Global Justice Index Report 2023

The Global Justice Index is an ongoing research project conducted by Fudan-IAS to measure the level of global justice achieved by nation-states. From the data collected in this project, we provide a framework for understanding the contribution each country made to greater global justice and show the all-county rankings for each topic. We have published results for yeas from 2010 to 2020 and are now presenting our fifth year of results, covering data from 2021. Our report consists of four sections: an introduction, findings, main results, and a conclusion.

Our introduction discusses the conceptual framework for selecting issues, dimensions, and measures. It is important to repeat this information to maintain the integrity of this year’s Global Justice Index research, although it has not changed from previous reports. The concept of global justice is widely recognized as a complex one, involving multiple components falling under both normative and empirical realities, requiring an integrated theoretical framework that covers both of these aspects. We clarified our conceptualization of global justice in a theoretical paper and discussed our issue area system on this basis.

Our understanding of global justice draws on diverse theories and intellectual traditions ranging across social, cultural, and political contexts. We recognize three main approaches—rights-based, goods-based, and virtue-based—as the foundations for a coherent theoretical framework that would have a normative basis for measurement. A rights-based approach centers on principles, rules, and the legitimacy of sources. It emphasizes fundamental entitlements and legal protections. A goods-based approach shifts the focus to material and institutional support provided by governments or institutions. It considers the tangible resources necessary for well-being. A virtue-based approach forms a personal pursuit, rather than mere compliance. Motivation and internal willingness drive ethical behavior. These three facets intertwine to form a holistic whole. The rights-based structure provides the foundation (the bones of the body of this report), the goods-based aspect supplies substance (forming the muscle and flesh), and the virtue-focused dimension brings purpose (as the heart).

In our theoretical framework, we propose two evaluative principles to guide the selection of issue areas for assessment. The first principle is the Common but Differentiated and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC), which addresses issues “for which no single nation-state can be held directly accountable or responsible, matters that can only be tackled through the globally concerted efforts of all stakeholders”. For instance, addressing climate change requires collaboration across countries, as no single nation can address it alone. The second principle is that of Cosmopolitan but Due-diligent Responsibilities (CDDR). This principle holds that “all-nation-states are morally obligated to provide cosmopolitan aid, in which context the least advantaged will have a due-diligent responsibility”. This concept aligns with the idea of mutual accountability, as outlined in the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, which was adopted in 2005 at the Second High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness to promote improved cooperation among actors in aid and development. According to this principle, all nation-states have a moral obligation to provide cosmopolitan aid, and even the least advantaged have a due-diligent responsibility. Nation-states are expected to offer material and institutional assistance within their territories, including antipoverty measures and education policies.

Following out the principles of CBDR-RC and CDDR, we have selected two clusters of issue areas for global justice in our measurement. The issue areas relating to CBDR-RC are (1) climate change (global warming), (2) peacekeeping, (3) humanitarian aid, (4) terrorism and armed conflicts, (5) cross-national criminal police cooperation, and (6) refugee concerns. The issue areas relating to CDDR are (7) antipoverty, (8) education, (9) public health, and (10) the protection of women and children. In the following sections, we provide rankings for nations’ contribution to global justice across these 10 issue areas for 2021. We also incorporate regional comparisons, in depth policy analyses, and visualization tools to enhance our understanding of the role that each country has played in advancing global justice.

This Global Justice Index report 2023 forms an updated version of previous years’ reports, but it is not simply a continuation of them. We have been improving our index year by year to with changes that have taken place globally. For example, to better account for the COVID-19 pandemic in 2019 and related aspects of justice, we incorporated new indicators in certain issue areas (health and humanitarian aid) to measure nations’ contributions to promoting global justice in response to COVID-19. In addition, we have bolstered our analysis section by including additional literature and policy implications while delving further into the data from the key countries. We also refined our imputation methodology to better address the challenge of missing data, which has been a persistent issue in compiling our report. Through adopting a more integrated approach utilizing data across issues, we have significantly enhanced the efficacy of our imputation process. These methodological advancements have produced to a more reliable index, with increased imputation rates and reduced errors, allowing for a broader comparison of countries. To maintain comparability and continuity, our methodology, main indicator system, and sources of data remain consistent with last year’s report.

The full article is available online here : https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41111-024-00254-2