unequal; 4=equal) 1.60 (0=no right; 5=full rights) 3.89 Water & Sanitation 74.72 Access to Information & Communications 70.33 Personal Freedom & Choice 63.24 Deaths attributable to unsafe water, Vulnerable employment sanitation and hygiene (per 100,000 Mobile telephone subscriptions (% of employees) 46.76 pop.) 29.64 (subscriptions/100 people) 104.46 Early marriage (% of women) 10.72 Populations using unsafe or Access to online governance unimproved water sources (%) 33.07 (0=low; 1=high) 0.76 Satisfied demand for contraception (% of women) 73.86 Populations using unsafe or Media censorship (0=frequent; unimproved sanitation (%) 28.36 4=rare) 1.75 Corruption (0=high; 100=low) 40.76 Internet users (% of pop) 50.59 Shelter 77.09 Inclusiveness 39.25 Health and Wellness Access to electricity (% of pop.) 89.41 60.88 Acceptance of gays and lesbians (0=low; 100=high) 0.33 Life expectancy at 60 (years) Household air pollution attributable 20.14 63.64 Discrimination and violence against deaths (deaths/100,000) Premature deaths from non- minorities (0=low; 10=high) communicable diseases 7.32 Usage of clean fuels and technology (deaths/100,000) 386.51 Equality of political power by gender for cooking (% of pop.) 61.98 (0=unequal power; 4=equal power) 1.77 Access to essential services (0=none; 100=full coverage) 69.28 Equality of political power by Personal Safety 62.15 socioeconomic position (0=unequal Access to quality healthcare power; 4=equal power) 1.69 Homicide rate (deaths/100,000) 5.83 (0=unequal; 4=equal) 1.63 Equality of political power by social Perceived criminality (1=low; 5=high) 3.63 Enviromental Quality 36.87 group (0=unequal power; 4=equal Political killings and torture power) 1.69 (0=low freedom; 1=high freedom) 0.55 Outdoor air pollution attributable deaths (deaths/100,000) 42.20 Access to Tra!c deaths (deaths/100,000) 16.41 Greenhouse gas emissions (total Advanced Education 66.42 CO2 equivalents) 3458.23 Expected years of tertiary education 2.04 Particulate matter 45.80 Women with advanced education (%) 0.54 Notes Biome protection 8.20 1. On some components and indicators, there are more ranked countries than the number of Quality weighted universities (points) 223.07 countries for which a full index score could be calculated. 2. Overall index, component and dimension scores are on a 0-100 scale; indicators scores are raw Citable documents 0.50 values. Comparing Countries Key Over-and underperfomance is relative to 15 counties of similar GDP per capita Overperforming by 1 or more pts. Underperforming by less than 1 pt. Suriname, Republic of North Macedonia, Barbados, Serbia, Botswana, Lebanon, Dominican Republic, Overperforming by less than 1 pt. Underperforming by 1 or more pts. China, Thailand, Gabon, Turkmenistan, Brazil, Maldives, Iran, Colombia Performing within the expected range No data available.

14 | socialprogress.org Degree of world underperformance The world underperforms relative to its income on 7 Water and Sanitation components. Personal Rights

The world lags most on Nutrition and Basic Medical Care Water and Sanitation and Shelter Personal Rights. Access to Basic Knowledge

Health and Wellness

Personal Safety

15 | socialprogress.org Score/Value Rank Strength/Weakness Social Progress Index 85.71/100 28/163 UNITED STATES GDP per Capita PPP $62,683 8/163

Score/ Rank Strength/ Score/ Rank Strength/ Score/ Rank Strength/ BASIC HUMAN NEEDS Value Weakness FOUNDATIONS OF WELLBEING Value Weakness OPPORTUNITY Value Weakness 92.08 34 83.14 37 81.89 14

Nutrition & Basic Access to Basic Knowledge 92.42 44 Personal Rights 90.84 36 Medical Care 97.61 29 Women with no schooling 0.00 27 Political rights (0=no rights; 40=full rights) 33.00 64 Undernourishment (% of pop.) 2.50 1 Primary school enrollment Child mortality rate (% of children) 99.61 27 Freedom of expression (deaths/1,000 live births) 6.53 45 Secondary school attainment (0=no freedom; 1=full freedom) 0.90 36 Maternal mortality rate (% of population) 95.60 24 Freedom of religion 29.34 73 (0=no freedom; 4=full freedom) 3.78 32 (deaths/100,000 live births) Gender parity in secondary Access to justice Child stunting (% of children) 2.32 3 attainment (distance from parity) 0.00 1 (0=non-existent; 1=observed) 0.93 25 Deaths from infectious diseases Access to quality education Property rights for women (deaths/100,000) 21.54 42 (0=unequal; 4=equal) 2.23 91 (0=no right; 5=full rights) 4.61 57 Water & Sanitation 98.97 24 Access to Information & Communications 93.30 11 Personal Freedom & Choice 84.96 19 Deaths attributable to unsafe water, Vulnerable employment sanitation and hygiene (per 100,000 Mobile telephone subscriptions (% of employees) 3.84 8 pop.) 0.28 35 (subscriptions/100 people) 129.01 1 Early marriage (% of women) 3.40 50 Populations using unsafe or Access to online governance unimproved water sources (%) 0.32 15 (0=low; 1=high) 1.00 1 Satisfied demand for contraception (% of women) 82.40 33 Populations using unsafe or Media censorship (0=frequent; unimproved sanitation (%) 2.91 41 4=rare) 3.20 45 Corruption (0=high; 100=low) 69.00 22 Internet users (% of pop) 87.27 28 Shelter 97.93 17 Inclusiveness 61.24 35 Health and Wellness Access to electricity (% of pop.) 100.00 1 74.66 42 Acceptance of gays and lesbians (0=low; 100=high) 0.80 13 Life expectancy at 60 (years) Household air pollution attributable 23.27 41 11.08 17 Discrimination and violence against deaths (deaths/100,000) Premature deaths from non- minorities (0=low; 10=high) communicable diseases 6.20 100 Usage of clean fuels and technology (deaths/100,000) 282.19 54 Equality of political power by gender for cooking (% of pop.) 95.00 1 (0=unequal power; 4=equal power) 2.43 45 Access to essential services (0=none; 100=full coverage) 88.03 31 Equality of political power by Personal Safety 73.82 57 socioeconomic position (0=unequal Access to quality healthcare power; 4=equal power) 2.19 84 Homicide rate (deaths/100,000) 4.96 95 (0=unequal; 4=equal) 2.04 97 Equality of political power by social Perceived criminality (1=low; 5=high) 3.00 37 Enviromental Quality 72.18 119 group (0=unequal power; 4=equal Political killings and torture power) 2.75 49 (0=low freedom; 1=high freedom) 0.91 39 Outdoor air pollution attributable deaths (deaths/100,000) 15.04 28 Access to Tra!c deaths (deaths/100,000) 12.20 76 Greenhouse gas emissions (total Advanced Education 90.53 1 CO2 equivalents) 6510.00 189 Expected years of tertiary education 4.00 15 Particulate matter 7.24 9 Women with advanced education (%) 0.90 22 Notes Biome protection 9.14 122 1. On some components and indicators, there are more ranked countries than the number of Quality weighted universities (points) 1072.60 1 countries for which a full index score could be calculated. 2. Overall index, component and dimension scores are on a 0-100 scale; indicators scores are raw Citable documents 1.85 30 values. Comparing Countries Key Over-and underperfomance is relative to 15 counties of similar GDP per capita Overperforming by 1 or more pts. Underperforming by less than 1 pt. Norway, Netherlands, Denmark, Iceland, United Arab Emirates, Austria, Switzerland, Germany, Swe- Overperforming by less than 1 pt. Underperforming by 1 or more pts. den, Belgium, Kuwait, Australia, Canada, Finland, Saudi Arabia Performing within the expected range No data available.

16 | socialprogress.org G7 social progress 2011-2020

The US is the only G7 country that has gone backwards on social progress. It is also one of only 3 countries where social progress has declined, along with Brazil and Hungary.

Italy

Canada

Japan

France

Germany

United Kingdom

United States

-1 0 1 2 3 4 5

17 | socialprogress.org US social progress: 2011 to 2020 Since 2011, the United States has improved most on Access to Information and Communications and Environmental Quality.

There have been significant declines in Personal Safety, Personal Rights and Inclusiveness.

18 | socialprogress.org The Social Progress Index captures outcomes related to all 17 Sustainable Development Goals in a simple but rigorous framework designed for aggregation, making it an invaluable proxy measure of SDG performance.

19 | socialprogress.org The Social Progress Index and the SDGs

SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX

BASIC HUMAN NEEDS FOUNDATIONS OF WELLBEING OPPORTUNITY

Nutrition & Basic Medical Care Access to Knowledge Personal Rights

Water & Sanitation Access to Information & Communications Personal Freedom & Choice

Shelter Health & Wellness Inclusiveness

Personal Safety Enviromental Quality Access to Advanced Education

www.socialprogress.org

20 | socialprogress.org Covid-19 pandemic threatens to set progress against the Sustainable Development Goals back a full decade

71.50 72.57 76.98 100.00 100.00

2015 2020 2030 2082 2092

Based on 2020 Social Progress Index projections, if current trends continue the world won’t achieve the Sustainable Development Goals 2082 – missing the 2030 target by more than a half-century.

And unless urgent actions are taken, the Covid-19 pandemic and accompanying economic crisis risk setting social progress in the world back by another decade, pushing out achieving the SDGs until 2092. www.socialprogress.org

21 | socialprogress.org Majority across countries hit hardest by the pandemic prioritize social progress over economic growth

Social Progress Index-Ipsos global poll – July/August 2020 7 out of every 10 people prioritize health and wellbeing over GDP during coronavirus crisis. Thinking about the current situation with Covid-19…which should your country prioritize more? Health & wellbeing 72%

Economic growth 28%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% More than half still want their country to prioritize social outcomes when the pandemic is over. Imagining when the Covid-19 pandemic is over…which should your country prioritize more? Social outcomes 53%

Economic growth 47%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Poll conducted between July 24 and August 7 2020 in random sample of adults in 13 countries - Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, India, Italy, Mexico, Peru, South Africa, Spain, Russia, UK and US.

22 | socialprogress.org From Index to Action to Impact Delivering local data and insight that is meaningful, relevant and actionable

Municipalities of Iceland are using SPI to localize and implement action towards the SDGs Youth Progress Index provides the most comprehensive analysis on the quality of life of East London Borough of Barking Canadian bank ATB Financial is young people around the world adopting SPI to understand how well & Dagenham ward level SPI guides business and in Alberta resource and service allocations, convert resources into social wellbeing generating £3 million in annual savings

European Union regional US city-level SPIs empower SPI provides a roadmap for mayors and business leaders City of San Jose uses SPI with new insight to prioritize policymakers to guide €350 billion+ to map social progress and policies and investments in EU Cohesion Policy spending skills gaps to reveal key workforce needs India state and district-level Coca-Cola and Natura used SPIs developed with government SPI to slow rural-to-urban think tank benchmarks performance Costa Rica uses SPI-based and guides CSR investments tool to assist government in migration to safeguarding their reopening strategies for supply chains in Brazil’s rainforest cantons and tourist destinations

City-level SPI in Colombia informs policy and tracks progress

Minsur uses local SPIs to prioritize investments to South Africa provincial improve social progress in its SPI helps unify public and Australia state-level SPI mining communities in Peru private sectors to improve the Government of Paraguay adopted fosters cross-sector country’s social outcomes SPI to set development targets and collaboration to address allocate budgets to achieve child shared social issues nutrition and education goals Global network of local partners delivering subnational Social Progress Indexes that have revealed the true state of the society for more than 2.7 billion people across 45+ countries.

23 | socialprogress.org Our partners and supporters The Social Progress Imperative is grateful to our many generous supporters, particularly our Strategic Partners for their collaboration and critical multi-year support.

Strategic partners

Major supporters

24 | socialprogress.org Thank you Appendix: Methodology

26 | socialprogress.org Social Progress Index design principles

27 | socialprogress.org Social Progress Index indicator selection

What is the source of this indicator?

Widely reputable and the methods Unknown, uses biased methods, it uses are sound or lacks rigorous data collection

How old are the data points?

Most data points are more than Reasonably current 5-10 years old

How many geographic regions does this indicator cover?

Fewer than 95% of the geographic 95-100% of geographic regions regions in the Index

SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX

28 | socialprogress.org Component methodology

Componentc = ( wi ∗ indicatori ) !

Each component is calculated as the weighted sum of the individual indicators, where the weights are determined by factor analysis.

29 | socialprogress.org Calculating dimensions and aggregate index

For each dimension, we calculate the sum of each of the components: 1 Dimension = Component d 4 c c

The Social Progress Index is the sum across the three dimensions:

1 SPI = Dimension 3 d d

30 | socialprogress.org

Top View