Global Peace Index

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Global Peace Index 2017 (countries appearing with a deeper shade of green are ranked as more peaceful, countries appearing more red are ranked as less peaceful)
The Institute for Economics and Peace produces the Global Peace Index

Global Peace Index (GPI) measures the relative position of nations' and regions' peacefulness.[1] The GPI ranks 163 independent states and territories according to their levels of peacefulness.

The GPI is a report produced by  the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) and developed in consultation with an international panel of peace experts from peace institutes and think tanks with data collected and collated by the Economist Intelligence Unit. The Index was first launched in May 2007, with subsequent reports being released annually, it is claimed to be the first study to rank countries around the world according to their peacefulness. In 2017 it ranked 163 countries, up from 121 in 2007; in the past decade, the GPI has presented trends of increased global violence and less peacefulness.[2] The study is the brainchild of Australian technology entrepreneur Steve Killelea, founder of Integrated Research, and is endorsed by individuals such as former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annanthe Dalai Lama, archbishop Desmond Tutu, former President of Finland and 2008 Nobel Peace Prize laureate Martti Ahtisaari, Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus, economist Jeffrey Sachs, former president of Ireland Mary Robinson, former Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations Jan Eliasson and former United States president Jimmy Carter. The updated index is released each year at events in London, Washington, DC; and at the United Nations Secretariat in New York between many others.

The GPI  gauges global peace using three broad themes: the level of societal safety and security, the extent of ongoing domestic and international conflict and the degree of militarization.[1] Factors are both internal such as levels of violence and crime within the country and external such as military expenditure and wars. It has been criticised by Riane Eisler for not including indicators specifically relating to violence against women and children, however reliable international data on these subjects is either unavailable or very sparsely reported in many countries.

The 2017 GPI indicates IcelandNew ZealandPortugalAustria, and Denmark to be the most peaceful countries and SyriaAfghanistanIraqSouth Sudan, and Yemen to be the least peaceful.[3] Long-term findings of the 2017 GPI include a less peaceful world over the past decade, a 2.14 per cent deterioration in the global level of peace in the past decade, growing inequality in peace between the most and least peaceful countries, a long-term reduction in the GPI Militarization domain, and a widening impact of terrorism, with historically high numbers of people killed in terrorist incidents over the past 5 years.[1]

Expert panel[edit]

The expert panel for the 2016 and 2017 GPI consisted of:

·      Professor Kevin P. Clements, Foundation Chair of Peace and Conflict Studies and Director, National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Otago, New Zealand

·      Dr Sabina Alkire, Director, Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative (OPHI), University of Oxford, United Kingdom

·      Dr Ian Anthony, Research Coordinator and Director of the Programme on Arms Control, Disarmament and Non-proliferation, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Sweden

·      Ms Isabelle Arrandon, Director of Research and Deputy Director of Communications & Outreach, International Crisis Group, Belgium

·      Dr Manuela Mesa, Director, Centre for Education and Peace Research (CEIPAZ) and President, Spanish Association for Peace Research (AIPAZ), Madrid, Spain

·      Mr Nick Grono, CEO, The Freedom Fund, United Kingdom

·      Dr Ekaterina Stepanova, Head, Unit on Peace and Conflict Studies, Institute of the World Economy and International Relations (IMEMO), Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia

Methodology[edit]

In assessing peacefulness, the GPI investigates the extent to which countries are involved in ongoing domestic and international conflicts, it also seeks to evaluate the level of harmony or discord within a nation; ten indicators broadly assess what might be described as a safety and security in society. The assertion is that low crime rates, minimal incidences of terrorist acts and violent demonstrations, harmonious relations with neighboring countries, a stable political scene and a small proportion of the population being internally displaced or refugees can be suggestive of peacefulness.

In 2017, 23 indicators were used to establish each country’s peacefulness score, the indicators were originally selected with the assistance of an expert panel in 2007 and are reviewed by the expert panel on an annual basis. The scores for each indicator are normalized on a scale of 1-5, whereby qualitative indicators are banded into five groupings and quantitative ones are scored from 1-5, to the third decimal point. A table of the indicators is below;[4] in the table, UCDP stands for the Uppsala Conflict Data Program maintained by the University of Uppsala in Sweden, EIU for The Economist Intelligence Unit, UNSCT for the United Nations Survey of Criminal Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems, ICPS is the International Center for Prison Studies at King's College London, IISS for the International Institute for Strategic Studies publication The Military Balance, and SIPRI for the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Arms Transfers Database.

# Indicator Source Coding
1 Number and duration of internal conflicts[5] UCDP, IEP Total number
2 Number of deaths from external organized conflict UCDP Armed Conflict Dataset Total number
3 Number of deaths from internal organised conflict International Institute for Strategic Studies, Armed Conflict Database Total number
4 Number, duration, and role in external conflicts UCDP Battle-related Deaths Dataset, IEP Total number
5 Intensity of organised internal conflict EIU Qualitative scale, ranked 1 to 5
6 Relations with neighbouring countries EIU Qualitative scale, ranked 1 to 5
7 Level of perceived criminality in society EIU Qualitative scale, ranked 1 to 5
8 Number of refugees and displaced persons as percentage of population UNHCR and IDMC Refugee population by country or territory of origin, plus the number of a country's internally displaced people (IDP's) as a percentage of the country's total population
9 Political instability EIU Qualitative scale, ranked 1 to 5
10 Impact of terrorism Global Terrorism Index  (IEP) Quantitative scale, ranked 1 to 5
11 Political terror Amnesty International and US State Department Qualitative scale, ranked 1 to 5
12 Number of homicides per 100,000 people UNODC Surveys on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (CTS); EIU estimates Total number
13 Level of violent crime EIU Qualitative scale, ranked 1 to 5
14 Likelihood of violent demonstrations EIU Qualitative scale, ranked 1 to 5
15 Number of jailed persons per 100,000 people  World Prison Brief, Institute for Criminal Policy Research at Birkbeck, University of London Total number
16 Number of internal security officers and police per 100,000 people UNODC CTS; EIU estimates Total number; Civil police force distinct from national guards or local militia[6]
17 Military expenditure as a percentage of GDP The Military Balance and IISS Cash outlays of central or federal government to meet costs of national armed forces, as a percentage of GDP, scores from 1 to 5 based on percentages[7]
18 Number of armed-services personnel per 100,000 The Military Balance and IISS All full-time active armed-services personnel
19 Volume of transfers of major conventional weapons as recipient (imports) per 100,000 people SIPRI Arms Transfers Database Imports of major conventional weapons per 100,000 people[8]
20 Volume of transfers of major conventional weapons as supplier (exports) per 100,000 people SIPRI Arms Transfers Database Exports of major conventional weapons per 100,000 people
21 Financial contribution to UN peacekeeping missions United Nations Committee on Contributions and IEP percentage of countries’ “outstanding payments versus their annual assessment to the budget of the current peacekeeping missions” over an average of three years, scored from 1-5 scale based on percentage of promised contributions met   
22 Nuclear and heavy weapons capability The Military Balance, IISS, SIPRI, UN Register of Conventional Arms and IEP  1-5 scale based on accumulated points; 1 point per armoured vehicle and artillery pieces, 5 points per tank, 20 points per combat aircraft, 100 points per warship, 1000 points for aircraft carrier and nuclear submarine[9]
23 Ease of access to small arms and light weapons EIU Qualitative scale, ranked 1 to 5

Indicators not already ranked on a 1 to 5 scale were converted by using the following formula: x=(x-Min(x))/(Max(x)-Min(x)) where Max(x) and Min(x) are the highest and lowest values for that indicator of the countries ranked in the index, the 0 to 1 scores that resulted were then converted to the 1 to 5 scale. Individual indicators were then weighted according to the expert panel's judgment of their importance, the scores were then tabulated into two weighted sub-indices: internal peace, weighted at 60% of a country's final score, and external peace, weighted at 40% of a country's final score. ‘Negative Peace’ which is defined as the absence of violence, or fear of violence is used as the definition of peace to create the Global Peace Index. An additional aim of the GPI database is to facilitate deeper study of the concept of positive peace, or those attitudes, institutions, and structures that drive peacefulness in society. The GPI also examines relationships between peace and reliable international measures, including democracy and transparency, education and material well-being. As such, it seeks to understand the relative importance of a range of potential determinants, or "drivers", which may influence the nurturing of peaceful societies, both internally and externally.[10]

The main findings of the 2017 Global Peace Index are:[1]

  • The overall score for the 2017 GPI improved slightly this year due to gains in six of the nine geographical regions represented. More countries improved their levels of peacefulness, than deteriorated: 93 compared to 68.
  • Peacebuilding activities can be highly cost-effective, providing cost savings 16 times the cost of the intervention.
  • The global economic impact of violence was $14.3 trillion PPP in 2016, equivalent to 12.6 per cent of global GDP, or $1,953 per person.
  •  In Low-Peace environments, the factors that matter the most are related to Well-Functioning Government, Low Levels of Corruption, Acceptance of the Rights of Others and Good Relations with Neighbours
  • Due to armed conflict in MENA, many related indicators such as deaths from internal conflict, number of refugees and IDPs, and organised internal conflict are at high levels.
  • Safety and Security improved due to many countries recording a lower homicide rate and lower levels of political terror.

Statistical analysis is applied to GPI data to uncover specific conditions conducive of peace. Researchers have determined that Positive Peace, which includes the attitudes, institutions, and structures that pre-empt conflict and facilitate functional societies, is the main driver of peace, the eight pillars of positive peace are well-functioning government, sound business environment, acceptance of the rights of others, good relations with neighbors, free flow of information, high levels of human capital, low levels of corruption, and equitable distribution of resources. Well-functioning government, low levels of corruption, acceptance of the rights of others and good relations with neighbours are more important in countries suffering from high levels of violence. Free flow of information and sound business environment become more important when a country is approaching the global average level of peacefulness, also described as the Mid-Peace level. Low levels of corruption is the only Pillar that is strongly significant across all three levels of peacefulness, this suggests it is an important transformational factor at all stages of nations’ development.

International Response to the GPI [edit]

The Index has received endorsements as a political project from a number of major international figures, including the former Secretary-General of the United Nations Kofi Annan, former President of Finland and 2008 Nobel Peace Prize laureate Martti Ahtisaari, the Dalai Lama, archbishop Desmond TutuMuhammad Yunus, and former United States President Jimmy Carter[11] Steve Killelea A.M., the Australian philanthropist who conceived the idea of the Index, argues that the Index "is a wake-up call for leaders around the globe.[12]

The Index has been widely recognized. Professor Jeffrey Sachs, Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University said: "The GPI continues its pioneering work in drawing the world’s attention to the massive resources we are squandering in violence and conflict. The lives and money wasted in wars, incarcerations, weapons systems, weapons trade, and more, could be directed to ending poverty, promoting education, and protecting the environment, the GPI will not only draw attention to these crucial issues, but help us understand them and to invest productively in a more peaceful world.”[13]

Marla Mossman of the Peace Alliance Leadership Council said she believes that the measurements of the Global Peace Index can be useful for crafting government policy, helping governments to identify problems and develop practical and relevant policies. Furthermore, she said that she saw the Index indicators as, “the measurements of the health of the nation. So we really can take the temperature of the world: are we healthy? Do we have a fever?”[14]

Following the release of the 2015 GPI, Professor Sir Lawrence Freedman of King’s College in London called the Index, “an extraordinarily useful body of information,” and its analysis “the best indicator of future conflict is past conflict, the challenge is how we break that cycle.” [15]

The Economist, in publishing the first edition of the index in 2007, admitted that, "the index will run into some flak." Specifically, according to The Economist, the weighting of military expenditure "may seem to give heart to freeloaders: countries that enjoy peace precisely because others (often the USA) care for their defense." The true utility of the index may lie not in its specific rankings of countries now, but in how those rankings change over time, thus tracking when and how countries become more or less peaceful.[16]

In 2012, the Economist suggested that “quantifying peace is a bit like trying to describe how happiness smells.” The publication admitted that the GPI has produced some “surprising results” and argued that “part of the appeal of the index is that readers can examine each of the variables in turn and think about how much weight to add to each.”[17]

The Australian National University says that the GPI report “presents the latest and most comprehensive global data on trends in peace, violence and war” and “provides the world’s best analysis of the statistical factors associated with long-term peace as well as economic analysis on the macroeconomic impacts of everyday violence and war on the global economy.”[18]

The GPI has been criticised for not including indicators specifically relating to violence against women and children. Back in 2007, Riane Eisler, writing in the Christian Science Monitor, argued that, "to put it mildly, this blind spot makes the index very inaccurate. She mentions a number of specific cases, including Egypt, where she claims 90% of women are subject to genital mutilation, and China, where, she says, "female infanticide is still a problem," according to a 2000 UNICEF study.[19]

Senior Analyst at the Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis, Sabhat Khan, argued that the Index should “involve more context on security environments.” Referring to the UAE’s GPI ranking in particular, Khan argued that “the measurement usually used by such rankings is crude data without contextualising them;”[20] for example, the UAE must bolster its security apparatus to respond to turbulence in neighbouring countries such as Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, which all rank at the very bottom of the GPI.

World Leaders Talking about the GPI[edit]

During a Peace Forum in August 2017, Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez said that “receiving such high praise from an institute that once named this country the most violent in the world is extremely significant…My administration will keep fighting to protect all Honduran citizens.” The President has recently launched an initiative to build a series of safe parks across Honduras and hopes to see further improvement reflected in future GPI rankings.[21]

Malaysia ranked 29th in the 2017 GPI, the country’s Communications and Multimedia Minister, Datuk Seri Salleh Said Keruak said that this ranking along with Malaysia’s high place in the 2017 World Happiness Report was proof that the “government’s efforts have made Malaysia a safe and prosperous country.” He also admitted, “there’s still much room for improvement to make Malaysia the best among the better countries and that’s what we’re doing now.”[22]

After the release of the 2016 GPI, the Botswanan Office of the President released a proud statement, “in this year’s Index, Botswana was ranked as 28 out of 163 countries, up 3 places from last year, this continues to place Botswana above over half of the European region countries surveyed as well as all five of the Permanent Members of the United Nations Security Council…in addition Botswana was one of only five countries, to achieve a perfect score in the domestic and international conflict domain.”[23]

Navid Hanif, Director of the United Nations Office for ECOSOC Support and Coordination said, “it’s intuitive that peace is useful and peacefullness is a reward in itself, but the IEP is trying to make the conclusion more evidence-based. Now that the index covers 99% of the population, it has come a long way, the report systemically measures peacefulness and identifies the determinants of peace.” [24]

Reacting to the 2017 results of the GPI, which ranked the Philippines 138 out of 163 countries, mainly because of poor scores in societal safety and security due to President Duterte’s war on drugs, Philippine Presidential spokesman Ernesto Abella countered, “We’re not entirely sure where the GPI, Global Peace Index analyst… who apparently is supposed to be a local, is really coming from. Maybe there’s a political slant somewhere…based on survey results, the net satisfaction of Filipino people is quite high.” [25]

Sierra Leone ranked 39th in the 2017 Global Peace Index. Former Chief of Staff and Office of National Security (ONS) advisor, Dr. Jonathan PJ Sandy, “Welcomed the 2017 Global Peace Index report released recently which ranked Sierra Leone in first position, as the most peaceful country in West Africa and third in the African continent…He observed that going by the report itself, [future] elections might be successfully held.” Presidential Spokesman, Abdulai Bayraytay “said the favourable Global Peace rating of Sierra Leone would serve as an impetus for the country to do more.”[26]

Media Coverage[edit]

The Independent: Global Peace Index: US Facing New Era of Instability as Middle East Sinks Further into Turmoil: “An annual global peace index has concluded that US political turmoil had pushed North America into deep instability in 2016 while the Middle East sank deeper into turmoil. Despite depicting tumult across continents, the 2017 Global Peace Index said the world had overall become more peaceful in the past year when measured against a range of indicators.”[27]

BBC: Global Peace Index 2017: World 0.28% more peaceful than last year: “Levels of peace around the world have improved slightly for the first time since the Syrian war began, but harmony has decreased in the US and terrorism records have increased, a Sydney-based think-tank has found.”[28]

Forbes: “The Global Peace Index, which the Institute compiles annually, paints a sombre picture: The world has become even less peaceful in 2016, continuing a decade-long trend of increased violence and strife. Published every year since 2008, the Index ranks 163 independent states and territories by their level of peacefulness.” [2]

Forbes: The World's Most and Least Peaceful Countries [Infographic]: “The 2017 Global Peace Index has found that the world has become a slightly safer place over the past year. However, the political fallout and deep rooted division brought on by the US presidential election campaign has led to a deterioration of peace levels in North America.”[29]

The Guardian: Fraught White House Campaign Blamed as US Bucks Global Trend Towards Peace: “The divisive nature of Donald Trump’s rise to the White House has increased mistrust of the US government and means social problems are likely to become more entrenched, said the authors of the annual Global Peace Index, in which 163 countries and territories are analysed.”[30]

HuffingtonPost: Global Peace Index 2017: Donald Trump Fallout Causes North America To Plummet Down Ranking: “While the world became a safer place to live overall, the 2017 Global Peace Index found disruption caused by the perception of corruption and attacks on media in the US led to its deterioration.”[31]

The Washington Times: U.S. Ranked the 114th Most Peaceful Nation on Earth says Annual Global Ranking: “The index is produced by the Australia-based Institute for Economics and Peace, which figures that the impact of strife worldwide is $14.3 trillion. News is not all bad, though; in a nutshell, the index found that 93 nations became ‘more peaceful’ in the last year, 68 were ‘less peaceful.’”[32]

Business Insider: The 12 Safest Countries in the World: “The think tank Institute for Economics and Peace recently published the Global Peace Index 2017, which reveals the safest — as well as the most dangerous — countries in the world. The report ranked 163 countries based on how peaceful they are, the rankings were determined by 23 factors, which included homicide rate, political terror, and deaths from internal conflict.”[33]

Sputnik International: Terrorism, Conflicts Cost Over $14 Trillion to Global Economy: “According to the latest estimation by the Global Peace Index that annually analyses the costs of security of living in countries and regions, worldwide terrorism is at an all-time high.”[14]

Indian news websites, ZeeNews, HindustanTimes, and Jagran Josh: The three Indian news agencies described the GPI’s ranking system, global peace trends, highlights from that year’s GPI and India’s own placement in the GPI, the Hindustan Times quoted the GPI and emphasized that “violence impacted India’s economy by USD 679.80 billion in 2016, 9 % of India’s GDP, or USD 525 per person”.,,[34][35][36]

Philstar, Filipino newspaper: “Among all the163 countries, the Philippines is ranked 138, for perspective, India is ranked just one notch above, at 137. Despite this low ranking, however, it has remained relatively stable in this low rank over time a long time. Though the raw score has worsened over the previous year, the country’s rank has not been far off from this rank in previous years…Though the point of view of the report deserves respect concerning societal safety, another side of the story needs more hearing internationally.” [37]

World Economic Forum: These are the Most Peaceful Countries in the World: “The Global Peace Index ranks 163 countries according to their domestic and international conflicts, safety and security and degree of militarization. It found 93 had improved, while 68 had deteriorated, and overall peace levels had inched up 0.28%.” [38]

Academic References[edit]

The International Journal of Press/Politics: Social Media and the Arab Spring: Politics comes first”: This article utilized the findings of the 2010 GPI to construct a human rights index, which was used in their overall study on the use of social media in political uprisings, and in the Arab Spring context in particular.[39]

Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development: “Security Challenges in Nigeria and the Implications for Business Activities and Sustainable Development”: The study utilizes GPI scores from 2009-2012 to examine implications for Nigeria’s business environment and overall progress in national security.[40]

Contemporary Security Policy: “Failed states and international order: constructing a post-Westphalian world”: The Global Peace Index, along with four other global indices, is used in this study’s ranking of ‘state failure’. “Although this index focuses primarily on trends of armed conflict and violence it is relevant to state weakness and failure as the indicators measured for the assessment of ‘peace’ in this context are also indicative of state capacity.” [41]

Biological Reviews: “Does Infectious Disease cause Global Variation in the Frequency of Intrastate Armed Conflict and Civil War?”: This study used the 2008 Global Peace Index to build what they call a ‘path analysis,’ in which they sought to uncover “whether infectious disease causes the emergence of a collectivist culture.” [42]

Political Research Quarterly: “Measuring the Rule of Law”: This article attempts to measure the rule of law, and in doing so “correlated the rule of law indices with a measure of violent crime (for 2007) included in the Global Peace Index.” [43]

Applied Energy: “The Analysis of Security Cost for Different Energy Sources”: This study utilized the Global Peace Index in calculating a disruption probability from geopolitical instability, with the overall aim of analysing security costs for different sources of energy.[44]

International Political Science Review: “Measuring Effective Democracy: A Defence”: In the construction of an effective democracy index (EDI), the authors built a table that includes 2008 GPI scores as a dependent variable in a regression analysis of economic development and various indices of democracy.[45]

Institute for Security Studies: “African Futures 2050- The Next Forty Years”: The African human security research institution utilized the findings of the Global Peace Index of 2010 to emphasize trends in drug crime and violence on the African continent.[46], [47]

Nature Communications: “Global Priorities for an Effective Information Basis of Biodiversity Distributions”: In their article about insufficient digital accessible information about ecosystems and biodiversity, the authors utilized the GPI to model the “effects of secure conditions” based on the index as a measure of political stability, armed conflict, and public safety levels.[48]

Nordic Journal of Religion and Society: “Why are Danes and Swedes so Irreligious”: This article uses the Global Peace Index, and its very high rankings of Denmark (3rd in 2008) and Sweden (13th in 2008) to support claims that the countries’ lack of religiosity can be linked to prosperous societal structures.[49]

Food Security: “Tracking phosphorus security: indicators of phosphorus vulnerability in the global food system”: Along with eleven other indicators, the GPI was used as a measure of political instability for the development of a utilized in the development of a phosphorus vulnerability analysis, aimed at formulating food production methods and government policy.[50]

World Politics: “The System Worked: Global Economic Governance During the Great Recession”: Drezner uses GPI measurements, particularly the fact that interstate violence and military expenditures have decreased in the years studied, to bolster an argument suggesting that the Great Recession has not led to an increase in global violence and conflict.[51]

Journal of Sustainable Development Studies: “Insecurity and Socio-economic Development in Nigeria”: This sustainable development study utilized the GPI, in conjunction with the Human Development Index and the Corruption Perception Index to track fluctuations in Nigeria’s socio-economic climate and insecurity issues over the past decade.[52]

Harvard Educational Review: “Peace Education in a Violent Culture”: In criticizing the United States’ culture of violence, the author refers to the developed country’s remarkably low ranking on the Global Peace Index as evidence of violence’s impact on societal peacefulness.[53]

International Security: “The Heart of the Matter: The Security of Women and the Security of States”: In this piece, the authors use the Global Peace Index as one of three measures of state security; the GPI is specifically used as a “general measure of state peacefulness.” The report concludes that higher levels of women’s physical security correlates positively with the GPI.[54]

The Equal Rights Review: “The Mental Health Gap in South Africa: A Human Rights Issue”: South Africa’s poor GPI ranking, among other measures is cited by the authors as part of their overall argument that the national government is not implementing promises made towards the achievement of equality, as signatories of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).[55]

Environment, Development and Sustainability: “Creating a ‘Values’ Chain for Sustainable Development in Developing Nations: Where Maslow meets Porter”: This study uses the ‘safety and security’ measures of the GPI, including political instability, level of violent crime, and likelihood of violent demonstrations, for supporting an argument that renders societal safety and security necessary for sustainable development.[56]

Global Peace Index rankings[edit]

Nations considered more peaceful have lower index scores; in 2013 researchers at the Institute for Economics and Peace harmonized the Global Peace Index database to ensure that the scores were comparable over time. The GPI Expert Panel decided that the Index would include nations and territories, but not micro-states. Countries covered by the GPI must either have a population of more than 1 million or a land area greater than 20,000 square kilometers.[1]

Country 2017 rank 2017 score[1] 2016 rank 2016 score[57] 2015 rank 2015 score[58] 2014 rank 2014 score[59] 2013 rank 2013 score[60] 2012 rank 2012 score[61],[62] 2011 rank 2011 score[63] 2010 rank 2010 score[64] 2009 rank 2009 score 2008 rank 2008 score
 Iceland 1 1.111 1 1.192 1 1.148 1 1.189 1 1.162 1 1.113 1 1.148 2 1.212 1 1.203 1 1.107
 New Zealand 2 1.241 4 1.287 4 1.221 4 1.236 3 1.237 2 1.239 2 1.279 1 1.188 2 1.227 2 1.190
 Portugal 3 1.258 5 1.356 11 1.344 18 1.425 18 1.467 16 1.470 17 1.453 13 1.366 15 1.426 14 1.385
 Austria 4 1.265 3 1.278 3 1.198 3 1.200 4 1.250 6 1.328 6 1.337 4 1.290 3 1.240 10 1.291
 Denmark 5 1.337 2 1.246 2 1.150 2 1.193 2 1.207 2 1.239 4 1.289 7 1.341 6 1.263 5 1.238
 Czech Republic 6 1.360 6 1.360 10 1.341 11 1.381 14 1.404 13 1.396 5 1.320 12 1.360 16 1.430 18 1.435
 Slovenia 7 1.364 10 1.408 15 1.378 14 1.398 13 1.374 8 1.330 10 1.358 11 1.358 10 1.343 13 1.370
 Canada 8 1.371 8 1.388 7 1.287 7 1.306 8 1.306 4 1.317 8 1.355 14 1.392 9 1.324 6 1.264
  Switzerland 9 1.373 7 1.370 5 1.275 5 1.258 5 1.272 10 1.349 16 1.421 18 1.424 11 1.349 4 1.234
 Ireland 10= 1.408 12 1.433 12 1.354 13 1.384 12 1.370 6 1.328 11 1.370 6 1.337 14 1.393 11 1.310
 Japan 10= 1.408 9 1.395 8 1.323 8 1.316 6 1.293 5 1.326 3 1.287 3 1.247 4 1.243 3 1.230
 Australia 12 1.425 15 1.465 9 1.329 15 1.414 16 1.438 22 1.494 18 1.455 19 1.467 19 1.440 16 1.421
 Bhutan 13 1.474 13 1.445 18 1.416 16 1.422 20 1.487 19 1.481 34 1.693 36 1.665 43 1.722 19 1.440
 Norway 14 1.486 17 1.500 17 1.393 10 1.371 11 1.359 18 1.480 9 1.356 5 1.322 8 1.324 9 1.288
 Hungary 15 1.494 19 1.534 22 1.463 21 1.482 23 1.520 17 1.476 20 1.495 20 1.495 25 1.574 20 1.452
 Germany 16 1.5 16 1.486 16 1.379 17 1.423 15 1.431 15 1.424 15 1.416 16 1.398 17 1.443 15 1.406
 Finland 17 1.515 11 1.429 6 1.277 6 1.297 7 1.297 9 1.348 7 1.352 9 1.352 7 1.297 7 1.273
 Sweden 18 1.516 14 1.461 13 1.360 11 1.381 9 1.319 14 1.419 13 1.401 10 1.354 5 1.253 8 1.282
 Belgium 19= 1.525 18 1.528 14 1.365 9 1.354 10 1.339 11 1.376 14 1.413 17 1.400 13 1.365 13 1.368
 Netherlands 19= 1.525 21 1.541 20 1.432 20 1.475 22 1.508 28 1.606 25 1.628 27 1.610 29 1.609 28 1.555
 Singapore 21 1.534 20 1.535 24 1.490 25 1.545 16 1.438 23 1.521 24 1.585 30 1.624 18 1.439 21 1.465
 Mauritius 22 1.547 23 1.559 25 1.503 24 1.544 21 1.497 21 1.487
 Spain 23 1.568 25 1.604 21 1.451 26 1.548 27 1.563 25 1.548 28 1.641 25 1.588 32 1.640 27 1.550
  Chile 24 1.595 27 1.635 29 1.563 30 1.591 31 1.589 30 1.616 38 1.710 28 1.616 20 1.468 17 1.431
  Romania 25 1.6 31 1.649 26 1.542 35 1.677 30 1.584 32 1.627 40 1.742 45 1.749 26 1.580 26 1.537
 Slovakia 26 1.611 24 1.603 23 1.478 19 1.467 33 1.622 26 1.590 23 1.576 21 1.536 23 1.532 25 1.533
 Botswana 27 1.622 28 1.639 31 1.597 36 1.678 32 1.598 31 1.621 35 1.695 33 1.641 31 1.634 37 1.650
 Bulgaria 28 1.631 29 1.646 32 1.607 32 1.637 35 1.663 39 1.699 53 1.845 50 1.785 46 1.738 46 1.720
 Malaysia 29 1.637 30 1.648 28 1.561 33 1.659 29 1.574 20 1.590 20 1.485 22 1.539 22 1.520 23 1.517
 Qatar 30 1.664 34 1.716 30 1.568 22 1.491 19 1.480 12 1.395 12 1.398 15 1.394 12 1.357 30 1.561
 Croatia 31 1.665 26 1.633 27 1.550 26 1.548 28 1.571 35 1.648 37 1.699 41 1.707 40 1.669 52 1.760
 Latvia 32 1.67 32 1.680 40 1.695 39 1.745 41 1.772 45 1.774 46 1.793 54 1.827 50 1.774 45 1.700
 Poland 33 1.676 22 1.557 19 1.430 23 1.532 25 1.530 24 1.524 22 1.545 29 1.618 28 1.597 33 1.610
 Costa Rica 34 1.701 33 1.699 34 1.654 42 1.755 40 1.755 36 1.659 31 1.681 26 1.590 27 1.595 31 1.570
 Uruguay 35 1.709 35 1.726 44 1.721 29 1.565 24 1.528 33 1.628 21 1.521 24 1.568 24 1.573 24 1.524
 Estonia 36 1.712 36 1.732 38 1.677 31 1.635 38 1.710 41 1.715 47 1.798 46 1.751 41 1.720 32 1.650
 Lithuania 37 1.732 37 1.735 37 1.674 46 1.797 43 1.784 43 1.741 43 1.760 42 1.713 36 1.675 48 1.670
 Italy 38 1.737 39 1.774 36 1.669 34 1.675 34 1.663 38 1.690 45 1.775 40 1.701 39 1.693 34 1.620
 Sierra Leone 39 1.76 43 1.805 59 1.864 66 1.942 59 1.904 52 1.855 61 1.904 53 1.818
 Taiwan 40 1.782 41 1.787 35 1.657 28 1.558 26 1.538 27 1.602 27 1.638 35 1.664 33 1.644 40 1.660
 United Kingdom 41= 1.786 47 1.830 39 1.685 47 1.798 44 1.787 29 1.609 26 1.631 31 1.631 41 1.710 48 1.740
 Zambia 41= 1.786 40 1.783 55 1.846 44 1.791 48 1.832 51 1.830 52 1.833 51 1.813 58 1.824 52 1.760
 Ghana 43 1.793 44 1.809 54 1.840 61 1.902 58 1.899 50 1.807 42 1.752 48 1.781 55 1.795 55 1.770
 Madagascar 44 1.797 38 1.763 67 1.911 66 1.942 90 2.074 99 2.124 105 2.239 77 2.019 69 1.886 35 1.630
 Laos 45 1.8 52 1.852 41 1.700 38 1.723 39 1.724 37 1.662 32 1.687 34 1.661 49 1.767 55 1.770
 Mongolia 46 1.801 50 1.838 43 1.706 41 1.778 64 1.921 58 1.884 57 1.880 92 2.101 88 2.060 89 2.060
 Korea Republic 47 1.823 53 1.858 42 1.701 52 1.849 47 1.822 42 1.734 50 1.829 43 1.715 42 1.716 40 1.660
 Malawi 48 1.825 45 1.817 51 1.814 77 1.995 74 1.984 60 1.894 39 1.740 51 1.813 51 1.776 62 1.840
 Panama 49 1.835 49 1.837 64 1.903 57 1.877 56 1.893 61 1.899 49 1.812 61 1.878 66 1.862 43 1.680
 Namibia 50 1.838 55 1.873 48 1.784 48 1.808 46 1.807 49 1.804 54 1.850 59 1.864 59 1.837 60 1.820
 France 51 1.839 46 1.829 45 1.742 48 1.808 53 1.863 40 1.710 36 1.697 32 1.636 52 1.779 50 1.750
 Indonesia 52 1.85 42 1.799 46 1.768 54 1.853 54 1.879 63 1.913 68 1.979 67 1.946 60 1.843 64 1.860
 Timor-Leste 53 1.866 56 1.879 58 1.860 69 1.947 51 1.854
 Tanzania 54 1.876 58 1.899 64 1.903 59 1.889 55 1.887 55 1.873 56 1.858 55 1.832 53 1.782 56 1.790
 Argentina 55 1.88 67 1.957 60 1.865 43 1.789 60 1.907 44 1.763 55 1.852 71 1.962 61 1.846 55 1.770
 Serbia 56 1.888 48 1.834 47 1.768 52 1.849 62 1.912 64 1.920 84 2.071 90 2.071 71 1.906 80 2.020
 Albania 57 1.908 54 1.867 52 1.821 65 1.939 69 1.961 66 1.927 63 1.912 65 1.925 70 1.890 71 1.910
 Kuwait 58 1.909 51 1.842 33 1.626 37 1.679 37 1.705 47 1.792 29 1.667 39 1.693 38 1.691 42 1.670
 Vietnam 59 1.919 59 1.906 56 1.848 45 1.792 41 1.772 34 1.641 30 1.670 38 1.691 48 1.764 42 1.730
 Senegal 60 1.929 70 1.978 49 1.805 72 1.974 85 2.061 78 1.994 77 2.047 79 2.031 75 1.969 74 1.950
 Equatorial Guinea 61 1.93 62 1.940 81 1.987 93 2.079 89 2.072 87 2.039 75 2.041 68 1.948 56 1.808 69 1.900
 Moldova 62 1.938 65 1.953 70 1.942 71 1.971 74 1.984 66 1.927 59 1.892 66 1.938 74 1.965 78 2.000
 Togo 63 1.939 66 1.954 71 1.944 80 2.003 67 1.954
 Cyprus 64 1.94 68 1.924 51 1.844 49 1.840 73 1.957 71 2.013 76 2.013 34 1.64 37 1.650
 United Arab Emirates 65 1.944 61 1.931 50 1.805 40 1.748 36 1.679 46 1.785 33 1.690 44 1.739 30 1.619 29 1.557
 Ecuador 66 1.948 76 2.020 84 1.997 85 2.042 83 2.059 85 2.028 90 2.116 101 2.185 105 2.197 100 2.170
 Montenegro 67 1.95 57 1.884 57 1.854 55 1.860 73 1.976 81 2.006 89 2.113 88 2.060 80 2.005
 Paraguay 68 1.961 80 2.037 89 2.023 73 1.976 84 2.060 76 1.973 66 1.954 77 2.019 73 1.950 69 1.900
 Tunisia 69 1.977 64 1.949 76 1.952 79 2.001 77 2.005 72 1.955 44 1.765 37 1.678 37 1.686 40 1.660
 Oman 70 1.983 74 2.016 74 1.947 59 1.889 45 1.806 59 1.887 41 1.743 23 1.561 21 1.438 22 1.467
 Peru 71 1.986 85 2.057 92 2.029 119 2.304 114 2.258 79 1.995 85 2.077 89 2.067 78 2.000 89 2.060
 Kazakhstan 72 1.992 75 2.019 87 2.008 103 2.150 78 2.031 105 2.151 93 2.137 95 2.113 97 2.141 82 2.030
 Greece 73 1.998 82 2.044 61 1.878 86 2.052 68 1.957 77 1.976 65 1.947 62 1.887 62 1.850 58 1.810
 Nicaragua 74 2.002 69 1.975 74 1.947 58 1.882 66 1.931 81 2.006 72 2.021 64 1.924 72 1.911 71 1.910
 Morocco 75 2.004 91 2.086 86 2.002 63 1.915 57 1.897 54 1.867 58 1.887 58 1.861 63 1.856 60 1.820
 Kosovo 76 2.007 77 2.022 69 1.938 64 1.929 72 1.969
 Swaziland 77 2.01 90 2.074 101 2.102 87 2.056 88 2.069 85 2.028 69 1.995 73 1.966
 Mozambique 78 2.013 68 1.963 80 1.976 82 2.004 61 1.910 48 1.796 48 1.809 47 1.779 47 1.762 45 1.700
 Benin 79 2.014 72 1.998 77 1.958 100 2.129 104 2.156 114 2.231
 Sri Lanka 80 2.019 97 2.133 114 2.188 105 2.197 110 2.230 103 2.145 126 2.407 133 2.621 126 2.571 120
 Guyana 81 2.021 95 2.105 92 2.029 83 2.013 70 1.962 69 1.937 88 2.112 91 2.095 94 2.082
 Liberia 82 2.023 72 1.998 78 1.963 84 2.014 80 2.048 101 2.131 96 2.159 99 2.148
 Haiti 83 2.026 89 2.066 98 2.074 99 2.127 92 2.075 107 2.179 113 2.288 114 2.270 120 2.406 114
 Bangladesh 84= 2.035 83 2.045 84 1.997 98 2.106 105 2.159 91 2.071 83 2.070 87 2.058 93 2.082 93 2.100
 Bosnia and Herzegovina 84= 2.035 60 1.915 53 1.839 61 1.902 71 1.967 65 1.923 60 1.893 60 1.873 45 1.735 69 1.900
 Bolivia 86 2.045 81 2.038 90 2.025 70 1.969 86 2.062 84 2.021 76 2.045 81 2.037 82 2.041 76 1.960
 Gabon 87 2.052 79 2.033 66 1.904 68 1.945 76 1.995 75 1.972 81 2.059 74 1.981 44 1.730 50 1.750
 Cuba 88 2.056 85 2.057 82 1.988 75 1.986 65 1.922 70 1.951 67 1.964 72 1.964 64 1.858 64 1.860
 Cambodia 89 2.065 104 2.161 111 2.179 106 2.201 115 2.263 108 2.207 115 2.301 111 2.252 101 2.178 95 2.120
 Lesotho 90 2.066 63 1.941 63 1.891 50 1.839 50 1.840 53 1.864
 Burkina Faso 91 2.07 88 2.063 83 1.994 78 1.998 87 2.064 56 1.881 51 1.832 57 1.852 65 1.860 72 1.930
 Jamaica 92 2.072 92 2.091 109 2.153 107 2.203 117 2.274 113 2.222 106 2.244 98 2.138 89 2.065 89
   Nepal 93 2.08 78 2.026 62 1.878 76 1.989 82 2.058 80 2.001 95 2.152 82 2.044 76 1.967
 Georgia 94 2.084 85 2.057 79 1.973 111 2.225 139 2.511 141 2.541 134 2.558 142 2.970 134 2.842
 Jordan 95 2.087 96 2.127 71 1.944 56 1.861 52 1.858 62 1.905 64 1.918 68 1.948 67 1.864 61 1.830
 Guinea 96 2.089 101 2.148 117 2.214 118 2.296 116 2.272 92 2.073 92 2.126
 Papua New Guinea 97= 2.095 99 2.143 96 2.064 90 2.066 99 2.126 93 2.076 94 2.139 95 2.113 91 2.075 96
 Trinidad and Tobago 97= 2.095 84 2.056 97 2.070 89 2.065 90 2.074 94 2.082 79 2.051 94 2.107 77 1.985 89
 Dominican Republic 99 2.114 99 2.143 100 2.089 95 2.093 94 2.103 90 2.068 91 2.125 93 2.103 79 2.004 83
  Angola 100 2.116 98 2.140 88 2.020 102 2.143 102 2.148 95 2.105 87 2.109 86 2.057 84 2.045 100 2.170
 Uzbekistan 101 2.132 109 2.216 113 2.187 104 2.179 124 2.333 110 2.219 109 2.260 110 2.242 109 2.274 113 2.325
 Macedonia 102 2.133 94 2.092 71 1.944 87 2.056 79 2.044 68 1.935 78 2.048 83 2.048 86 2.052 76 1.960
 Belarus 103 2.141 106 2.202 110 2.163 92 2.078 96 2.117 109 2.208 112 2.283 105 2.204 85 2.046 89 2.060
 Myanmar 104 2.179 115 2.256 130 2.323 136 2.473 140 2.528 139 2.525 133 2.538 132 2.580 122 2.495 124 2.540
 Uganda 105 2.182 101 2.148 111 2.179 110 2.221 106 2.180 98 2.121 96 2.159 100 2.165 103 2.188 110
 Honduras 106 2.185 111 2.237 116 2.210 117 2.281 123 2.332 129 2.339 117 2.327 125 2.395 116 2.379 116 2.370
 Djibouti 107 2.196 121 2.292 102 2.113 74 1.979 63 1.917 56 1.881
 Brazil 108 2.199 105 2.176 103 2.122 91 2.073 81 2.051 83 2.017 74 2.040 83 2.048 87 2.058 93 2.100
 Algeria 109 2.201 108 2.213 104 2.131 114 2.239 119 2.284 121 2.255 129 2.423 116 2.277 110 2.276 108 2.290
 Gambia 110 2.211 92 2.091 99 2.086 94 2.085 93 2.091 74 1.961 62 1.910 63 1.890
 Kyrgyzstan 111 2.216 124 2.294 121 2.249 125 2.382 131 2.391 131 2.359 114 2.296
 Armenia 112 2.22 110 2.218 91 2.028 97 2.097 98 2.123 115 2.238 109 2.260 113 2.266
 Rwanda 113 2.227 128 2.323 139 2.420 137 2.494 135 2.444 119 2.250 99 2.185 75 2.012 81 2.025 66 1.870
 United States 114 2.232 103 2.154 94 2.038 101 2.137 100 2.126 88 2.058 82 2.063 85 2.056 104 2.195 100
 El Salvador 115 2.239 111 2.237 123 2.263 116 2.280 112 2.240 111 2.220 102 2.215 103 2.195 92 2.080 93 2.100
 China 116 2.242 120 2.288 124 2.267 108 2.207 101 2.142 89 2.061 80 2.054 80 2.034 83 2.045 82 2.030
 Guatemala 117 2.245 117 2.270 118 2.215 115 2.248 109 2.221 124 2.287 125 2.405 112 2.258 102 2.187 102 2.210
 Tajikistan 118 2.263 122 2.293 108 2.152 126 2.395 118 2.282 99 2.124 103 2.225
 Turkmenistan 119 2.27 106 2.202 106 2.135 95 2.093 103 2.154 117 2.242 108 2.248 117 2.295 90 2.075 97 2.160
 Thailand 120 2.286 125 2.312 126 2.303 126 2.395 130 2.378 126 2.303 107 2.247 124 2.393 119 2.399 111 2.324
 Ivory Coast 121 2.307 118 2.279 105 2.133 140 2.546 151 2.732 134 2.419 128 2.417 118 2.297 113 2.320 109 2.300
 Guinea-Bissau 122 2.309 116 2.264 120 2.235 145 2.591 132 2.431 95 2.105
 South Africa 123 2.324 126 2.316 136 2.376 122 2.364 121 2.292 127 2.321 118 121 2.380 112 2.317 95 2.120
 Republic of the Congo 124 2.334 114 2.249 115 2.196 109 2.211 107 2.183 104 2.148 98 2.165 102 2.192 99 2.161 101 2.180
 Kenya 125 2.336 131 2.379 133 2.342 132 2.452 136 2.466 120 2.252 111 2.276 120 2.369 111 2.297 118 2.380
 Niger 126 2.343 113 2.239 129 2.320 121 2.351 127 2.362 116 2.241 119 2.356
 Zimbabwe 127 2.352 127 2.322 125 2.294 148 2.662 149 2.696 140 2.538 140 2.722 135 2.678 131 2.700 134 2.380
 Mauritania 128 2.355 123 2.295 122 2.262 120 2.350 122 2.326 125 2.301 130 2.425 123 2.389 117 2.388 105 2.250
 Iran 129 2.364 133 2.411 138 2.409 131 2.437 137 2.473 128 2.324 119 2.356 104 2.202 106 2.241 106 2.241
 Cameroon 130 2.39 130 2.356 134 2.349 113 2.235 108 2.191 97 2.113 86 2.104 106 2.210 95 2.111 93 2.100
 Bahrain 131 2.404 132 2.398 107 2.142 111 2.225 95 2.109 118 2.247 123 2.398 70 1.956 57 1.815 57 1.800
 Azerbaijan 132 2.426 134 2.450 132 2.325 123 2.365 126 2.350 132 2.360 122 2.379 119 2.367 114 2.342 108 2.290
 Saudi Arabia 133 2.474 129 2.338 95 2.042 80 2.003 97 2.119 106 2.178 101 2.192 107 2.216 108 2.251 105 2.250
 Ethiopia 134 2.477 119 2.284 119 2.234 139 2.502 146 2.630 137 2.504 131 2.468 127 2.444 130 2.635 126 2.460
 Chad 135 2.495 136 2.464 140 2.429 142 2.558 138 2.493 145 2.671 141 2.740 141 2.964 135 2.959 134 2.970
 Eritrea 136 2.505 135 2.460 127 2.309 124 2.377 120 2.288 122 2.264 104 2.227
 India 137 2.541 141 2.566 143 2.504 144 2.571 141 2.570 142 2.549 135 2.570 128 2.516 125 2.554 123 2.490
 Philippines 138 2.555 139 2.511 141 2.462 134 2.456 129 2.374 133 2.415 136 2.574 130 2.574 118 2.397 116 2.370
 Egypt 139 2.583 142 2.574 137 2.382 143 2.571 113 2.258 111 2.220 73 2.023 49 1.784 68 1.872 74 1.950
 Mali 140 2.596 137 2.489 128 2.310 135 2.465 125 2.346 102 2.132 100 2.188 109 2.240 107 2.250 108 2.290
 Burundi 141 2.641 138 2.500 130 2.323 130 2.418 144 2.593 138 2.524 132 2.532 131 2.577 123 2.536
 Mexico 142 2.646 140 2.557 144 2.530 138 2.500 133 2.434 135 2.445 121 2.362 107 2.216 98 2.158 89 2.060
 Venezuela 143 2.652 143 2.651 142 2.493 129 2.410 128 2.370 123 2.278 124 2.403 122 2.387 115 2.348 103 2.240
 Israel 144 2.707 144 2.656 148 2.781 149 2.689 150 2.730 150 2.842 145 2.901 149 3.019 137 3.012 134 2.970
 Palestine 145 2.774 148 2.832
 Colombia 146= 2.777 147 2.764 146 2.720 150 2.701 147 2.634 144 2.625 139 2.700 138 2.787 129 2.625 125 2.610
 Turkey 146= 2.777 145 2.710 135 2.363 128 2.402 134 2.437 130 2.344 127 2.411 126 2.420 124 2.538 119 2.430
 Lebanon 148 2.782 146 2.752 145 2.623 146 2.620 142 2.575 136 2.459 137 2.597 134 2.639 128 2.606 127 2.670
 Nigeria 149 2.849 149 2.877 151 2.910 151 2.710 148 2.693 146 2.801 142 2.743 137 2.756 127 2.599 118 2.570
 DPR Korea 150 2.967 150 2.944 153 2.977 153 3.071 154 3.044 152 2.932 149 3.092 139 2.855 133 2.771 129 2.750
 Russia 151 3.047 151 3.079 152 2.954 152 3.039 155 3.060 153 2.938 147 2.966 143 3.013 138 3.064 131 2.870
  Pakistan 152 3.058 153 3.145 154 3.049 154 3.107 157 3.106 149 2.833 146 2.905 145 3.050 140 3.087 132 2.890
  Democratic Republic of the Congo 153 3.061 152 3.112 155 3.085 155 3.213 156 3.085 154 3.073 148 3.016 140 2.925 136 2.988 128 2.690
 Ukraine 154 3.184 156 3.287 150 2.845 141 2.546 111 2.238 71 1.953 69 1.995 97 2.115 100 2.166 80 2.020
 Central African Republic 155= 3.213 157 3.354 158 3.332 156 3.331 153 3.031 151 2.872 144 2.869 136 2.753 132 2.706 130 2.810
 Sudan 155= 3.213 155 3.269 156 3.295 157 3.362 158 3.242 156 3.193 151 3.223 146 3.125 139 3.086 136 3.150
 Libya 157 3.328 154 3.200 149 2.819 133 2.453 145 2.604 147 2.830 143 2.816 56 1.839 54 1.790 65 1.870
 Somalia 158 3.387 159 3.414 157 3.307 158 3.368 161 3.394 158 3.392 153 3.379 148 3.390 141 3.269 137 3.320
 Yemen 159 3.412 158 3.399 147 2.751 147 2.629 152 2.747 143 2.601 138 2.670 129 2.573 121 2.416 111 2.324
 South Sudan 160 3.524 162 3.593 159 3.383 160 3.397 143 2.576
  Iraq 161 3.556 161 3.570 161 3.444 159 3.377 159 3.245 155 3.192 152 3.296 149 3.406 143 3.370 138 3.370
  Afghanistan 162 3.567 160 3.538 160 3.427 161 3.416 162 3.440 157 3.252 150 3.212 147 3.252 142 3.358 135 3.000
  Syria 163 3.814 163 3.806 162 3.645 162 3.650 160 3.393 147 2.830 116 2.322 115 2.274 96 2.112 77 1.990

Note: The GPI’s methodology gets updated regularly and is improved to reflect the most up-to-date datasets. Each year’s GPI report includes a detailed description of the methodology used.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b c d e f Institute for Economics and Peace. "Global Peace Index 2017" (PDF). visionofhumanity.org. 
  2. ^ a b Wang, Monica. "The World's Most And Least Peaceful Countries In 2016". Forbes. Retrieved 2017-11-26. 
  3. ^ Institute for Economics and Peace. "Global Peace Index Map". Vision of Humanity. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  4. ^ Information about indicators and methodology "2013 Global Peace Index"(PDF). Institute for Economics and Peace. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-12-10. Retrieved 2013-06-24.
  5. ^ In this case, a conflict is defined as, "a contested incompatibility that concerns government and/or territory where the use of armed force between two parties, of which at least one is the government of a state, results in at least 25 battle-related deaths in a year."
  6. ^ Excludes militia and national guard forces.
  7. ^ This includes, "cash outlays of central or federal government to meet the costs of national armed forces—including strategic, land, naval, air, command, administration and support forces as well as paramilitary forces, customs forces and border guards if these are trained and equipped as a military force."
  8. ^ This includes transfers, purchases, or gifts of aircraft, armoured vehicles, artillery, radar systems, missiles, ships, engines
  9. ^ Rates the destructive capability of a country's stock of heavy weapons via a categorised system. As of 2013, countries with nuclear capabilities receive a score of five, the highest possible score.
  10. ^ Institute for Economics and Peace. "Global Peace Index Report, Methodology, pg. 113-136" (PDF). Visionofhumanity.org. 
  11. ^ "Endorsers for GPI" (PDF). Vision of Humanity. Retrieved 2013-08-16.
  12. ^ "Norway rated most peaceful nation". 2007-05-30. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  13. ^ "Global Peace Index: World Less Peaceful in 2010 Report, Violence Impacting Global Economy $7 Trillion Annually". Phil's Stock World. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  14. ^ a b Sputnik. "Terrorism, Conflicts Cost Over $14 Trillion to Global Economy". sputniknews.com. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  15. ^ "King's College London - 2015 Global Peace Index: an increasingly divided world". www.kcl.ac.uk. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  16. ^ "Give peace a rating". The Economist. 2007-05-31. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  17. ^ "Give peace a score". The Economist. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  18. ^ "Giving peace a chance? 2017 Global Peace Index". ANU. 2017-06-09. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  19. ^ "Dark underbelly of the world's most 'peaceful' countries". Christian Science Monitor. 2007-07-26. ISSN 0882-7729. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  20. ^ "UAE drops in rank in annual peace index amid increasing regional violence". The National. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  21. ^ Honduras, Republic of. "Honduras Peace Forum Marks National Progress in Crime Prevention". www.prnewswire.com. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  22. ^ "2017 Global Peace Index and World Happiness Report shows Opposition leaders were wrong". NST Online. 2017-07-05. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  23. ^ "2016 Global Peace Index released-Botswana moves up 3 places; still ranked among the world's most peaceful nations – Embassy of the Republic of Botswana". botswana-brussels.com. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  24. ^ "Global Peace Index: Nine trillion reasons to pursue peace | UN DESA | United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs". www.un.org. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  25. ^ Romero, A. "Palace Disputes Peace Index Report". www.pressreader.com. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  26. ^ "JPJ Sandy Praises Global Peace Index Report". Sierra Leone Concord Times. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  27. ^ "Last year there were 10 countries in the world entirely free from war. This year it's just four, this is the troubling reason why". The Independent. 2017-06-01. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  28. ^ "World now 0.28% more peaceful - research". BBC News. 2017-06-01. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  29. ^ McCarthy, Niall. "The World's Most and Least Peaceful Countries [Infographic]". Forbes. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  30. ^ McVeigh, Karen (2017-06-01). "Fraught White House campaign blamed as US bucks global trend towards peace". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  31. ^ "US Became Less Peaceful After Donald Trump's Election, Influential Study Finds". HuffPost UK. 2017-06-01. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  32. ^ "U.S. ranked the 114th most peaceful nation on earth says annual global ranking". The Washington Times. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  33. ^ "The 12 safest countries in the world". Business Insider. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  34. ^ "India ranks 137th in Global Peace Index 2017, Bhutan most peaceful in South Asia". Zee News. 2017-06-17. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  35. ^ "India ranked 141 in global peace index, Syria least peaceful". http://www.hindustantimes.com. 2016-06-08. Retrieved 2017-11-27.  External link in |work= (help)
  36. ^ Rapaka, K. "IEP released the 2016 Global Peace Index, India ranks 141". Jagranjosh.com. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  37. ^ Sicat, Gerardo P. "The Global Peace Index". philstar.com. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  38. ^ Edmond, C. "These are the most peaceful countries in the world". World Economic Forum. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  39. ^ Wolfsfeld, Gadi; Segev, Elad; Sheafer, Tamir (2013-01-16). "Social Media and the Arab Spring". The International Journal of Press/Politics. 18 (2): 115–137. doi:10.1177/1940161212471716. 
  40. ^ Achumba, I.; Ighomereho, O.S.; Akpor-Robaro, M.O. "Security Challenges in Nigeria and the Implications for Business Activities and Sustainable Development". Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development. 4. 
  41. ^ Newman, E. (2009). "Failed States and International Order: Constructing a Post-Westphalian World". Contemporary Security Policy. 30: 421–443. doi:10.1080/1352326090332647. 
  42. ^ Letendre, Kenneth; Fincher, Corey L.; Thornhill, Randy (2010-08-01). "Does infectious disease cause global variation in the frequency of intrastate armed conflict and civil war?". Biological Reviews. 85 (3): 669–683. doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.2010.00133.x. ISSN 1469-185X. 
  43. ^ Skaaning, Svend-Erik (2009-09-22). "Measuring the Rule of Law". Political Research Quarterly. 63 (2): 449–460. doi:10.1177/1065912909346745. 
  44. ^ Jun, Eunju; Kim, Wonjoon; Chang, Soon Heung. "The analysis of security cost for different energy sources". Applied Energy. 86 (10): 1894–1901. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2008.11.028. 
  45. ^ Alexander, Amy C.; Inglehart, Ronald; Welzel, Christian (2011-11-30). "Measuring effective democracy: A defense". International Political Science Review. 33 (1): 41–62. doi:10.1177/0192512111414682. 
  46. ^ Cilliers, J.; Hughes, B.; Moyer, J. (2011). "African Futures 2050- The Next Forty Years" (PDF). Institute for Security Studies. 
  47. ^ UNFPA - United Nations Population Fund (2016). ""Best friends" save women's lives in war-weary Central African Republic". www.unfpa.org. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  48. ^ Meyer, Carsten; Kreft, Holger; Guralnick, Robert; Jetz, Walter (2015-09-08). "Global priorities for an effective information basis of biodiversity distributions". Nature Communications. 6: 8221. doi:10.1038/ncomms9221. 
  49. ^ Zuckerman, P. (2009). "Why Are Danes and Swedes So Irreligious?" (PDF). Nordic Journal of Religion and Society. 22: 55–69. 
  50. ^ Cordell, Dana; White, Stuart (2015-04-01). "Tracking phosphorus security: indicators of phosphorus vulnerability in the global food system". Food Security. 7 (2): 337–350. doi:10.1007/s12571-015-0442-0. ISSN 1876-4517. 
  51. ^ Drezner, Daniel W. (January 2014). "The System Worked: Global Economic Governance during the Great Recession". World Politics. 66 (1): 123–164. doi:10.1017/S0043887113000348. ISSN 0043-8871. 
  52. ^ Olukayide Ewetan, O.; Urhie, E. (2014). "Insecurity and Socio-Economic Development in Nigeria" (PDF). Journal of Sustainable Development in Nigeria. 5: 40–63. 
  53. ^ Harris, Ian M. (2007). "Peace Education in a Violent Culture". Harvard Educational Review. 77 (3). 
  54. ^ Hudson, V.M.; et al. (2009). "The Heart of the Matter: The Security of Women and the Security of States". International Security. 33 (3): 7–45. 
  55. ^ Burns, J.K. (2011). "The Mental Health Gap in South Africa- A Human Rights Issue" (PDF). The Equal Rights Review. 6: 99–113. 
  56. ^ Walsh, Philip R. (2011-08-01). "Creating a "values" chain for sustainable development in developing nations: where Maslow meets Porter". Environment, Development and Sustainability. 13 (4): 789. doi:10.1007/s10668-011-9291-y. ISSN 1387-585X. 
  57. ^ Institute for Economics and Peace (2016). "Global Peace Index 2016" (PDF). Visionofhumanity.org. 
  58. ^ Institute for Economics and Peace (2015). "Global Peace Index 2015" (PDF). Visionofhumanity.org. 
  59. ^ Institute for Economics and Peace (2014). "Global Peace Index 2014" (PDF). Visionofhumanity.org. 
  60. ^ Institute for Economics and Peace (2013). "Global Peace Index 2013" (PDF). Visionofhumanity.org. 
  61. ^ Institute for Economics and Peace (2012). "Global Peace Index 2012" (PDF). Visionofhumanity.org. 
  62. ^ "Global peace index 2012: the full list". the Guardian. 2012-06-12. Retrieved 2017-11-27. 
  63. ^ Institute for Economics and Peace (2011). "Global Peace Index 2011" (PDF). visionofhumanity.org. 
  64. ^ Institute for Economics and Peace (2010). "Global Peace Index 2010" (PDF). visionofhumanity.org. 

External links[edit]