2011 Ibrahim Index of

2011 Ibrahim Index of African Governance Summary
2011 Ibrahim Index of African Governance: Summary published October 2011 copyright 2011 Mo Ibrahim Foundation The Mo Ibrahim Foundation is committed to making data on governance quality in Africa freely available and accessible to all citizens of the continent and interested stakeholders. We welcome and encourage any accurate reproduction, translation and dissemination of this material. The material must be attributed to the Mo Ibrahim Foundation, but not in any way that suggests that the Foundation endorses you or your use of the material. We also welcome any feedback and comments on the Ibrahim Index. To request additional copies of this or other publications, to provide feedback or to discuss use of the Ibrahim Index please email media@moibrahimfoundation.org Printed and bound in Swindon, England Designed and typeset by Text Matters (www.textmatters.com)
Data used in the 2011 Ibrahim Index are from 2000 to 2010, prior to South Sudans secession from Sudan.
Foreword2
About the Ibrahim Index3 Structure of the Index4 Methodology6 Ibrahim Index: from raw data to final scores7 Overall Country Results8 Key Findings10 Country Case Studies11 Category Results13 Safety and Rule of Law14 Participation and Human Rights17 Sustainable Economic Opportunity20 Human Development23
Data Providers26 Indicators27 Appendix 1: Executive Elections in Africa31 Appendix 2: Ibrahim Index Timeline (20072011)32 Project Team33 Acknowledgements34 About the Mo Ibrahim Foundation35
Centre-spread pull-out page: 2011 Ibrahim Index of African Governance Country Rankings and Scores
Foreword
We are pleased to present the 2011 Ibrahim Index of African Governance. In a year when governance has dominated global as well as African headlines we hope that the findings of the 2011 Ibrahim Index will help to establish a constructive basis towards the achievement of an increasingly peaceful and prosperous Africa.
Dr Mo Ibrahim Founder and Chair of the Mo Ibrahim Foundation
2 2011 Ibr ahIm Index of afrIcan Governance: Summa ry
We hope that the findings of the 2011 Ibrahim Index will help to establish a constructive basis towards achieving an increasingly peaceful and prosperous Africa.
The findings of the 2011 Index present a complex yet hopeful picture for African governance. An optimistic story is emerging from our continents successes. A clear link can be observed between a balanced, equitable and inclusive approach to all categories of governance and national progress. These findings strongly challenge the narrative that supposes governments should pick and choose which areas to focus on at the expense of others as a natural and unavoidable trade-off of leadership. The events of this year have clearly shown the possible consequences of a skewed focus that selectively denies citizens some of the public goods and services they are entitled to expect. The dramatic progress being made by countries embracing the whole basket of public goods and services are also examples that other countries might find useful. We are delighted to see the evident economic growth across Africa but we are concerned about the stagnation, and in many cases the reversal, in the rule of law and citizens rights. We sounded alarm bells last year concerning this issue. If economic progress is not translated into better quality of life and respect for citizens rights, we will witness more Tahrir Squares in Africa. In 2011 we have continued the process of engaging the wider African academic community through a workshop in Dakar, hosted jointly by the Foundation and CODESRIA. Furthermore, we have begun two major projects that will both significantly improve the quality and availability of data that can be used to assess governance, and further entrench African ownership of the Index. We are supporting the expansion of Afrobarometer in order to increase the number of African countries in which the organisation collects citizens views on a wide range of social and economic issues. With Global Integrity Trust, we are building a network of experts across Africa to provide assessments of key issues from an African perspective. We hope these contributions will go some way towards filling the many gaps to be found in data on Africa.
We are also continuing to refine the structure of the Index. The growing consensus around physical infrastructure as a crucial tool for development which I have seen first-hand through my participation in the G20 High Level Panel for Infrastructure Investment has been reflected in the inclusion of new indicators. Similarly, we have enhanced our assessment of soft infrastructure (telecoms and IT) to reflect their political dividends. The Foundation is also working to improve our assessment of sustainable economic opportunities. We are particularly focused on capturing the inclusivity and sustainability of the economic programmes pursued by governments. Sound economic management must be about equity as well as growth. But the patchiness of data concerning Africa continues to be a major challenge in the compilation of the Index. The Foundation is working on a number of projects to help fill some of these gaps as well as advocating for all stakeholders to focus attention on this crucial issue. Whatever the issue, we continue to welcome feedback to ensure that the Index is the most robust, relevant and user-friendly assessment possible. We have also this year seen the birth of two new African states, South Sudan and Sudan, born from the split of former Sudan. In the 2011 Index which covers the period 2000 to 2010, Sudan is assessed throughout as a single entity. Moving forward, the Foundation will endeavour to include the two new entities of Sudan and South Sudan in the Index as soon as data are available. The Ibrahim Index is a collaborative project, made possible by tireless work and dedication. My particular gratitude goes to the Index team at the Foundation. Our special advisor, Dr Daniel Kaufmann, co-producer of the Worldwide Governance Indicators and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, as well as the Technical Committee and the Advisory Council, have added greatly to the Index. The 23 organisations which provide the data are essential partners and, last but not least, I particularly want to thank the Foundations two African institutional partners: the African Development Bank and the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa.
About the Ibrahim Index

Established in 2007, the Ibrahim Index is the most comprehensive collection of quantitative data that provides an annual assessment of governance performance in every African country.
2011 IBRAhIM INDEx CoUNTRy RANKINGS
Rank 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12nd 13rd 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th 21st 22nd 23rd 24th 25th 26th 27th 28th 29th 30th 31st 32nd 33rd 34th 35th 36th 37th 38th 39th 40th 41st 42nd 43rd 44th 45th 46th 47th 48th 49th 50th 51st 52nd 53rd Mauritius Cape Verde Botswana Seychelles South Africa Namibia Ghana Lesotho Tunisia Egypt Benin So Tom and Prncipe Tanzania Morocco Senegal Zambia Malawi Algeria Burkina Faso Uganda Mozambique Mali Kenya Gambia Rwanda Swaziland Gabon Libya Djibouti Sierra Leone Comoros Mauritania Madagascar Ethiopia Togo Liberia Burundi Cameroon Niger Congo Nigeria Angola Guinea Guinea-Bissau Equatorial Guinea Cte dIvoire Eritrea Sudan Central African Republic Congo, Democratic Rep. Zimbabwe Chad Somalia Score (out of 100) 82 79 76 73 71 70 66 63 62 61 60 58 58 58 57 57 57 55 55 55 55 54 53 52 52 51 51 50 49 48 47 47 47 46 46 45 45 45 44 42 41 41 38 37 37 36 35 33 33 32 31 31 8
The Ibrahim Index

is funded and led by an African institution. is Africas leading assessment of governance. provides a framework and tools for citizens, public authorities and partners to assess progress in governance. compiles 86 indicators grouped into 14 sub-categories and four overarching categories to measure the effective delivery of public goods and services to African citizens (see pp.45 for full structure of the Index). uses indicators from 23 data providers. is made up of over 40,000 raw data points.
Partnerships
The Ibrahim Index is currently compiled in partnership with an Advisory Council and a Technical Committee that include experts from a range of African institutions (see p.33 for Project Team). The Foundation is also working with Afrobarometer and Global Integrity South Africa.
Through partnership with the Mo Ibrahim Foundation and other donors, Afrobarometer (which is managed from the Centre for Democratic Development Ghana) will be expanding its citizen surveys to cover over two thirds of African countries, creating the first pan-African databank of citizens views and voices on a range of governance issues. The Foundation will support the Global Integrity Trust (based in South Africa) to recruit a network of experts in every African country to provide assessments of key social, economic and political indicators; those indicators will eventually feed into and bolster the Ibrahim Index.
This is part of the Foundations commitment to further entrench the continents ownership of governance issues and to improve the quality and availability of data on Africa.
The 2011 Ibrahim Index

The 2011 Ibrahim Index includes new indicators in the following areas: physical and telecommunications infrastructure; gender; health; welfare service provision; and economic management.
Data
The Ibrahim Index is currently compiled using various international and African sources. Many crucial indicators of governance, such as poverty, could not be included as the data are not sufficiently comprehensive. The future provision of robust data, including poverty statistics, from African sources is a core priority for the Foundation.
Structure of the Index

2011 IbrahIm Index of
Categories
SAFETy AND RULE oF LAw
PARTICIPATIoN AND hUMAN RIGhTS
Subcategories
Rule of Law
Accountability
Personal Safety
National Security
Participation
Rights
Gender
Indicators
Judicial Process Judicial Independence Sanctions Transfers of Power Property Rights*
Accountability, Transparency and Corruption in the Public Sector* Accountability, Transparency and Corruption in Rural Areas Corruption and Bureaucracy Accountability of Public Officials Corruption in Government and Public Officials Prosecution of Abuse of Office
Domestic Political Persecution* Social Unrest Safety of the Person Violent Crime Human Trafficking
Cross-Border Tensions
Government Involvement in Armed Conflict
Free and Fair Executive Elections Free and Fair Elections Political Participation Electoral SelfDetermination Effective Power to Govern
Core International Human Rights Conventions Human Rights Political Rights Workers Rights Freedom of Expression* Freedom of Association and Assembly* Civil Liberties*
Gender Equality* Gender Balance in Primary and Secondary Education Womens Participation in the Labour Force Equal Representation in Rural Areas Women in Parliament Womens Rights* Legislation on Violence against Women
Domestic Armed Conflict Political Refugees Internally Displaced People
afrIcan Governance
SUSTAINABLE ECoNoMIC oPPoRTUNITy
hUMAN DEVELoPMENT
Categories
Public Management
Business Environment
Infrastructure
Rural Sector
welfare
Education
health
Subcategories
Indicators
Statistical Capacity Public Administration* Inflation Diversification Reserves Budget Management* Ratio of Total Revenue to Total Expenditure Ratio of Budget Deficit or Surplus to GDP Debt Management* Ratio of External Debt Service to Exports Reliability of Financial Institutions
Competitive Environment* Investment Climate Investment Climate for Rural Businesses Rural Financial Services Development Bureaucracy and Red Tape
Access to Electricity Road and Rail Networks* Air Transport Facilities Telephone and IT Infrastructure* Digital Connectivity*
Public Resources for Rural Development Land and Water for LowIncome Rural Populations* Agricultural Research and Extension Services Agricultural Input and Produce Markets Policy and Legal Framework for Rural Organisations Dialogue between Government and Rural Organisations
Welfare Regime Social Protection and Labour* Social Exclusion Welfare Services (Health and Education)* Equity of Public Resource Use* Access to Water* Access to Sanitation* Environmental Policy Environmental Sustainability*
Education Provision and Quality Ratio of Pupils to Teachers in Primary School Primary School Completion Progression to Secondary School Tertiary Enrolment
Maternal Mortality Child Mortality Immunisation (Measles and DPT)* Antiretroviral Treatment Provision Disease (Cholera, Malaria and TB)*
* clustered indicator
Methodology
The Ibrahim Index of African Governance is a composite index, constructed by combining underlying indicators in a standardised way to provide a statistical measure of governance performance in all African countries. As a progressive and consultative project, the Index continuously adapts, accommodating the input and critiques of stakeholders. Governance, as defined by the Board of the Mo Ibrahim Foundation, is inclusive from the viewpoint of the citizen. The definition is intentionally broad so as to capture all aspects of what a citizen has the right to demand from his or her state. It can be summarised by four over-arching dimensions: Safety and Rule of Law, Participation and Human Rights, Sustainable Economic Opportunity, and Human Development. As governance is not measurable directly, it is necessary to determine the most suitable proxy indicators that appropriately reflect this definition of governance. Beyond the requirement for a particular indicator to be compatible with the Foundations definition of governance, there are other criteria that the indicator must meet. An included indicator should cover at least two thirds of the countries on the continent (35 or more) and should provide at least two years worth of data between 2000 and 2010. The latest available data should not be more than three years old and new data releases should be regular (at least every three years). Even when indicators meet these criteria, often their data sources do not provide data for all countries, in all years. Missing raw data values in the Ibrahim Index are estimated using country mean substitution or extrapolation, where appropriate. Some of the raw data used in the computation of the Ibrahim Index contain observations that lie an abnormal distance from other values of the indicator. In the 2011 Index, the following ten indicators required statistical treatment to reduce the effects of such outliers on final scores: Inflation, Refugees, Internally Displaced People, Reserves, Ratio of Budget Deficit or Surplus to GDP, Ratio of External Debt Service to Exports, Ratio of Total Revenue to Total Expenditure, Internet Subscribers, Tertiary Enrolment, and Cholera. As data included in the Index come from 23 separate institutions, and are on different scales at source, these raw data must be standardised in order to be meaningfully combined. The data for each indicator are transformed by the method of Min-Max normalisation, which performs a linear transformation on the data whilst preserving the relationships among the original data values. Min-Max normalisation subtracts the minimum value of an indicators raw data set from each countrys value for that indicator in a particular year. That value is then divided by the range of the indicator (maximum value in the raw data set minus the minimum value in the data set). The new values are multiplied by 100 in order to put them on a new scale of 0100, where 100 is always the best possible score. A simple statistical method of data aggregation is applied to combine the normalised data into a composite index. Each normalised indicator is assigned to the sub-category in which it best sits conceptually. Sub-category scores are calculated by averaging the scores of the underlying indicators. Category scores are calculated by averaging the 14 sub-category scores, and finally, the overall Index scores are obtained by averaging the scores of the four categories. Neither the categories nor sub-categories are explicitly weighted. Whilst the overall composite score for the Ibrahim Index enables users to make broad comparisons, interesting analysis can be done at the category and sub-category levels. The inherently unobservable nature of governance means that the Index is a proxy measurement. The main sources of uncertainty in the computation of the Index arise from missing data and measurement errors. The Foundation publishes standard errors and confidence intervals alongside the overall Index and category scores to reflect this uncertainty. Given that measurement imprecision exists in any governance index, users of the Ibrahim Index are encouraged to avoid the over-interpretation of small score differences. The addition of new indicators annually provides calibrations and refinements to the Index. Furthermore, the entire Index database is updated each year, in accordance with best practices. Retrospective revisions compelled by data reassessments at source mean that data used in the 2011 Index may be different in some instances from those used in the 2007 Index. A countrys rank in the 2011 Index is reflective of the Foundations assessment based on the best available information at the time of construction. Comparisons between years should therefore be performed entirely on the 2011 data set. For a more detailed methodology paper please visit: www. moibrahimfoundation.org/en/section/the-ibrahim-index/ methodology
Data used in the 2011 Ibrahim Index are from 2010, prior to South Sudans secession from Sudan. The data set used to calculate the 2011 Ibrahim Index contains data from 2000 to 2010. A decline or improvement is described as significant through the use of standard statistical methodology at a 90% confidence level. However some analysts may find it instructive to examine movements below this threshold. Comparisons between sub-categories should only be made on the basis of rank. These comparisons are relative (not absolute) for each country. All figures have been rounded to the nearest whole number. This means that countries may appear to have the same score but do not when decimal places are taken into account. Countries have been ranked and trends have been described based on the full scores, not the rounded numbers that appear here.
METhoDoLoGy
Ibrahim Index: from raw data to final scores
Safety and Rule of Law
Human Development
4 categories 3 sub-categories 2 indicators 1 data

Participation and Human Rights
IbRaHIm InDEx
Sustainable Economic Opportunity
1 The data gathered comes in
different units and scales. Before they can be used in the Ibrahim Index, they are transformed onto a scale on which they can be meaningfully compared and averaged.*
2 Once the 86 indicators have
been transformed to a common scale, each one is grouped with similar indicators to form 14 sub-categories. The sub-category score is the simple average of all the indicator scores.
3 Sub-categories are then
grouped into one of four categories; the category score is the average of subcategory scores.
4 The category scores are then
averaged to produce the final Ibrahim Index score.
* Clustered indicators: 24 indicators were formed by clustering a number of
underlying variables which each measure the same dimension and come from different sources, or measure similar concepts and come from the same source. A cluster is formed by averaging the underlying variables (post normalisation).
Overall Country Results
< 30 3039 4050 5155 5669 70 Western Sahara is on the UN list of nonself-governing territories. Data shown are from 2010, prior to South Sudans secession from Sudan.
Number of countries with improved scores
countries
27
countries
17
countries
14
countries
38
countries
48
oVERALL
SAFETy AND RULE oF LAw
hUMAN DEVELoPMENT
Just over half of the countries in Africa have improved in overall governance quality, and just under half have declined. This masks large differences in performances between countries and across categories.
The majority of countries have improved in both Sustainable Economic Opportunity and Human Development, but this progress is not mirrored in Safety and Rule of Law and Participation and Human Rights.
2011 oVERALL CoUNTRy RESULTS
RANK 2010 18th 11th 3rd 19th 37th 38th 2nd 49th 31st 40th 50th 46th 29th 10th 45th 47th 34th 27th 24th 7th 43rd 44th 23rd 8th 36th 28th 33rd 17th Algeria Benin Botswana Burkina Faso Burundi Cameroon Cape Verde Central African Republic Comoros Congo Congo, Democratic Rep. Cte dIvoire Djibouti Egypt Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Ethiopia Gabon Gambia Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Kenya Lesotho Liberia Libya Madagascar Malawi 42nd Angola
ANNUAL SCoRES 2006 2007 2008 2009 54 34 59 76 54 44 44 76 29 31 51 40 30 36 49 56 35 39 46 49 54 65 39 41 54 63 34 53 59 53 54 51 79 59 55 70 43 42 51 59 60 74 39 9 71 32 50 57 39 65 54 56 32 56 35 60 76 53 46 46 78 31 31 45 40 32 36 49 59 37 38 46 49 53 65 38 41 54 64 39 53 60 54 53 54 79 58 54 71 44 42 51 59 59 72 45 9 71 33 50 58 40 65 56 57 32 56 38 59 76 53 44 46 80 34 28 49 42 32 35 48 59 37 36 47 49 54 64 36 42 53 64 41 53 57 54 54 45 83 57 53 70 46 42 52 60 57 72 45 7 70 30 52 57 43 63 54 57 30 55 40 60 76 55 48 45 78 32 30 48 42 32 37 49 62 36 35 46 50 52 66 36 37 51 61 43 51 50 56 54 47 83 58 55 70 44 41 51 58 58 73 46 8 70 32 52 58 44 63 54 57 31
TREND 2010 200610 55 41 60 76 55 45 45 79 33 31 47 42 32 36 49 61 37 35 46 51 52 66 38 37 53 63 45 50 47 57 54 47 82 58 55 70 44 41 52 58 57 73 48 8 71 33 51 58 46 62 55 57 31

Continental average: 50 highest country score: Mauritius (82) Lowest country score: Somalia (8) highest regional average: Southern Africa (58) Lowest regional average: Central Africa (39)
Overview
52nd Chad
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Mauritius Cape Verde Botswana Seychelles South Africa Namibia Ghana Lesotho Tunisia Egypt
Top ten
Significant changes
Signicant improvement Signicant decline
-15 0
Liberia Sierra Leone Madagascar

+15
22nd Mali 32nd Mauritania 1st 14th 21st 6th 39th 41st 25th 12th 15th 4th 30th 53rd 5th 48th 26th 13th 35th 9th 20th 16th 51st Mauritius Morocco Mozambique Namibia Niger Nigeria Rwanda So Tom and Prncipe Senegal Seychelles Sierra Leone Somalia South Africa Sudan Swaziland Tanzania Togo Tunisia Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe
Key Findings
The fifth annual Ibrahim Index of African Governance shows that balance, equity and inclusiveness are key to governance quality. The Index illustrates that countries that pursue a balanced approach to all dimensions of governance achieve the most success. Over the last five years, the countries that have consistently ranked in the top five for overall governance performance (Mauritius, Cape Verde, Botswana, Seychelles and South Africa) have, up to now, performed highly in Safety and Rule of Law, Participation and Human Rights, Sustainable Economic Opportunity and Human Development. Similarly countries that have improved significantly over this period have improved evenly in all four categories. But the general trend in Africa is one of imbalance. Many countries have improved in both Sustainable Economic Opportunity and Human Development, while the majority of countries have regressed in Safety and Rule of Law and Participation and Human Rights.
Top 5
oVERALL SCoRE SAFETy AND RULE oF LAw
hUMAN DEVELoPMENT
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
Mauritius Cape Verde Botswana Seychelles South Africa
82 79 76 73 71
89 87 87 78 69
75 78 68 67 72
79 68 68 63 64
87 83 82 86 77
Mauritius: comparing 2006 and 2010 scores

Mauritius, ranked top in the Index for the past five years, is demonstrative of balanced performance.
100
Eritrea: comparing 2006 and 2010 scores

Eritrea, ranked 47th in the Index in 2010, is illustrative of imbalanced performance.
100
SAFETY AND RULE OF LAW
+5
-3
PARTICIPATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS
-9
-4 -7
100
100
100
100
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
+2
SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
+12
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
+4
100 2006 scores 2010 scores 2006 scores
100 2010 scores
Madagascar: 20062010 scores

Madagascar is the only country to have declined statistically significantly between 2006 and 2010. Madagascars overall decline is largely driven by statistically significant decreases in score for Safety and Rule of Law and Participation and Human Rights.
70
50 Overall Safety and Rule of Law Participation and Human Rights Sustainable Economic Opportunity Human Development 2007 2008 2009 2010
30 2006
KEy FINDINGS
Country Case Studies

Two countries emerging from lengthy civil conflicts Liberia and Sierra Leone have shown the most striking improvements over the past five years. This has been achieved through even progress across all categories.
Liberia
Liberia is one of the two countries to show statistically significant improvement in overall governance quality over the past five years.
Sierra Leone
Sierra Leone is the second country that demonstrates statistically significant improvement in overall governance quality over the past five years.
Liberia: 20062010 scores

50
Sierra Leone: 20062010 scores

50
45
45
40
40
35
35
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
This has been achieved through improvements in all four categories of the Index and 13 out of 14 sub-categories.
Sierra Leone has similarly gained ground in all four categories of the Index.
Liberia: comparing 2006 and 2010 scores

100
Sierra Leone: comparing 2006 and 2010 scores

100
+14
+11
+18
+4 +11
100
100
100
100
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
+8
+12
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
+4
100 2006 scores 2010 scores 2006 scores
100 2010 scores
KEy FINDINGS
Country Case Studies

There are also countries which show a strong disconnect between performances in categories.
Egypt and Tunisia

Egypt and Tunisia both rank in the top ten for overall governance quality. This is driven by strong performances in Human Development, and to a lesser extent Sustainable Economic Opportunity.
Libya
Libya is ranked in the bottom half of the Index in 2010. Similarly to Egypt and Tunisia, Libya shows imbalance in performance between Human Development and Participation and Human Rights. In Libyas case the imbalance is extreme with the country ranking in the top ten for Human Development and in the bottom three for Participation and Human Rights. Libyas performances in Safety and Rule of Law and Sustainable Economic Opportunity are also weak in relation to Human Development.
Conversely both countries perform particularly poorly in Participation and Human Rights. The imbalance between performances in Human Development and Participation and Human Rights might well have been a trigger for instability. One of the other major issues is also the imbalance between high levels of education and the shortage of job opportunities, specifically for young graduates. This issue is not yet captured by the Index but the Foundation is currently working on ways to assess this.
Libya: comparing 2006 and 2010 scores

100
Egypt: comparing 2006 and 2010 scores

100
-8
+3
100
100
+4
-1
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
0
100 2006 scores
-5
100
100
2010 scores
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
+2
+11
100 2006 scores 2010 scores
Tunisia: comparing 2006 and 2010 scores

100
-7
-7
100
100
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
+2
100 2006 scores
+1
2010 scores
Category Results
Sub-categories Categories
Rule of Law
Accountability Personal Safety National Security
PARTICIPATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS 2011 IBRAHIM INDEX OF AFRICAN GOVERNANCE SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
Participation Rights Gender Public Management Business Environment Infrastructure Rural Sector Welfare
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
Education Health
CATEGoRy RESULTS
Safety and Rule of Law

Having a firmly embedded judicial system that is just, effective, accessible to all, administered by competent and independent judges who work independently of political influences and in a corruptionfree environment and make decisions according to merit, is a major prerequisite for ensuring safety and rule of law. Indeed consideration of safety cannot be separated from an assessment of the entrenchment of the rule of law in a state. This accords citizens the right to safety rather than the mere presence of safety with no guarantees of entitlement. This extends to include the accountability of public officials and prevention, control and elimination of corruption in the country. Experience has demonstrated that a legal system can easily be subverted if its enforcers are not accountable to those they serve and if they are prone to influence through financial and other considerations. Furthermore, an empowered citizenry conscious of its constitutional and fundamental rights and responsibilities ensures the conditions for the entrenchment of the rule of law and safety in the state. To ensure maximum progress in the efforts to promote good governance in Africa, it is imperative to see to it that safety in its holistic form and the rule of law exist concomitantly.
Salim ahmed Salim Former Secretary-General, Organisation of African Unity and former Prime Minister of Tanzania; Member of the Board and Chair of the Prize Committee of the Mo Ibrahim Foundation
In this category
Rule of Law Judicial Process Judicial Independence Sanctions Transfers of Power Property Rights* Accountability Accountability, Transparency and Corruption in the Public Sector* Accountability, Transparency and Corruption in Rural Areas Corruption and Bureaucracy Accountability of Public Officials Corruption in Government and Public Officials Prosecution of Abuse of Office Personal Safety Domestic Political Persecution* Social Unrest Safety of the Person Violent Crime Human Trafficking National Security Cross-Border Tensions Government Involvement in Armed Conflict Domestic Armed Conflict Political Refugees Internally Displaced People
* clustered indicator (see Indicators p.27) newly-included indicator for 2011
Safety and Rule of Law country scores
< 20 2042 4350 5159 6070 > 70 Western Sahara is on the UN list of non-self-governing territories. Data shown are from 2010, prior to South Sudans secession from Sudan.
SAFETy AND RULE oF LAw RESULTS
RANK 2010 28th 45th 9th 2nd 19th 35th 37th 3rd 50th 47th 27th 49th 48th 26th 12th 39th 46th 38th 21st 34th 6th 41st 44th 31st 8th 33rd 43rd 40th 11th 14th 1st 13th 17th 4th 29th 36th 30th 10th 20th 5th 53rd 7th 16th 18th 25th 24th 23rd 15th 51st Algeria Angola Benin Botswana Burkina Faso Burundi Cameroon Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Comoros Congo, Democratic Rep. Cte dIvoire Djibouti Egypt Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Ethiopia Gabon Gambia Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Kenya Lesotho Liberia Libya Madagascar Malawi Mali Mauritius Morocco Mozambique Namibia Niger Nigeria Rwanda So Tom and Prncipe Senegal Seychelles Somalia South Africa Swaziland Tanzania Togo Tunisia Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe
ANNUAL SCoRES 2006 2007 2008 2009 51 40 71 87 68 46 49 91 31 41 58 39 30 33 58 59 43 45 47 55 59 73 48 45 52 69 33 49 67 66 62 60 84 64 66 78 56 42 52 68 62 78 41 13 74 24 62 64 51 64 54 65 33 51 37 72 88 63 51 49 90 30 36 45 41 27 32 60 62 46 45 47 57 55 73 41 47 53 69 39 49 70 65 62 56 84 63 65 79 50 44 54 70 63 77 48 4 72 25 64 62 53 63 56 65 32 54 42 70 88 60 46 50 91 40 31 53 41 30 35 59 63 45 37 47 56 56 72 36 47 52 70 45 50 63 65 62 42 88 61 63 80 53 47 56 70 62 76 52 4 71 21 63 63 55 60 56 65 26 53 39 68 86 62 48 48 83 29 34 54 43 29 36 58 65 44 35 45 55 46 73 37 43 47 69 47 50 52 65 60 44 89 61 62 78 54 44 51 66 59 79 49 5 69 20 62 61 54 62 54 62 31
TREND 2010 200610 54 39 66 87 59 46 46 87 29 36 54 43 30 31 56 63 45 36 45 59 46 72 43 40 48 69 47 41 44 65 62 47 89 62 61 78 50 46 49 65 59 78 58 5 69 21 62 60 57 58 58 62 28

Overview
42nd Congo
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Mauritius Botswana Cape Verde Namibia Seychelles Ghana South Africa Lesotho Benin So Tom and Prncipe
Top ten
Significant changes
Signicant improvement Signicant decline
-25 0
Sierra Leone Madagascar

+25
32nd Mauritania
22nd Sierra Leone
52nd Sudan
SUB-CATEGoRy RESULTS
Rule of Law
Top ten scores 1st 3rd 5th 7th Botswana (97) Cape Verde (88) Ghana (85) Seychelles (74) 2nd Mauritius (94) 4th South Africa (85) 6th Namibia (81) 8th Lesotho (66) 9th Uganda (65) 10th Malawi (64) Bottom ten scores 44th Comoros (31) 45th Congo, Democratic Rep. (30) 46th Libya (30) 47th Liberia (29) 48th Zimbabwe (27) 49th Madagascar (21) 50th Sudan (17) 51st Cte dIvoire (11) 52nd Eritrea (6) 53rd Somalia (0)
Continental average: 48 highest country score: Botswana (97) Lowest country score: Somalia (0) highest regional average: Southern Africa (63) Lowest regional average: Central Africa (36)
16
Accountability
Top ten scores 1st 3rd 5th 7th Botswana (86) Cape Verde (82) South Africa (72) Lesotho (65) 2nd Mauritius (82) 4th Namibia (76) 6th Seychelles (68) 8th Ghana (61) 9th Rwanda (59) 10th Swaziland (59) Bottom ten scores 44th Gambia (25) 45th Congo (24) 46th Guinea-Bissau (24) 47th Angola (22) 48th Chad (22) 49th Libya (21) 50th Sudan (20) 51st Equatorial Guinea (18) 52nd Zimbabwe (15) 53rd Somalia (3)
2011 Ibr ahIm Index of afrIcan Governance: Summa ry
Continental average: 43 highest country score: Botswana (86) Lowest country score: Somalia (3) highest regional average: Southern Africa (55) Lowest regional average: Central Africa (26)
Personal Safety
Top ten scores 1st 3rd 5th 5th 7th Mauritius (80) Seychelles (70) Botswana (65) Comoros (65) Namibia (63) 2nd Cape Verde (77) 4th So Tom and Prncipe (69) Bottom ten scores 44th South Africa (25) 45th Chad (24) 45th Nigeria (24) 47th Cte dIvoire (23) 47th Guinea (23) 49th Guinea-Bissau (20) 50th Sudan (16) 50th Zimbabwe (16) 52nd Congo, Democratic Rep. (11) 53rd Somalia (3)
Continental average: 44 highest country score: Mauritius (80) Lowest country score: Somalia (3) highest regional average: West Africa (47) Lowest regional average: Central Africa (33)
8th Djibouti (61) 9th Benin (59) 9th Burkina Faso (59)
National Security
Top ten scores 1st 3rd 5th 7th Mauritius (100) Cape Verde (100) South Africa (95) Zambia (95) 2nd Botswana (100) 4th Seychelles (100) 6th Malawi (95) 8th Benin (95) 9th Gabon (95) 10th Namibia (95) Bottom ten scores 44th Chad (63) 45th Ethiopia (61) 46th Cte dIvoire (59) 47th Zimbabwe (55) 48th Eritrea (54) 49th Rwanda (54) 50th Congo, Democratic Rep. (52) 51st Sudan (30) 52nd Central African Republic (23) 53rd Somalia (13)
Continental average: 78 highest country score: Mauritius (100) Lowest country score: Somalia (13) highest regional average: Southern Africa (87) Lowest regional average: East Africa (66)
CATEGoRy RESULTS
Participation and Human Rights

In preparing an index illustrating outcomes in the areas of participation and human rights, it is clear that participation is much easier to assess and measure. Of course, participation encompasses and overlaps with areas of human rights, such as the right to vote, the right to a fair election, and freedom to express views on political issues and to hold government accountable for commitments made under national and international law. When we look back at the development of the international human rights system over the past 60 years there is a significant gap in implementation which poses a problem in developing an index to measure outcomes in a comparable way in all countries in Africa. Despite the present gap, and the weakness in data, I believe the Ibrahim Index is making a significant contribution. It is exerting a healthy pressure on the UN and others to develop more practical ways to compare the human rights record of African countries. By offering the best measurements and relevant data the Index can find at present, it is creating a demand which civil society in each country should champion for better performance measurements. What an innovative way to enhance protection and promotion of human rights in African countries!
mary robinson Former President of Ireland and former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights; Member of the Board and Prize Committee of the Mo Ibrahim Foundation
In this category
Participation Free and Fair Executive Elections Free and Fair Elections Political Participation Electoral Self-Determination Effective Power to Govern Rights Core International Human Rights Conventions Human Rights Political Rights Workers Rights Freedom of Expression* Freedom of Association and Assembly * Civil Liberties* Gender Gender Equality * Gender Balance in Primary and Secondary Education Womens Participation in the Labour Force Equal Representation in Rural Areas Women in Parliament Womens Rights* Legislation on Violence against Women
Participation and Human Rights country scores
< 25 2536 3749 5056 5766 67 Western Sahara is on the UN list of non-self-governing territories. Data shown are from 2010, prior to South Sudans secession from Sudan.
PARTICIPATIoN AND hUMAN RIGhTS RESULTS
RANK 2010 32nd Algeria 27th 9th 5th 15th 23rd 37th 1st 36th 48th Angola Benin Botswana Burkina Faso Burundi Cameroon Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Congo Congo, Democratic Rep. Cte dIvoire Djibouti Egypt Eritrea Ethiopia Gabon Gambia Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Kenya Lesotho Liberia Libya Madagascar Malawi Mali Mauritania Mauritius Morocco Mozambique Namibia Niger Nigeria Rwanda So Tom and Prncipe Senegal Seychelles Sierra Leone Somalia South Africa Sudan Swaziland Tanzania Togo Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe
ANNUAL SCoRES 2006 2007 2008 2009 38 31 67 72 54 55 36 74 33 25 57 37 31 29 37 35 18 24 38 45 49 71 34 53 60 69 43 17 65 56 59 48 78 42 63 75 50 40 44 62 69 72 49 14 76 18 31 64 29 41 53 59 30 43 37 67 71 56 55 38 76 37 27 48 37 34 31 35 37 20 23 34 44 49 71 36 53 57 72 50 18 63 56 57 63 80 36 59 71 51 39 43 62 64 65 56 12 73 18 30 64 31 40 56 56 30 36 40 62 69 57 49 33 79 40 22 56 40 31 26 33 33 17 22 34 39 49 68 33 51 56 72 49 19 59 50 57 43 78 36 58 67 47 37 40 62 60 64 53 13 72 19 27 57 37 37 51 54 27 38 42 64 68 57 55 34 78 38 24 54 38 33 28 34 35 17 20 35 39 46 69 29 34 51 65 54 19 44 58 55 49 77 35 59 66 39 33 39 62 59 66 52 12 72 20 28 60 40 33 50 54 27
TREND 2010 200610 38 43 65 68 56 50 34 78 34 24 51 38 33 30 34 34 17 20 34 39 44 69 33 35 53 66 54 19 44 59 56 47 75 35 58 66 42 34 39 63 59 67 53 13 72 22 28 60 42 34 51 54 27

Continental average: 45 highest country score: Cape Verde (78) Lowest country score: Somalia (13) highest regional average: Southern Africa (55) Lowest regional average: Central Africa (31)
Overview
22nd Comoros
33rd 44th 45th 41st 39th 50th 38th 31st 25th 4th 43rd 34th 20th 7th 18th 51st 26th 13th 16th 24th 2nd 35th 14th 8th 29th 40th 30th 10th 12th 6th 19th 53rd 3rd 49th 46th 11th 28th 21st 17th 47th
52nd Equatorial Guinea
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Cape Verde Mauritius South Africa Ghana Botswana Seychelles Lesotho Namibia Benin So Tom and Prncipe
Top ten
Significant changes
Signicant decline
-25 0
Madagascar
+25
42nd Tunisia
Participation
Top ten scores 1st 3rd 5th 7th Cape Verde (83) Liberia (78) South Africa (75) Botswana (75) 2nd Mauritius (80) 4th Benin (78) 6th Seychelles (75) 8th So Tom and Prncipe (73) 9th Ghana (72) 10th Comoros (68) Bottom ten scores 44th Tunisia (17) 45th Rwanda (17) 46th Sudan (13) 47th Equatorial Guinea (13) 48th Morocco (11) 49th Swaziland (10) 50th Chad (8) 51st Somalia (7) 52nd Eritrea (3) 52nd Libya (3)
Continental average: 42 highest country score: Cape Verde (83) Lowest country score: Eritrea, Libya (3) highest regional average: Southern Africa (53) Lowest regional average: North Africa (22)
19
Rights
Top ten scores 1st 3rd 5th 7th Cape Verde (86) Ghana (75) Benin (68) Mali (67) 2nd Mauritius (81) 4th Namibia (69) 6th South Africa (67) 8th So Tom and Prncipe (65) 9th Lesotho (62) 10th Zambia (61) Bottom ten scores 44th Swaziland (26) 45th Djibouti (25) 46th Congo, Democratic Rep. (23) 47th Tunisia (21) 48th Zimbabwe (20) 49th Libya (16) 50th Sudan (15) 51st Equatorial Guinea (11) 52nd Somalia (9) 53rd Eritrea (7)
Continental average: 43 highest country score: Cape Verde (86) Lowest country score: Eritrea (7) highest regional average: West Africa (53) Lowest regional average: Central Africa (30)
Gender
Top ten scores 1st 3rd 5th 7th Lesotho (76) Seychelles (74) Tanzania (71) Cape Verde (66) 2nd South Africa (75) 4th Rwanda (74) 6th Botswana (70) 8th Mauritania (65) 9th Mauritius (65) 10th Tunisia (63) Bottom ten scores 44th Liberia (38) 45th Togo (37) 46th Mali (36) 47th Chad (34) 48th Nigeria (33) 49th Congo, Democratic Rep. (33) 50th Central African Republic (32) 51st Niger (30) 52nd Equatorial Guinea (26) 53rd Somalia (23)
Continental average: 51 highest country score: Lesotho (76) Lowest country score: Somalia (23) highest regional average: Southern Africa (60) Lowest regional average: Central Africa (37)
CATEGoRy RESULTS
Sustainable Economic Opportunity

Sustainable Economic Opportunity is one of the four pillars under which governance is measured in the Ibrahim Index. Freedom to participate in the creation of economic wealth is a key right for all citizens and governments have an overwhelming duty to develop an enabling framework. This pillar seeks to measure, first, governments abilities to manage the macro economy along sound lines to ensure broad economic development. It also seeks to measure the regulatory framework, which allows, inter alia, the wealth-creating private sector to grow within the constraints and interest of society as a whole. A third category of variables covers the availability of basic infrastructure, which in some cases is provided by the State, whilst in others by the private sector, within a system determined by governments. The final group of indicators cover aspects of rural and environmental issues. These are of particular significance, given the large rural populations of most countries, the importance of subsistence goods together with concerns associated with environmental degradation and climate change, which may become even more acute. It is encouraging to note that on average the majority of countries of Africa have consistently improved their scores in this pillar.
Lord cairns Former Chief Executive Officer, SG Warburg and Former Chairman, Actis Capital LLP; Member of the Board of the Mo Ibrahim Foundation
In this category
Public Management Statistical Capacity Public Administration* Inflation Diversification Reserves Budget Management* Ratio of Total Revenue to Total Expenditure Ratio of Budget Deficit or Surplus to GDP Debt Management* Ratio of External Debt Service to Exports Reliability of Financial Institutions Business Environment Competitive Environment* Investment Climate Investment Climate for Rural Businesses Rural Financial Services Development Bureaucracy and Red Tape Infrastructure Access to Electricity Road and Rail Networks* Air Transport Facilities Telephone and IT Infrastructure* Digital Connectivity * Rural Sector Public Resources for Rural Development Land and Water for Low-Income Rural Populations* Agricultural Research and Extension Services Agricultural Input and Produce Markets Policy and Legal Framework for Rural Organisations Dialogue between Government and Rural Organisations
Sustainable Economic Opportunity country scores
SUSTAINABLE ECoNoMIC oPPoRTUNITy RESULTS
RANK 2010 21st 34th 19th 4th 10th 38th 29th 3rd 44th 47th 50th 37th 51st 40th 30th 2nd 43rd 49th 15th 35th 20th 16th 48th 46th 25th 14th 45th 12th 24th 27th 31st 28th 1st 6th 9th 36th 13th 41st 17th 8th 33rd 53rd 7th 39th 26th 11th 5th 18th 23rd Algeria Angola Benin Botswana Burkina Faso Burundi Cameroon Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Comoros Congo Congo, Democratic Rep. Cte dIvoire Djibouti Egypt Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Ethiopia Gabon Gambia Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Kenya Lesotho Liberia Libya Madagascar Malawi Mali Mauritania Mauritius Morocco Namibia Nigeria Rwanda So Tom and Prncipe Senegal Seychelles Sierra Leone Somalia South Africa Sudan Swaziland Tanzania Tunisia Uganda Zambia
ANNUAL SCoRES 2006 2007 2008 2009 56 35 50 68 51 36 44 58 22 34 31 39 27 41 46 58 33 36 55 34 48 52 33 30 49 57 22 62 52 42 49 49 67 60 50 60 36 40 54 40 51 61 32 2 62 43 44 53 31 66 56 47 21 56 35 50 67 49 36 47 63 26 33 31 38 29 39 46 61 36 35 55 33 48 47 36 27 50 55 24 60 55 44 47 50 68 63 49 60 42 40 51 38 50 61 39 2 62 43 44 54 31 67 57 49 21 56 36 48 68 51 40 49 69 26 32 29 40 32 38 42 62 38 34 56 39 47 50 34 31 48 55 25 61 55 47 48 49 78 62 48 60 45 39 52 40 49 60 40 2 60 31 52 57 32 68 53 48 22 53 39 52 67 57 44 48 68 29 32 28 39 28 38 47 70 33 29 55 41 51 55 34 33 45 54 27 55 53 47 51 48 79 63 52 63 44 42 54 40 54 61 43 4 61 39 50 57 34 67 52 49 21
TREND 2010 200610 52 42 52 68 59 40 48 68 36 33 29 41 29 39 47 70 36 29 54 42 52 53 30 33 50 55 34 57 50 48 47 48 79 64 51 63 45 41 57 38 53 63 43 4 64 40 50 58 36 67 52 51 24

Continental average: 47 highest country score: Mauritius (79) Lowest country score: Somalia (4) highest regional average: North Africa (60) Lowest regional average: Central Africa (38)
Overview
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Mauritius Egypt Cape Verde Botswana Tunisia Morocco South Africa Seychelles Namibia Burkina Faso
Top ten
Significant changes
Signicant improvement
-15 0
Central African Rep. Egypt Sierra Leone

+15
22nd Mozambique 32nd Niger
42nd Togo
52nd Zimbabwe
Public Management
Top ten scores 1st 3rd 5th 7th South Africa (73) Tunisia (71) Botswana (70) Algeria (66) 2nd Libya (71) 4th Morocco (70) 6th Mauritius (66) 8th Rwanda (65) 9th Cape Verde (64) 10th Namibia (62) Bottom ten scores 44th Congo, Democratic Rep. (48) 45th Equatorial Guinea (47) 46th Comoros (47) 47th Central African Republic (46) 48th Zimbabwe (44) 49th Sudan (43) 50th Chad (41) 51st Guinea (40) 52nd Eritrea (34) 53rd Somalia (4)
Continental average: 56 highest country score: South Africa (73) Lowest country score: Somalia (4) highest regional average: North Africa (65) Lowest regional average: East Africa (49)
22
Top ten scores 1st 3rd 5th 7th Mauritius (98) Botswana (77) Morocco (70) Rwanda (69) 2nd Egypt (80) 4th South Africa (72) 6th Cape Verde (70) 8th Ghana (68) 9th Namibia (66) 10th Seychelles (65) Bottom ten scores 44th Togo (33) 45th Comoros (33) 46th Guinea-Bissau (31) 47th Congo (30) 48th Equatorial Guinea (26) 49th Libya (26) 50th Congo, Democratic Rep. (22) 51st Eritrea (11) 52nd Zimbabwe (9) 53rd Somalia (3)
Infrastructure
Top ten scores 1st 3rd 5th 7th Seychelles (81) Mauritius (70) Namibia (64) Botswana (63) 2nd Libya (75) 4th Tunisia (67) 6th Egypt (63) 8th Cape Verde (52) 9th Lesotho (50) 10th Morocco (47) Bottom ten scores 44th Liberia (16) 45th Mali (16) 46th Burundi (15) 47th Sierra Leone (14) 48th Nigeria (10) 49th Niger (6) 50th Somalia (4) 51st Comoros (3) 52nd Guinea (2) 53rd Congo, Democratic Rep. (1)
Continental average: 31 highest country score: Seychelles (81) Lowest country score: Congo, Democratic Rep. (1) highest regional average: North Africa (54) Lowest regional average: Central Africa (20)
Rural Sector*
Top ten scores 1st 3rd 5th 7th Cape Verde (87) Burkina Faso (76) Tanzania (74) Tunisia (68) 2nd Mauritius (81) 4th Egypt (75) 6th Rwanda (70) 8th Senegal (67) 9th Morocco (67) 10th Benin (66) Bottom ten scores 42nd Angola (38) 43rd Djibouti (38) 44th Togo (37) 45th Chad (37) 46th Central African Republic (36) 47th Cte dIvoire (36) 48th Comoros (35) 49th Guinea-Bissau (35) 50th Liberia (35) 51st* Zimbabwe (8)
Continental average: 54 highest country score: Cape Verde (87) Lowest country score: Zimbabwe (8)* highest regional average: North Africa (65) Lowest regional average: Central Africa (43) * No data available for Somalia or Libya
CATEGoRy RESULTS
Human Development
Human Development reflects the outcomes of investments made in the talents of a country, with a particular focus on education, health and social safety nets. Human Development indicators measure the efforts contributed by the individual, family, community and society as a whole to develop the human capital base of a nation. Governments commitment to make the appropriate investment to provide equitable access to, and quality outcomes of education, training and health care systems is key to success. In addition government has a role in creating an appropriate investment climate for innovative partnerships between public sector/ private sector/civil society to ensure good and shared outcomes in developing the talents of citizens. Human Development indicators provide a profile of the quality of a countrys human capital base and its ability to participate in the competitive global knowledge economy. Although the trend in most African countries is encouraging with respect to greater focus on investments in Human Development, more effort needs to go into data collection about monitoring and evaluating outcomes of those investments. Access to education and health care facilities does not necessarily translate into higher quality of outcomes in the form of well-educated and trained people nor in healthier populations. Africa needs to ensure that it invests effectively and efficiently in its youthful population for it to compete in the market place for industrial and service sector investment. The youthful population of the African continent should be turned into a competitive advantage in a world where the war on talent separates successful nations from failed ones.
dr mamphela ramphele Former Managing Director, World Bank and former ViceChancellor, University of Cape Town; Member of the Board of the Mo Ibrahim Foundation
In this category
Welfare Welfare Regime Social Protection and Labour * Social Exclusion Welfare Services (Health and Education)* Equity of Public Resource Use* Access to Water * Access to Sanitation* Environmental Policy Environmental Sustainability * Education Education Provision and Quality Ratio of Pupils to Teachers in Primary School Primary School Completion Progression to Secondary School Tertiary Enrolment Health Maternal Mortality Child Mortality Immunisation (Measles and DPT)* Antiretroviral Treatment Provision Disease (Cholera, Malaria and TB)*
Human Development country scores
hUMAN DEVELoPMENT RESULTS
RANK 2010 7th 48th 24th 6th 40th 44th 29th 4th 51st 25th Algeria Angola Benin Botswana Burkina Faso Burundi Cameroon Cape Verde Central African Republic Comoros Congo Congo, Democratic Rep. Cte dIvoire Djibouti Egypt Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Ethiopia Gabon Gambia Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Kenya Lesotho Liberia Libya Madagascar Malawi Mauritania Mauritius Morocco Mozambique Namibia Niger Nigeria Rwanda So Tom and Prncipe Seychelles Sierra Leone Somalia South Africa Sudan Swaziland Tanzania Togo Tunisia Uganda Zambia
ANNUAL SCoRES 2006 2007 2008 2009 72 28 50 79 42 40 48 80 29 25 58 45 32 41 56 74 45 50 45 61 60 63 41 35 56 58 39 82 52 49 45 46 85 70 42 70 32 44 54 64 56 85 34 7 74 42 60 48 44 87 53 53 45 74 33 51 79 44 42 50 81 30 27 55 45 37 42 56 75 46 49 47 62 59 67 39 37 56 58 41 84 53 50 47 48 86 70 42 73 34 45 53 65 57 86 38 19 75 45 63 51 44 89 55 57 46 78 36 54 81 45 43 52 82 30 28 57 48 35 43 57 76 47 52 51 63 62 68 41 37 57 59 43 83 52 52 48 48 87 70 45 72 37 44 59 66 58 87 36 9 77 48 65 52 46 88 56 60 43 77 40 56 82 47 44 53 83 31 29 56 48 38 45 57 76 49 54 50 64 64 69 44 39 59 59 46 82 51 54 49 47 87 71 48 72 40 44 62 62 59 86 38 10 77 49 66 54 47 88 59 61 44
TREND 2010 200610 77 39 56 82 47 44 53 83 31 29 56 48 38 45 58 76 49 54 50 64 64 70 44 40 60 61 47 82 50 54 50 47 87 71 48 72 40 44 62 68 59 86 38 10 77 49 66 54 48 88 59 61 44

Continental average: 56 highest country score: Tunisia (88) Lowest country score: Somalia (10) highest regional average: North Africa (74) Lowest regional average: Central Africa (45)
Overview
52nd Chad
35th 50th 41st 23rd 9th 34th 28th 31st 16th 15th 12th 43rd 46th 20th 18th 39th 5th 30th 26th 38th 2nd 11th 36th 10th 47th 45th 17th 13th 3rd 49th 53rd 8th 33rd 14th 27th 37th 1st 21st 19th
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Tunisia Mauritius Seychelles Cape Verde Libya Botswana Algeria South Africa Egypt Namibia
Top ten
Significant changes
There were no significant changes in this category between 2006 and 2010.
32nd Mali
22nd Senegal
42nd Zimbabwe
Welfare
Top ten scores 1st 3rd 5th 7th Mauritius (89) Cape Verde (81) Botswana (77) Algeria (68) 2nd Tunisia (83) 4th South Africa (80) 6th Ghana (69) 8th Djibouti (68) 9th Egypt (68) 10th Rwanda (66) Bottom ten scores 44th Eritrea (38) 45th Cte dIvoire (36) 46th Central African Republic (33) 47th Congo, Democratic Rep. (33) 48th Togo (32) 49th Equatorial Guinea (32) 50th Chad (30) 51st Sudan (28) 52nd Zimbabwe (28) 53rd Somalia (4)
Continental average: 52 highest country score: Mauritius (89) Lowest country score: Somalia (4) highest regional average: North Africa (66) Lowest regional average: Central Africa (41)
25
Education
Top ten scores 1st 3rd 5th 7th Seychelles (96) Mauritius (84) South Africa (82) Egypt (79) 2nd Tunisia (87) 4th Libya (83) 6th Algeria (81) 8th Botswana (78) 9th Cape Verde (74) 10th Ghana (66) Bottom ten scores 44th Mozambique (36) 45th Sierra Leone (35) 46th Niger (33) 47th Burkina Faso (31) 48th Burundi (31) 49th Chad (28) 50th Guinea-Bissau (26) 51st Angola (21) 52nd Central African Republic (17) 53rd Somalia (0)
Continental average: 51 highest country score: Seychelles (96) Lowest country score: Somalia (0) highest regional average: North Africa (72) Lowest regional average: Central Africa (42)
Health
Top ten scores 1st 3rd 5th 7th Seychelles (99) Cape Verde (95) Botswana (91) Mauritius (87) 2nd Libya (98) 4th Tunisia (95) 6th Namibia (88) 8th So Tom and Prncipe (87) 9th Morocco (84) 10th Swaziland (84) Bottom ten scores 44th Burundi (52) 45th Niger (49) 46th Liberia (47) 47th Guinea-Bissau (47) 48th Central African Republic (44) 49th Congo, Democratic Rep. (43) 50th Sierra Leone (38) 51st Nigeria (36) 52nd Chad (29) 53rd Somalia (27)
Continental average: 66 highest country score: Seychelles (99) Lowest country score: Somalia (27) highest regional average: North Africa (83) Lowest regional average: Central Africa (51)
Data Providers
african development bank (afdb) website: www.afdb.org Data sources: Country Performance Assessment (CPA) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-AfDB-CPA); African Economic Outlook (AEO) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-AEO) bertelsmann foundation (bf) website: www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de Data source: Bertelsmann Transformation Index (BTI) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-BTI) centre for democratic development (cdd Ghana) website: www.cddghana.org Data source: Sanctions in Africa 20002010 (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-CDDGhana) 26 2011 Ibr ahIm Index of afrIcan Governance: Summa ry The cingranelli-richards human rights data Project (cIrI) website: http://ciri.binghamton.edu Data source: Cingranelli-Richards (CIRI) Human Rights Dataset (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-CIRI) economist Intelligence Unit (eIU) website: www.eiu.com Data sources: Democracy Index (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-EIU); CountryData (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-EIU); Commissioned Expert Assessments (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-EIU-MIF) freedom house (fh) website: www.freedomhouse.org Data sources: Freedom in the World Survey (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-FH-FW); Freedom of the Press Index (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-FH-FP) The heritage foundation and The Wall Street Journal (her-WSJ) website: www.heritage.org/Index Data source: Index of Economic Freedom (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-HER-WSJ) Institut de recherche empirique en economie Politique (IreeP) website: www.ireep.org Data source: African Electoral Index: 20002010 (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-IERPE) Inter-agency Group for child mortality estimation (IGme) website: www.childmortality.org Data source: Child Mortality Estimates Info (CME) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-IGCME) Internal displacement monitoring centre (Idmc) website: www.internal-displacement.org Data source: Internal Displacement: Global Overview of Trends and Developments (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-IDMC) International bank for reconstruction and development, The World bank (Wb) website: www.worldbank.org Data sources: IDA Resource Allocation Index (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-WB-IRAI); Bulletin Board on Statistical Capacity (BBSC) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011WB-BBSC); World Development Indicators (WDI) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-WB-WDIdata); Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-WB-WGI) International fund for agricultural development (Ifad) website: www.ifad.org Data source: Performance-based Allocation System (PBAS): Rural Sector Performance Assessments (RSPA) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-IFAD) International monetary fund (Imf) website: www.imf.org Data sources: International Financial Statistics (IFS) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-IMF-FS); Article IV Consultation Staff Reports (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-IMF) International Telecommunication Union (ITU) website: www.itu.int Data source: World Telecommunications/ICT Indicators Database (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-ITU) Joint United nations Programme on hIv/aIdS (UnaIdS) website: www.unaids.org Data source: UNAIDS Report on the Global AIDS Epidemic (tinyurl. com/IIAG2011-UNAIDS) office of the high commissioner for human rights (ohchr) website: www.ohchr.org Data sources: Multilateral Treaties Deposited with the Secretary General (MTDSG) database (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-OHCHR-MTDSG); Treaty Body database (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-OHCHR-TBD) office of the United nations high commissioner for refugees (Unhcr) website: www.unhcr.org Data source: UNHCR Statistical Online Population Database (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-UNHCR) organisation for economic co-operation and development (oecd) website: www.oecd.org Data sources: Gender, Institutions and Development Database (GID-DB) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-OECD); African Economic Outlook (AEO) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-AEO) Political Terror Scale (PTS) website: www.politicalterrorscale.org Data source: Political Terror Scale (PTS) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-PTS) reporters sans frontires (rSf) website: http://en.rsf.org Data source: Press Freedom Index (PFI) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-RSF) Uppsala University, department of Peace and conflict research Uppsala conflict data Programme (UcdP) website: www.pcr.uu.se/research/ucdp Data source: UCDP Dataset (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-UCDP) US department of State office to monitor and combat Trafficking in Persons (USdS) website: www.state.gov/g/tip Data source: Trafficking in Persons Report (TPR) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-USDS) World health organization (Who) website: www.who.int Data sources: WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP) for Water Supply and Sanitation Database (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-JMP); Global Health Observatory (GHO) (tinyurl.com/IIAG2011-WHO)
Indicators
The Ibrahim Index is compiled using indicators based on either Expert Assessment (EA) or Official Data (OD). Data Providers are shown as acronyms (see p.26) after the name of each indicator and variable.
* A clustered indicator is composed of a number of underlying variables

which each measure the same dimension and come from different sources, or measure similar dimensions and come from the same source.
Safety and Rule of Law Rule of Law

Judicial Process (EIU) Extent to which the judicial process or courts are subject to interference or distortion by interest groups (EA) Judicial Independence (BF) Extent to which the courts can interpret and review norms and pursue their own reasoning, free from the influence of rulers or powerful groups and individuals (EA) Sanctions (CDD Ghana) Imposition of sanctions by the United Nations and/or the African Union on a state and/ or governmental and/or nongovernmental actors (EA/OD) Transfers of Power (EIU) Clarity, establishment and acceptance of constitutional mechanisms for the orderly transfer of power from one administration to the next (EA) Property Rights* Z Property Rights (AfDB, wB)* Extent to which private economic activity is facilitated by an effective legal system and rule-based governance structure in which property and contract rights are reliably respected and enforced (EA) Z Property Rights (BF) Extent to which government ensures well-defined rights of private property and regulates the acquisition of property (EA) Z Property Rights Protection (EIU) Degree to which property rights are respected and enforced (EA) Z Property Freedom (hER-wSJ) Ability of individuals to accumulate private property, secured by clear laws that are fully enforced by the
state. The independence of the judiciary, including the extent of corruption, and the ability to enforce contracts are also assessed (EA)
Personal Safety
Domestic Political Persecution* Z Physical Integrity Rights (CIRI) Prevalence of torture, extrajudicial killings, political imprisonment and disappearance (EA) Z Political Terror (PTS) Degree of state terror, defined as violations of physical or personal integrity rights carried out by a state or its agents. These include state-sanctioned killings, torture, disappearances, and political imprisonment (EA) Social Unrest (EIU) Prevalence of violent social unrest (EA) Safety of the Person (EIU) Level of criminality (EA) Violent Crime (EIU) Prevalence of violent crime, both organised and common (EA) human Trafficking (USDS) Government action to combat forced labour and involuntary commercial sex (EA)
Political Refugees (UNhCR) People fleeing the country due to fear of persecution (EA) Internally Displaced People (IDMC) People displaced within the country due to violence, conflict, human rights violations, or natural or human-made disasters (EA)
Accountability
Accountability, Transparency and Corruption in the Public Sector (AfDB, wB)* Accountability of the executive for use of funds and results of actions by the electorate, legislature and judiciary and extent to which public employees within the executive are accountable for use of resources, administrative decisions and results (EA) Accountability, Transparency and Corruption in Rural Areas (IFAD) Local level accountability of the executive and legislature, including public employees and elected officials, to lowincome rural populations for use of funds and results of actions (EA) Corruption and Bureaucracy (wB) Intrusiveness of bureaucracy, amount of red tape likely to be encountered and likelihood of experiencing corruption among officials and other groups (EA) Accountability of Public officials (EIU) Existence of safeguards or sanctions ensuring accountability and performance from public officials (both elected and appointed) (EA) Corruption in Government and Public officials (EIU) Level of vested cronyism among, and corruption of, public officials (both elected and appointed) (EA) Prosecution of Abuse of office (BF) Legal or political penalties for officeholders who abuse their positions (EA)
National Security
Cross-Border Tensions (EIU) Potential threats to economic and political stability due to tensions with neighbouring states (EA) Government Involvement in Armed Conflict (UCDP) Direct or indirect involvement of the government in an armed conflict which results in at least 25 annual battle-related deaths (EA) Domestic Armed Conflict (EIU) Level of internal conflict and/ or civil war, or the likelihood of conflict developing in the near future (EA)
INDICAToRS
Participation and Human Rights Participation

Free and Fair Executive Elections (IREEP) Freedom and fairness of executive elections across the campaign period and all aspects of the election process, including extent of opposition participation, adherence to electoral procedures, citizens access to information, levels of violence, acceptance of results and turnover of power (EA) Free and Fair Elections (BF) Degree of freedom and fairness of elections (EA) Political Participation (EIU) Availability of relevant information for citizens and their freedom to participate in the political process (EA) Electoral Self-Determination (CIRI) Extent to which citizens enjoy freedom of political choice, and the legal right and effective capacity to change laws and governing bodies through free and fair elections (EA) Effective Power to Govern (BF) Extent to which democratically elected rulers have effective power to govern or to which there are veto powers and political enclaves (EA)
Political Rights (Fh) Freedom to participate in the political process including the right to vote freely for distinct alternatives in legitimate elections, compete for public office, join political parties and organisations, and elect accountable representatives (EA) workers Rights (CIRI) Extent to which workers enjoy internationally recognised rights at work, including freedom of association, the right to bargain collectively, a minimum age of employment and acceptable conditions with regards to minimum wages, hours of work, and occupational safety and health (EA) Freedom of Expression* Z Freedom of Expression (BF) Extent to which citizens, organisations and mass media can express opinions freely (EA) Z Freedom of Speech and Press (CIRI) Extent to which freedoms of speech and press are affected by government censorship, including ownership of media outlets (EA) Z Press Freedom (Fh) Degree of print, broadcast and internet freedom (EA) Z Press Freedom (RSF) State of press freedom, including every kind of violation that directly affects journalists (such as murders, imprisonment, physical attacks and threats) and news media (such as censorship, confiscation, searches and harassment). Self-censorship, financial pressure and degree of impunity enjoyed by those responsible for violations are also assessed (EA) Freedom of Association and Assembly* Z Freedom of Association and Assembly (BF) Extent to which independent political and/or civic groups can associate and assemble freely (EA) Z Freedom of Assembly and Association (CIRI) Extent to which the internationally recognised right of citizens to associate freely with other persons
in political parties, trade unions, cultural organisations or other special interest groups exists in practice (EA) Z Freedom of Association (EIU) Extent to which freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining is respected (EA) Civil Liberties* Z Protection of Civil Liberties (BF) Extent to which civil rights are guaranteed and protected and citizens can seek redress for violations of these liberties (EA) Z Civil Liberties (EIU) Extent of various citizens freedoms including equality under the law, freedom from torture and freedom of expression (EA) Z Civil Liberties (Fh) Extent of civil liberties: freedom of expression and belief; associational and organisational rights; rule of law; and personal autonomy without interference from the state (EA)
women in Parliament (wB) Parliamentary seats, in a single or lower chamber, held by women (OD) womens Rights (CIRI)* Z womens Economic Rights Extent to which women enjoy internationally recognised rights at work (EA) Z womens Political Rights Extent to which women enjoy internationally recognised rights to participate freely in the political process (EA) Legislation on Violence against women (oECD) Existence of laws against domestic violence, sexual assault or rape, and sexual harassment (EA)
Gender
Gender Equality (AfDB, wB)* Whether a country has enacted, and enforces, laws and policies that promote equal access for men and women to human capital development opportunities, and productive and economic resources; and give men and women equal status and protection under the law (EA) Gender Balance in Primary and Secondary Education (wB) Ratio of girls to boys enrolled at primary and secondary levels in public and private schools (OD) womens Participation in the Labour Force (wB) Proportion of the female population, 15 and older, that is economically active (OD) Equal Representation in Rural Areas (IFAD) Extent to which laws, policies, institutions and practices promote equal representation of men and women in local decision-making (EA)
Rights
Core International human Rights Conventions (ohChR) Whether a country has ratified the nine core international human rights conventions and, additionally, whether it has submitted the first of a number of regular reports to treaty bodies that monitor implementation (EA/OD) human Rights (EIU) Likelihood of a state being accused of serious human rights violations (EA)
INDICAToRS
EA = Expert Assessment OD = Official Data * clustered indicator
Sustainable Economic Opportunity Public Management

Statistical Capacity (wB) Capacity of statistical systems in terms of methodology, data sources, periodicity and timeliness (EA) Public Administration (AfDB, wB)* Extent to which civilian central government (including teachers, health workers and police) is structured to design and implement government policy and effectively deliver services (EA) Inflation (IMF) Average change in consumer price index in local currency over the previous year (OD) Diversification (AfDB-oECD) Extent to which exports are diversified (OD) Reserves (EIU) Total international reserves in relation to imports of goods and non-factor services (OD) Budget Management (AfDB, wB)* Extent to which the budget is comprehensive and credible, linked to policy priorities, with effective financial management systems and timely and accurate fiscal reporting (EA) Ratio of Total Revenue to Total Expenditure (EIU) Total budget revenue as a proportion of total budget expenditure (OD) Ratio of Budget Deficit or Surplus to GDP (EIU) Central government receipts minus central government outlays in relation to gross domestic product (OD) Debt Management (AfDB, wB)* Short and medium-term sustainability of fiscal policy (taking into account monetary and exchange rate policy and sustainability of public debt) and its impact on growth (EA)
Ratio of External Debt Service to Exports (EIU) Total external debt service due in relation to exports of goods, non-factor services, income and workers remittances (OD) Reliability of Financial Institutions (EIU/IMF) Total stock of currency held within banks as a proportion of the money supply in the economy (OD)
Bureaucracy and Red Tape (EIU) Bureaucratic delay and complexity in obtaining the appropriate documentation or authorisation to engage in business activities (EA)
Rural Sector
Public Resources for Rural Development (IFAD) Government policies, strategies and investment programmes for the agricultural and rural development sector, and the efficiency, consistency and transparency with which resources are allocated, managed and accounted for (EA) Land and water for LowIncome Rural Populations (IFAD)* Z Access to Land Extent to which the legal, institutional and market frameworks provide the basis for low-income rural populations to have secure access to land both individually held and common property resources and the extent to which they are able to benefit from these (EA) Z Access to water for Agriculture Extent to which the policy and institutional framework provides for rural populations to have equitable user rights over water resources for agriculture and to effectively manage those resources (EA) Agricultural Research and Extension Services (IFAD) Accessibility of agricultural research and the extension system to low-income farmers, including women, and its responsiveness to their needs and priorities (EA) Agricultural Input and Produce Markets (IFAD) Extent to which the policy and institutional framework supports the development of commercially based agricultural markets that are rooted in the private sector and are efficient, equitable and accessible to small farmers (EA) Policy and Legal Framework for Rural organisations (IFAD) Extent to which an enabling policy and legal environment is present for low-income rural populations to organise into autonomous groups and associations or engage in other forms of collective action (EA)
Infrastructure
Access to Electricity (EIU) Risk that power shortages could disrupt business activities (EA) Road and Rail Networks (EIU)* Z Road Network Risk that the road network will be inadequate for business needs in terms of obsolescence, maintenance, and sufficient supply to meet demand (EA) Z Rail Network Risk that the rail network will be inadequate for business needs (EA) Air Transport Facilities (EIU) Risk that the air transport will be inadequate for business needs in terms of obsolescence, maintenance, and sufficient supply to meet demand (EA) Telephone and IT Infrastructure (EIU)* Z Telephone Network Risk that the telephone network will not be adequate for business needs in terms of obsolescence, maintenance and sufficient supply to meet demand (EA) Z IT Infrastructure Risk that information technology infrastructure will be inadequate for business needs (EA) Digital Connectivity (ITU)* Z Mobile Phone Subscribers Subscriptions to public mobile telephone services including the number of prepaid SIM cards active during the past three months (OD) Z Computer Usage Personal computers installed (OD) Z Internet Subscribers Total active (over the past three months) internet subscriptions with fixed (wired) internet access, which includes dial up and fixed broadband subscriptions (OD)
Competitive Environment* Z Competitive Environment (AfDB, wB)* Extent to which the legal, regulatory, and policy environment helps or hinders private businesses in investing, creating jobs and becoming more productive (EA) Z Competition (BF) Extent to which the fundamentals of marketbased competition have developed and safeguards exist to prevent economic monopolies and cartels (EA) Z Unfair Competitive Practices (EIU) Quality of the competitive framework in place including the likelihood that domestic or foreign corporations are subject to discriminatory prices, taxes and tariffs (EA) Investment Climate (hER-wSJ) Degree of economic freedom, based on constraints on the flow of investment capital (EA) Investment Climate for Rural Businesses (IFAD) Extent to which the policy, legal and regulatory framework supports the emergence and development of private rural businesses (EA) Rural Financial Services Development (IFAD) Extent to which the policy and institutional framework supports the development of a commercially based rural financial market that is rooted in the private sector and is efficient, equitable and accessible to low-income rural populations (EA)
INDICAToRS
Dialogue between Government and Rural organisations (IFAD) Extent to which rural populations are able to enter into dialogue with, and lobby, government and express their concerns and priorities, and extent of government responsiveness to lowincome rural populations and consideration of their views in policy-making for the sector (EA) 30 2011 Ibr ahIm Index of afrIcan Governance: Summa ry
Human Development Welfare

welfare Regime (BF) Extent to which there is equality of opportunity and there are social safety nets which compensate for poverty and other risks, such as old age, illness, unemployment or disability (EA) Social Protection and Labour (AfDB, wB)* Government policies in the area of social protection and labour market regulation, which reduce the risk of becoming poor, assist those who are poor to better manage further risks, and ensure a minimum level of welfare to all people (EA) Social Exclusion (BF) Extent to which significant parts of the population are fundamentally excluded from society due to poverty and inequality combined (income gaps, gender, education, religion, ethnicity) (EA) welfare Services (health and Education) (AfDB, wB)* National policies and public and private sector service delivery that affect access to and quality of: health and nutrition services, including population and reproductive health; education, early childhood development, training and literacy programmes; and prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria (EA) Equity of Public Resource Use (AfDB, wB)* Extent to which the pattern of public expenditures and revenue collection affects the poor and is consistent with national poverty reduction priorities (EA) Access to water (who-UNICEF)* Z Access to Piped water Proportion of the total population served with piped water into their dwelling, yard or plot (OD) Z Access to Improved water Proportion of the population that is served with a drinking water source that, by nature of its construction,
adequately protects the source from outside contamination particularly with faecal matter (OD) Access to Sanitation (who-UNICEF)* Z Access to Improved Sanitation Proportion of the total population that is served with a sanitation facility that hygienically separates human excreta from human contact and which includes specified mechanisms for disposal and storage of that waste (OD) Z open Defecation Sanitation Proportion of the total population that is forced to dispose of human faeces in outdoor spaces or alongside solid waste (OD) Environmental Policy (BF) Extent to which environmental concerns are effectively taken into account in both macro and microeconomic policymaking (EA) Environmental Sustainability (AfDB, wB)* Extent to which environmental policies foster the protection and sustainable use of natural resources and the management of pollution (EA)
Tertiary Enrolment (wB) Total enrolment, regardless of age, in relation to the population of the age group for tertiary education (OD)
Health
Maternal Mortality (who) Female deaths from any cause related to or aggravated by pregnancy or its management (excluding accidental or incidental causes) (OD) Child Mortality (IGME) Probability of a child born in a specified year dying before reaching the age of five if subject to current age-specific mortality rates (OD) Immunisation (Measles and DPT) (wB)* Z Immunisation against Measles Children aged 1223 months who have received appropriate vaccinations against measles before 12 months or anytime before the survey (OD) Z Immunisation against DPT Children aged 1223 months who have received appropriate vaccinations against diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus before 12 months or anytime before the survey (OD) Antiretroviral Treatment Provision (UNAIDS) Adults and children with advanced HIV infection receiving antiretroviral therapy (OD) Disease (Cholera, Malaria and TB) (who)* Z Cholera Deaths due to cholera per 100,000 population per year (OD) Z Malaria Deaths due to malaria per 100,000 population per year (OD) Z Tuberculosis Deaths due to TB, including HIV-related TB deaths per 100,000 population per year (OD)
Education
Education Provision and Quality (BF) Extent to which there are solid institutions for basic, secondary, and tertiary education as well as for research and development (EA) Ratio of Pupils to Teachers in Primary School (wB) Pupils enrolled in primary school in relation to primary school teachers (OD) Primary School Completion (wB) Students completing the last year of primary school (OD) Progression to Secondary School (wB) New entrants to the first grade of secondary school in a given year, in relation to students enrolled in the final grade of primary school in the previous year (OD)
Appendix 1: Executive Elections in Africa

A number of African countries will be holding executive elections in 2012. For these countries, the following data show performances in each category of the Index and the trends over time for overall governance quality.
Index scores for countries with confirmed executive elections

OVERALL RANK COUNTRY NEXT ELECTION OVERALL INDEX SCORE SAFETY AND RULE OF LAW PARTICIPATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
15th 22nd 30th 27th 7th 10th 23rd
Senegal Mali Sierra Leone Gabon Ghana Egypt Kenya
February 2012 April 2012 August 2012 November 2012 December 2012 tbc tbc
57 54 48 51 66 61 53
59 62 58 59 72 63 48
59 56 53 39 69 34 53
53 47 43 42 53 70 50
59 50 38 64 70 76 60
Overall governance quality scores (20002010)

70
65
Ghana 62
66 Ghana
61 Egypt
60
Senegal 57 57 Senegal
55
Egypt 54 Kenya 53 54 Mali 53 Kenya 51 Gabon Mali 49 Gabon 48
50
48 Sierra Leone
45
40
35
Sierra Leone 33
30
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Appendix 2: Ibrahim Index Timeline (20072011)

Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
2007
15 5
58
Inaugural edition, no sub-category data provided
Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
2008
51 14 5
+ 0 indicators - 7 indicators
Transfer of Index compilation from Kennedy School of Government (Harvard) to a Foundation research team with support from an Advisory Council and Technical Committee including representatives from CODESRIA, CDD Ghana and IREEP Benin. The roles of the Technical Committee and Advisory Council were expanded substantially in 2009.
2009
106 84 13 4
Amalgamation of Safety and Security and Rule of Law categories New sub-categories: Gender and Environment and Rural Sector Combination of Poverty and Health sub-categories Increased emphasis on civil liberties Introduction of underlying variables and sub-category data
Continued expansion of Technical Committee Exploration and initial work on projects with Afrobarometer to expand citizen surveys across Africa and with Global Integrity to create expert assessments using experts based on the continent. Beginnings of capacity development programme that will ultimately see the process of Index compilation transferred to partner institutions in Africa. The programme included a technical workshop in partnership with the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). Agreements with Afrobarometer and Global Integrity to implement citizen survey and expert assessment projects. Academic workshop, hosted in partnership with CODESRIA, in Dakar to discuss the measurement and conceptualisation of governance, and the use of the Ibrahim Index for teaching, research and policy-making.
2010
100 88 13 4
+ 11 indicators
(assessing / governance; water and sanitation provision; statistical capacity; gender) - 8 indicators
2011
121 86 14 4
Creation of new sub-category through separation of indicators measuring health and welfare + 10 indicators (assessing physical and telecommunications infrastructure; gender; health; welfare service provision; and economic management) - 3 indicators
categories
sub-categories
indicators
variables
Project Team
Advisory Council and Technical Committee
Mo Ibrahim Foundation Research Team
Karin Alexander Institute of Democracy in Africa (Idasa), South Africa Lord Cairns* Board Member, Mo Ibrahim Foundation Nathalie Delapalme* Board Member, Mo Ibrahim Foundation Keli Gadzekpo Databank, Ghana Dr E Gyimah-Boadi* Afrobarometer, and Ghana Center for Democratic Development (CDD Ghana), Ghana Dr Ali Hadi* American University in Cairo (AUC), Egypt Dr Abdalla Hamdok* United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA), Ethiopia Hadeel Ibrahim* Board Member, Mo Ibrahim Foundation Dr Daniel Kaufmann* Brookings Institution, USA Dr Georges Nzongola-Ntalaja The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA Dr Funmi Olonisakin* Kings College London, UK; African Leadership Centre, Kenya Julie Oyegun World Bank Group, USA Dr Irene Pogoson University of Ibadan, Nigeria Dr Mamphela Ramphele* Board Member, Mo Ibrahim Foundation Dr Ebrima Sall* Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa (CODESRIA), Senegal Dr Akilagpa Sawyerr * formerly, Association of African Universities (AAU), Ghana Dr Piero Stanig* London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), UK Dr Leonard Wantchekon* Institute for Empirical Research in Political Economy (IREEP), Benin; Princeton University, USA
Nathalie Delapalme Director of Research and Policy Elizabeth McGrath Head of the Index Team Salmana Ahmed Analyst Kenza Ziar Analyst Estelle Levoyer Data and Research Intern Dr Daniel Kaufmann Special Advisor to the Index
* Technical Committee Member
Acknowledgements
The Ibrahim Index has benefited greatly from the advice and expertise of many individuals and institutions over the past five years. As a progressive and consultative project, the Index continues to evolve, accommodating the input, feedback and critiques of numerous stakeholders. This engagement is an essential element in the development of the Index and I would like to express particular thanks to those who have collaborated in, and supported, the 2011 Ibrahim Index. First of all, warmest thanks go to my fellow Board Members of the Mo Ibrahim Foundation: the Chairman, Dr Mo Ibrahim; Lord Cairns; Hadeel Ibrahim; Sir Ketumile Masire; Dr Mamphela Ramphele; Dr Mary Robinson; and Dr Salim Ahmed Salim for their invaluable guidance during the Index process. The Ibrahim Index has also benefited from collaboration with Dr Daniel Kaufmann, of the Brookings Institution. His engaged input contributes to making the Ibrahim Index a rigorous and robust reference tool for citizens, governments and analysts. Special thanks also go to the Ibrahim Index Technical Committee members for sharing their time and expertise. Their insightful and constructive comments contributed greatly to the Indexs overall quality. They are: Dr E. Gyimah Boadi (Afrobarometer/Centre for Democratic Development Ghana); Dr Ali Hadi (The American University in Cairo); Dr Abdalla Hamdok (UNECA); Dr Funmi Olonisakin (African Leadership Centre); Dr Ebrima Sall (CODESRIA); Dr Akilagpa Sawyerr (Former Head of the Association of African Universities); Dr Piero Stanig (London School of Economics and Political Science); and Dr Leonard Wantchekon (IREEP Benin and Princeton University). I would also like to thank the Ibrahim Index Advisory Council members who provided important feedback and recommendations in the preparation of the 2011 Ibrahim Index. They are: Karin Alexander (Idasa); Keli Gadzekpo (Databank Ghana); Dr Georges Nzongola-Ntalaja (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill); Julie Oyegun (The World Bank Group); and Dr Irene Pogoson (University of Ibadan). The Technical Committee members are also members of the Advisory Council. As a composite index, the Ibrahim Index utilises data from 23 data providers, a full list of which is available in this report. I would like to thank each of the organisations which supplied underlying data for the 2011 Index. Their work is a source of great knowledge which is of service to Africa and the world. Last but not least, I give special thanks to the members of the Ibrahim Index Research Team: Elizabeth McGrath, Salmana Ahmed, Kenza Ziar and Estelle Levoyer for their hard work and dedication. Nathalie Delapalme Director of Research and Policy
About the Mo Ibrahim Foundation

Established in 2006, by Mo Ibrahim, the Mo Ibrahim Foundation supports good governance and great leadership in Africa. The Foundation works to: provide a framework and tools by which citizens and governments can assess and measure progress in governance recognise excellence in African leadership and provide a practical way in which leaders can build positive legacies on the continent when they have left national office stimulate debate on the quality of governance and major governance issues in Africa develop leadership and governance capacity in Africa.
The Foundations core initiatives
Board of Directors
The Foundation is governed by a Board of Directors comprised of:
The Ibrahim Index of African Governance Established in 2007, the Ibrahim Index is the most comprehensive collection of quantitative data that provides an annual assessment of governance performance in every African country. Compiled in partnership with experts from a number of African institutions, the Ibrahim Index provides a framework for citizens, public authorities and partners to assess progress in governance. The Index is made up of over 40,000 raw data points and contains 86 indicators from 23 data providers that measure the effective delivery of public goods and services to citizens.
Mo Ibrahim (Founder and Chair), Founder, Celtel International Lord Cairns Former Chairman, Actis Capital LLP; former Chief Executive Officer, SG Warburg Nathalie Delapalme Director of Research and Policy, Mo Ibrahim Foundation; former Advisor on Africa and Development issues to various French Foreign Ministers hadeel Ibrahim Director of Strategy and External Relations, Mo Ibrahim Foundation Sir Ketumile Masire Co-Chairperson of the Global Coalition for Africa; former President of Botswana Dr Mamphela Ramphele Former Managing Director, World Bank; former ViceChancellor, University of Cape Town Mary Robinson Former President of Ireland; former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Salim Ahmed Salim Former Secretary-General, Organisation of African Unity; former Prime Minister of Tanzania.
The Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership Established in 2007, the Ibrahim Prize celebrates excellence in African leadership. It is awarded to a former Executive Head of State or Government by a Prize Committee composed of eminent figures, including two Nobel Laureates. Previous laureates include President Joaquim Chissano of Mozambique (2007), President Festus Mogae of Botswana (2008) and President Nelson Mandela (Honorary). In 2009 and 2010, the Ibrahim Prize was not awarded by the Prize Committee. The Ibrahim Discussion Forum Established in 2009, the Ibrahim Discussion Forum is an annual high level discussion forum on major African issues, facilitated by the Mo Ibrahim Foundation. Capacity Building Programmes
The Ibrahim Scholarship Programmes are a range of scholarships to support aspiring African leaders at a number of distinguished academic institutions, including Ahfad University in Khartoum, the American University in Cairo, London Business School and the School of Oriental and African Studies. The Ibrahim Leadership Fellowships Programme is a selective programme designed to identify and prepare the next generation of outstanding African leaders by providing them with mentoring opportunities in key multilateral institutions. Ibrahim Leadership Fellows will be hosted at the African Development Bank, the UN Economic Commission for Africa and the World Trade Organization. The inaugural Ibrahim Fellows will be announced in November 2011.
TUNISIA MOROCCO
ALGERIA WESTERN SAHARA
LIBYA
EGYPT
MAURITANIA CAPE VERDE SENEGAL MALI NIGER CHAD GUINEA BURKINA FASO NIGERIA GHANA CTE DIVOIRE CAMEROON BENIN TOGO EQUATORIAL GUINEA GABON CONGO SO TOM & PRNCIPE CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC SOUTH SUDAN ETHIOPIA DJIBOUTI SOMALIA SUDAN ERITREA
GAMBIA GUINEA BISSAU
SIERRA LEONE LIBERIA
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO RWANDA BURUNDI
UGANDA KENYA
TANZANIA
SEYCHELLES
ANGOLA ZAMBIA MALAWI
COMOROS
ZIMBABWE NAMIBIA BOTSWANA MOZAMBIQUE MADAGASCAR
SWAZILAND LESOTHO SOUTH AFRICA MAURITIUS
The regional groupings are those used by the African Development Bank (www.afdb.org): Central Africa: Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon. East Africa: Burundi, Comoros, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Seychelles, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda. North Africa: Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Tunisia. Southern Africa: Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Zambia, Zimbabwe. west Africa: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Cte dIvoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, So Tom and Prncipe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togo.
published October 2011 2011 Ibrahim Index of African Governance: Summary copyright 2011 Mo Ibrahim Foundation

2011 Ibrahim Index of

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

2011 Ibrahim Index of

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

2011 Ibrahim Index of African Governance Summary

2 2011 Ibr ahIm Index of afrIcan Governance: Summa ry

About the Ibrahim Index

The Ibrahim Index

3 2011 Ibr ahIm Index of afrIcan Governance: Summa ry

The 2011 Ibrahim Index

Structure of the Index

SAFETy AND RULE oF LAw

PARTICIPATIoN AND hUMAN RIGhTS

4 2011 Ibr ahIm Index of afrIcan Governance: Summa ry

Judicial Process Judicial Independence Sanctions Transfers of Power Property Rights*

Domestic Armed Conflict Political Refugees Internally Displaced People

SUSTAINABLE ECoNoMIC oPPoRTUNITy

5 2011 Ibr ahIm Index of afrIcan Governance: Summa ry

6 2011 Ibr ahIm Index of afrIcan Governance: Summa ry

Ibrahim Index: from raw data to final scores

7 2011 Ibr ahIm Index of afrIcan Governance: Summa ry

Safety and Rule of Law

4 categories 3 sub-categories 2 indicators 1 data

Sustainable Economic Opportunity

1 The data gathered comes in

2 Once the 86 indicators have

3 Sub-categories are then

4 The category scores are then

averaged to produce the final Ibrahim Index score.

* Clustered indicators: 24 indicators were formed by clustering a number of

Overall Country Results

8 2011 Ibr ahIm Index of afrIcan Governance: Summa ry

Number of countries with improved scores

SAFETy AND RULE oF LAw

PARTICIPATIoN AND hUMAN RIGhTS

SUSTAINABLE ECoNoMIC oPPoRTUNITy

2011 oVERALL CoUNTRy RESULTS

TREND 2010 200610 55 41 60 76 55 45 45 79 33 31 47 42 32 36 49 61 37 35 46 51 52 66 38 37 53 63 45 50 47 57 54 47 82 58 55 70 44 41 52 58 57 73 48 8 71 33 51 58 46 62 55 57 31

9 2011 Ibr ahIm Index of afrIcan Governance: Summa ry

Liberia Sierra Leone Madagascar

10 2011 Ibr ahIm Index of afrIcan Governance: Summa ry

PARTICIPATIoN AND hUMAN RIGhTS

SUSTAINABLE ECoNoMIC oPPoRTUNITy

1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th

Mauritius Cape Verde Botswana Seychelles South Africa

Mauritius: comparing 2006 and 2010 scores

Eritrea: comparing 2006 and 2010 scores

SAFETY AND RULE OF LAW

SAFETY AND RULE OF LAW

PARTICIPATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS

SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

100 2006 scores 2010 scores 2006 scores

100 2010 scores

Madagascar: 20062010 scores

Country Case Studies

Liberia: 20062010 scores

Sierra Leone: 20062010 scores

11 2011 Ibr ahIm Index of afrIcan Governance: Summa ry

Liberia: comparing 2006 and 2010 scores

Sierra Leone: comparing 2006 and 2010 scores

SAFETY AND RULE OF LAW

PARTICIPATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS

SAFETY AND RULE OF LAW

PARTICIPATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS

SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY