Blavatnik Index of Public Administration

The Blavatnik Index of Public Administration has been calculated from 82 metrics drawn from 17 data sources. Each metric is aligned with one of the 4 domains and 20 themes set out in the Index’s conceptual framework. Currently, on a ‘global’ basis we have been able to measure 16 of the 20 themes, four in each domain.

The methodology of the Index is designed to provide a relative assessment of country performance, the source data have been (re-)scaled from 0.00 to 1.00, where 0.00 represents the lowest scoring country and 1.00 represents the highest scoring country. This scaling is not only necessary because the source data are measured on different scales, but also supports our broader aim for the Index results to be a tool for comparative analysis.

The Index covers 120 countries which have been selected via a data coverage assessment that considers not just overall availability of data for a country but the spread of that data across the Index’s conceptual framework. These countries represent a broad spread of geographic regions, income levels and population sizes. The main areas with low coverage are: the Caribbean where only three island nations are included; the Middle East and North Africa where only eight countries are included, so for analysis we have grouped these countries with nine others from central Asia; and, in Oceania where only Australia and New Zealand are included. While sub-Saharan Africa has good coverage overall, central African and Francophone nations are not as well represented.

It is inevitable that for an exercise such as this there will be a focus on individual rankings and positions, however users of the Index should exercise caution in how they interpret the results. The data provide only a partial picture of the performance and quality of public administrations and the Index methodology produces a relative assessment without regards to specific benchmarks. The best data about an individual country’s public administration will be the data available domestically. The Index is designed to support and complement that data rather than to replace it. The Index is based only on data from sources with broad international coverage, there are other sources with fewer countries and we encourage users to also consider these source alongside the Index results.

Users should be careful in their interpretation of small differences in score and rank; the Index is designed as a tool to provide indicative comparisons that spur further inquiry and to promote peer learning rather than as a definitive or authoritative measure of performance. A summary of the data sources, methodology and approach to country selection for the Index is provided at pages 24-25, and full details are available on the Index’s website.

The top 5 countries in the Index are Singapore (1st); Norway (2nd); Canada and Denmark (joint 3rd); and Finland (5th). All five of these countries tend to perform strongly across all four domains of the Index – Singapore comes first/joint first in two of the Index’s four domains (Public Policy and National Delivery); Denmark, Finland and Norway come first/joint first in one domain each (Strategy and Leadership, Public Policy, and People and Processes respectively); while Canada consistently comes fourth/joint fourth in each of the four domains. After these five countries there are seven countries that rank sixth to ninth: the UK and New Zealand (joint 6th); Australia (8th); and Estonia, France, Spain and the United States (joint 9th).

Naturally there is keen interest in who scores top in the Index, but the Index’s global coverage allows countries to review how they compare to more relevant peers. Brazil and Columbia (both 32nd) are the highest scoring ‘upper middle income’ economies, Ukraine (42nd) is the highest scoring ‘lower middle income’ economy, while Rwanda (69th) is the highest scoring ‘low income’ economy. Comparing countries regionally, Uruguay (20th) is the third highest scoring country in the Americas (after Canada and the United States), Indonesia (38th) is the highest scoring country in Asia and Pacific that is not classified as a high income economy, Estonia’s Baltic neighbours of Lithuania (15th) and Latvia (19th) are the next highest Eastern European countries and Mauritius (34th) and Kenya (62nd) are the highest scoring countries in Sub-Saharan Africa.

While our analysis produces an overall score this should only be the starting point for those interested in understanding how countries compare. The four countries which score joint ninth (Estonia, France, Spain and the United States) are a good example: while they achieve the same score and rank in the overall Index, they each score differently in the four domains that make up the Index. Estonia comes 2nd in the People and Processes domain but 17th in the National Delivery domain; Spain is 4th in the Public Policy domain but 28th in the People and Processes domain; France is 8th in the National Delivery domain but 14th in the Strategy and Leadership domain; and, the United States is 5th in the Strategy and Leadership domain but 22nd in the National Delivery domain.

Moving down a further level of the Index’s framework and data model demonstrates this variability in country performance. Of the five countries that rank in the overall top five for the Index, Denmark ranks in the top ten for 12 of the 16 themes the Index can measure, Norway for 10 themes, Canada and Singapore for 9 themes each and Finland ranks in the top ten for 8 of the 16 themes.

Index results for all countries