Sustainable Governance Indicators
The Sustainable Governance Indicators (SGI) are a project of the Bertelsmann Foundation . On the basis of 147 individual indicators, the SGI systematically assess the need for reform in politics , the economy and society as well as the reform and governance capabilities of 31 OECD countries. Around 80 experts are involved in the current round of the study , which covers the period from May 2008 to April 2010. The first edition of the SGI ran from 2005 to March 2007.
method
A country's need for reform is summarized in the Sustainable Governance Indicators in the Status Index, and the ability to reform in the Management Index. Two established scientists analyzed the OECD member states. Both local and international experts are involved in order to identify and reduce subjective assessments by the experts. In order to cover interdisciplinary expertise, the experts include both political scientists and economists . Scientists with a focus on comparative political science combined the experts' reports into a country report.
SGI and the Bertelsmann Transformation Index
The SGI are based on the methodological scheme of the Bertelsmann Stiftung's Transformation Index ( Bertelsmann Transformation Index , BTI), which has been comparing 128 countries in transition with regard to their progress in democracy and market economies since 2003 . In contrast to the BTI, the Sustainable Governance Indicators are based on a different assessment standard for the 31 OECD countries examined, since the OECD countries can already be viewed as consolidated market-based democracies.
Status index
When examining the need for reform (Status Index), two basic dimensions are analyzed in the SGI:
- The first dimension of the Status Index shows the quality of a country's democracy. Categories such as “ electoral process ”, “information access”, “ civil rights ” and “ rule of law ” are examined.
- The second dimension of the Status Index relates to the level of performance of the OECD countries in various policy areas that are of central importance for the future viability of a society. Here the areas of “ economy and employment ”, “ social affairs ”, “ security ” and “ resources ” are considered, which in turn are based on 15 different policy areas.
Management Index
When analyzing a country's ability to reform, the Management Index is also based on two dimensions:
- On the one hand, the Management Index evaluates the respective strategic control and problem-solving ability of a government in the dimension “government performance”; The central analysis categories here are “management skills”, “policy implementation ” and “institutional learning”.
- On the other hand, the management index provides information on the extent to which actors outside the executive - citizens , parliaments and mediating organizations ( media , parties and associations ) - increase the problem-solving ability of governments through their respective control and communication services.
The SGI are re-assessed by the Bertelsmann Foundation every two to three years.
Results
Status Index 2011
The Northern European countries dominate the top group in the Status Index. At the same time, with Anglo-Saxon New Zealand and continental-European Switzerland, two countries with a different political and welfare state tradition are represented at the top of the ranking. The middle field (Canada, Australia, Germany, Iceland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, USA, Ireland, Great Britain, Belgium, Austria, Czech Republic, France, Portugal, Japan, Chile, Spain and Poland) and the bottom group (South Korea, Italy, Slovakia, Mexico , Greece and Turkey) are geographically and culturally at least as heterogeneous as the top group.
Common typologies of comparative political science cannot explain the positions of the OECD countries in the Status Index. Majority democracies, for example, do neither systematically better nor systematically worse than consensus democracies. The division of the countries into federal and centralized states does not help to explain the different reform activities either. Within the top group, the Scandinavians mainly represent states of the social democratic welfare state type. With New Zealand, Switzerland and Canada in the upper midfield, more liberal welfare states also have high scores. Overall, a look at the results of the Status Index shows that the long-standing and established OECD members tend to achieve higher scores - with exceptions: Chile as a new member achieved a placement in the lower midfield, and Italy and Greece are significantly worse placed than some of the Eastern European countries. The tendency is for the small, open economies to pursue particularly sustainable policies.
Management Index 2011
At the highest aggregation level of the Management Index, the overview provides the first important indications as to which countries show the best overall governance performance and which countries still have some catching up to do. In-depth background information on the performance of a country is provided by the detailed country reports on the SGI website with well-founded, qualitative information down to the level of the individual indicators.
The SGI Management Index is led quite clearly by Sweden and Norway. Both countries have an average of more than 8 points. Behind are Denmark, Finland, New Zealand and Australia. Even if the overall excellent performance of the Northern European countries is striking, as in the Status Index, the very good result of the Anglo-Saxon systems of New Zealand and Australia shows that not necessarily a certain political "system type" is decisive for a successful performance in the Management Index. This top group is followed by a broad middle field, which then only shows changes in the index values in rather small steps, so that no clear form of group formation can be observed here. However, the clear worst performers in the survey are Greece and Slovakia. Both are almost a full point behind Italy, which is in 29th place. Particularly noteworthy is the new OECD member Chile, which is already ahead of some of the established long-term OECD member states.
summary of results
The results of the SGI show that there is a strong correlation between a country's level of performance and its ability to implement reforms. Countries that have a strong executive capacity and a high quality of democracy, as well as fully involving social actors in the political process, are more successful in terms of both sustainability and social justice .
See also
- Bertelsmann Foundation
- Bertelsmann Transformation Index
- Good governance
- Sustainability
- sustainability
Web links
swell
- ↑ http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/cps/rde/xchg/bst/hs.xsl/prj_52957.htm
- ↑ http://www.bertelsmann-transformation-index.de/4.0.html?&L=0
- ↑ Stefan Empter & Josef Janning (2009): Sustainable Governance Indicators 2009 - An Introduction, in: Bertelsmann Stiftung (ed.): Sustainable Governance Indicators 2009. Policy Performance and Executive Capacity in the OECD. Gütersloh: Verlag Bertelsmann Stiftung, 2009. p.15.
- ↑ http://www.sgi-network.org/index.php?page=index&index=status
- ^ Sustainable Governance Indicators 2009. Policy Performance and Executive Capacity in the OECD. p. 22nd
- ↑ http://sgi-network.org/pdf/SGI11_Social_Justice_DE.pdf