エラーが発生しました。 詳細 隠す
保存されていないページがあります。 復元 取り消す

メキシコ

  • 大統領:Andrés Manuel López Obrador
  • 上院議長:Ernesto Cordero Arroyo
  • 首都:Mexico City (Distrito Federal)
  • 言語:Spanish only 92.7%, Spanish and indigenous languages 5.7%, indigenous only 0.8%, unspecified 0.8% note: indigenous languages include various Mayan, Nahuatl, and other regional languages (2005)
  • 政府
  • 統計局
  • 人口、人:129,163,276 (2017)
  • 面積、平方キロメートル:1,943,950 (2017)
  • 1人当たりGDP、US $:8,903 (2017)
  • GDP、現在の10億米ドル:1,149.9 (2017)
  • GINI指数:43.4 (2016)
  • ビジネスのしやすさランク:49 (2017)

Governance

すべてのデータセット:  B C D F G N O P Q R S T U W
  • B
    • 1月 2018
      ソース: Bertelsmann Stiftung
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 19 4月, 2018
      データセットを選択
      The Bertelsmann Stiftung’s Transformation Index (BTI) analyzes and evaluates the quality of democracy, a market economy and political management in 128 developing and transition countries. It measures successes and setbacks on the path toward a democracy based on the rule of law and a market economy flanked by sociopolitical safeguards. Within this framework, the BTI publishes two rankings, the Status Index and the Management Index. Countries are further categorized on the basis of these status index and management rankings/scores. For instance, countries are categorized in to 5 groups – viz; 5 or failed, 4 or very limited, 3 or limited, 2 or advanced, and 1 or highly advanced—based on their status index score of 1 to 10. A country with a high score, 8.5 and above, is categorized as highly advanced. A country with a low score, below 4, is categorized as failed. A country is categorized as ‘very limited’ if it has a status index score between 4 and 5.5. A score between 5.5 and 7 means the country is categorized as ‘limited’ and a country is categorized as ‘advanced’ for a score between 7.1 and 8.5. On the basis of the democratic status ranking, countries are further categorized as 5 or ‘hard - line autocracies,’ 4 or ‘moderate autocracies,’ 3 or ‘highly defective democracies,’ 2 or ‘defective democracies,’ and 1 or ‘democracies in consolidation.’ A country with a democratic status ranking below 4 is categorized as a hard line autocracy. A democratic status score between 4 and 5 means that the country is part of the ‘moderate autocracy’ group. A country is grouped as a ‘highly defective democracy’ for a score between 5 and 6. A country is recognized as a ‘defective democracy’ for a score between 6 and 8, and a score of 8 and above earns a country the status of a ‘democracy in consolidation.’ Countries are also categorized in to 5 groups based on their market economy status ranking. The countries are categorized as ‘rudimentary’ or group 5, ‘poorly functioning’ or group 4, ‘functional flaws’ or group 3, ‘functioning’ or group 2, and ‘developed’ or group 1. A country is recognized as a member of the ‘developed’ group with a market economy status ranking/score of 8 and above. A country is grouped as ‘functioning’ if it has a score between 7 and 8. A market economy status ranking between 5 and 7 means the country is categorized to group 3 or the ‘functional flaws’ group. A score between 3 and 5 means that the country is ‘poorly functioning’ and a score below 3 means the country enjoys a ‘rudimentary’ status. Based on the management index ranking, countries are categorized as 5 or failed, 4 or weak, 3 or moderate, 2 or good, and1 or very good. A country is categorized as ‘very good’ for a score of 7 and above. It is categorized as ‘good’ for a score between 5.6 and 7, and as ‘moderate’ for a score between 4.4 and 5.5. A score between 3 and 4.3 means a country is categorized as ‘weak,’ and a score below 3 means the categorization of a country as ‘failed.’ Countries are ranked between 1 and 10 on the basis of the level of difficulty they face. The level of difficulty is further categorized as 5 or negligible, 4 or minor, 3 or moderate, 2 or substantial, and 1 or massive. A score of 8.5 and above means the categorization of the country’s level of difficulty as ‘massive, and a score below 2.5 means the categorization of the level of difficulty faced by the country as ‘negligible.’ The level of difficulty score of 2.5 to 4.4 means a country faces a ‘minor’ level of difficulty and a score between 4.5 and 6.4 means the level of difficulty faced by a country is ‘moderate.’ A country with a score of 6.5 to 8.4 faces a ‘substantial’ level of difficulty.
  • C
    • 11月 2012
      ソース: Freedom House
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 12 12月, 2012
      データセットを選択
      Countries at the Crossroads is an annual analysis of government performance in 70 strategically important countries worldwide that are at a critical crossroads in determining their political future. The in-depth comparative assessments and quantitative ratings – examining government accountability, civil liberties, rule of law, and anticorruption and transparency efforts – are intended to help international policymakers identify areas of progress, as well as to highlight areas of concern that could be addressed in diplomatic efforts and reform assistance.The Crossroads project has generated far-reaching interest since its inception in 2004. Increased attention to the relationship between competent governance and respect for civil and political rights means that scholars and policymakers require sophisticated tools to help place the performance of various governments in perspective. Crossroads helps ground this analysis by providing indispensable quantitative assessment that allows for comparison over time, as well as detailed narrative reports that provide real-world context.A new edition of Crossroads is published each year, with half the set of countries analyzed in odd years and the other half in even years. Crossroads reports are written and evaluated by some of the most prominent independent experts available for each country.
  • D
    • 4月 2019
      ソース: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 16 4月, 2019
      データセットを選択
      The OECD Digital STRI heterogeneity indices complement the recently published Digital STRI's and presents indices of regulatory heterogeneity based on the rich information in the Digital STRI regulatory database. The indices are built from assessing – for each country pair and each measure – whether or not the countries have the same regulation. For each country pair and each sector, the indices reflect the (weighted) share of measures for which the two countries have different regulation.
  • F
    • 7月 2019
      ソース: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 14 7月, 2019
      データセットを選択
      The FDI Regulatory Restrictiveness Index (FDI Index) measures statutory restrictions on foreign direct investment across 22 economic sectors. It gauges the restrictiveness of a country’s FDI rules by looking at the four main types of restrictions on FDI: 1) Foreign equity limitations; 2) Discriminatory screening or approval mechanisms; 3) Restrictions on the employment of foreigners as key personnel and 4) Other operational restrictions, e.g. restrictions on branching and on capital repatriation or on land ownership by foreign-owend enterprises. Restrictions are evaluated on a 0 (open) to 1 (closed) scale. The overall restrictiveness index is the average of sectoral scores. The discriminatory nature of measures, i.e. when they apply to foreign investors only, is the central criterion for scoring a measure. State ownership and state monopolies, to the extent they are not discriminatory towards foreigners, are not scored. The FDI Index is not a full measure of a country’s investment climate. A range of other factors come into play, including how FDI rules are implemented. Entry barriers can also arise for other reasons, including state ownership in key sectors. A country’s ability to attract FDI will be affected by others factors such as the size of its market, the extent of its integration with neighbours and even geography among other. Nonetheless, FDI rules can be a critical determinant of a country’s attractiveness to foreign investors.
    • 4月 2012
      ソース: Agi Data
      アップロード者: Knoema
      データセットを選択
      Experts commonly support the notion that access to information is integral to the promotion of participation, transparency and accountability in any given society. A freedom of information framework aims at improving the efficiency of the government and increasing the transparency of its functioning by: 1. Regularly and reliably providing government documents to the public; 2. Educating the public on the significance of transparent government;3. Facilitating appropriate and relevant use of information in the lives of individuals
  • G
    • 4月 2019
      ソース: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 12 4月, 2019
      データセットを選択
      The GID-DB is a database providing researchers and policymakers with key data on gender-based discrimination in social institutions. This data helps analyse women’s empowerment and understand gender gaps in other key areas of development.Covering 180 countries and territories, the GID-DB contains comprehensive information on legal, cultural and traditional practices that discriminate against women and girls.
    • 12月 2013
      ソース: Transparency International
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 20 2月, 2014
      データセットを選択
      Data cited at: Global Corruption Barometer (2013) 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: http://www.transparency.org/gcb2013/in_detail#sthash.hey9okGH.dpuf
    • 6月 2018
      ソース: Open Knowledge International
      アップロード者: Sivakama Sundari
      以下でアクセス: 13 6月, 2018
      データセットを選択
  • N
  • O
  • P
    • 12月 2018
      ソース: Political Terror Scale
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 30 1月, 2019
      データセットを選択
      citation: Gib­ney, Mark, Linda Cor­nett, Reed Wood, Peter Hasch­ke, and Daniel Arnon. 2016. The Polit­ic­al Ter­ror Scale 1976-2015. Date Re­trieved, from the Polit­ic­al Ter­ror Scale website: ht­tp://www.polit­ic­al­ter­rorscale.org.   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.
    • 6月 2015
      ソース: World Bank
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 25 1月, 2017
      データセットを選択
      Privatization Database provides information on privatization transactions of at least US$1 million in developing countries from 2000 to 2008. Prior to this effort the most comprehensive information could be found in the World Bank’s Privatization Transactions database, which covered the years 1988 through 1999.
    • 6月 2019
      ソース: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
      アップロード者: Pallavi S
      以下でアクセス: 05 6月, 2019
      データセットを選択
      The OECD Indicators of Product Market Regulation (PMR) are a comprehensive and internationally-comparable set of indicators that measure the degree to which policies promote or inhibit competition in areas of the product market where competition is viable. They measure the economy-wide regulatory and market environments in 34 OECD countries in (or around) 1998, 2003, 2008 and 2013, and in another set of non-OECD countries in 2013. They are consistent across time and countries. Users of the data must be aware that they may no longer fully reflect the current situation in fast reforming countries. The indicators cover formal regulations in the following areas: state control of business enterprises; legal and administrative barriers to entrepreneurship; barriers to international trade and investment. Not all data are available for all countries for all years.
  • Q
    • 1月 2019
      ソース: Quality of Government Institute
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 01 2月, 2019
      データセットを選択
      Data cited at: The Quality of Government Institute; Teorell, Jan, Stefan Dahlberg, Sören Holmberg, Bo Rothstein, Natalia Alvarado Pachon & Richard Svensson. 2018. The Quality of Government Standard Dataset, version Jan18. University of Gothenburg: The Quality of Government Institute, http://www.qog.pol.gu.se doi:10.18157/QoGStdJan18   In the QoG Standard TS dataset, data from 1946 to 2018 is included and the unit of analysis is country-year (e.g. Sweden-1946, Sweden-1947 and so on).    
  • R
    • 7月 2019
      ソース: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
      アップロード者: Pallavi S
      以下でアクセス: 05 7月, 2019
      データセットを選択
      The OECD indicators of regulation in energy, transport and communications (ETCR) summarise regulatory provisions in seven sectors: telecoms, electricity, gas, post, rail, air passenger transport, and road freight. The ETCR indicators have been estimated in a long-time series and are therefore well suited for time-series analysis. The ETCR time series was updated, revised and now cover 34 OECD countries and a set of non-OECD countries for 2013. Users of the data must be aware that they may no longer fully reflect the current situation in fast reforming countries. Not all data are available for all countries for all years.
    • 6月 2019
      ソース: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
      アップロード者: Pallavi S
      以下でアクセス: 05 6月, 2019
      データセットを選択
      The OECD cross-section sectoral indicators measure regulatory conditions in the professional services and retail distribution sectors. The retail indicators cover barriers to entry, operational restrictions, and price controls. These indicators were updated and revised; they are now estimated for 34 OECD countries for the years 1998, 2003, around 2008 and 2013 and for another set of non-OECD countries for 2013. Users of the data must be aware that they may no longer fully reflect the current situation in fast reforming countries. Not all data are available for all countries for all years.
    • 3月 2019
      ソース: World Justice Project
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 01 4月, 2019
      データセットを選択
      Data cited at: The World Justice Project (WJP) The World Justice Project (WJP) Rule of Law Index® is a quantitative assessment tool designed by the World Justice Project to offer a detailed and comprehensive picture of the extent to which countries adhere to the rule of law in practice. Factors of the WJP Rule of Law Index include: 1. Constraints on Government Powers 2. Absence of Corruption 3. Open Government 4. Fundamental Rights 5. Order and Security 6. Regulatory Enforcement 7. Civil Justice 8. Criminal Justice (Data is collected for a 9th factor, Informal Justice, but it is not included in aggregated scores and rankings. This is due to the complexities of these systems and the difficulties in measuring their fairness and effectiveness in a matter that is both systematic and comparable across countries.) Every year WJP collects data from representative samples of the general public and legal professionals to compute the index scores. The data, once collected, are carefully processed to arrive at country-level scores. The respondent level data is first edited to exclude partially-completed surveys, suspicious data, and outliers. Individual answers are then mapped on to the 44 sub-factors of the index. Answers are coded so that all values fall between 0 (least rule of law) and 1 (most rule of law), and aggregated at country level using the simple, or unweighted, average of all respondents. Note: 2012-2013 values given for year 2013 and 2017-2018 given for year 2018.
  • S
    • 7月 2017
      ソース: Johannes Kepler University
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 12 3月, 2019
      データセットを選択
      Data cited at: Shadow Economies around the World: New Results for 158 Countries over 1991-2015 by Friedrisch SCHNEIDER. Working Paper No. 1710 July 2017   Abstract: This paper is a first attempt to estimate the size and development of the shadow economy of 158 countries over the period 1991 up to 2015. Using the Multiple Indicators, Multiple Causes (MIMIC) method we apply for the first time (i) the light intensity approach instead of GDP avoiding the problem that quite often GDP is used as a cause and indicator variable, (ii) the Predictive Mean Matching (PMM) method, and (iii) a variety of robustness tests. Results suggest that the average size of the shadow economy of these 158 countries over 1991-2015 is 32.5% of official GDP, which was 34.82% in 1991 and decreased to 30.66% in 2015. The lowest size of the shadow economy East Asian countries with 16.77% averaged over the period 1991- 2015, then follows OECD countries with 18.7% and the highest value have Latin American and sub-Saharan African countries with values above 35%.
    • 8月 2016
      ソース: Actionable Governance Indicators Data Portal
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 30 8月, 2016
      データセットを選択
      Statistical Capacity Indicator has three dimensions: a). Statistical Methodology b). Source data and c). Periodicity and timeliness. For each dimension, a country is scored against specific criteria, using information available from the World Bank, IMF, UN, UNESCO, and WHO. A composite score for each dimension is calculated by adding criteria scores, ranges from 0 to 1, and multiplying by 10. And an overall score combining all three dimensions are derived for each country on a scale of 0-100 by taking average of these three dimensions. A score of 100 indicates that the country meets all the criteria. The first dimension, statistical methodology, Countries are evaluated against a set of criteria such as use of an updated national accounts base year, use of the latest BOP manual, external debt reporting status, subscription to IMF’s Special Data Dissemination Standard, and enrolment data reporting to UNESCO. The second dimension, source data, reflects whether a country conducts data collection activities in line with internationally recommended periodicity, and whether data from administrative systems are available and reliable for statistical estimation purposes. Specifically, the criteria used are the periodicity of population and agricultural censuses, the periodicity of poverty and health related surveys, and completeness of vital registration system coverage. The third dimension, periodicity and timeliness, looks at the availability and periodicity of key socioeconomic indicators, of which nine are MDG indicators. This dimension attempts to measure the extent to which data are made accessible to users through transformation of source data into timely statistical outputs. Criteria used include indicators on income poverty, child and maternal health, HIV/AIDS, primary completion, gender equality, access to water and GDP growth.
    • 4月 2019
      ソース: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 12 4月, 2019
      データセットを選択
      The OECD STRI heterogeneity indices complement the existing STRI's and presents indices of regulatory heterogeneity based on the rich information in the STRI regulatory database. The indices are built from assessing – for each country pair and each measure – whether or not the countries have the same regulation. For each country pair and each sector, the indices reflect the (weighted) share of measures for which the two countries have different regulation.
    • 6月 2019
      ソース: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 05 6月, 2019
      データセットを選択
      The subnational government finance dataset presents data on the institutional organisation at local and regional levels as well as on public finance. Financial data cover the general government sector and subnational government subsector (state and local government levels) in the 35 OECD member countries and in the EU. Four main dimensions are presented: expenditure (including investment), revenue, budget balance and debt. The dataset is released as a beta version. Data at country level are derived mainly from the OECD National Accounts harmonised according to the new standards of the System of National Accounts (SNA) 2008, implemented by most OECD countries since December 2014. They are complemented by data from Eurostat, IMF (Australia, Chile), and national statistical institutes for some countries or indicators (in particular, territorial organisation). Data were extracted in February 2017 and are from 2015, unless otherwise specified
    • 10月 2018
      ソース: Sustainable Governance Indicators
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 05 11月, 2018
      データセットを選択
      The SGI is a platform built on a cross-national survey of governance that identifies reform needs in 41 EU and OECD countries. The SGI brings together a broad network of experts and practitioners aiming to understand what works best in sustainable governance. Advocating the exchange of best practices, we offer full access to our data set and enable the comparisons that generate innovation in governance.
  • T
    • 3月 2017
      ソース: World Economic Forum
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 01 3月, 2017
      データセットを選択
      Data cited at: The World Economic Forum https://www.weforum.org/ Topic: The Global Enabling Trade Report 2016 Publication URL: http://reports.weforum.org/global-enabling-trade-report-2016/ License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode   The Enabling Trade Index (ETI) was developed within the context of the World Economic Forum’s Transportation Industry Partnership program, and was first published in The Global Enabling Trade Report 2008. The ETI measures the extent to which individual economies have developed institutions, policies, and services facilitating the free flow of goods over borders and to destination. The structure of the Index reflects the main enablers of trade, breaking them into four overall issue areas, captured in the subindexes: 1) The market access subindex measures the extent to which the policy framework of the country welcomes foreign goods into the economy and enables access to foreign markets for its exporters. 2) The border administration subindex assesses the extent to which the administration at the border facilitates the entry and exit of goods. 3) Infrastructure subindex takes into account whether the country has in place the transport and communications infrastructure necessary to facilitate the movement of goods within the country and across the border. 4) The business environment subindex looks at the quality of governance as well as at the overarching regulatory and security environment impacting the business of importers and exporters active in the country. Each of these four subindexes is composed in turn of a number of pillars of enabling trade, of which there are seven in all. These are: 1) Domestic market access; 2) Foreign market access; 3) Efficiency and transparency of border administration; 4) Availability and quality of transport infrastructure; 5) Availability and quality of transport services; 6) Availability and use of ICTs; 7) Operating environment. Each indicator and sub-indicator is given a score on a scale of 1 to 7 that corresponds to the worst and best possible outcome, respectively.
    • 3月 2012
      ソース: Global Integrity
      アップロード者: Knoema
      データセットを選択
      The Global Integrity Report is an essential guide to anti-corruption institutions and mechanisms around the world, intended to help policymakers, advocates, journalists and citizens identify and anticipate the areas where corruption is more likely to occur. The Report evaluates both anti-corruption legal frameworks and the practical implementation and enforcement of those frameworks, and takes a close look at whether citizen can effectively access and use anti-corruption safeguards. The Report is prepared by local researchers, journalists and academics using a double-blind peer review process. More than 1,000 local contributors have participated in preparing the Report since 2004. The Global Integrity Report 2011 covers 31 countries examining transparency of the public procurement process, media freedom, asset disclosure requirements, conflicts of interest regulations, and more.
    • 6月 2018
      ソース: Walk Free Foundation
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 23 7月, 2018
      データセットを選択
      The Global Slavery Index, the flagship report of the Walk Free Foundation. The Global Slavery Index estimates the number of people in modern slavery in 167 countries. It is a tool for citizens, non government organisations, businesses and public officials to understand the size of the problem, existing responses and contributing factors, so they can build sound policies that will end modern slavery. The Global Slavery Index answers the following questions: What is the estimated prevalence of modern slavery country by country, and what is the absolute number by population? How are governments tackling modern slavery? What factors explain or predict the prevalence of modern slavery? Government Response Rating by Country A - 70 to 79.9 BBB - 60 to 69.9 BB - 50 to 59.9 B - 40 to 49.9 CCC - 30 to 39.9 CC - 20 to 29.9 C - 10 to 19.9 D - <0 to 9.9
    • 4月 2018
      ソース: International Budget Partnership
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 23 4月, 2018
      データセットを選択
      The Open Budget Index assigns countries covered by the Survey a transparency score on a 100-point scale using 92 questions from the Survey — these questions focus specifically on whether the government provides the public with timely access to comprehensive information contained in eight key budget documents. The Open Budget Index measures the overall commitment of countries to transparency and allows for comparisons among countries.   "These materials were developed by the International Budget Partnership. IBP has given us permission to use the materials solely for noncommercial, educational purpose"
  • U
    • 7月 2018
      ソース: United Nations Public Administration Country Studies
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 13 8月, 2018
      データセットを選択
      Data cited at: UN E-Government Knowledgebase - https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/ 1. The EGDI is based on a comprehensive Survey of the online presence of all 193 United Nations Member States, which assesses national websites and how e-government policies and strategies are applied in general and in specific sectors for delivery of essential services. The assessment rates the e-government performance of countries relative to one another as opposed to being an absolute measurement. The results are tabulated and combined with a set of indicators embodying a country’s capacity to participate in the information society, without which e-government development efforts are of limited immediate use. Although the basic model has remained consistent, the precise meaning of these values varies from one edition of the Survey to the next as understanding of the potential of e-government changes and the underlying technology evolves. This is an important distinction because it also implies that it is a comparative framework that seeks to encompass various approaches that may evolve over time instead of advocating a linear path with an absolute goal. 2. E-Government Development Index-EGDI Very High-EGDI (Greater than 0.75) High-EGDI (Between 0.50 and 0.75) Middle-EGDI (Between 0.25 and 0.50) Low-EGDI (Less than 0.25)
  • W
    • 5月 2012
      ソース: International Labour Organization
      アップロード者: Knoema
      データセットを選択
      Wages and Employment
    • 4月 2019
      ソース: Reporters Without Borders
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 13 5月, 2019
      データセットを選択
      The Range of Score to Access the Press Freedom.  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 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.      
    • 8月 2018
      ソース: World Bank
      アップロード者: Knoema
      以下でアクセス: 27 9月, 2018
      データセットを選択
      The Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) project reports aggregate and individual governance indicators for over 200 countries and territories over the period 1996–2017, for six dimensions of governance:Voice and AccountabilityPolitical Stability and Absence of ViolenceGovernment EffectivenessRegulatory QualityRule of LawControl of Corruption The Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) are a research dataset summarizing the views on the quality of governance provided by a large number of enterprise, citizen and expert survey respondents in industrial and developing countries. These data are gathered from a number of survey institutes, think tanks, non-governmental organizations, international organizations, and private sector firms. The WGI do not reflect the official views of the World Bank, its Executive Directors, or the countries they represent. The WGI are not used by the World Bank Group to allocate resources. Measure description: Estimate:-Estimate of governance (ranges from approximately -2.5 (weak) to 2.5 (strong) governance performance) Standard error (StdErr):-Standard error reflects variability around the point estimate of governance. Number of sources (NumSrc):-Number of data sources on which estimate is based Rank:-Percentile rank among all countries (ranges from 0 (lowest) to 100 (highest) rank) Lower:-Lower bound of 90% confidence interval for governance, in percentile rank terms Upper:-Upper bound of 90% confidence interval for governance, in percentile rank terms