Palestina

The Times Higher Education Emerging Economies University Rankings 2018 includes only institutions in countries classified by the FTSE as “advanced emerging”, “secondary emerging” or “frontier”.   its fifth year, the 2018 ranking parts with the 'BRICS' acronym in the title to recognize the strength and potential of a diverse range of emerging economies. The rankings use the same 13 performance indicators as the THE World University Rankings to judge institutions on their teaching, research, knowledge transfer and international outlook. But they are recalibrated to reflect the development priorities of universities in emerging economies. The performance indicators are grouped into five areas: 1. Teaching (the learning environment) 2. Research (volume, income and reputation) 3. Citations (research influence) 4. International outlook (staff, students and research) 5. Industry income ( knowledge transfer) Note: The ranking of institutions, after 200, have been given in range like 201-250 and 251-300.   The rank has been taken as 201, 202, 203 ……. 250 as the same order as they appear in the source.

Data cited at https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2020/index/nzl by Transparency International is licensed under CC-BY-ND 4.0. Global Corruption Barometer is the largest world-wide public opinion survey on corruption. see more at https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2020/index/nzl Transparency International(TI) defines corruption as the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. This definition encompasses corrupt practices in both the public and private sectors. The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) ranks countries according to the perception of corruption in the public sector. The CPI is an aggregate indicator that combines different sources of information about corruption, making it possible to compare countries. The CPI ranks almost 200 countries by their perceived levels of corruption, as determined by expert assessments and opinion surveys.

Bloom Consulting was founded in 2003 as a Nation Branding consultancy. Our Headquarters are located in Madrid, with offices in Lisbon and São Paulo. Bloom Consulting has been interviewed by The Economist, Forbes and CNN . According to Country Branding Central www.countrybrandingwiki.org, our CEO José Filipe Torres, a recurrent lecturer in Universities such as Harvard, is considered one of the top 3 international experts in the field of Nation Branding, Region and City Branding, providing advisory for the OECD. In addition, Bloom Consulting publishes the Bloom Consulting Country Brand Ranking © annually for both Trade and Tourism, to extensively analyze the brand performance of 193 countries and territories worldwide and the Digital Country Index - Measuring the Brand appeal of countries and territories in the Digital World.

Sources: The Global Health Security Index and The Center for Systems Science and Engineering at JHU

The Digital Opportunity Index (DOI) is the only index that includes price data for 181 economies, which is vital in assessing effective market demand. The Digital Opportunity Index (DOI) has been designed to as a tool for tracking progress in bridging the digital divide and the implementa- tion of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). As such, it provides a powerful policy tool for exploring the global and regional trends in infrastructure, opportu- nity and usage that are shaping the Information Society.

Data cited at:  Retrieved from-https://atlas.cid.harvard.edu/rankings/product

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  

The average global index score stagnated in 2022. Despite expectations of a rebound after the lifting of pandemic-related restrictions, the score was almost unchanged, at 5.29 (on a 0-10 scale), compared with 5.28 in 2021. The positive effect of the restoration of individual freedoms was cancelled out by negative developments globally. The scores of more than half of the countries measured by the index either stagnated or declined. Western Europe was a positive outlier, being the only region whose score returned to pre-pandemic levels. 

The GEM Adult Population Survey (APS) measures the level and nature of entrepreneurial activity around the world. It is administered to a representative national sample of at least 2000 respondents. The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor is the world's foremost study of entrepreneurship. Through a vast, centrally coordinated, internationally executed data collection effort, GEM is able to provide high quality information, comprehensive reports and interesting stories, to enhance the understanding of the entrepreneurial phenomenon.

Data cited at:  GEM National Expert Survey The GEM National Expert Survey (NES) monitors the factors that are believed to have a significant impact on entrepreneurship, known as the Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions (EFCs). It is administered to a minimum of 36 carefully chosen 'experts' in each country. The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor is the world's foremost study of entrepreneurship. Through a vast, centrally coordinated, internationally executed data collection effort, GEM is able to provide high quality information, comprehensive reports and interesting stories, to enhance the understanding of the entrepreneurial phenomenon.

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.

Data cited at:  Knowledge4All, United Nations Development Program & Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum Knowledge Foundation.

Data cited at: Institute for Economics and Peace retrieved from Vision of Humanity  The Global Peace Index 2022

Data Cited at: ITUC GLOBAL RIGHTS INDEX The 2020 ITUC Global Rights Index depicts the world’s worst countries for workers by rating 144 countries on a scale from 1-5+ based on the degree of respect for workers’ rights with 1 being the best rating and 5+ the worst rating. 5+ No guarantee of rights due to the breakdown of the rule of law 5 No guarantee of rights 4 Systematic violations of rights 3 Regular violations of rights 2 Repeated violations of rights 1 Sporadic violations of rights No data

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:  Institute for Economics & Peace and available from http://visionofhumanity.org/reports Note: The Year of data has been considered as year of publication, for example 2020 report is considered as year 2020.   The Global Terrorism Index (GTI) is a comprehensive study which accounts for the direct and indirect impact of terrorism in 163 countries in terms of its effect on lives lost, injuries, property damage and the psychological aftereffects of terrorism. This study covers 99.6 per cent of the world's population. It aggregates the most authoritative data source on terrorism today, the Global Terrorism Database (GTD) collated by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) into a composite score in order to provide an ordinal ranking of nations on the negative impact of terrorism. The GTD is unique in that it consists of systematically and comprehensively coded data on domestic as well as international terrorist incidents and now includes more than 140,000 cases.  

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: International Telecommunication Union-https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/stat/default.aspx 

The Index for Risk Management INFORM is a composite indicator developed by JRC as a tool for understanding the risk of humanitarian crisis and disasters.

The Global Cybersecurity Index (GCI) is a trusted reference that measures the commitment of countries to cybersecurity at a global level – to raise awareness of the importance and different dimensions of the issue. As cybersecurity has a broad field of application, cutting across many industries and various sectors, each country’s level of development or engagement is assessed along five pillars – (i) Legal Measures, (ii) Technical Measures, (iii) Organizational Measures, (iv) Capacity Development, and (v) Cooperation – and then aggregated into an overall score.​ Based on a multi‐stakeholder approach and initiative, the GCI leverages the capacity and expertise of different organizations (see key partners below), with the objectives of improving the quality of the survey, fostering international cooperation, and promoting knowledge exchange on this topic. The ITU Global Cybersecurity Agenda (GCA)​ ​provides the general foundation and framework for the initiative.​

Data cited at: Gygli, Savina, Florian Haelg, Niklas Potrafke and Jan-​Egbert Sturm (2019): The KOF Globalisation Index – Revisited, Review of International Organizations, 14(3), 543-​574 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-​019-09344-2   original contribution introducing the KOF Globalisation Index: Dreher, Axel (2006): Does Globalization Affect Growth? Evidence from a new Index of Globalization, Applied Economics 38, 10: 1091-​1110.

This Dataset contains Indicators related to IC Development Index and Tables from "Measuring the Information Society Report 2018, Volume 1" For Indicators for other ICT Development data please refer: https://knoema.com/ITUKIICT2019/global-ict-developments

Data cited at: Open data research Network  Lisence: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Peer-reviewed numerical scores assigned to each primary data variable collected for the Open Data Barometer.

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.

Passport Index is an interactive tool, which collects, displays and ranks the passports of the world. You can discover the world’s passports on a map, by country name, by Passport Power Rank and even by the color of their cover. Visa Free Score Passports accumulate points for each visa free country that their holders can visit without a visa, or they can obtain a visa on arrival. Passport Power Rank Passports are ranked based on their Visa Free Score. The higher the Visa Free Score, the better the Passport Power Rank. Methodology The country list is based on the 193 UN member countries and 6 territories (Macao, Kosovo, etc.) for a total of 199. Territories annexed to other countries such as Norfolk Island, French Polynesia, etc. are excluded. Data is based on research from publicly available sources, as well as information shared by government agencies.

  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  

PCI is calculated as a geometric average of eight domains or categories, namely, ICTs, structural change, natural capital, human capital, energy, transport, the private sector and institutions

The SCImago Institutions Rankings (SIR) is a classification of academic and research-related institutions ranked by a composite indicator that combines three different sets of indicators based on research performance, innovation outputs and societal impact measured by their web visibility. It provides a friendly interface that allows the visualization of any customized ranking from the combination of these three sets of indicators. Additionally, it is possible to compare the trends for individual indicators of up to six institutions. For each large sector it is also possible to obtain distribution charts of the different indicators.  

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.

Levels of restrictions on religion Government Restrictions Index Very high- 6.6 to 10.0 High- 4.5 to 6.5 Moderate - 2.4 to 4.4 Low- 0.0 to 2.3 Social Hostilities Index Very high- 7.2 to 10.0 High- 3.6 to 7.1 Moderate- 1.5 to 3.5 Low- 0.0 to 1.4

  The WPS Index is a simple and transparent measure that captures women’s autonomy and empowerment at home, in the community, and in society. The index is structured around three basic dimensions of women’s well-being: inclusion (economic, social, political); justice (formal laws and informal discrimination); and security (at the individual, community, and societal levels. This second edition adds more than a dozen countries—including Libya and South Sudan—that meet the minimum requirements of recent and reliable data across the three dimensions. Those additions bring the total ranking to 167 countries, encompassing more than 98 percent of the world’s population.

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

Data cited at: Charities Aid Foundation   CAF World Giving Index 2019: For the 2019 edition, CAF included aggregate data for each country across the 10 years interview was conducted, namely 2009-2018. This data corresponds to the reports issued the year after interviewing took place (i.e. CAF World Giving Index 2010 refers to data collected in 2009). Due to the small variation in countries Gallup interview in each year, CAF has only included countries in this edition for which data was available for at least eight of the last 10 years. This means that this edition is based on 128 countries.   CAF World Giving Index ranking and scores: In order to establish a rounded measure of giving behavior across the world, the CAF World Giving Index relies on a simple averaging of the responses from the three key questions asked in each country. Each country is given a percentage score and countries are ranked on the basis of these scores. For this 10th edition, CAF has averaged the scores across the 10 years to give aggregate numbers.

The World Happiness Report is a landmark survey of the state of global happiness that ranks 156 countries by how happy their citizens perceive themselves to be. The World Happiness Report 2020 for the first time ranks cities around the world by their subjective well-being and digs more deeply into how the social, urban and natural environments combine to affect our happiness.

The Range of Score to Access the Press Freedom. (New Scale) From 85 to 100 points: Good From 70 to 85 points: Satisfactory From 55 to 70 points: Problematic From 40 to 55 points: Difficult From 0 to 40 points: Very Serious   The Range of Score to Access the Press Freedom. (Old Scale) From 0 to 15 points: Good From 15.01 to 25 points: Fairly good From 25.01 to 35 points: Problematic From 35.01 to 55 points: Bad From 55.01 to 100 points: Very bad Note: Negative value is available for 2012 only and it represents the country in top* The press freedom index that Reporters Without Borders publishes every year measures the level of freedom of information in nearly 180 countries. It reflects the degree of freedom that journalists, news organizations and netizens enjoy in each country, and the efforts made by the authorities to respect and ensure respect for this freedom. It is based partly on a questionnaire that is sent to our partner organizations (18 freedom of expression NGOs located in all five continents), to our network of 150 correspondents, and to journalists, researchers, jurists and human rights activists. The 179 countries ranked in this year's index are those for which Reporters Without Borders received completed questionnaires from various sources. Some countries were not included because of a lack of reliable, confirmed data. A score and a position are assigned to each country in the final ranking. They are complementary indicators that together assess the state of press freedom. In order to make the index more informative and make it easier to compare different years, scores will henceforth range from 0 to 100, with 0 being the best possible score and 100 the worst. The index reflects the situation during a specific period. This year's index is based solely on events between the start of December 2012 and the end of November 2013. It does not look at human rights violations in general, just violations of freedom of information. The index should in no way be taken as an indication of the quality of the media in the countries concerned. In order to make the index more informative and make it easier to compare different years, scores will henceforth range from 0 to 100, with 0 being the best possible score and 100 the worst. The index reflects the situation during a specific period. This year's index is based solely on events between the start of December 2012 and the end of November 2013. It does not look at human rights violations in general, just violations of freedom of information. The index should in no way be taken as an indication of the quality of the media in the countries concerned. In order to make the index more informative and make it easier to compare different years, scores will henceforth range from 0 to 100, with 0 being the best possible score and 100 the worst. The index reflects the situation during a specific period. This year's index is based solely on events between the start of December 2012 and the end of November 2013. It does not look at human rights violations in general, just violations of freedom of information. The index should in no way be taken as an indication of the quality of the media in the countries concerned. This year's index is based solely on events between the start of December 2012 and the end of November 2013. It does not look at human rights violations in general, just violations of freedom of information. The index should in no way be taken as an indication of the quality of the media in the countries concerned. This year's index is based solely on events between the start of December 2012 and the end of November 2013. It does not look at human rights violations in general, just violations of freedom of information. The index should in no way be taken as an indication of the quality of the media in the countries concerned.   * In order to have a bigger spread in the scores and increase the differentiation between countries, this year's questionnaire had more answers assigning negative points. That is why countries at the top of the index have negative scores this year. Although the point system has produced a broader distribution of scores than in 2010, each country's evolution over the years can still be plotted by comparing its position in the index rather than its score. This is what the arrows in the table refer to – a country's change in position in the index compared with the preceding year.