WORLD DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS
10
The world by income Low ($975 or less)
Classified according to World Bank estimates of 2008 GNI per capita
Lower middle ($976–$3,855) Upper middle ($3,856–$11,905) High ($11,906 or more) No data
Greenland (Den)
Iceland
Norway
Faeroe Islands (Den)
Sweden
Finland Russian Federation
The Netherlands
Estonia Russian Latvia Fed. Lithuania United Belarus Germany Poland Kingdom Belgium Ukraine Moldova Romania France Italy
Isle of Man (UK)
Canada
Denmark
Ireland Channel Islands (UK)
Luxembourg Liechtenstein Switzerland Andorra United States
Portugal
Spain Monaco Tunisia Algeria
Cayman Is.(UK)
Cuba Belize Jamaica Guatemala Honduras El Salvador Nicaragua Costa Rica
Cape Verde
Mali
Niger
The Gambia Guinea-Bissau R.B. de Venezuela
Guyana Suriname
Sierra Leone Liberia
Benin Côte Ghana d’Ivoire
Togo Equatorial Guinea São Tomé and Príncipe
Cameroon
Congo
Malawi
Bolivia Zimbabwe Namibia Paraguay
U.S. Virgin Islands (US)
St. Kitts and Nevis Netherlands Antilles (Neth) Aruba (Neth)
Argentina
Martinique (Fr)
St. Lucia St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Barbados Grenada Trinidad and Tobago
Guam (US)
Federated States of Micronesia
Brunei Darussalam Malaysia
Marshall Islands
Palau
Maldives Nauru
Singapore
Botswana
South Africa
Poland
Kiribati
Comoros
Solomon Islands
Papua New Guinea
Indonesia
Tuvalu
Mayotte (Fr)
Madagascar
Vanuatu
Fiji
Mauritius Réunion (Fr)
Australia
New Caledonia (Fr)
Lesotho
Czech Republic Ukraine Slovak Republic Austria
Guadeloupe (Fr)
Dominica
N. Mariana Islands (US)
Philippines
Seychelles
Mozambique
Swaziland Germany Uruguay
Lao P.D.R.
Timor-Leste
Tonga
Chile
Myanmar
Sri Lanka
Kenya
Rwanda Dem.Rep.of Burundi Congo Tanzania
Zambia
Puerto Rico (US)
India
Vietnam Cambodia
Brazil
American Samoa (US)
Bangladesh
Thailand
Somalia Uganda
Gabon
Japan
Bhutan
Nepal
Rep. of Yemen
Ethiopia
Central African Republic
Angola
Antigua and Barbuda
Pakistan
Djibouti Nigeria
French Polynesia (Fr)
Dominican Republic
Afghanistan
United Arab Emirates Oman
Rep.of Korea
China
Sudan
Kiribati
Peru
Dem.People’s Rep.of Korea
Tajikistan
Bahrain Qatar Saudi Arabia
Eritrea
Burkina Faso
Guinea
French Guiana (Fr)
Colombia
Fiji
Jordan
Arab Rep. of Egypt
Chad
Senegal
Ecuador
Samoa
West Bank and Gaza
Turkmenistan
Islamic Rep. of Iran Kuwait
Iraq
Mongolia Kyrgyz Rep.
Uzbekistan
Azerbaijan
Mauritania
Haiti
Panama
Syrian Arab Rep.
Libya
Former Spanish Sahara
Georgia Armenia
Cyprus Lebanon Israel
Malta
Morocco
Mexico
Turkey
Greece
Gibraltar (UK) Bermuda (UK)
The Bahamas
Kazakhstan
Bulgaria
Romania
Bosnia and Herzegovina San Marino Italy Montenegro Vatican City
New Zealand
Hungary
Slovenia Croatia
Serbia
Kosovo Bulgaria FYR Macedonia Albania Greece
R.B. de Venezuela
Antarctica
IBRD 37654 MARCH 2010
Designed, edited, and produced by Communications Development Incorporated, Washington, D.C., with Peter Grundy Art & Design, London
2010
WORLD DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS
Copyright 2010 by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/THE WORLD BANK 1818 H Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20433 USA All rights reserved Manufactured in the United States of America First printing April 2010 This volume is a product of the staff of the Development Data Group of the World Bank’s Development Economics Vice Presidency, and the judgments herein do not necessarily reflect the views of the World Bank’s Board of Executive Directors or the countries they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication and accepts no responsibility whatsoever for any consequence of their use. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this volume do not imply on the part of the World Bank any judgment on the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. This publication uses the Robinson projection for maps, which represents both area and shape reasonably well for most of the earth’s surface. Nevertheless, some distortions of area, shape, distance, and direction remain. The material in this publication is copyrighted. Requests for permission to reproduce portions of it should be sent to the Office of the Publisher at the address in the copyright notice above. The World Bank encourages dissemination of its work and will normally give permission promptly and, when reproduction is for noncommercial purposes, without asking a fee. Permission to photocopy portions for classroom use is granted through the Copyright Center, Inc., Suite 910, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA. Photo credits: Front cover, Joerg Boethling/Peter Arnold, Inc.; page xxiv, Curt Carnemark/World Bank; page 52, Curt Carnemark/World Bank; page 148, Scott Wallace/World Bank; page 216, Curt Carnemark/World Bank; page 286, Scott Wallace/World Bank; page 344, Curt Carnemark/World Bank. If you have questions or comments about this product, please contact: Development Data Group The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Room MC2-812, Washington, D.C. 20433 USA Hotline: 800 590 1906 or 202 473 7824; fax 202 522 1498 Email:
[email protected] Web site: www.worldbank.org or www.worldbank.org/data ISBN 978-0-8213-8232-5 ECO -AUDIT Environmental Benefits Statement The World Bank is committed to preserving endangered forests and natural resources. The Office of the Publisher has chosen to print World Development Indicators 2010 on recycled paper with 50 percent post-consumer fiber in accordance with the recommended standards for paper usage set by the Green Press Initiative, a nonprofit program supporting publishers in using fiber that is not sourced from endangered forests. For more information, visit www. greenpressinitiative.org. Saved: 116 trees 37 million Btu of total energy 11,069 pounds of net greenhouse gases 53,312 gallons of waste water 3,237 pounds of solid waste
2010
WORLD DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS
PREFACE The 1998 edition of World Development Indicators initiated a series of annual reports on progress toward the International Development Goals. In the foreword then–World Bank President James D. Wolfensohn recognized that “by reporting regularly and systematically on progress toward the targets the international community has set for itself, we will focus attention on the task ahead and make those responsible for advancing the development agenda accountable for results.” The same vision inspired world leaders to commit themselves to the Millennium Development Goals. On this, the 10th anniversary of the Millennium Declaration, World Development Indicators 2010 focuses on progress toward the Millennium Development Goals and the challenges of meeting them. There has been remarkable progress. Despite the global financial crisis, poverty rates in developing countries continue to fall, with every likelihood of reaching and then exceeding the Millennium Development Goals target in most regions of the world. Since the turn of the century, 37 million more children have enrolled in primary school. Measles immunization rates have risen to 81 percent, with similar progress in other vaccination programs and health-related services. Since 2000 the number of children dying before age 5 has fallen from more than 10 million a year to 8.8 million. So, much progress. But we still have far to go. Global and regional averages cannot disguise the large differences between countries. Average annual incomes range from $280 to more than $60,000 per person. Life expectancy ranges from 44 years to 83 years. And differences within countries can be even greater. But we should not be discouraged. Nor should we conclude that the effort has failed just because some countries will fall short of the targets. The Millennium Development Goals have helped to focus development efforts where they will do the most good and have created new demand for good statistics. Responding to the demand for statistics to monitor progress on the Millennium Development Goals, developing countries and donor agencies have invested in statistical systems, conducted more frequent surveys, and improved methodologies. And the results are beginning to show in the pages of World Development Indicators. But here too our success makes us keenly aware of the need to do more to enrich the quality of development statistics. And we are just as committed to making them more widely available. With the release of the 2010 edition of World Development Indicators, the World Bank is redesigning its Web sites and making its development databases freely and fully accessible. As always, we invite your ideas and innovations in putting statistics in service to people.
Shaida Badiee Director Development Economics Data Group
2010 World Development Indicators
v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This book and its companion volumes, The Little Data Book and The Little Green Data Book, are prepared by a team led by Soong Sup Lee under the supervision of Eric Swanson and comprising Awatif Abuzeid, Mehdi Akhlaghi, Azita Amjadi, Uranbileg Batjargal, David Cieslikowski, Loveena Dookhony, Richard Fix, Shota Hatakeyama, Masako Hiraga, Kiyomi Horiuchi, Bala Bhaskar Naidu Kalimili, Buyant Erdene Khaltarkhuu, Alison Kwong, K. Sarwar Lateef, Ibrahim Levent, Raymond Muhula, Changqing Sun, K.M. Vijayalakshmi, and Estela Zamora, working closely with other teams in the Development Economics Vice Presidency’s Development Data Group. The electronic products were prepared with contributions from Azita Amjadi, Ramvel Chandrasekaran, Ying Chi, Jean-Pierre Djomalieu, Ramgopal Erabelly, Reza Farivari, Shelley Fu, Gytis Kanchas, Buyant Erdene Khaltarkhuu, Ugendran Makhachkala, Vilas Mandlekar, Nacer Megherbi, Parastoo Oloumi, Abarna Panchapakesan, William Prince, Sujay Ramasamy, Malarvizhi Veerappan, and Vera Wen. The work was carried out under the management of Shaida Badiee. Valuable advice was provided by Shahrokh Fardoust. The choice of indicators and text content was shaped through close consultation with and substantial contributions from staff in the World Bank’s four thematic networks—Sustainable Development, Human Development, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management, and Financial and Private Sector Development—and staff of the International Finance Corporation and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency. Most important, the team received substantial help, guidance, and data from external partners. For individual acknowledgments of contributions to the book’s content, please see Credits. For a listing of our key partners, see Partners. Communications Development Incorporated provided overall design direction, editing, and layout, led by Meta de Coquereaumont, Bruce Ross-Larson, and Christopher Trott. Elaine Wilson created the cover and graphics and typeset the book. Joseph Caponio provided production assistance. Communications Development’s London partner, Peter Grundy of Peter Grundy Art & Design, designed the report. Staff from External Affairs oversaw printing and dissemination of the book.
2010 World Development Indicators
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS FRONT Preface Acknowledgments Partners Users guide
v vii xii xxii
1. WORLD VIEW Introduction
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1a 1b 1c 1d 1e 1f 1g 1h 1i 1j 1k 1l 1m 1n 1o 1.2a 1.3a 1.4a
1
Tables Size of the economy 32 Millennium Development Goals: eradicating poverty and saving lives 36 Millennium Development Goals: protecting our common environment 40 Millennium Development Goals: overcoming obstacles 44 Women in development 46 Key indicators for other economies 50 Text figures, tables, and boxes Progress toward the Millennium Development Goals, by country 2 Progress toward the Millennium Development Goals, by population 2 Progress toward the Millennium Development Goals among low-income countries 3 Progress toward the Millennium Development Goals among lower middle-income countries 3 Progress toward the Millennium Development Goals among upper middle-income countries 3 Inequalities for school completion rates persist for men and women 24 Large disparities in child survival 24 Brazil improves income distribution 25 Child mortality rates rise when adjusted for equity 25 How governance contributes to social outcomes 27 Under-five mortality rates vary considerably among core fragile states 27 Status of national strategies for the development of statistics, 2009 28 Statistical capacity indicators by region and areas of performance 29 Statistical capacity has improved . . . 29 . . . but data are still missing for key indicators 29 Location of indicators for Millennium Development Goals 1–4 39 Location of indicators for Millennium Development Goals 5–7 43 Location of indicators for Millennium Development Goal 8 45
2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 2.11 2.12 2.13 2.14 2.15 2.16 2.17 2.18 2.19 2.20 2.21 2.22 2a 2b 2c 2d 2e 2f 2g 2h 2i 2j 2k 2l 2m 2n 2o 2p 2q 2r 2s 2t 2u 2v 2w 2x 2y
2. PEOPLE 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6
viii
2.6a
Introduction
53
Tables Population dynamics Labor force structure Employment by economic activity Decent work and productive employment Unemployment Children at work
62 66 70 74 78 82
2010 World Development Indicators
2.8a 2.8b 2.8c 2.9a 2.12a 2.15a
Poverty rates at national poverty lines Poverty rates at international poverty lines Distribution of income or consumption Assessing vulnerability and security Education inputs Participation in education Education efficiency Education completion and outcomes Education gaps by income and gender Health services Health information Disease prevention coverage and quality Reproductive health Nutrition Health risk factors and future challenges Mortality
86 89 94 98 102 106 110 114 118 120 124 128 132 136 140 144
Text figures, tables, and boxes Child mortality is higher among the poorest children . . . 53 . . . as is child malnutrition 53 The poorest women have the least access to prenatal care 54 Poor and rural children are less likely to complete primary school . . . 54 . . . and more likely to be out of school 54 Poorer children are more likely to die before age 5 . . . 54 . . . and to be out of school 54 First-line health facilities in many countries lack electricity and clean water 55 Fewer health facilities in Guinea had electricity in 2001 than in 1998, but more had running water 55 Availability of child health services is weak in Egypt and Rwanda 55 Wealthy people have better access to child health services 56 Absenteeism among health workers reduces access to health care 56 Distribution of health workers in Zambia , 2004 56 Many schools lack electricity, blackboards, seating, and libraries 57 Absenteeism is high among teachers in some poor countries, 2002–03 57 The cost of education 57 Public expenditures on primary education, by region, 2004 58 Available data on human development indicators vary by region 58 In many regions fewer than half of births are reported to the United Nations Statistics Division . . 59 . . . and even fewer child deaths are reported 59 Out of school children are difficult to measure 59 Out-of-pocket health care costs are too high for many people to afford 60 Informal payments to health care providers are common 60 Primary school enrollment and attendance, 2003–08 61 Instructional time for children varies considerably by country, 2004–06 61 Brazil has rapidly reduced children’s employment and raised school attendance 85 While the number of people living on less than $1.25 a day has fallen, the number living on $1.25–$2.00 a day has increased 91 Poverty rates have begun to fall 91 Regional poverty estimates 92 The Gini coefficient and ratio of income or consumption of the richest quintile to the poorest quintiles are closely correlated 97 The situations of out of school children vary widely 109 Gender disparities in net primary school attendance are largest in poor and rural households 119
3. ENVIRONMENT 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10 3.11 3.12 3.13 3.14 3.15 3.16 3a 3b 3c 3d 3e 3f 3g 3h 3i 3.1a
Introduction
149
Tables Rural population and land use Agricultural inputs Agricultural output and productivity Deforestation and biodiversity Freshwater Water pollution Energy production and use Energy dependency and efficiency and carbon dioxide emissions Trends in greenhouse gas emissions Sources of electricity Urbanization Urban housing conditions Traffic and congestion Air pollution Government commitment Toward a broader measure of savings
3.2a 3.2b
154 158 162 166 170 174 178 182 186 190 194 198 202 206 208 212
3.3a
149 150 150
3.9b
Text figures, tables, and boxes Carbon dioxide is the most common greenhouse gas Carbon dioxide emissions have surged since the 1950s Carbon dioxide emissions are growing, 1990–2006 A few rapidly developing and high-income countries produce 70 percent of carbon dioxide emissions Trends in fossil fuel use and energy intensity Emission reductions by 2030 Future energy use under the IEA-450 scenario People affected by natural disasters and projected changes in rainfall and agricultural production Potential contributions of the water sector to attaining the Millennium Development Goals What is rural? Urban?
150 151 151 151 152
3.3b 3.5a 3.5b 3.6a 3.7a 3.8a 3.8b 3.9a
3.10a 3.10b 3.11a 3.11b 3.12a 3.13a
Nearly 40 percent of land globally is devoted to agriculture 161 Developing regions lag in agricultural machinery, which reduces their agricultural productivity 161 Cereal yield in low-income economies is less than 40 percent of the yield in high-income countries 165 Sub-Saharan Africa has the lowest yield, while East Asia and Pacific is closing the gap with high-income economies 165 Agriculture is still the largest user of water, accounting for some 70 percent of global withdrawals in 2007 . . . 173 . . . and approaching 90 percent in some developing regions in 2007 173 Emissions of organic water pollutants declined in most economies from 1990 to 2006, even in some of the top emitters 177 A person in a high-income economy uses more than 12 times as much energy on average as a person in a low-income economy 181 High-income economies depend on imported energy . . . 185 . . . mostly from middle-income economies in the Middle East and North Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean 185 The 10 largest contributors to methane emissions account for about 62 percent of emissions 189 The 10 largest contributors to nitrous oxide emissions account for about 56 percent of emissions 189 Sources of electricity generation have shifted since 1990 . . . 193 . . . with developing economies relying more on coal 193 Urban population nearly doubled in low- and lower middle-income economies between 1990 and 2008 197 Latin America and the Caribbean had the same share of urban population as high-income economies in 2008 197 Selected housing indicators for smaller economies 201 Particulate matter concentration has fallen in all income groups, and the higher the income, the lower the concentration 205
153 157
2010 World Development Indicators
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS 5. STATES AND MARKETS
4. ECONOMY 4.a 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.10 4.11 4.12 4.13 4.14 4.15 4a 4b 4c 4d 4e 4f 4g 4h 4i 4j 4m–4r 4s–4x 4y–4dd 4ee–4jj 4kk–4pp 4qq–4vv 4ww–4bbb 4ccc–4hhh 4.3a 4.4a 4.5a 4.6a 4.7a 4.9a 4.10a 4.11a 4.12a 4.15a
x
Introduction
217
Tables Recent economic performance of selected developing countries Growth of output Structure of output Structure of manufacturing Structure of merchandise exports Structure of merchandise imports Structure of service exports Structure of service imports Structure of demand Growth of consumption and investment Central government finances Central government expenses Central government revenues Monetary indicators Exchange rates and prices Balance of payments current account
224 226 230 234 238 242 246 250 254 258 262 266 270 274 278 282
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13
217
5b
217
5c
218 218 218 218 219 219 219 219 220
5d
Text figures, tables, and boxes As incomes rise, poverty rates fall Income per capita is highly correlated with many development indicators After years of record economic growth the global economy experienced a recession in 2009 Trade contracted in almost every region Private capital flows began to slow in 2008 Some developing country regions maintained growth Current account surpluses and deficits both decreased Economies with large government deficits Economies with large government debts Economies with increasing default risk Growth in GDP, selected major developing economies Growth in industrial production, selected major developing economies Lending and inflation rates, selected major developing economies Central government debt, selected major developing economies Merchandise trade, selected major developing economies Equity price indexes, selected major developing economies Bond spreads, selected major developing economies Financing through international capital markets, selected major developing economies Manufacturing continues to show strong growth in East Asia through 2008 Developing economies’ share of world merchandise exports continues to expand Top 10 developing economy exporters of merchandise goods in 2008 Top 10 developing economy exporters of commercial services in 2008 The mix of commercial service imports by developing economies is changing GDP per capita is still lagging in some regions Twenty developing economies had a government expenditure to GDP ratio of 30 percent or higher Interest payments are a large part of government expenses for some developing economies Rich economies rely more on direct taxes Top 15 economies with the largest reserves in 2008
2010 World Development Indicators
220 220 220 222 222 222 222 237 241 245 249 253 261 265 269 273 285
5a
5e 5f 5g 5h
Introduction
287
Tables Private sector in the economy Business environment: enterprise surveys Business environment: Doing Business indicators Stock markets Financial access, stability, and efficiency Tax policies Military expenditures and arms transfers Fragile situations Public policies and institutions Transport services Power and communications The information age Science and technology
292 296 300 304 308 312 316 320 324 328 332 336 340
Text figures, tables, and boxes Pakistani women without access to an all-weather road have fewer prenatal consultations and fewer births attended by skilled health staff, 2001–02 288 Private investment in water and sanitation is only about 2–3 percent of the total, 2005–08 289 More than half of firms in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa say that lack of reliable electricity is a major constraint to business 290 Regional collaboration in infrastructure—the Greater Mekong Subregion program 290 In 2008 investment in infrastructure with private participation grew in all but two developing country regions 290 Five countries accounted for almost half of investment in infrastructure with private participation, 1990–2008 291 Investment rose in energy, telecommunications, and transport, but remained flat in water and sanitation, 2005–08 291 Investment in water and sanitation with private participation accounted for only 4.4 percent of the total, 1990–2008 291
6. GLOBAL LINKS Introduction
6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11 6.12 6.13 6.14 6.15 6.16 6.17 6.18 6.19 6a 6b 6c 6d 6e 6f 6g 6h
Tables Integration with the global economy Growth of merchandise trade Direction and growth of merchandise trade High-income economy trade with low- and middle-income economies Direction of trade of developing economies Primary commodity prices Regional trade blocs Tariff barriers Trade facilitation External debt Ratios for external debt Global private financial flows Net official financial flows Financial flows from Development Assistance Committee members Allocation of bilateral aid from Development Assistance Committee members Aid dependency Distribution of net aid by Development Assistance Committee members Movement of people Travel and tourism Text figures, tables, and boxes Growth of exports and growth of GDP go hand in hand Export revenues are increasingly larger portions of low-income economies’ GDP Developing economies’ share in world exports has increased, especially for large middle-income economies Low-income economies specialize in labor-intensive exports Labor-intensive products face higher tariffs than other commodities Low-income economies have a small share in the global agricultural market Developing economies are trading more with other developing economies For some developing economies only five products make up more than 90 percent of total merchandise exports
345
6i 6j
354 358 362
6k 6l 6m
365 368 371 374 378 382 386 390 394 398
6n
402
6.5a
404 406
6.6a
410 414 418
6o 6p 6q 6.1a 6.3a 6.4a
6.7a
6.10a 346 347 347 347
6.11a 6.12a 6.13a
348 348 348
6.16a 6.17a 6.19a
Nontariff barriers on imports may be higher than tariff barriers Agricultural exports from low-income economies face the highest overall restrictions Some OECD members apply very high tariffs selectively Growth of trade in services peaked in the last three years Developing economies expanded their share in the world tourism industry Remittances have become an important source of external financing for low- and middle-income economies Logistics performance is lowest for low-income economies Challenges for landlocked economies Lead time to import and export is longest for low-income economies Services trade has not grown as rapidly as merchandise trade Trade among developing economies has grown faster than trade among high-income economies High-income economies export mostly manufactured goods to low- and middle-income economies Developing economies are increasingly trading with other developing economies in the same region Primary commodity prices have been volatile over the past two years The number of trade agreements has increased rapidly since 1990, especially agreements between high-income economies and developing economies and agreements among developing economies Debt flows from private creditors to low- and middle-income economies fell sharply in 2008 The burden of external debt service declined over 2000–08 Most global foreign direct investment is directed to highincome economies and a few large middle-income economies Net lending from the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development declined as countries paid off loans, and concessional lending from the International Development Association increased Official development assistance from non-DAC donors, 2004–08 Destination of aid varies by donor High-income economies remain the main recipients of increased international tourism expenditure, but the share of developing economies’ receipts has risen
349 349 350 350 351 351 352 353 353 357 364 367 370 373
377 389 393 397
401 409 413
421
349
BACK Primary data documentation Statistical methods Credits Bibliography Index of indicators
2010 World Development Indicators
423 434 436 438 448
xi
PARTNERS Defining, gathering, and disseminating international statistics is a collective effort of many people and organizations. The indicators presented in World Development Indicators are the fruit of decades of work at many levels, from the field workers who administer censuses and household surveys to the committees and working parties of the national and international statistical agencies that develop the nomenclature, classifications, and standards fundamental to an international statistical system. Nongovernmental organizations and the private sector have also made important contributions, both in gathering primary data and in organizing and publishing their results. And academic researchers have played a crucial role in developing statistical methods and carrying on a continuing dialogue about the quality and interpretation of statistical indicators. All these contributors have a strong belief that available, accurate data will improve the quality of public and private decisionmaking. The organizations listed here have made World Development Indicators possible by sharing their data and their expertise with us. More important, their collaboration contributes to the World Bank’s efforts, and to those of many others, to improve the quality of life of the world’s people. We acknowledge our debt and gratitude to all who have helped to build a base of comprehensive, quantitative information about the world and its people. For easy reference, Web addresses are included for each listed organization. The addresses shown were active on March 1, 2010. Information about the World Bank is also provided.
International and government agencies Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center The Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) is the primary global climate change data and information analysis center of the U.S. Department of Energy. The CDIAC’s scope includes anything that would potentially be of value to those concerned with the greenhouse effect and global climate change, including concentrations of carbon dioxide and other radiatively active gases in the atmosphere, the role of the terrestrial biosphere and the oceans in the biogeochemical cycles of greenhouse gases, emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, long-term climate trends, the effects of elevated carbon dioxide on vegetation, and the vulnerability of coastal areas to rising sea levels. For more information, see http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/.
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit The Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH is a German government-owned corporation for international cooperation with worldwide operations. GTZ’s aim is to positively shape political, economic, ecological, and social development in partner countries, thereby improving people’s living conditions and prospects. For more information, see www.gtz.de/.
Food and Agriculture Organization The Food and Agriculture Organization, a specialized agency of the United Nations, was founded in October 1945 with a mandate to raise nutrition levels and living standards, to increase agricultural productivity, and to better the condition of rural populations. The organization provides direct development assistance;
xii
2010 World Development Indicators
collects, analyzes, and disseminates information; offers policy and planning advice to governments; and serves as an international forum for debate on food and agricultural issues. For more information, see www.fao.org/.
Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre The Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre was established in 1998 by the Norwegian Refugee Council and is the leading international body monitoring conflict-induced internal displacement worldwide. The center contributes to improving national and international capacities to protect and assist the millions of people around the globe who have been displaced within their own country as a result of conflicts or human rights violations. For more information, see www.internal-displacement.org/.
International Civil Aviation Organization The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), a specialized agency of the United Nations, is responsible for establishing international standards and recommended practices and procedures for the technical, economic, and legal aspects of international civil aviation operations. ICAO’s strategic objectives include enhancing global aviation safety and security and the efficiency of aviation operations, minimizing the adverse effect of global civil aviation on the environment, maintaining the continuity of aviation operations, and strengthening laws governing international civil aviation. For more information, see www.icao.int/.
International Labour Organization The International Labour Organization (ILO), a specialized agency of the United Nations, seeks the promotion of social justice and internationally recognized human and labor rights. ILO helps advance the creation of decent jobs and the kinds of economic and working conditions that give working people and business people a stake in lasting peace, prosperity, and progress. As part of its mandate, the ILO maintains an extensive statistical publication program. For more information, see www.ilo.org/.
International Monetary Fund The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is an international organization of 186 member countries established to promote international monetary cooperation, a stable system of exchange rates, and the balanced expansion of international trade and to foster economic growth and high levels of employment. The IMF reviews national, regional, and global economic and financial developments; provides policy advice to member countries; and serves as a forum where they can discuss the national, regional, and global consequences of their policies. The IMF also makes financing temporarily available to member countries to help them address balance of payments problems. Among the IMF’s core missions are the collection and dissemination of high-quality macroeconomic and financial statistics as an essential prerequisite for formulating appropriate policies. The
2010 World Development Indicators
xiii
PARTNERS IMF provides technical assistance and training to member countries in areas of its core expertise, including the development of economic and financial data in accordance with international standards. For more information, see www.imf.org/.
International Telecommunication Union The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is the leading UN agency for information and communication technologies. ITU’s mission is to enable the growth and sustained development of telecommunications and information networks and to facilitate universal access so that people everywhere can participate in, and benefit from, the emerging information society and global economy. A key priority lies in bridging the socalled Digital Divide by building information and communication infrastructure, promoting adequate capacity building, and developing confidence in the use of cyberspace through enhanced online security. ITU also concentrates on strengthening emergency communications for disaster prevention and mitigation. For more information, see www.itu.int/.
KPMG KPMG operates as an international network of member firms in more than 140 countries offering audit, tax, and advisory services. It works closely with clients, helping them to mitigate risks and perform in the dynamic and challenging environment in which they do business. For more information, see www.kpmg.com/Global.
National Science Foundation The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent U.S. government agency whose mission is to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; and to secure the national defense. NSF’s goals—discovery, learning, research infrastructure, and stewardship—provide an integrated strategy to advance the frontiers of knowledge, cultivate a world-class, broadly inclusive science and engineering workforce, expand the scientific literacy of all citizens, build the nation’s research capability through investments in advanced instrumentation and facilities, and support excellence in science and engineering research and education through a capable and responsive organization. For more information, see www.nsf.gov/.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) includes 30 member countries sharing a commitment to democratic government and the market economy to support sustainable economic growth, boost employment, raise living standards, maintain financial stability, assist other countries’ economic development, and contribute to growth in world trade. With active relationships with some 100 other countries, it has a global reach. It is best known for its publications and statistics, which cover economic and social issues from macroeconomics to trade, education, development, and science and innovation. The Development Assistance Committee (DAC, www.oecd.org/dac/) is one of the principal bodies through which the OECD deals with issues related to cooperation with developing countries. The DAC is a key forum
xiv
2010 World Development Indicators
of major bilateral donors, who work together to increase the effectiveness of their common efforts to support sustainable development. The DAC concentrates on two key areas: the contribution of international development to the capacity of developing countries to participate in the global economy and the capacity of people to overcome poverty and participate fully in their societies. For more information, see www.oecd.org/.
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) conducts research on questions of conflict and cooperation of importance for international peace and security, with the aim of contributing to an understanding of the conditions for peaceful solutions to international conflicts and for a stable peace. SIPRI’s main publication, SIPRI Yearbook, is an authoritive and independent source on armaments and arms control and other conflict and security issues. For more information, see www.sipri.org/.
Understanding Children’s Work As part of broader efforts to develop effective and long-term solutions to child labor, the International Labour Organization, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and the World Bank initiated the joint interagency research program “Understanding Children’s Work and Its Impact” in December 2000. The Understanding Children’s Work (UCW) project was located at UNICEF’s Innocenti Research Centre in Florence, Italy, until June 2004, when it moved to the Centre for International Studies on Economic Growth in Rome. The UCW project addresses the crucial need for more and better data on child labor. UCW’s online database contains data by country on child labor and the status of children. For more information, see www.ucw-project.org/.
United Nations The United Nations currently has 192 member states. The purposes of the United Nations, as set forth in its charter, are to maintain international peace and security; to develop friendly relations among nations; to cooperate in solving international economic, social, cultural, and humanitarian problems and in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; and to be a center for harmonizing the actions of nations in attaining these ends. For more information, see www.un.org/.
United Nations Centre for Human Settlements, Global Urban Observatory The Urban Indicators Programme of the United Nations Human Settlements Programme was established to address the urgent global need to improve the urban knowledge base by helping countries and cities design, collect, and apply policy-oriented indicators related to development at the city level. With the Urban Indicators and Best Practices programs, the Global Urban Observatory is establishing a worldwide information, assessment, and capacity-building network to help governments, local authorities, the private sector, and nongovernmental and other civil society organizations. For more information, see www.unhabitat.org/.
2010 World Development Indicators
xv
PARTNERS United Nations Children’s Fund The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) works with other UN bodies and with governments and nongovernmental organizations to improve children’s lives in more than 190 countries through various programs in education and health. UNICEF focuses primarily on five areas: child survival and development, basic education and gender equality (including girls’ education), child protection, HIV/AIDS, and policy advocacy and partnerships. For more information, see www.unicef.org/.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) is the principal organ of the United Nations General Assembly in the field of trade and development. Its mandate is to accelerate economic growth and development, particularly in developing countries. UNCTAD discharges its mandate through policy analysis; intergovernmental deliberations, consensus building, and negotiation; monitoring, implementation, and follow-up; and technical cooperation. For more information, see www.unctad.org/.
United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations The United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations contributes to the most important function of the United Nations—maintaining international peace and security. The department helps countries torn by conflict to create the conditions for lasting peace. The first peacekeeping mission was established in 1948 and has evolved to meet the demands of different conflicts and a changing political landscape. Today’s peacekeepers undertake a wide variety of complex tasks, from helping build sustainable institutions of governance, to monitoring human rights, to assisting in security sector reform, to disarmaming, demobilizing, and reintegrating former combatants. For more information, see www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/.
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, Institute for Statistics The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations that promotes international cooperation among member states and associate members in education, science, culture, and communications. The UNESCO Institute for Statistics is the organization’s statistical branch, established in July 1999 to meet the growing needs of UNESCO member states and the international community for a wider range of policy-relevant, timely, and reliable statistics on these topics. For more information, see www.uis.unesco.org/.
United Nations Environment Programme The mandate of the United Nations Environment Programme is to provide leadership and encourage partnership in caring for the environment by inspiring, informing, and enabling nations and people to improve their quality of life without compromising that of future generations. For more information, see www.unep.org/.
xvi
2010 World Development Indicators
United Nations Industrial Development Organization The United Nations Industrial Development Organization was established to act as the central coordinating body for industrial activities and to promote industrial development and cooperation at the global, regional, national, and sectoral levels. Its mandate is to help develop scientific and technological plans and programs for industrialization in the public, cooperative, and private sectors. For more information, see www.unido.org/.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime was established in 1977 and is a global leader in the fight against illicit drugs and international crime. The office assists member states in their struggle against illicit drugs, crime, and terrorism by helping build capacity, conducting research and analytical work, and assisting in the ratification and implementation of relevant international treaties and domestic legislation related to drugs, crime, and terrorism. For more information, see www.unodc.org/.
The UN Refugee Agency The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) is mandated to lead and coordinate international action to protect refugees and resolve refugee problems worldwide. Its primary purpose is to safeguard the rights and well-being of refugees. UNHCR also collects and disseminates statistics on refugees. For more information, see www.unhcr.org
Upsalla Conflict Data Program The Upsalla Conflict Data Program has collected information on armed violence since 1946 and is one of the most accurate and well used data sources on global armed conflicts. Its definition of armed conflict is becoming a standard in how conflicts are systematically defined and studied. In addition to data collection on armed violence, its researchers conduct theoretically and empirically based analyses of the causes, escalation, spread, prevention, and resolution of armed conflict. For more information, see www.pcr.uu.se/research/UCDP/.
World Bank The World Bank is a vital source of financial and technical assistance for developing countries. The World Bank is made up of two unique development institutions owned by 186 member countries—the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA). These institutions play different but collaborative roles to advance the vision of an inclusive and sustainable globalization. The IBRD focuses on middle-income and creditworthy poor countries, while IDA focuses on the poorest countries. Together they provide low-interest loans, interest-free credits, and grants to developing countries for a wide array of purposes, including investments in education, health, public administration, infrastructure, financial and private sector development, agriculture, and environmental and natural resource management. The World Bank’s work focuses on achieving the Millennium Development Goals by working with partners to alleviate poverty. For more information, see www.worldbank.org/data/.
2010 World Development Indicators
xvii
PARTNERS World Health Organization The objective of the World Health Organization (WHO), a specialized agency of the United Nations, is the attainment by all people of the highest possible level of health. It is responsible for providing leadership on global health matters, shaping the health research agenda, setting norms and standards, articulating evidence-based policy options, providing technical support to countries, and monitoring and assessing health trends. For more information, see www.who.int/.
World Intellectual Property Organization The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations dedicated to developing a balanced and accessible international intellectual property (IP) system, which rewards creativity, stimulates innovation, and contributes to economic development while safeguarding the public interest. WIPO carries out a wide variety of tasks related to the protection of IP rights. These include developing international IP laws and standards, delivering global IP protection services, encouraging the use of IP for economic development, promoting better understanding of IP, and providing a forum for debate. For more information, see www.wipo.int/.
World Tourism Organization The World Tourism Organization is an intergovernmental body entrusted by the United Nations with promoting and developing tourism. It serves as a global forum for tourism policy issues and a source of tourism know-how. For more information, see www.unwto.org/.
World Trade Organization The World Trade Organization (WTO) is the only international organization dealing with the global rules of trade between nations. Its main function is to ensure that trade flows as smoothly, predictably, and freely as possible. It does this by administering trade agreements, acting as a forum for trade negotiations, settling trade disputes, reviewing national trade policies, assisting developing countries in trade policy issues—through technical assistance and training programs—and cooperating with other international organizations. At the heart of the system—known as the multilateral trading system—are the WTO’s agreements, negotiated and signed by a large majority of the world’s trading nations and ratified by their parliaments. For more information, see www.wto.org/.
xviii
2010 World Development Indicators
Private and nongovernmental organizations Containerisation International Containerisation International Yearbook is one of the most authoritative reference books on the container industry. The information can be accessed on the Containerisation International Web site, which also provides a comprehensive online daily business news and information service for the container industry. For more information, see www.ci-online.co.uk/.
DHL DHL provides shipping and customized transportation solutions for customers in more than 220 countries and territories. It offers expertise in express, air, and ocean freight; overland transport; contract logistics solutions; and international mail services. For more information, see www.dhl.com/.
International Institute for Strategic Studies The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) provides information and analysis on strategic trends and facilitates contacts between government leaders, business people, and analysts that could lead to better public policy in international security and international relations. The IISS is a primary source of accurate, objective information on international strategic issues. For more information, see www.iiss.org/.
International Road Federation The International Road Federation (IRF) is a nongovernmental, not-for-profit organization whose mission is to encourage and promote development and maintenance of better, safer, and more sustainable roads and road networks. Working together with its members and associates, the IRF promotes social and economic benefits that flow from well planned and environmentally sound road transport networks. It helps put in place technological solutions and management practices that provide maximum economic and social returns from national road investments. The IRF works in all aspects of road policy and development worldwide with governments and financial institutions, members, and the community of road professionals. For more information, see www.irfnet.org/.
Netcraft Netcraft provides Internet security services such as antifraud and antiphishing services, application testing, code reviews, and automated penetration testing. Netcraft also provides research data and analysis on many aspects of the Internet and is a respected authority on the market share of web servers, operating systems, hosting providers, Internet service providers, encrypted transactions, electronic commerce, scripting languages, and content technologies on the Internet. For more information, see http://news.netcraft.com/.
2010 World Development Indicators
xix
PARTNERS PricewaterhouseCoopers PricewaterhouseCoopers provides industry-focused services in the fields of assurance, tax, human resources, transactions, performance improvement, and crisis management services to help address client and stakeholder issues. For more information, see www.pwc.com/.
Standard & Poor’s Standard & Poor’s is the world’s foremost provider of independent credit ratings, indexes, risk evaluation, investment research, and data. S&P’s Global Stock Markets Factbook draws on data from S&P’s Emerging Markets Database (EMDB) and other sources covering data on more than 100 markets with comprehensive market profiles for 82 countries. Drawing a sample of stocks in each EMDB market, Standard & Poor’s calculates indexes to serve as benchmarks that are consistent across national boundaries. For more information, see www.standardandpoors.com/.
World Conservation Monitoring Centre The World Conservation Monitoring Centre provides information on the conservation and sustainable use of the world’s living resources and helps others to develop information systems of their own. It works in close collaboration with a wide range of people and organizations to increase access to the information needed for wise management of the world’s living resources. For more information, see www.unep-wcmc.org/.
World Economic Forum The World Economic Forum (WEF) is an independent international organization committed to improving the state of the world by engaging leaders in partnerships to shape global, regional, and industry agendas. Economic research at the WEF—led by the Global Competitiveness Programme—focuses on identifying the impediments to growth so that strategies to achieve sustainable economic progress, reduce poverty, and increase prosperity can be developed. The WEF’s competitiveness reports range from global coverage, such as Global Competitiveness Report, to regional and topical coverage, such as Africa Competitiveness Report, The Lisbon Review, and Global Information Technology Report. For more information, see: www.weforum.org/.
World Information Technology and Services Alliance The World Information Technology and Services Alliance (WITSA) is a consortium of more than 60 information technology (IT) industry associations from economies around the world. WITSA members represent over 90 percent of the world IT market. As the global voice of the IT industry, WITSA has an active role in international public policy issues affecting the creation of a robust global information infrastructure, including advocating policies that advance the industry’s growth and development, facilitating international trade and investment in IT products and services, increasing competition through open markets and regulatory reform, strengthening national industry associations through the sharing of knowledge, protecting intellectual property, encouraging cross-industry and government cooperation to enhance information security,
xx
2010 World Development Indicators
bridging the education and skills gap, and safeguarding the viability and continued growth of the Internet and electronic commerce. For more information, see www.witsa.org/.
World Resources Institute The World Resources Institute is an independent center for policy research and technical assistance on global environmental and development issues. The institute provides—and helps other institutions provide— objective information and practical proposals for policy and institutional change that will foster environmentally sound, socially equitable development. The institute’s current areas of work include trade, forests, energy, economics, technology, biodiversity, human health, climate change, sustainable agriculture, resource and environmental information, and national strategies for environmental and resource management. For more information, see www.wri.org/.
2010 World Development Indicators
xxi
USERS GUIDE Tables
simple totals, where they do not), median values (m),
not be complete because of special circumstances
The tables are numbered by section and display
weighted averages (w), or simple (unweighted) aver-
affecting the collection and reporting of data, such
the identifying icon of the section. Countries and
ages (u). Gap filling of amounts not allocated to coun-
as problems stemming from conflicts.
economies are listed alphabetically (except for Hong
tries may result in discrepancies between subgroup
For these reasons, although data are drawn from
Kong SAR, China, which appears after China). Data
aggregates and overall totals. For further discussion
the sources thought to be most authoritative, they
are shown for 155 economies with populations of
of aggregation methods, see Statistical methods.
should be construed only as indicating trends and
more than 1 million, as well as for Taiwan, China, in
characterizing major differences among economies
selected tables. Table 1.6 presents selected indi-
Aggregate measures for regions
rather than as offering precise quantitative mea-
cators for 55 other economies—small economies
The aggregate measures for regions cover only low- and
sures of those differences. Discrepancies in data
with populations between 30,000 and 1 million and
middle-income economies, including economies with
presented in different editions of World Development
smaller economies if they are members of the Interna-
populations of less than 1 million listed in table 1.6.
Indicators reflect updates by countries as well as
tional Bank for Reconstruction and Development or,
The country composition of regions is based on
revisions to historical series and changes in meth-
as it is commonly known, the World Bank. A complete
the World Bank’s analytical regions and may differ
odology. Thus readers are advised not to compare
set of indicators for these economies is available
from common geographic usage. For regional clas-
data series between editions of World Development
on the World Development Indicators CD-ROM and in
sifications, see the map on the inside back cover and
Indicators or between different World Bank publica-
WDI Online. The term country, used interchangeably
the list on the back cover flap. For further discussion
tions. Consistent time-series data for 1960–2008
with economy, does not imply political independence,
of aggregation methods, see Statistical methods.
are available on the World Development Indicators
but refers to any territory for which authorities report
CD-ROM and in WDI Online.
separate social or economic statistics. When avail-
Statistics
able, aggregate measures for income and regional
Data are shown for economies as they were con-
in real terms. (See Statistical methods for information
groups appear at the end of each table.
stituted in 2008, and historical data are revised to
on the methods used to calculate growth rates.) Data
reflect current political arrangements. Exceptions are
for some economic indicators for some economies
noted throughout the tables.
are presented in fiscal years rather than calendar
Indicators are shown for the most recent year or period for which data are available and, in most
Except where otherwise noted, growth rates are
tables, for an earlier year or period (usually 1990 or
Additional information about the data is provided
years; see Primary data documentation. All dollar fig-
1995 in this edition). Time-series data for all 210
in Primary data documentation. That section sum-
ures are current U.S. dollars unless otherwise stated.
economies are available on the World Development
marizes national and international efforts to improve
The methods used for converting national currencies
Indicators CD-ROM and in WDI Online.
basic data collection and gives country-level informa-
are described in Statistical methods.
Known deviations from standard definitions or
tion on primary sources, census years, fiscal years,
breaks in comparability over time or across countries
statistical methods and concepts used, and other
Country notes
are either footnoted in the tables or noted in About
background information. Statistical methods provides
•
the data. When available data are deemed to be
technical information on some of the general calcula-
too weak to provide reliable measures of levels and
tions and formulas used throughout the book.
standards, the data are not shown.
include data for Hong Kong SAR, China; Macao SAR, China; or Taiwan, China. •
trends or do not adequately adhere to international
Data for Indonesia include Timor-Leste through 1999 unless otherwise noted
Data consistency, reliability, and comparability Considerable effort has been made to standardize
Unless otherwise noted, data for China do not
•
Montenegro declared independence from Serbia
Aggregate measures for income groups
the data, but full comparability cannot be assured,
and Montenegro on June 3, 2006. When available,
The aggregate measures for income groups include
and care must be taken in interpreting the indicators.
data for each country are shown separately. How-
210 economies (the economies listed in the main
Many factors affect data availability, comparability,
ever, some indicators for Serbia continue to include
tables plus those in table 1.6) whenever data are
and reliability: statistical systems in many develop-
data for Montenegro through 2005; these data are
available. To maintain consistency in the aggregate
ing economies are still weak; statistical methods,
footnoted in the tables. Moreover, data for most
measures over time and between tables, missing
coverage, practices, and definitions differ widely; and
indicators from 1999 onward for Serbia exclude
data are imputed where possible. The aggregates
cross-country and intertemporal comparisons involve
data for Kosovo, which in 1999 became a terri-
are totals (designated by a t if the aggregates include
complex technical and conceptual problems that can-
tory under international administration pursuant
gap-filled estimates for missing data and by an s, for
not be resolved unequivocally. Data coverage may
to UN Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999);
xxii
2010 World Development Indicators
any exceptions are noted. Kosovo became a World
Symbols
Bank member on June 29, 2009, and its data are
..
shown in the tables when available.
means that data are not available or that aggregates cannot be calculated because of missing data in the
Classification of economies
years shown.
For operational and analytical purposes the World Bank’s main criterion for classifying economies is
0 or 0.0
gross national income (GNI) per capita (calculated
means zero or small enough that the number would
by the World Bank Atlas method). Every economy
round to zero at the displayed number of decimal
is classified as low income, middle income (subdi-
places.
vided into lower middle and upper middle), or high income. For income classifications see the map on
/
the inside front cover and the list on the front cover
in dates, as in 2003/04, means that the period of
flap. Low- and middle-income economies are some-
time, usually 12 months, straddles two calendar
times referred to as developing economies. The term
years and refers to a crop year, a survey year, or a
is used for convenience; it is not intended to imply
fiscal year.
that all economies in the group are experiencing similar development or that other economies have
$
reached a preferred or final stage of development.
means current U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.
Note that classification by income does not necessarily reflect development status. Because GNI per
>
capita changes over time, the country composition of
means more than.
income groups may change from one edition of World Development Indicators to the next. Once the classifi -
<
cation is fixed for an edition, based on GNI per capita
means less than.
in the most recent year for which data are available (2008 in this edition), all historical data presented
Data presentation conventions
are based on the same country grouping.
•
Low-income economies are those with a GNI per
A blank means not applicable or, for an aggregate, not analytically meaningful.
capita of $975 or less in 2008. Middle-income econo-
•
A billion is 1,000 million.
mies are those with a GNI per capita of more than
•
A trillion is 1,000 billion.
$975 but less than $11,906. Lower middle-income
•
Figures in italics refer to years or periods other
and upper middle-income economies are separated
than those specified or to growth rates calculated
at a GNI per capita of $3,855. High-income economies are those with a GNI per capita of $11,906 or more. The 16 participating member countries of the
for less than the full period specified. •
Data for years that are more than three years from the range shown are footnoted.
euro area are presented as a subgroup under highincome economies.
The cutoff date for data is February 1, 2010.
2010 World Development Indicators
xxiii
WORLD VIEW
Introduction
T
he Millennium Declaration, adopted unanimously by world leaders at the United Nations in September 2000, was not the first effort to mobilize global action to end poverty. The First United Nations Development Decade, proclaimed in 1961, drew attention to the great differences among development outcomes and called for accelerating growth. Subsequent Development Decades formulated new development strategies. But not until the 1990s did a consensus emerge that eliminating poverty, broadly defined, should be at the center of development efforts. Analytical work at the World Bank (World Bank 1990) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP 1990) shaped a view of poverty as multifaceted, not just about income or consumption, and envisioned development as a means to empower the poor by increasing their access to employment and to health, education, and other social services. This consensus was reflected in a series of UN summits in the early 1990s that culminated in the 1995 World Summit on Social Development, which endorsed the goal of eradicating poverty. The Millennium Development Goals: countdown to 2015 Inspired by the lofty goals announced at these summits, a high-level meeting of the Development Assistance Committee in 1996 endorsed seven International Development Goals and accompanying indicators for assessing aid efforts (OECD DAC 1996). Despite the goals’ origins in UN summits and conferences, some viewed them with suspicion because they had been promulgated by rich donors. Nevertheless, the goals helped focus attention on the need to measure development outcomes. And most were incorporated into the Millennium Declaration, which was adopted unanimously at the United Nations Millennium Summit in 2000. A year later the UN Secretary-General’s Road Map towards the Implementation of the Millennium Declaration (UN 2001) formally unveiled eight goals, supported by 18 quantified and time-bound targets and 48 indicators, which became the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Like the International Development Goals, the MDGs took 1990 as their benchmark and 2015 as the completion date. An important difference is the inclusion in the MDGs of an eighth goal defining a global partnership for development between rich countries and developing countries. The partnership is intended to achieve the seven other goals by creating a fair and rule-based financial and trading system,
1
increasing aid for the poorest and most isolated countries, and improving access to new technologies. A decade has passed since the Millennium Declaration, and the countdown to 2015 has begun. World Development Indicators 2010 takes a comprehensive look at the issues facing developing countries as they attempt to meet the targets set for 2015. This section looks at progress through 2008 and examines such cross-cutting issues as inequality in outcomes; tension between quantitative targets and quality outcomes; impact of the quality of governance on implementation of the MDGs, particularly in fragile states; and progress in data availability and quality.
An overview of progress on the Millennium Development Goals Opinion is divided on whether the MDGs were intended as global targets and whether each country was intended to adopt or adapt them. The Millennium Declaration enunciated global targets, but the UN Secretary- General’s road map saw the targets as operational goals for member states. For countries already making strong development progress, the targets were relatively easy. Economic growth is closely associated with progress on the MDGs (see section 4). Where economic growth was rapid, poverty reduction and social indicators improved; where
2010 World Development Indicators
1
growth was slow and institutional deficits large, the going was more difficult. What worked in one setting did not always work in others. Responses to policy initiatives depend on constraints imposed by local culture, the resources at society’s disposal, and the local environment. Progress has been considerable. Despite the current crisis, the target to reduce by half the proportion of people living in extreme poverty is within reach at a global level. Rapid growth in East Asia and Pacific and falling poverty rates in South Asia, the two regions with the most people living on less than $1.25 a day, account for this remarkable achievement. But progress has been uneven at the country level (figure 1a). Only 49 of 87 countries with data are on track to achieve the poverty target. Some 47 percent of the people in low- and middle-income countries live in countries that have already attained the target or are on track to do so, while 41 percent live in countries that are off track or seriously off track (figure 1b). And 12 percent live in the 60 countries for which there are insufficient data to assess progress. 1a
Progress toward the Millennium Development Goals, by country Share of countries making progress toward Millennium Development Goals (percent) 100
Reached target Seriously off track
On track Off track Insufficient data
50 0 50 100 Goal 1 Extreme poverty
Goal 2 Primary education completion
Goal 3 Gender parity in primary education Source: World Bank staff estimates.
Goal 3 Gender parity in secondary education
Goal 4 Child mortality
Goal 5 Attended births
Goal 7 Access to safe water
1b
Progress toward the Millennium Development Goals, by population Share of population in countries making progress toward Millennium Development Goals (percent) 100
Reached target Seriously off track
Goal 7 Access to sanitation
On track Off track Insufficient data
50 0 50 100 Goal 1 Extreme poverty
Goal 3 Gender parity in primary education Source: World Bank staff estimates.
2
Goal 2 Primary education completion
Goal 3 Gender parity in secondary education
2010 World Development Indicators
Goal 4 Child mortality
Goal 5 Attended births
Goal 7 Access to safe water
Goal 7 Access to sanitation
Progress on the human development indicators is mixed. In absolute terms progress has been impressive. Since 2000 some 37 million more children have been able to attend and complete primary school. More than 14 million children have been vaccinated against measles, with similar progress in other vaccination programs and health-related services. Since 2000 the number of children dying before age 5 has fallen from more than 10 million a year to 8.8 million. The greatest progress has been toward the targets for primary school attendance, gender equality in primary and secondary school, and access to safe drinking water: • Seven of ten people in developing countries live in countries that have already attained universal primary school completion or are on track to do so. But only two in five developing countries will have done so, while more than one in three countries is off track or seriously off track. • Four of five people in developing countries live in countries that have attained or are likely to attain gender equality in primary and secondary education. Some 81 of 144 countries have attained this goal, and another 10 are on track to do so. • Seven of ten people in developing countries live in countries that have halved the proportion of people without sustainable access to improved water, though more than half of developing countries have not achieved the target. Progress in sanitation has been much slower, among the worst for the MDGs. Only 16 percent of the population in developing countries live in countries that have managed to halve the proportion of people with sustainable access to basic sanitation, and only one in five countries has succeeded in doing so. Nearly 7 of 10 countries are off track or seriously off track on this goal. Progress has been slowest in reducing child malnutrition and child mortality. • Standards for measuring malnutrition (weight for age) among children have been revised. Under the new methodology 25 of the 55 countries with data have met or are on track to meet this goal, while 30 are not. • Some 45 percent of people in developing countries live in countries that have reduced or are on track to reduce the under-fi ve mortality rate by two-thirds, while some 56
WORLD VIEW
percent live in the 102 of 144 countries that are unlikely to attain this goal.
Progress by income group The first edition of World Development Indicators (in 1997) reported a developing country population in 1995 of 4.8 billion, two-thirds in low-income countries. China and India together had 2.1 billion people. This edition reports a developing country population in 2008 of 5.6 billion, two-thirds of whom live in lower middleincome countries. This massive shift reflects the advance of China and India from low-income to lower middle-income status. Today, 43 lowincome countries account for just under 1 billion people, and 46 upper middle-income countries account for about 950 million. Some 3.7 billion people live in 55 lower middle-income countries, two-thirds of them in China and India. Progress on the MDGs among low-income countries has generally been poor (figure 1c). This is not surprising considering the domination of this group by states in fragile situations. With the exception of gender equality in primary schools (61 percent of low-income countries expect to ensure gender equality in primary schools but only 30 percent in secondary schools) and access to water (35 percent of countries expect to reach this goal), no more than one in five countries has reached or is on track to reach the goals. Middle-income countries generally do much better (figure 1d). Progress for upper middleincome countries is more difficult when the goal involves a large reduction from already advanced levels attained (figure 1e). Thus, for example, child mortality rates in upper middleincome countries averaged 47 per 1,000 in 1990 (four times the average for high-income countries) and have fallen to 24 (compared with 7 for high-income countries). A two-thirds reduction would require the rate to fall to 16. Still, a majority of these countries are expected to attain most of the goals. Lower middle-income countries also do much better than low-income countries, though they still face serious challenges in meeting human development– related goals. A third expect to reach the poverty reduction goal, and 38 percent have already attained the primary school completion goal and 7 percent are on track to do so. Two of three countries in this group have attained or expect to attain gender equality in secondary schools.
Progress toward the Millennium Development Goals among low-income countries Share of low-income countries making progress toward Millennium Development Goals (percent) 100
Reached target Seriously off track
1c
On track Off track Insufficient data
50 0 50 100 Goal 1 Extreme poverty
Goal 2 Primary education completion
Goal 3 Gender parity in primary education Source: World Bank staff estimates.
Goal 3 Gender parity in secondary education
Goal 4 Child mortality
Goal 5 Attended births
Goal 7 Access to safe water
Goal 7 Access to sanitation
Progress toward the Millennium Development Goals among lower middle-income countries 1d Share of lower middle-income countries making progress toward Millennium Development Goals (percent) 100
Reached target Seriously off track
On track Off track Insufficient data
50 0 50 100 Goal 1 Extreme poverty
Goal 2 Primary education completion
Goal 3 Gender parity in primary education Source: World Bank staff estimates.
Goal 3 Gender parity in secondary education
Goal 4 Child mortality
Goal 5 Attended births
Goal 7 Access to safe water
Goal 7 Access to sanitation
Progress toward the Millennium Development Goals among upper middle-income countries 1e Share of upper middle-income countries making progress toward Millennium Development Goals (percent) 100
Reached target Seriously off track
On track Off track Insufficient data
50 0 50 100 Goal 1 Extreme poverty
Goal 2 Primary education completion
Goal 3 Gender parity in primary education Source: World Bank staff estimates.
Goal 3 Gender parity in secondary education
Goal 4 Child mortality
Goal 5 Attended births
Goal 7 Access to safe water
Goal 7 Access to sanitation
And 43 percent expect to attain access to the water goal. The two areas where lower middleincome countries do poorly are child mortality and access to sanitation, with 7 of 10 countries not expected to attain the child mortality reduction goal and 2 of 3 countries the sanitation goal. Many of these countries have large concentrations of poverty reflecting high levels of income inequality. 2010 World Development Indicators
3
Goal 1
Eradicate poverty and hunger
We will spare no effort to free our fellow men, women and children from the abject and dehumanizing conditions of extreme poverty . . . We resolve further to halve, by the year 2015, the proportion of the world’s people whose income is less than one dollar a day. —United Nations Millennium Declaration (2000)
Target 1A Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people whose income is less than $1.25 a day Defined as average daily consumption of $1.25 or less, extreme poverty means living on the edge of subsistence. The number of people living in extreme poverty has been falling since 1990, slowly at first and more rapidly since the turn of the century. The largest reduction has occurred in East Asia and Pacific, where China has made great strides. In South Asia accelerated growth in India could lift millions more out of poverty. Sub-Saharan Africa, which stagnated through most of the 1990s, has begun to reduce the number of people in extreme poverty. Although the decline was slowed by the global financial crisis, the number of people living in extreme poverty is expected to fall to around 900 million by 2015, even as the population living in developing countries rises to 5.8 billion. Still, an additional 1.1 billion people will live on less than $2 a day. Most regions on track The international poverty line was revalued from $1.08 a day (in 1993 prices) to $1.25 (in 2005 prices), using new estimates of the cost of living derived from the 2005 International Comparison Program. Although the new estimates increased the number and proportion of people living in extreme poverty, the reduction in poverty rates remained the same. East Asia and Pacific will exceed the target set by the Millennium Declaration, reducing extreme poverty rates
4
2010 World Development Indicators
almost 90 percent from 1990 to 2015. South Asia, which made slower progress through the early part of the 21st century, will also reach the target if growth continues, as will the Middle East and North Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean. Sub-Saharan Africa will be the only region with a sizable number of people in extreme poverty that fails to reach the target. Uneven progress Global and regional averages disguise large differences among countries. Since 2000, 49 countries have attained the rate of poverty reduction needed to cut 1990 poverty rates by half and achieve the target. Thirty-eight remain off track and unlikely to reach the target. And 57 countries—22 of them in Sub-Saharan Africa— lack sufficient survey data to measure progress since 1990. Living below the poverty line Poverty lines in poor countries are usually set at the level needed to obtain a basic supply of food and the bare necessities of life. Many poor people subsist on far less than that. The average daily expenditure of the poor is derived from the poverty gap ratio—the average shortfall of the total population from the poverty line as a percentage of the poverty line. But averages are only that: many more live on even less. To overcome extreme poverty, everyone must first get to the poverty line. Monitoring inequality The share of income or consumption received by the poorest 20 percent of the population was incorporated in the Millennium Development Goals as a basic measure of equity. In a typical developing country the poorest 20 percent of the population accounts for just 6 percent of total income or consumption. Since 1990 that share has increased most in low-income countries and has tended to shrink in upper middleincome countries. Many factors affect the distribution of income or consumption, and there is no clear link between economic growth and changes in income distribution.
WORLD VIEW
All regions but Sub-Saharan Africa are on track to reach the poverty reduction target
The number of people living in extreme poverty has been falling since 1990 Number of people in developing countries above and below $1.25 poverty line (billions)
People living on less than $1.25 a day (percent)
East Asia & Pacific Sub-Saharan Africa
South Asia Other regions
6
60 Sub-Saharan Africa
People above the $2 a day poverty line
5 4
40 South Asia
3
East Asia & Pacific
2 20
Middle East & North Africa
Latin America & Caribbean
People between the $1.25 and $2 a day poverty lines People below $1.25 a day poverty line
1
Europe & Central Asia
0 0 1990
1999
2005
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
Source: World Bank staff calculations.
Source: World Bank staff calculations.
More gainers than losers
Progress in reducing poverty Share of countries in region making progress toward reducing extreme poverty (percent)
1981
2015
Reached target Off track Insufficient data
On track Seriously off track
100
Income or consumption share of poorest quintile, average for 2000–07 (percent) 10
Low income Upper middle income
Lower middle income Line of equality
8
50
Median of all countries, 2000–07
6 0 4 50 2 Median of all countries, 1990–99
100 East Europe & Latin Middle Asia & Central America & East & Pacific Asia Caribbean North Africa
South Asia
SubSaharan Africa
0 0
2 4 6 8 Income or consumption share of poorest quintile, average for 1990–99 (percent)
10
Source: World Bank staff calculations.
Source: World Bank staff estimates.
Living below the poverty line—poorer than poor Average daily expenditure of the poor, 2005 ($) 1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00 East Europe & Latin Middle Asia & Central America & East & Pacific Asia Caribbean North Africa
South Asia
SubSaharan Africa
Source: World Bank staff calculations.
2010 World Development Indicators
5
Goal 1
Eradicate poverty and hunger
We strongly support fair globalization and resolve to make the goals of full and productive employment and decent work for all, including for women and young people . . . part of our efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. —United Nations World Summit Outcome (2005)
Target 1B Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all, including women and young people Recognizing the importance of productive employment for creating the means for poverty reduction, the UN General Assembly adopted a new target at its 2005 high-level review of the Millennium Development Goals. Because employment patterns change as economies develop, the target does not specify values to be achieved. But time trends and differences between regions provide evidence of structural change—and progress toward the Millennium Development Goals. Full employment Labor time lost can never be recovered, so maintaining full employment is important for sustaining growth and income generation. But over the long run employment to population ratios tend to fall as economies become wealthier, young people stay in school longer, and people live longer past their working years. Raising productivity Increasing productivity is the key to raising incomes and reducing poverty. Over the past two decades output per worker has grown faster in Asia and Eastern Europe than in high-income economies. East Asia and Pacific, starting from a low level, has made the largest gains but has still not caught up with the middle-income economies of Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, and the Middle East and North Africa. Average productivity in Sub-Saharan Africa remains
6
2010 World Development Indicators
very low, roughly at the level in East Asia and Pacific in 1999. Workers at risk Vulnerable employment—own-account and unpaid family workers, who are least likely to be protected by labor laws and social safety nets—accounted for just over half of world employment in 2007 and remains high in East Asia and Pacific, South Asia, and Sub-Saharan Africa. Women are more likely than men to be in vulnerable employment.
Target 1C Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger A calorie shortfall Undernourishment measures the availability of food to meet people’s basic energy needs. Rising agricultural production has kept ahead of population growth in most regions, but rising prices and the diversion of food crops to fuel production have reversed the declining rate of undernourishment since 2004–06. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations estimates that the number of people worldwide who receive less than 2,100 calories a day rose from 873 million in 2004–06 to 915 million in 2006–08 and could rise further in the next two years (FAO 2009b). Underweight children A shortfall in food calories is only one cause of malnutrition. The distribution of food within families, a person’s health, and the availability of micronutrients (minerals and vitamins) also affect nutritional outcomes. Women and children are the most vulnerable. Even before the recent food crisis, about a quarter of children in Sub-Saharan Africa and two-fifths in South Asia were underweight. And children in the poorest households in developing countries are more than twice as likely to be underweight as those in the richest households.
WORLD VIEW
Labor productivity has increased . . .
. . . but large differences remain
Average annual growth in output per employed person, 1991–2008 (percent)
Output per employed person (2005 purchasing power parity $, thousands) 80
8
1991
2000
2008
60
6
4
40
2
20
0
0
East Asia & Pacific
East Europe & Latin Middle South SubHigh Asia & Central America East & Asia Saharan income Pacific Asia & Carib. N. Africa Africa Source: International Labour Organization and World Bank staff estimates.
Employment ratios tend to fall as income increases Employment to population ratio, 2008 (percent)
40
40
20
20
0 High income
Source: International Labour Organization, Key Indicators of the Labour Market database.
People with insufficient daily nourishment 1990–92
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
High income
Workers in vulnerable employment lack safety nets
60
Prevalance of undernourishment (percent of population)
Middle East & North Africa
Source: World Bank staff estimates.
60
Lower Upper middle income middle income
Latin America & Caribbean
Vulnerable employment as share of total employment (percent) 80
80
Low income
Europe & Central Asia
2000
2008
0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: International Labour Organization, Key Indicators of the Labour Market database.
Child malnutrition rates remain high in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa
2004–06
40
Share of children under age 5 under weight for age (percent)
2000
2008
50
40
30
30 20 20 10 10 0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Latin Middle Central America & East & Asia Caribbean North Africa
Source: Food and Agriculture Organization.
South Asia
SubSaharan Africa
0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: United Nations Children’s Fund and World Health Organization.
2010 World Development Indicators
7
Goal 2 Achieve universal primary education Every person—child, youth and adult—shall be able to benefit from educational opportunities designed to meet their basic learning needs. —World Declaration on Education for All, Jomtien, Thailand (1990)
Target 2C Ensure that by 2015 children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling The goal of educating every child at least through primary school was announced in 1990 by the Jomtien Conference on Education for All. Progress in the least developed countries, slow through the 1990s, has accelerated since 2000. Countries in three regions—East Asia and Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean—are close to enrolling all their primary-school-age children. The sharp increase in enrollment rates in Sub-Saharan Africa despite population growth is also encouraging. But as of 2006 an estimated 72 million children worldwide were not in school—and about half of them will have no contact with formal education. Within countries, poor children are less likely to be enrolled in school, but large proportions of children in wealthier households in the poorest developing countries are also not enrolled. Keeping children in school For all children to complete a course of primary education, they must be enrolled in school. Although enrollments in grade 1 have been increasing, many children drop out of primary school because their families do not see the
8
2010 World Development Indicators
value of education. Many things discourage children and their parents: absent or indifferent teachers, inadequate or dangerous facilities, and demand for children’s labor at home or in the market. Enrolling all children and keeping them in school will require continuing reforms and increased investment. Progress toward education for all Based on available data, 50 developing countries have achieved universal primary education, and 7 more are on track to do so. Countries in Europe and Central Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean have been most successful in reaching the target. Thirty-eight countries, most of them in Sub-Saharan Africa, are seriously off track and unlikely to reach the target. The literacy challenge Literacy comes closest to a general measure of the quality of education outcomes. Throughout developing countries youth literacy rates are higher than adult literacy rates—a result of expanded access to formal schooling. The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization Institute of Statistics defines literacy as the ability to read and write with understanding a short, simple sentence about everyday life. In many countries national assessment tests are enabling ministries of education to monitor progress. But practices differ, and in some places literacy is assessed simply by school attendance. Dramatic improvements have occurred in the Middle East and North Africa and South Asia. But in every region except Latin America and the Caribbean boys are more literate than girls, a difference seen most starkly in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa.
WORLD VIEW
Progress toward universal primary education Share of countries in region making progress toward universal primary education (percent)
Reached target Off track Insufficient data
To reach the goal of universal primary education, children must remain in school
On track Seriously off track
100
Share of students starting grade 1 who reach the last grade of primary education (percent) 110 East Asia and Pacific
Latin America and Caribbean
100 50
Europe and Central Asia
90
Middle East and North Africa
80
0
South Asia
70 Sub-Saharan Africa
50 60 50
100 East Europe & Latin Middle Asia & Central America & East & Pacific Asia Caribbean North Africa
South Asia
Source: World Bank staff estimates.
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Source: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization Institute for Statistics.
Primary school enrollments are rising
Youth literacy is on the rise . . . Youth literacy rate (percent)
1999
SubSaharan Africa
1990
2008
100
Net primary enrollment rate (percent)
2000
2007
100
75
75
50 50
25 25 0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Latin Middle Central America & East & Asia Caribbean North Africa
South Asia
SubSaharan Africa
Source: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization Institute for Statistics.
0 Girls
Boys
East Asia & Pacific
Girls
Boys
Europe & Central Asia
Girls
Boys
Latin America & Caribbean
Girls
Boys
Middle East & North Africa
Girls
Boys
South Asia
Girls
Boys
Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization Institute for Statistics.
. . . but in most regions girls lag behind boys Youth literacy rate, 2008 (percent)
Female
Male
100
75
50
25
0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Latin Middle Central America & East & Asia Caribbean North Africa
South Asia
SubSaharan Africa
Source: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization Institute for Statistics.
2010 World Development Indicators
9
Goal 3 Promote gender equality and empower women We also resolve . . . to promote gender equality and the empowerment of women as effective ways to combat poverty, hunger and disease and to stimulate development that is truly sustainable. —United Nations Millennium Declaration (2000)
Target 3A Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education, preferably by 2005, and in all levels of education no later than 2015 Education opportunities for girls have expanded. Patterns of enrollment in upper middle- income countries now resemble those in high-income countries, while those in lower middle-income countries are nearing equity. But gender gaps remain large in low-income countries, especially at the primary and secondary levels. Girls born in poor households and living in rural communities are least likely to be enrolled in school. Cultural attitudes and practices that promote early marriage, the seclusion of girls, and the education of boys over girls continue to present formidable barriers to gender parity. Progress toward gender parity in education Developing countries continue to make progress toward gender parity in primary and secondary education. Sixty-four countries, many of them in Europe and Central Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean, have achieved gender parity in enrollment, and another twenty are on track to do so by 2015. But 22 countries are seriously off track, the majority of them in Sub-Saharan Africa. Patterns of progress at the secondary level are similar to those at the primary level: 73 countries have achieved gender parity, and another 14 are on track. Latin America and the Caribbean and Europe and Central Asia have made the most progress. However, 29 countries, more than two-thirds of them in Sub-Saharan Africa, are seriously off track and are unlikely to achieve parity if current trends continue. In most regions, progress toward gender parity
10
2010 World Development Indicators
has been faster in secondary schools than in primary schools. In Latin America and the Caribbean, for example, four of five countries have reached the target at the secondary level, while only slightly more than half have reached the target or are on track to do so at the primary level. These patterns imply that boys are leaving secondary school in disproportionate numbers—not a good solution to achieving gender parity. Data for tertiary education are not widely reported. Most countries with data have made progress toward gender parity, but countries in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa lag behind. Where and how women work Women’s share in paid employment in the nonagricultural sector has risen marginally in some regions but remains less than 20 percent in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. There are more men than women in wage and salaried employment in all regions but Europe and Central Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean. In Sub-Saharan Africa there are almost twice as many men as women in salaried and wage employment. Women are also clearly segregated in sectors that are generally known to be lower paid. And in the sectors where women dominate, such as health care, women rarely hold upper-level management jobs. Women in government The proportion of parliamentary seats held by women has increased steadily since the 1990s. The most impressive gains have come in Latin America and the Caribbean, the Middle East and North Africa, and South Asia, where women’s representation rose 30–50 percent over 1990–2009. But while countries in the Middle East and North Africa made substantial gains, women still hold less than 10 percent of parliamentary seats, the lowest among all regions. Latin America and the Caribbean is out in front, with women holding 23 percent of the seats. But Rwanda leads the way, making history in 2008 when it elected 56 percent of women to its parliament. Worldwide, women are entering more political leadership positions. In March 2009, 15 women were heads of state, up from 9 in 2000.
WORLD VIEW
Progress toward gender parity in primary education Share of countries in region making progress toward gender parity in primary education (percent)
As income rises, so does female enrollment
Reached target Off track Insufficient data
On track Seriously off track
Ratio of female to male enrollment rates, 2007 (percent)
Primary
Secondary
Tertiary
125
100 100 50 75 0
50
25
50
0 Low income
100 East Europe & Latin Middle Asia & Central America & East & Pacific Asia Caribbean North Africa Source: World Bank staff estimates.
South Asia
SubSaharan Africa
Upper middle income
High income
Source: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization Institute for Statistics.
Progress toward gender parity in secondary education Share of countries in region making progress toward gender parity in secondary education (percent)
Lower middle income
Women’s share in nonagricultural work has barely changed
Reached target Off track Insufficient data
On track Seriously off track
Share of women employed in nonagricultural sector (percent) 50 Europe and Central Asia
100 40
Latin America and Caribbean East Asia and Pacific
50 30 0
Middle East and North Africa
20 South Asia
10
50
0 1990
100 East Europe & Latin Middle Asia & Central America & East & Pacific Asia Caribbean North Africa Source: World Bank staff estimates.
South Asia
2000
2005
2007
Source: International Labour Organization.
Progress toward gender parity in tertiary education Share of countries in region making progress toward gender parity in tertiary education (percent)
1995
SubSaharan Africa
Women’s political representation is growing
Reached target Off track Insufficient data
On track Seriously off track
Share of seats held by women in national parliaments (percent) 25
100
High income
20
East Asia and Pacific
50 15 0
Latin America and Caribbean
Sub-Saharan Africa South Asia
10
Europe and Central Asia Middle East and North Africa
5
50
0 1997
100 East Europe & Latin Middle Asia & Central America & East & Pacific Asia Caribbean North Africa Source: World Bank staff estimates.
South Asia
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
SubSaharan Africa Source: Inter-Parliamentary Union.
2010 World Development Indicators
11
Goal 4 Reduce child mortality As leaders we have a duty therefore to all the world’s people, especially the most vulnerable and, in particular, the children of the world, to whom the future belongs. —United Nations Millennium Declaration (2000)
Target 4A Reduce by two-thirds, between 1990 and 2015, the under-five mortality rate Deaths of children under age 5 have been declining since 1990. In 2006, for the first time, the number of children who died before their fifth birthday fell below 10 million. In developing countries child mortality declined about 25 percent, from 101 per 1,000 in 1990 to 73 in 2008. Still, many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa have made little progress—there, one child in seven dies before the fifth birthday. The odds are slightly better in South Asia, where one child in thirteen dies before the fifth birthday. These two regions remain overriding priorities for child survival interventions such as immunizations, exclusive breastfeeding, and insecticide-treated nets. Measuring progress Thirty-nine countries have achieved or are now on track to achieve the target of a two-thirds reduction in under-five mortality rates. Two of the poorest countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, Eritrea and Malawi, have made remarkable progress. Successful countries now account for
12
2010 World Development Indicators
half the population of low- and middle-income economies. Preventing child deaths Immunizations for measles continue to expand worldwide. In all regions coverage is now more than 70 percent, resulting in marked improvements in child survival. However, severe disparities remain within countries. Only 40 percent of poor children are immunized, compared with more than 60 percent of children from wealthier households. In some countries, however, the poor have shared in these health improvements. In Mozambique immunization coverage increased from 58 percent in 1997 to 77 percent in 2003. The poorest 40 percent of households were the beneficiaries of most of this increase. Despite all these improvements, measles remains one of the leading causes of vaccine-preventable child mortality. Life expectancy begins at birth Infant mortality—child deaths before age 1—is the primary contributor to child mortality. Improvements in infant and child mortality are the major contributors to increasing life expectancy in developing countries. Success in reducing infant mortality may be viewed as a general indicator of progress toward the human development outcomes in the Millennium Development Goals: access to medicines, health facilities, water, and sanitation; fertility patterns; maternal health; maternal and infant nutrition; maternal and infant disease exposure; and female literacy (Mishra and Newhouse 2007).
WORLD VIEW
Progress toward reducing child mortality Share of countries in region making progress toward reducing child mortality (percent)
Reached target Off track Insufficient data
Child mortality rates have fallen by as much as 57 percent since 1990 On track Seriously off track
100
Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000) 200
Sub-Saharan Africa
150
50
South Asia
100
0
Middle East and North Africa East Asia and Pacific
50
50
Europe and Central Asia Latin America and Caribbean High income
0
100 East Europe & Latin Middle Asia & Central America & East & Pacific Asia Caribbean North Africa
South Asia
Source: World Bank staff estimates.
1995
2000
2005
2008
Source: Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation.
Progress toward measles immunization Share of countries in region making progress toward measles immunization (percent)
1990
SubSaharan Africa
Reached target Off track Insufficient data
Measles is the leading cause of vaccine-preventable deaths in children On track Seriously off track
100
Measles immunization rate (percent) 100
Europe and Central Asia East Asia and Pacific
50
High income
Middle East and North Africa
80 Latin America and Caribbean
0
South Asia
60 50 Sub-Saharan Africa
40
100 East Europe & Latin Middle Asia & Central America & East & Pacific Asia Caribbean North Africa Source: World Bank staff estimates.
South Asia
1990
SubSaharan Africa
1995
2000
2005
2008
Source: United Nations Children’s Fund and World Health Organization.
Infant mortality rates are falling Reduction of infant mortality rate, 1990–2008 (percent) 0
–20
–40
–60 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
High income
Source: World Bank staff estimates.
2010 World Development Indicators
13
Goal 5
Improve maternal health
[W]e resolve to promote gender equality and eliminate pervasive gender discrimination by . . . ensuring equal access to reproductive health. —United Nations World Summit Outcome (2005)
Target 5A Reduce by three-quarters, between 1990 and 2015, the maternal mortality ratio Every year more than 500,000 women die from complications of pregnancy or childbirth, almost all of them (99 percent) in developing countries. For each woman who dies, 30–50 women suffer injury, infection, or disease. Pregnancy-related complications are among the leading causes of death and disability for women ages 15–49 in developing countries. Dangerous for mothers About half of maternal deaths occur in SubSaharan Africa, and about a third in South Asia. Together the two regions accounted for 85 percent of maternal deaths in 2005. The causes of maternal death vary. Hemorrhage is the leading cause in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, while hypertensive disorders during pregnancy and labor are more common in Latin America and the Caribbean. Providing care to mothers Skilled attendance at delivery is critical for reducing maternal mortality. Since 1990 every region has made some progress in improving the availability of skilled health personnel at childbirth. In developing countries births attended by skilled health staff rose from about 50 percent in 1990 to 66 percent in 2008. Countries in Europe and Central Asia have made the most progress in ensuring safe deliveries. Most have achieved universal coverage, and the rest are on track to achieve it by 2015. But the overall picture remains sobering. In South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa more than half of births are not attended by skilled staff. And wealthy
14
2010 World Development Indicators
women are more than twice as likely as the poorest women to have access to skilled health staff at childbirth. Many health problems among pregnant women are preventable and treatable through visits with trained health workers before childbirth. At least four visits would enable women to receive important services such as tetanus vaccinations, treatment of infections, and treatment for life-threatening complications. The proportion of pregnant women who had at least one antenatal visit rose from about 64 percent in 1990 to 79 percent in 2008. But the proportion who had four or more visits is still less than 50 percent in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, where the majority of maternal deaths occur. The provision of reproductive health services is advancing very slowly in these regions.
Target 5B Achieve, by 2015, universal access to reproductive health High risks for young mothers and their children In developing countries women continue to die because they lack access to contraception. And early pregnancy multiplies the chance of dying in childbirth. Contraceptive use has increased in most developing countries for which data are available, generally accompanied by reductions in fertility. In almost all regions more than half of women who are married or in union use some method of birth control. The exception is Sub-Saharan Africa, where contraceptive prevalence has remained at a little over 20 percent. More than 200 million women want to delay or cease childbearing—roughly one in six women of reproductive age. Substantial proportions of women in every country—more than half in some—say that their last birth was unwanted or mistimed. More than a quarter of these pregnancies, about 52 million annually, end in abortion. About 13 percent of maternal deaths are attributed to unsafe abortions, and young women are especially vulnerable.
WORLD VIEW
Skilled care at birth can prevent complications from becoming fatalities Births attended by skilled health staff (percent)
Most deaths from complications of childbirth are in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia Maternal mortality ratio (per 100,000 live births)
2000
2008
1990
2005
1,000
100
750
75
500
50
250
25
0
0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Latin Middle Central America & East & Asia Caribbean North Africa
South Asia
East Asia & Pacific
SubSaharan Africa
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: Estimates developed by World Health Organization, United Nations Children’s Fund, United Nations Population Fund, and World Bank.
Source: United Nations Children’s Fund.
Contraceptive use has increased, but many women are still unable to get family planning services Contraceptive prevalence rate (percent of women ages 15–49)
2000
2008
100
The risks are higher for both mother and child when births occur frequently and at young ages Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 women ages 15–19)
1998
2008
150
75 100 50
50 25
0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Latin Middle Central America & East & Asia Caribbean North Africa
South Asia
SubSaharan Africa
Source: United Nations Children’s Fund.
East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: United Nations Population Division.
Progress in providing care to mothers Share of countries in region making progress toward births attended by skilled staff (percent)
0
Reached target Off track Insufficient data
Care before delivery reduces risks for mothers and children On track Seriously off track
100
Pregnant women receiving prenatal care at least four times (percent)
2000
2008
100
75
50
50
0
25
50
0
100 East Europe & Latin Middle Asia & Central America & East & Pacific Asia Caribbean North Africa Source: World Bank staff estimates.
South Asia
SubSaharan Africa
East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: United Nations Children’s Fund.
2010 World Development Indicators
15
Goal 6 Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases We recognize that HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis and other infectious diseases pose severe risks for the entire world and serious challenges to the achievement of development goals. —United Nations World Summit Outcome (2005)
Target 6A Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS Living with HIV/AIDS Worldwide, some 33.4 million people—two-thirds of them in Sub-Saharan Africa and most of them women—are living with HIV/AIDS, but the prevalence rate has remained constant since 2000. There were 2.7 million new HIV infections in 2008, a 17 percent decline over eight years. In 14 of 17 African countries with adequate survey data the proportion of pregnant women ages 15–24 living with HIV/AIDS has declined since 2000–01. Some of the most worrisome increases in new infections are now occurring in populous countries in other regions, such as Indonesia, the Russian Federation, and some high-income countries. Even more worrisome, an estimated 370,000 children younger than age 15 became infected with HIV in 2007. Globally, the number rose from 1.6 million in 2001 to 2.0 million in 2007. Most of these children (90 percent) live in Sub-Saharan Africa. Orphaned and vulnerable Worldwide in 2008 some 17.5 million children had lost one or both parents to AIDS, including nearly 14.1 million children in Sub-Saharan Africa. A key indicator of progress in HIV/AIDS treatment and the situation of children affected by AIDS is school attendance by orphans. Orphans and vulnerable children are at higher risk of missing out on schooling, live in households with less food security, and are in greater danger of exposure to HIV. The disparity in school attendance between orphans and nonorphans appears to be shrinking in many countries.
16
2010 World Development Indicators
Target 6B Achieve by 2010 universal access to treatment for HIV/ AIDS for all those who need it Treating HIV/AIDS Wider access to antiretroviral treatment has contributed to the first decline in AIDS deaths since the epidemic began. Coverage has improved substantially in Sub-Saharan Africa, but more than 60 percent of the population in need still do not have access to treatment.
Target 6C Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the incidence of malaria and other diseases Curbing the toll of malaria The World Health Organization estimates that in 2006 there were 190–330 million malaria episodes, leading to nearly 1 million malaria-related deaths. While malaria is endemic in most tropical and subtropical regions, 90 percent of malaria deaths occur in Sub-Saharan Africa, and most are among children under age 5. Children who survive malaria do not escape unharmed. Repeated episodes of fever and anemia take a toll on their mental and physical development. Much progress has been made across Sub-Saharan Africa in scaling up insecticide-treated net use among children, which rose from 2 percent in 2000 to 20 percent in 2006. In countries with trend data, 19 of 22 countries showed at least a threefold increase over 2000–06, and 17 showed a fivefold increase. Tuberculosis rates falling, but not fast enough The number of new tuberculosis cases globally peaked in 2004 and is leveling off. Tuberculosis prevalence (cases per 100,000 people) has fallen, but the target of halving 1990 prevalence and death rates by 2015 is unlikely to be met in all regions. Prevalence is still high in Sub-Saharan Africa, and South Asian countries appear to have just returned to 1990 prevalence levels in 2007. In 2007 there were 13.7 million cases globally, down only slightly from the 13.9 million in 2006, when 1.3 million infected people died. An estimated half million people who died were also HIV positive.
WORLD VIEW
Tuberculosis prevalence and mortality are falling, but resistant strains remain a challenge
Two-thirds of young people living with HIV/AIDS are in Sub-Saharan Africa, most of them women
Deaths from tuberculosis (per 100,000 people)
HIV prevalence among people ages 15–24, 2007 (percent) 4
125
Male
Female
Sub-Saharan Africa
100 3 75 2 50 South Asia East Asia & Pacific
25
1 Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
Europe & Central Asia
0 1991
1995
2000
High income
2007
0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
High income
Source: Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS and World Health Organization.
Source: World Health Organization.
Use of insecticide-treated nets by children is rising 1999–2005
Orphaned children are less likely to attend school
2005–08
2001
Chad Rwanda Gambia, The
2007 1997
Zambia São Tomé and Príncipe
2003 2000
Zambia
Tanzania
2005
Guinea-Bissau 2000
Togo
Namibia
2005
Ethiopia 2000
Senegal
Central African Rep.
2005
Ghana 1998
Lesotho
Sierra Leone Tanzania
2003 1999
Zimbabwe
Malawi Benin
2005–06 2000
Kenya Central African Rep. Cameroon
2004 2000
Burundi Burkina Faso
2006 2000
Uganda
Senegal
2006
Burundi 1999
Niger
Sierra Leone
2004–05
Nigeria 1996
Mozambique
Congo, Dem. Rep.
2005
Côte d’Ivoire 1996–97
Congo, Dem. Rep.
Swaziland 0
20
40
60
Children sleeping under insecticide-treated nets (percent of children under age 5) Source: United Nations Children’s Fund.
2004
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
Ratio of school attendance of orphans to school attendance of nonorphans, 2000–07 Source: United Nations Children’s Fund.
2010 World Development Indicators
17
Goal 7 Ensure environmental sustainability We must spare no effort to free all of humanity, and above all our children and grandchildren, from the threat of living on a planet irredeemably spoilt by human activities, and whose resources would no longer be sufficient for their needs. —United Nations Millennium Declaration (2000)
Target 7A Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programs and reverse the loss of environmental resources International concern for the loss of environmental resources and the impact on human welfare was first expressed in 1972 at the UN Conference on the Human Environment. The 1992 “Earth Summit” in Rio de Janeiro adopted Agenda 21, a comprehensive blueprint of actions to be taken globally, nationally, and locally in every area in which humans directly affect the environment. Agenda 21 was incorporated into the Millennium Declaration along with a commitment to embark on the reductions in greenhouse gas emissions required under the Kyoto Protocol and to implement the conventions on biodiversity and desertification. Forests lost Loss of forests is one of the most tangible measures of environmental destruction. Many of the world’s poor people depend on forests. The loss of forests threatens their livelihoods, destroys habitat that harbors biodiversity, and eliminates an important carbon sink that helps to moderate the climate. Net losses since 1990 have been substantial, especially in Latin America and the Caribbean and Sub-Saharan Africa, but recent data show a slowing in the global rate of deforestation. Rising greenhouse gas emissions The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was agreed at the 1972 Earth Summit. Neither the UNFCCC nor the Millennium Development Goals commit countries to
18
2010 World Development Indicators
specific targets for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. And despite the commitments made by the 37 industrial countries that are parties to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, emissions of greenhouse gases have continued to rise. As economies develop, their use of energy derived from fossil fuels increases. Even with improved energy efficiency, which has lowered carbon dioxide emissions per unit of GDP, average emissions per person continue to rise. Without agreed and enforceable targets for reduced emissions, little progress will be made in reducing the threat of global climate change. Greater demands on water resources Most water is used for agriculture and industry, with only a small part going to domestic consumption. Growing economies and populations are putting greater demands on the world’s freshwater resources. In 2007 there were 62 economies with less than 1,700 cubic meters of freshwater resources per person, a level associated with water stress. Of these, 41 were in water scarcity, with less than 1,000 cubic meters per person. Water pollution and wasteful practices further reduce available water. In some economies, especially in the Middle East and North Africa, withdrawals exceed available resources, and the difference is made up by desalinization of sea water.
Target 7B Reduce biodiversity loss, achieving, by 2010, a significant reduction in the rate of loss The loss of habitat for animal and plant species has led to widespread extinctions. Developing economies, especially those near the equator, contain some of the most important regions of biodiversity. Preservation of habitat through the designation of protected areas is an important practical step to ensure sustainable development. The number and size of protected areas have increased, but there is no direct evidence that the rate of biodiversity loss has slowed.
WORLD VIEW
Demands on the world’s freshwater resources are rising Renewable internal freshwater resources (trillion cubic meters)
The world has lost more than 1.4 million square kilometers of forest since 1990
Total water resources Freshwater withdrawals
East Asia & Pacific
15 Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Caribbean 10 Middle East & North Africa South Asia 5 Sub-Saharan Africa High income 0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Latin Middle Central America & East & Asia Caribbean North Africa
South Asia
–800
SubSaharan Africa
Source: Food and Agriculture Organization.
Some 18 million square kilometers of land have been protected . . . Terrestrial protected areas, 2008 (percent of surface area) 25
–600
–400
0
–200
+200
Forest loss (–) or gain (+) (thousand square kilometers) Source: Food and Agriculture Organization.
Lowering the carbon footprint of GDP
Carbon dioxide emissions (kilograms per 2005 purchasing power parity $ of GDP) 1.5
20
Europe and Central Asia
1.0
15
East Asia and Pacific
South Asia
10
Sub-Saharan Africa
Middle East and North Africa
0.5 5
High income Latin America and Caribbean
0 East Europe & Latin Middle South SubHigh Asia & Central America East & Asia Saharan income Pacific Asia & Carib. N. Africa Africa Source: United Nations Environment Programme, World Conservation Monitoring Centre.
. . . but only 3 million square kilometers of marine areas are protected Marine protected areas, 2008 (percent of surface area) 5
0.0 1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
Source: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center and World Bank staff calculations.
Carbon dioxide emissions continue to rise
Total carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels (million metric tons) 15,000 High income
4 10,000
3
East Asia and Pacific
2 5,000 1
Europe and Central Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
0 East Europe & Latin Middle South SubHigh Asia & Central America East & Asia Saharan income Pacific Asia & Carib. N. Africa Africa Source: United Nations Environment Programme, World Conservation Monitoring Centre.
Middle East and North Africa
Latin America and Caribbean
South Asia
0 1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
Source: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center.
2010 World Development Indicators
19
Goal 7 Ensure environmental sustainability We will put into place policies to ensure adequate investment in a sustainable manner in health, clean water and sanitation . . . —United Nations World Summit Outcome (2005)
. . . recognizing the urgent need for the provision of increased resources for affordable housing and housing-related infrastructure . . . —United Nations World Summit Outcome (2005)
Target 7C Halve by 2015 the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation More people have access to an improved water source In 1990 almost 1 billion people in developing countries lacked convenient access to an adequate daily supply of water from an improved source. The numbers lacking access have been declining. At least 65 developing countries are on track to reduce by half the proportion of people lacking access to an improved water source, and others could still reach the target by 2015. But an “improved source” does not always mean a source of safe water. Water from improved sources, such as public taps or hand pumps and tubewells, may not meet standards of water quality set by the World Health Organization. Such sources may also require much fetching and carrying of water: many people, especially in rural areas, still do not have the convenience of piped water in their homes. Access to improved sanitation has proved more difficult More than 1.5 billion people lack access to toilets, latrines, and other forms of improved
20
2010 World Development Indicators
sanitation, a number that has barely changed since 1990. In developing countries the proportion of the population without access to improved sanitation fell from 55 percent in 1990 to 45 percent in 2006. To reach the target in 2015, more than 1.1 billion more people will have to gain access to an improved facility. Progress has been slowest in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. Even as countries try to improve their sanitation systems, 18 percent of the world’s population lack any form of sanitation. They practice open defecation, at great risk to their own health and to that of others around them.
Target 7D Achieve by 2020 a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers A growing need for urban housing The Millennium Declaration adopted the goal of the “Cities without Slums” initiative, to improve the lives of 100 million slum dwellers, although at the time there was no standard definition of a slum. Since then work by the United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT) has helped quantify the number of people living in urban slums. That evidence suggests that more than 200 million urban dwellers have enjoyed improved living conditions, but the number of people moving into urban areas has grown even faster. UN-HABITAT estimates that more than 825 million people are now living in dwellings that lack access to an improved drinking water source, improved sanitation facilities, sufficient living area, durable structure, or security of tenure. In Sub-Saharan Africa more than half the urban population lives in slum conditions.
WORLD VIEW
Progress on access to an improved water source Share of countries in region making progress toward water access (percent)
Reached target Off track Insufficient data
On track Seriously off track
Most regions will achieve the 2015 target for access to an improved water source
Population without access to improved drinking water source (millions)
100
1,000
50
750 Middle East & North Africa Latin America & Caribbean
0
500 South Asia
50
Sub-Saharan Africa
250
Europe & Central Asia
East Asia & Pacific
100 East Europe & Latin Middle Asia & Central America & East & Pacific Asia Caribbean North Africa
South Asia
Source: World Bank staff estimates.
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
Source: World Health Organization–United Nations Children’s Fund Joint Monitoring Programme.
Progress on access to improved sanitation Share of countries in region making progress toward sanitation access (percent)
0
SubSaharan Africa
Reached target Off track Insufficient data
On track Seriously off track
More than 1.5 billion people still lack sanitation facilities
Population without access to improved sanitation (millions)
100
1,600
50
1,200
Europe & Central Asia South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
0
800
50
400
Middle East & North Africa East Asia & Pacific
Latin America & Caribbean
100 East Europe & Latin Middle Asia & Central America & East & Pacific Asia Caribbean North Africa Source: World Bank staff estimates.
South Asia
0
SubSaharan Africa
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
Source: World Health Organization–United Nations Children’s Fund Joint Monitoring Programme.
The original housing target has been met, but millions still live in slum conditions
Share of urban population living in slums (percent) 75 Sub-Saharan Africa
50 South Asia East Asia and Pacific Middle East and North Africa
25
Latin America and Caribbean Europe and Central Asia
0 1990
1995
2000
2005
2007
Source: United Nations Human Settlements Programme.
2010 World Development Indicators
21
Goal 8 Develop a global partnership for development Success in meeting these objectives depends, inter alia, on good governance within each country. It also depends on good governance at the international level and on transparency in the financial, monetary and trading systems. We are committed to an open, equitable, rule-based, predictable and nondiscriminatory multilateral trading and financial system. —United Nations Millennium Declaration (2000)
Official development assistance Following the Millennium Summit, world leaders meeting at Monterrey, Mexico, in 2002 agreed on the need to provide financing for development through a coherent process that recognized the need for domestic as well as international resources. These leaders called on rich countries to increase aid levels to 0.7 percent of their gross national income (GNI), but only a few have. Three years later, the leaders of the Group of Eight industrialized countries meeting in Gleneagles, Scotland, made specific commitments to increase aid flows to Africa. Aid flows have increased substantially since 2000—from $69 billion in 2000 to $122 billion in 2008 (in 2007 dollars). While aid flows to Africa have increased, at $38 billion in 2008 they have fallen well short of the Gleneagles commitments. Market access The world economy is bound together by trade and investment. To improve the opportunities for developing countries, the Millennium Declaration calls for rich countries to permit tariff- and duty-free access of the exports of developing countries and draws attention to the need for assistance to improve countries’ capacity to export. Average tariffs levied by rich countries have been falling, but many obstacles remain for developing country exporters. The averages
22
2010 World Development Indicators
disguise high peak tariffs applied selectively to certain goods. Arcane rules of origin may also prevent countries from qualifying for duty-free access. And subsidies paid by rich countries to agricultural producers make it hard for developing countries to compete. Though falling, subsidies are still much higher than the level of aid provided by the same counties. Debt sustainability Better debt management, trade expansion, and, for the poorest countries, substantial debt relief have reduced the burden of debt service. The slowdown in the global economy since 2007 is likely to reverse these trends in the near term and increase the difficulties of servicing debt or borrowing to finance balance of payments deficits, especially for countries with above average debt levels. Debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative has reduced future debt payments by $57 billion (in end-2008 net present value terms) for 35 countries that have reached their decision point. And 28 countries that have also reached the completion point have received additional assistance of $25 billion (in end-2008 net present value terms) under the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative. Access to technology If trade and investment provide the economic sinews that bind the world together, communications is the nerve tissue, relaying messages from the most remote parts of the planet. While the growth of fixed-line systems has peaked in high-income economies and slowed appreciably in developing countries, mobile cellular subscriptions continue to grow at a rapid pace, and Internet use, barely under way in 2000, is now spreading through many developing countries.
WORLD VIEW
The burden of debt service has been falling for developing countries
Aid efforts by DAC donors have increased, but most fall short of their commitments
Official development assistance as share of GNI (percent)
Debt service as share of exports (percent)
1.25
25 Heavily indebted poor countries
Sweden
1.00
20 Upper middle-income economies
15
Netherlands
0.75 United Kingdom
10
0.50 All DAC donors
Lower middle-income economies
5
0.25
Japan United States
0 1990
0.00 1995
2000
2005
2008
Source: World Bank staff estimates.
1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Development Assistance Committee.
Developing countries have easier access to OECD markets . . .
Growth of fixed telephone lines has slowed, but cellular phone use is rising rapidly
Telephone subscriptions (per 100 people)
Share of goods (excluding arms) admitted free of tariffs from developing countries (percent)
125
100 Mobile cellular, high-income economies
100 75 United States
Japan
75 Fixed lines, high-income economies
50
50
European Union
Mobile cellular, low- and middle-income economies
25
25
Fixed lines, low- and middle-income economies
0 0
1996
2000
2005
1990
2007
Source: World Trade Organization.
1995
2000
2005
2008
Source: International Telecommunication Union.
. . . but agricultural subsidies by OECD members exceed their net official development assistance
Internet use in developing countries is beginning to take off
Internet users (per 100 people) 80
Percent 2.5
High-income economies
2.0
60 OECD countries: agricultural support as a share of GDP
1.5 40 1.0 20 0.5
Low- and middle-income economies
DAC donors: net aid as a share of GNI
0.0 1990
0 1995
2000
2005
Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Development Assistance Committee.
2008
1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
Source: International Telecommunication Union.
2010 World Development Indicators
23
Millennium Development Goals and inequality The first cross-cutting challenge for quality of life indicators is to detail the inequalities in individual conditions in the various dimensions of life, rather than just the average conditions in each country. To some extent, the failure to account for these inequalities explains the “growing gap” . . . between the aggregate statistics that dominate policy discussions and people’s sentiments about their own condition. Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress (Stiglitz, Sen, and Fitoussi 2009), September 14, 2009 Although goal 1 includes a measure of income inequality, the MDGs do not directly address differences in outcome associated with socioeconomic status, race, religion, or ethnic identity, although goal 3 addresses gender inequality. For nearly all the goals, the indicators used to monitor them may conceal large disparities within populations. Country averages obscure 1f
Inequalities for school completion rates persist for men and women School completion rate (percent) 100
Female
Male
75 50 25 0 Poorest quintile
2nd quintile
3rd quintile
4th quintile
Richest quintile
Source: Gwatkin and others 2007.
1g
Large disparities in child survival Deaths per 1,000 live births
Under age 1
Under age 5
150
100
50
0 Poorest quintile
2nd quintile
Source: Gwatkin and others 2007.
24
2010 World Development Indicators
3rd quintile
4th quintile
Richest quintile
differences between urban and rural areas, among religions and ethnic groups, between the sexes (figure 1f), and almost always between the rich and the poor. The degree of inequality varies from country to country, but within each country it is usually the poor who fare the worst (World Bank and IMF 2007). Child death rates have fallen in low- and middle-income countries from 100 per 1,000 live births in 1990 to 75 in 2008, but they are falling less rapidly for the very poor (figure 1g). Poor people have less access to health services. They are more exposed to health risks because of malnutrition, high treatment costs, and long distances to health clinics. Some programs can be targeted to reach the most needy—oral rehydration therapy has been successful in reaching poor children and Brazil has improved income distribution (box 1h)—but large disparities remain. More midwives attend births in richer than in poorer areas of countries (Watkins 2008). Similarly, while primary school completion rates rose between 1991 and 2008 in low- and middle- income countries from an average of 78 percent to 86 percent (see table 1.2), in 36 countries primary completion rates were 20 or more percentage points higher for the richest quintile than the poorest (see table 2.15).The probability that a poor Tanzanian child will complete primary school is less than one in three, whereas almost all rich Tanzanian children complete primary school. Large gaps persist between the rich and the poor in the gross intake rate in grade 1, average years of schooling, and out of school children (see table 2.15). In Mali nearly 7 of 10 children ages 6–11 in the poorest 20 percent of the population are out of school, compared with 2 of 10 in the richest 20 percent.
An equity-based measure of the Millennium Development Goals In a world of great inequality progress on the MDG indicators does not guarantee that poor people will be better off. Some countries could attain the MDG targets largely by improving outcomes for the richest 60 percent of the population, without improving conditions for the poor. Until the late 1990s difficulties measuring income and consumption had inhibited assessment of economic inequalities. Then researchers found that information about readily observable household characteristics such as the type of roof or possessions such as radios and bicycles
WORLD VIEW 1h
Brazil improves income distribution While income inequalities have worsened in most middle-income countries, Brazil has seen dramatic improvements in both poverty and income distribution. Brazil’s poverty rate fell from 41 percent in the early 1990s to 33–34 percent in 1995, where it stayed until 2003, when a steady decline began that lowered the poverty rate to 25.6 percent by 2006. Extreme poverty rates followed a similar path, falling from 14.5 percent in 2003 to 9.1 percent in 2006. Using the World Bank’s global definition of poverty of living on less than $1 a day, the poverty headcount ratio dropped steadily from 14 percent in 1990 to 8 percent in 2004. Reductions in the number of people living in poverty have been accompanied by a decline in income inequality as measured by the Gini index, from 0.60 in 2002 to 0.54 in 2006. Income growth for the poorest 10 percent outstripped income growth for the richest 10 percent (see figure). Lower poverty and more equitable income distribution have been fueled by low inflation, a targeted transfer program (including Bolsa Famillia, a conditional cash transfer program), improvements in labor productivity following gains in schooling, and better integration of labor markets across Brazil. Inequality remains among the highest in the world, but recent improvements show that inequality does not inevitably accompany development. Social indicators have improved as well. Child mortality rates fell sharply, from 56 per 1,000 in 1990 to 22 in 2008, in part reflecting better immunization rates. Births attended by skilled health staff rose to 97 percent. Primary completion rates rose 90 percent in 1990 to universal coverage.
could provide a reliable measure of household wealth and a reasonable proxy for household income and consumption data. An index constructed from these physical indicators is now widely used to analyze data from Demographic and Health Surveys and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys wealth quintiles. Jan Vandermoortele (2009) has suggested adjusting national averages by assigning greater weight to the scores of the poor. Giving a score of 30 instead of 20 to the poorest quintile and 10 instead of 20 to the richest quintile, with intermediate quintile scores of 25, 20, and 15, enables the weighted average to better measure progress by the poorer quintiles. Figure 1i shows how average child mortality rates would be adjusted for selected countries. The adjusted measure would credit countries making more rapid progress in improving the outcomes of the poor with making faster progress toward the MDG targets. This or other methods of adjusting for distributional patterns are worth exploring for future use.
Progress in service quality Inequality in access to health and education services is mirrored by unevenness in the quality of services delivered. Education quality has lagged behind the substantial quantitative progress in access to schools. Quality as measured by differences in cognitive skills is not just a richpoor issue in developing countries: it is also a source of huge disparities between developed
Annual growth rate of GNI per capita, by income decile, 2001–06 (percent) 10
8
6
4 National average
2
0 Poorest Second Third Fourth Fifth 10% decile decile decile decile
Sixth Seventh Eighth Ninth Richest decile decile decile decile 10%
Source: World Bank 2008a.
1i
Child mortality rates rise when adjusted for equity Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000)
Unadjusted rate
Equity-adjusted rate
125 100 75 50 25 0 India 1998/99
Bolivia 2003
South Africa 1998
Peru 2000
Indonesia 2002/03
Egypt, Arab Rep. 2005
Dominican Republic 2002
Vietnam 2002
Source: Vandermoortele 2009.
and developing countries. The duration and curriculum of primary schooling reflect the need for children to acquire competencies in basic knowledge, skills, values, and behavior. Thus the importance of ensuring that all children complete at least the primary stage of schooling. Yet the evidence suggests that merely attaining 100 percent primary completion rates, which many developing countries are on track to do, will not ensure that children acquire the necessary competencies. The expansion of education systems, including the building of schools and hiring and training of teachers, is a popular and appropriate strategy for meeting the MDG target. But promoting learning and the acquisition of competencies is a much more diffi cult challenge. Reading comprehension 2010 World Development Indicators
25
tests organized under the Programme for International Student Assessment show that on a scale of 1 (low) to 5 (high), some 15 percent of students in rich countries scored below level 1, while 45 percent of students in Asian countries and 54 percent in Latin American and Caribbean countries did (Watkins 2008). In a recent survey of students in grades 6–8 in government schools in India, 31 percent of students who had completed primary education could not read a simple story and 29 percent could not do two-digit subtraction —competencies they should have acquired by grade 2. Similar results emerge from other testing. Low education quality refl ects resource constraints and weak management. These lead to poor infrastructure, high pupil–teacher ratios, and poorly trained, paid, and motivated teachers, resulting in teacher absenteeism and low-quality teaching. This erodes the implicit MDG target of achieving universal competencies. Low-quality schooling also leads to high levels of repetition and drop-out and weakens the demand for education from parents. Poor people pay the greatest price for low quality because their children are the most likely to attend the worst schools. This is not to suggest that the focus should shift from quantity to quality. The two need to go together. More effort is also needed to monitor student learning through national and international assessments and benchmarking to create stronger incentives for better performance. Quality is of equal concern in health care, though data are still hard to collect. There is considerable evidence of widespread misdiagnosis of ailments and failure to adhere to recommended protocols or checklists for treatment of major diseases. High maternal mortality ratios through much of South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa reflect poor-quality care that is not directly measured in the MDGs. The number of antenatal visits is measured but not their quality. The proportions of births attended by skilled attendants are monitored, but not the practices followed. This poor state of health information systems has resulted in a dependence on surveys, which take place at long intervals and do not capture moment of care data (Shankar and others 2008). An upgrade in locally based health information systems is needed to provide real-time data on delivery practices, care, and outcome to improve practices and reduce maternal and infant mortality.
26
2010 World Development Indicators
Governance and fragility Reaching poor people and ensuring that the services they receive improve human outcomes depend on governments discharging their responsibility to their citizens. This is more than a matter of ensuring economic growth, although growth and per capita incomes are closely associated with improved education and health outcomes. And it is more than a matter of public spending, although financing is a critical input. It is also a matter of ensuring that the money is well spent and achieves the intended objectives. And that requires strong governance and public accountability between citizens and their elected governments, between governments and service providers, and between service providers and citizens. To meet the MDGs, governments need to provide the physical and human infrastructure to improve access to schools and public health facilities, but they also need to provide incentives for the efficient delivery of services and to be responsive to public complaints about service provision. Countries that underperform on health and education outcomes often have poor governance. Cameroon, for example, is a lower middle-income country whose pattern of health outcomes matches that of countries that are far poorer. Its under-five mortality rate of 131 per 1,000 is above the average for low-income countries and almost double the average for lower middle-income countries, while the under-five mortality rate for the poorest 20 percent (189 per 1,000) was more than twice the average for the richest (88) in 2006. The maternal mortality ratio is also high (669 per 100,000) despite improving indicators for prenatal care and births attended by skilled health staff. These poor health outcomes reflect in part low public spending: less than 1 percent of GDP in 2007, compared with an average of 2.4 percent for Sub-Saharan Africa and 1.8 percent for lower middle-income countries (see table 2.16). Resources are also poorly allocated, directed at centralized administration rather than front-line workers. But poor governance drives many of these outcomes as well. As in many developing countries citizens needing health care must pay high “informal payments.” Drugs and procurement are major sources of illegally diverted funds. Measuring governance is not easy, involving many institutions and formal and informal rules that guide their operation. Formal rules are easier to observe and measure. Informal rules, steeped in a country’s culture and history, are
WORLD VIEW
Building capacity for better data The second half of the 1990s saw a marked increase in demand for reliable data to design poverty reduction programs and demonstrate their effectiveness. Developing country governments faced both domestic and external
1j
How governance contributes to social outcomes Country Policy and Institutional Assessment ratings for public sector management and institutions, 2008 5
4
3
2
1
0 0
1 2 3 4 Country Policy and Institutional Assessment ratings for social inclusion and equity, 2008
5
Source: World Bank staff estimates.
1k
Under-five mortality rates vary considerably among core fragile states Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000)
1990
2008
300
200 Low-income country average
100
ire To go Er itr ea Su da M ya n m Pa Con ma r pu go a ,R Ne ep w Gu . i Zi nea m ba bw e
iti Cô
te
d’
Ivo
p.
Ha
an
Re
i
te es
-L or
Ce
nt
ra l
Af
ric
.
nd ru Ti
m
Bu
ep
ia De
m
.R
ad
al m
So
go , Co n
ria
Ch
be Li
u
ea
sa
in
is -B
ea
Gu
la go in
is an gh
An Gu
ta
n
0
Af
less easy to observe but may have a greater impact. Efforts are being made to measure governance. The World Bank’s Country Policy and Institutional Assessment measure (see table 5.9) provides two sets of indicators of the relationship between governance and social indicators. One set captures dimensions of governance that influence social outcomes, such as the quality of budgetary and financial management, the efficiency of revenue mobilization, the quality of public administration, and corruption. Another set captures policies for social inclusion and equity directed at such outcomes as gender equality, equity of public resource use, human capacity building, social protection and labor, and policies for environmental sustainability. The relationship between the two indicator sets is close (figure 1j). While some countries appear to have strong social policies and outcomes despite poor governance (Bangladesh is an example), in most cases better governance goes with better policies and outcomes. Countries facing particularly severe development challenges—weak institutional capacity, poor governance, political instability, and conflict—are sometimes referred to as fragile states. They are least likely to achieve the MDGs. The 2010 list of core fragile states accounts for only 6 percent of the population of developing countries but for more than 12 percent of the extreme poor. They account for 21 percent of child deaths in developing countries and 20 percent of children who did not complete primary school on time. Fragile states make up a majority of the low-income countries that will not achieve the goal of gender parity in primary and secondary schools. This lack of progress reflects weak governance, low institutional capacity, and frequent internal and sometimes external conflicts. This is not to suggest that fragile states have a uniformly poor record on the MDGs. The performance of 20 large (more than 1 million population) fragile states on under-five mortality shows that child mortality increased in 3 countries and showed little or no progress in 9, but improved in 8 to a level below the average for low-income countries (figure 1k).
Source: Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation.
pressure to produce better data and monitor development outcomes more systematically. Increasingly, the need for improved statistical capacity building began to emerge from poverty reduction strategies supported by grants and concessional funding from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, and United Nations development assistance frameworks. In response, the Partnership in Statistics for Development in the 21st Century (PARIS21) was created in November 1999 to bring together donors and developing countries to promote statistical capacity- building programs. Adoption of the MDGs gave new momentum to the demand for better data. A series of 2010 World Development Indicators
27
Managing for Development Results conferences produced a Marrakech Action Plan calling for: • All low-income countries to develop and implement national strategies for the development of statistics. • All low-income countries to participate in censuses in 2010. • Greater domestic and foreign financing for statistical capacity building. • Establishment of an International Household Survey Network to help countries learn from each other and benchmark their progress. • Major improvements in MDG monitoring. • Increased accountability of the international statistical system. Progress in designing and implementing national strategies for statistics has been impressive (fi gure 1l). Some 42 percent of the 78 International Development Association (IDA)–eligible countries are already implementing a strategy, and 32 percent are designing a strategy or awaiting its adoption. Measuring progress in statistical capacity building Developing a strategy is only the beginning. Implementation calls for increased investment to address structural and capacity constraints. Strategies must be effectively linked to government budgets and action plans. Progress in improving institutional capacity through better practices and better data collection was modest over the decade (table 1m). The major area of improvement was in the availability of data. Countries in Europe and Central Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean also greatly improved their scores on practice and collection and South Asia on collection. Status of national strategies for the development of statistics, 2009 6 countries without a strategy and not planning one
14 countries with expired strategy or without strategy now planning one 33 countries currently implementing a strategy 25 countries currently designing a strategy or awaiting adoption
Source: PARIS21 2009.
28
2010 World Development Indicators
1l
To ensure that the increased efforts and donor financing for statistical capacity development are producing results, the World Bank launched a statistical capacity indicator in 2004 based on information that is easily collected and publicly available in most countries. The indicator combines three measures of statistical capacity: • Practice, a measure of a country’s capacity to meet international standards, methods, and data reporting practices in economic and social statistics. • Collection, a measure of a country’s ability to collect data at recommended intervals. • Availability, a measure of a country’s capacity to make data available and accessible to users in international data sources such as World Development Indicators. Over 1999–2009 the statistical capacity index for 117 World Bank borrower countries rose from 52 to 65. Progress was faster in nonSub-Saharan IDA countries (up 20 percentage points) than in Sub-Saharan IDA countries (up 6 percentage points). Of 42 Sub-Saharan African countries with statistical capacity data for both 1999 and 2009, 12 saw a decline and 8 barely improved. However, several Sub-Saharan countries recorded substantial improvements. The predominance of core fragile states in SubSaharan Africa contributed to the poor scores. Some 16 core fragile states saw a modest improvement over the decade (up 6 percentage points). A few exceptions—Afghanistan, Burundi, Republic of Congo, and Liberia—saw substantial increases in their statistical capacity index, albeit from a low base (figure 1n). Data availability improves Data availability has improved considerably. The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization has reported a substantial increase in the availability of enrollment data. The number of countries conducting health-related surveys at least every three years has doubled. Thus, MDG-related data are becoming more available. In 2003 only 4 countries had two data points for 16 or more of the 22 MDG indicators. Today, some 118 countries (72 percent) have two data points for the 16–22 indicators grouping (figure 1o). Improvements in statistical capacity have been accompanied by improvements in reporting to international agencies and increased access and understanding in these agencies of national sources (PARIS21 2009).
WORLD VIEW 1m
Statistical capacity indicators by region and areas of performance
All countries Statistical capacity index component
East Asia
Europe and Central Asia
Latin America and the Caribbean
Middle East and North Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
1999
2009
1999
2009
1999
2009
1999
2009
1999
2009
1999
2009
1999
Overall
52
65
55
68
55
79
62
75
49
59
50
68
47
2009
54
Practice
45
56
50
63
51
76
53
68
46
55
43
58
36
38
Collection
53
63
56
65
63
81
65
75
45
55
50
72
45
48
Availability
59
77
59
76
50
80
68
84
55
68
56
73
61
75
Source: World Bank staff estimates.
The effort to get low-income countries to participate in 2010 censuses promises to greatly improve global coverage. Only nine countries have not yet scheduled a census (seven also did not participate in 2000). PARIS21 (2009) estimates that some 140 million people will not be covered by the 2010 censuses, well down from the 550 million in the 2000 censuses.
1n
Statistical capacity has improved . . . Statistical capacity index, 1999–2009 (1, low, to 100, high) 100
1990
2008
75 50 25
Data quality remains uncertain Despite this impressive progress, data quality remains a concern. “Far too much of the growing amount of data cited in high-level reports is still based on poor quality information, extrapolation, and guesswork” (Manning 2009, p. 38). Strengthening national statistical systems must go beyond producing a few high-profile statistics to improving the underlying processes. This includes the sectoral agencies responsible for delivering services and collecting data on the population served. A heavy reliance on household surveys—which can produce high-quality data but at greater cost and lower frequency than national statistical systems— may be necessary to compensate for a lack of vital registration systems and reliable administrative systems. But if the main source of information is surveys that take place only every three to five years, it is difficult to reward good performance or correct poor performance. There is a “growing mismatch between the multiple demands for monitoring and the ability of local systems to generate credible data” (Manning 2009, p. 38). The best assurance of high-quality data is an independent and well managed statistical system that adheres to recognized standards, uses a variety of instruments (surveys, censuses, and administrative records), documents its processes, and publishes its results. Highquality systems do not exist in a vacuum. Users must demand reliable data and recognize their
0 Kazakhstan Ukraine
Sri Lanka
Guatemala Tajikistan Cameroon
Serbia
Bosnia and Burundi Herzegovina
Congo, Rep.
Source: World Bank staff estimates.
1o
. . . but data are still missing for key indicators Share of countries lacking two or more data points (percent)
Low-income economies Lower middle-income economies Upper middle-income economies
50 40 30 20 10 0 Poverty
Primary school completion
Gender (primary)
Gender (secondary)
Child mortality
Child births attended
Source: PARIS21 2009.
value. And someone—usually the government— must be willing to pay for them. Statistics are the classic example of a public good, which can be shared by many without loss to any—but they are still costly to produce. The MDGs have helped to raise the profile of statistics and the agencies that produce them, but the achievements of the last two decades are far from secure. Without continuous improvement and a strong commitment to producing useful, high-quality data, statistical systems will languish. Public and private sectors will be the poorer for it. 2010 World Development Indicators
29
Millennium Development Goals Goals and targets from the Millennium Declaration Indicators for monitoring progress Goal 1 Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger Target 1.A Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people whose income is less than $1 a day
1.1
Target 1.B Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all, including women and young people
1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7
Target 1.C Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger
1.8 1.9
Goal 2 Achieve universal primary education Target 2.A Ensure that by 2015 children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling
2.1 2.2 2.3
Goal 3 Promote gender equality and empower women Target 3.A Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education, preferably by 2005, and in all levels of education no later than 2015
3.1 3.2 3.3
Goal 4 Reduce child mortality Target 4.A Reduce by two-thirds, between 1990 and 2015, the under-five mortality rate
Goal 5 Improve maternal health Target 5.A Reduce by three-quarters, between 1990 and 2015, the maternal mortality ratio Target 5.B Achieve by 2015 universal access to reproductive health
Target 6.B Achieve by 2010 universal access to treatment for HIV/AIDS for all those who need it Target 6.C Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the incidence of malaria and other major diseases
Net enrollment ratio in primary education Proportion of pupils starting grade 1 who reach last grade of primary education Literacy rate of 15- to 24-year-olds, women and men Ratios of girls to boys in primary, secondary, and tertiary education Share of women in wage employment in the nonagricultural sector Proportion of seats held by women in national parliament
4.1 4.2 4.3
Under-five mortality rate Infant mortality rate Proportion of one-year-old children immunized against measles
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5
Maternal mortality ratio Proportion of births attended by skilled health personnel Contraceptive prevalence rate Adolescent birth rate Antenatal care coverage (at least one visit and at least four visits) Unmet need for family planning
5.6 Goal 6 Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases Target 6.A Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS
Proportion of population below $1 purchasing power parity (PPP) a day1 Poverty gap ratio [incidence × depth of poverty] Share of poorest quintile in national consumption Growth rate of GDP per person employed Employment to population ratio Proportion of employed people living below $1 (PPP) a day Proportion of own-account and contributing family workers in total employment Prevalence of underweight children under five years of age Proportion of population below minimum level of dietary energy consumption
HIV prevalence among population ages 15–24 years Condom use at last high-risk sex Proportion of population ages 15–24 years with comprehensive, correct knowledge of HIV/AIDS 6.4 Ratio of school attendance of orphans to school attendance of nonorphans ages 10–14 years 6.5 Proportion of population with advanced HIV infection with access to antiretroviral drugs 6.6 Incidence and death rates associated with malaria 6.7 Proportion of children under age five sleeping under insecticide-treated bednets 6.8 Proportion of children under age five with fever who are treated with appropriate antimalarial drugs 6.9 Incidence, prevalence, and death rates associated with tuberculosis 6.10 Proportion of tuberculosis cases detected and cured under directly observed treatment short course
6.1 6.2 6.3
The Millennium Development Goals and targets come from the Millennium Declaration, signed by 189 countries, including 147 heads of state and government, in September 2000 (www. un.org/millennium/declaration/ares552e.htm) as updated by the 60th UN General Assembly in September 2005. The revised Millennium Development Goal (MDG) monitoring framework shown here, including new targets and indicators, was presented to the 62nd General Assembly, with new numbering as recommended by the Inter-agency and Expert Group on MDG Indicators at its 12th meeting on 14 November 2007. The goals and targets are interrelated and should be seen as a whole. They represent a partnership between the developed countries and the developing countries “to create an environment—at the national and global levels alike—which is conducive to development and the elimination of poverty.” All indicators should be disaggregated by sex and urban-rural location as far as possible.
30
2010 World Development Indicators
Goals and targets from the Millennium Declaration Indicators for monitoring progress Goal 7 Ensure environmental sustainability Target 7.A Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programs and reverse the loss of environmental resources Target 7.B Reduce biodiversity loss, achieving, by 2010, a significant reduction in the rate of loss
Target 7.C Halve by 2015 the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation Target 7.D Achieve by 2020 a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers Goal 8 Develop a global partnership for development Target 8.A Develop further an open, rule-based, predictable, nondiscriminatory trading and financial system
7.1 7.2
Proportion of land area covered by forest Carbon dioxide emissions, total, per capita and per $1 GDP (PPP) 7.3 Consumption of ozone-depleting substances 7.4 Proportion of fish stocks within safe biological limits 7.5 Proportion of total water resources used 7.6 Proportion of terrestrial and marine areas protected 7.7 Proportion of species threatened with extinction 7.8 Proportion of population using an improved drinking water source 7.9 Proportion of population using an improved sanitation facility 7.10 Proportion of urban population living in slums2
Some of the indicators listed below are monitored separately for the least developed countries (LDCs), Africa, landlocked developing countries, and small island developing states.
(Includes a commitment to good governance, development, and poverty reduction—both nationally and internationally.)
Target 8.B
Target 8.C
Target 8.D
Target 8.E
Target 8.F
Official development assistance (ODA) 8.1 Net ODA, total and to the least developed countries, as percentage of OECD/DAC donors’ gross national income 8.2 Proportion of total bilateral, sector-allocable ODA of OECD/DAC donors to basic social services (basic education, primary health care, nutrition, safe water, and Address the special needs of the least developed sanitation) countries 8.3 Proportion of bilateral official development assistance of OECD/DAC donors that is untied (Includes tariff and quota-free access for the least 8.4 ODA received in landlocked developing countries as a developed countries’ exports; enhanced program of proportion of their gross national incomes debt relief for heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) and cancellation of official bilateral debt; and more 8.5 ODA received in small island developing states as a proportion of their gross national incomes generous ODA for countries committed to poverty reduction.) Market access Address the special needs of landlocked 8.6 Proportion of total developed country imports (by value developing countries and small island developing and excluding arms) from developing countries and least states (through the Programme of Action for developed countries, admitted free of duty the Sustainable Development of Small Island 8.7 Average tariffs imposed by developed countries on Developing States and the outcome of the 22nd agricultural products and textiles and clothing from special session of the General Assembly) developing countries 8.8 Agricultural support estimate for OECD countries as a percentage of their GDP 8.9 Proportion of ODA provided to help build trade capacity Deal comprehensively with the debt problems of developing countries through national and Debt sustainability international measures in order to make debt 8.10 Total number of countries that have reached their HIPC sustainable in the long term decision points and number that have reached their HIPC completion points (cumulative) 8.11 Debt relief committed under HIPC Initiative and Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI) 8.12 Debt service as a percentage of exports of goods and services In cooperation with pharmaceutical companies, 8.13 Proportion of population with access to affordable provide access to affordable essential drugs in essential drugs on a sustainable basis developing countries In cooperation with the private sector, make 8.14 Telephone lines per 100 population available the benefits of new technologies, 8.15 Cellular subscribers per 100 population especially information and communications 8.16 Internet users per 100 population
1. Where available, indicators based on national poverty lines should be used for monitoring country poverty trends. 2. The proportion of people living in slums is measured by a proxy, represented by the urban population living in households with at least one of these characteristics: lack of access to improved water supply, lack of access to improved sanitation, overcrowding (3 or more persons per room), and dwellings made of nondurable material. 2010 World Development Indicators
31
1.1
Size of the economy Population Surface Population area density
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
32
millions 2008
thousand sq. km 2008
29 3 34 18 40 3 21 8 9 160 10 11 9 10 4 2 192 8 15 8 15 19 33 4 11 17 1,325 7 45 64 4 5 21 4 11 10 5 10 13 82 6 5 1 81 5 62d 1 2 4 82 23 11 14 10 2 10 7
652 29 2,382 1,247 2,780 30 7,741 84 87 144 208 31 113 1,099 51 582 8,515 111 274 28 181 475 9,985 623 1,284 756 9,598 1 1,142 2,345 342 51 322 57 111 79 43 49 284 1,001 21 118 45 1,104 338 549 d 268 11 70 357 239 132 109 246 36 28 112
2010 World Development Indicators
Gross national income, Atlas method
Gross national income per capita, Atlas method
Purchasing power parity gross national income
people per sq. km 2008
$ billions 2008
Rank 2008
$ 2008
Rank 2008
$ billions 2008
Per capita $ 2008
44 115 14 14 15 109 3 101 105 1,229 48 354 78 9 74 3 23 70 56 314 82 40 4 7 9 23 142 6,696 41 28 11 89 65 82 102 135 129 206 49 82 296 49 32 81 17 114d 6 166 62 235 103 87 128 40 56 358 65
10.6 12.1 144.2 60.2 286.6 10.3 862.5 382.7 33.2 83.4 51.9 477.3 6.1 14.1 17.1 12.8 1,401.3 41.8 7.3 1.1 9.3 21.9 1,453.8 1.8 5.9 157.5 3,888.1 219.3 207.9 9.8 6.5 27.4 20.3 60.2 .. 173.6 323.0 43.1 49.8 146.8 21.2 1.5 19.5 22.4 252.9 2,695.6 10.6 0.7 10.8 3,506.9 14.7 319.2 36.6 3.5 0.4 .. 12.7
121 114 50 63 28 122 15 25 80 58 66 18 140 106 102 112 10 73 135 188 125 92 9 175 141 46 3 36 37 124 137 85 97 64
370 3,840 4,190 3,340 7,190 3,350 40,240 45,900 3,830 520 5,360 44,570 700 1,460 4,520 6,640 7,300 5,490 480 140 640 1,150 43,640 410 540 9,370 2,940 31,420 4,620 150 1,790 6,060 980 13,580 ..c 16,650 58,800 4,330 3,690 1,800 3,460 300 14,570 280 47,600 42,000 7,320 400 2,500 42,710 630 28,400 2,680 350 250 ..e 1,740
198 113 109 124 85 123 29 19 114 186 98 21 178 152 106 90 83 96 187 210 179 156 22 192 185 76 127 37 104 209 147 92 166 63
32.0a 23.6 270.9a 86.9 557.9 19.4 798.3 311.5 67.4 232.4 117.2 378.9 12.7 40.1 31.5 25.6 1,933.0 86.7 17.6 3.1 27.2 41.4 1,289.5 3.2 11.7 222.4 7,960.7 306.8 379.4 18.0 10.1 49.5a 32.6 75.6 .. 238.6 206.2 77.6a 104.8 445.7 40.7a 3.1a 25.9 70.2 191.0 2,135.8 17.9 2.1 21.2 2,951.8 30.9 318.0 64.2a 9.5 0.8 .. 28.0a
1,100a 7,520 7,880 a 4,820 13,990 6,310 37,250 37,360 7,770 1,450 12,110 35,380 1,470 4,140 8,360 13,300 10,070 11,370 1,160 380 1,860 2,170 38,710 730 1,070 13,240 6,010 43,960 8,430 280 2,800 10,950a 1,580 17,050 .. 22,890 37,530 7,800a 7,770 5,470 6,630a 640a 19,320 870 35,940 33,280 12,390 1,280 4,920 35,950 1,320 28,300 4,690a 970 520 .. 3,830a
43 26 71 67 49 95 179 100 89 32 6 120 194 118 4 104 27 76 159 203 113
55 7 107 116 146 122 202 62 204 16 25 82 194 135 23 180 40 132 199 206 149
Gross domestic product
Rank 2008
% growth 2007–08
Per capita % growth 2007–08
192 112 107 130 76 119 26 25 109 179 88 31 178 141 104 81 95 91 188 208 172 163 21 202 194 82 122 15 102 210 155 93 176 68
2.3 6.0 3.0 13.2 6.8 b 6.8 3.7 1.8 10.8 6.2 10.0 1.1 5.1 6.1 5.4 2.9 5.1 6.0 4.5 4.5 6.7 3.9 0.4 2.2 –0.2 3.2 9.0 2.4 2.5 6.2 5.6 2.6 2.2 2.4 .. 2.5 –1.1 5.3 6.5 7.2 2.5 2.0 –3.6 11.3 0.9 0.4 2.3 5.9 2.0 1.3 7.3 2.9 4.0 4.7 3.3 1.3 4.0
–0.4 5.6 1.5 10.2 5.7b 6.6 0.6 1.3 9.5 4.7 10.3 0.3 1.8 4.3 5.6 1.4 4.1 6.5 1.0 1.4 5.0 1.6 –0.6 0.3 –2.9 2.1 8.4 1.6 1.0 3.3 3.7 1.2 –0.1 2.4 .. 1.6 –1.7 3.8 5.4 5.2 2.1 –1.0 –3.5 8.5 0.5 –0.1 0.5 3.0 3.2 1.5 5.1 2.5 1.5 2.4 1.0 –0.3 1.9
55 24 108 109 125 118 205 65 197 29 36 87 183 129 28 182 42 132 196 206 144
Population Surface Population area density
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Gross national income, Atlas method
millions 2008
thousand sq. km 2008
people per sq. km 2008
$ billions 2008
10 1,140 227 72 31 4 7 60 3 128 6 16 39 24 49 2 3 5 6 2 4 2 4 6 3 2 19 15 27 13 3 1 106 4 3 32 22 50 2 29 16 4 6 15 151 5 3 166 3 7 6 29 90 38 11 4 1
93 3,287 1,905 1,745 438 70 22 301 11 378 89 2,725 580 121 100 11 18 200 237 65 10 30 111 1,760 65 26 587 118 330 1,240 1,031 2 1,964 34 1,564 447 799 677 824 147 42 268 130 1,267 924 324 310 796 75 463 407 1,285 300 313 92 9 12
112 383 125 44 70 64 338 203 248 350 67 6 68 198 502 165 153 28 27 36 410 68 39 4 54 80 33 158 82 10 3 625 55 110 2 71 28 76 3 201 487 16 47 12 166 16 9 215 46 15 16 23 303 125 116 446 111
128.6 1,186.7 426.8 251.5 .. 220.3 180.6 2,121.6 12.9 4,869.1 20.5 96.6 28.4 .. 1,046.3 .. 117.0 4.1 4.7 26.9 28.4 2.2 0.7 77.9 39.9 8.4 7.9 4.2 196.0 7.4 2.6 8.5 1,062.4 5.3h 4.4 80.8i 8.4 .. 9.0 11.5 811.4 118.8 6.1 4.8 177.4 416.4 39.1 157.3 22.7 6.8 13.1 115.1 170.4 447.1 219.6 .. ..
Rank 2008
52 12 22 30 34 40 7 110 2 96 55 83 14 51 155 147 86 82 173 195 60 75 129 131 152 39 134 164 127 13 144 149 59 130 126 117 16 53 138 146 42 24 72 47 88 136 108 54 44 20 35
Gross national income per capita, Atlas method
Purchasing power parity gross national income
$ 2008
Rank 2008
$ billions 2008
Per capita $ 2008
12,810 1,040 1,880 3,540 ..f 49,770 24,720 35,460 4,800 38,130 3,470 6,160 730 ..e 21,530 ..f 43,930 780 760 11,860 6,780 1,060 170 12,380 g 11,870 4,130 420 280 7,250 580 840 6,700 9,990 1,500 h 1,670 2,520 i 380 ..e 4,210 400 49,340 27,830 1,080 330 1,170 87,340 14,330 950 j 6,690 1,040 2,110 3,990 1,890 11,730 20,680 ..k ..k
66 162 145 117
182.8 3,339.3 816.9 769.7 .. 158.0 200.6 1,843.0 19.8a 4,493.7 33.8 152.2 60.3 .. 1,353.2 .. 142.3 11.4 12.7 36.3 49.2 4.0 1.2 102.4a 57.7 18.9 20.0 12.1 370.8 13.9 6.3 16.0 1,525.4 11.7h 9.2 134.3i 17.2 .. 13.3 32.1 667.9 107.6 14.9a 10.0 298.8 282.5 60.4 429.9 42.9a 13.3a 29.0 229.1 352.4 637.0 237.2 .. ..
18,210 2,930 3,590 10,840 .. 35,710 27,450 30,800 7,360a 35,190 5,710 9,710 1,550 .. 27,840 .. 53,430 2,150 2,050 16,010 11,740 1,970 310 16,260 a 17,170 9,250 1,050 810 13,730 1,090 1,990 12,570 14,340 3,270 h 3,470 4,180i 770 .. 6,240 1,110 40,620 25,200 2,620a 680 1,980 59,250 22,150 2,590 12,620a 2,030a 4,660 7,940 3,900 16,710 22,330 .. ..
12 45 32 101 31 121 91 177 49 14 174 175 69 86 160 208 67 68 110 190 204 84 184 169 87 74 151 150 134 197 108 194 13 41 159 200 155 2 59 169 88 162 141 112 144 70 50
1.1
WORLD VIEW
Size of the economy
Gross domestic product
Rank 2008
% growth 2007–08
Per capita % growth 2007–08
66 153 147 92
0.6 6.1 6.1 7.8 .. –3.0 4.0 –1.0 –1.3 –0.7 7.9 3.2 1.7 .. 2.2 .. 4.4 7.6 7.5 –4.6 8.5 3.9 7.1 3.8 3.0 5.0 7.3 9.7 4.6 5.0 1.9 4.5 1.8 7.2h 8.9 5.6i 6.8 12.7 2.9 5.3 2.1 –1.1 3.5 9.5 6.0 2.1 7.7 2.0 9.2 6.6 5.8 9.8 3.8 4.9 0.0 .. 12.2
0.8 4.7 4.8 6.4 .. –4.5 2.2 –1.8 –1.7 –0.6 4.5 1.9 –1.0 .. 1.9 .. 1.9 6.7 5.5 –4.2 7.7 3.0 2.4 1.7 3.6 4.9 4.5 6.7 2.9 2.5 –0.6 3.9 0.7 7.4h 7.6 4.3i 4.3 11.8 0.9 3.4 1.7 –2.0 2.2 5.3 3.6 0.9 5.5 –0.2 7.4 4.1 3.9 8.5 2.0 4.9 –0.2 .. –0.7
30 44 39 114 33 124 97 177 43 4 164 167 71 90 170 209 70 67 99 195 199 77 193 166 85 75 149 148 140 200 120 190 17 49 158 204 169 3 54 159 84 168 134 106 143 69 56
2010 World Development Indicators
33
1.1
Size of the economy Population Surface Population area density
millions 2008
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
thousand sq. km 2008
people per sq. km 2008
Gross national income, Atlas method
$ billions 2008
22 238 94 178.1 142 17,098 9 1,371.2 10 26 394 4.3 12 440.5 25 2,000 l 12 197 63 11.9 7 88 83 41.1 6 72 78 1.8 5 1 6,943 168.2 5 49 112 89.7 2 20 100 49.0 9 638 14 .. 49 1,219 40 283.2 46 505 91 1,454.8 20 66 312 35.8 41 2,506 17 45.7 1 17 68 3.0 9 450 22 469.4 8 41 191 424.5 21 185 112 44.4 7 143 49 4.1 42 947 48 18.4n 67 513 132 247.2 1 15 74 2.7 6 57 119 2.6 1 5 260 22.1 10 164 66 36.0 74 784 96 666.6 5 488 11 14.4 32 241 161 13.3 46 604 80 148.6 4 84 54 .. 61 244 254 2,827.3 304 9,632 33 14,572.9 3 176 19 27.5 27 447 64 24.7 28 912 32 257.9 86 331 278 76.8 4 6 654 .. 23 528 43 21.9 13 753 17 12.0 12 391 32 .. 6,697 s 134,097 s 52 w 57,960.4 t 19,313 52 510.5 976 4,652 79,485 60 15,123.0 3,703 32,309 119 7,674.5 949 47,176 21 7,454.1 5,629 98,797 59 15,648.9 1,930 16,299 122 5,102.0 443 23,926 19 3,258.0 566 20,421 28 3,831.0 325 8,778 38 1,052.6 1,545 5,131 324 1,487.5 819 24,242 35 882.6 1,069 35,299 32 42,415.0 326 2,583 130 12,663.5
Gross national income per capita, Atlas method
Purchasing power parity gross national income
Rank 2008
$ 2008
Rank 2008
$ billions 2008
41 11 150 21 116 74 176 45 56 68
8,280 9,660 440 17,870 980 m 5,590 320 34,760 16,590 24,230 ..e 5,820 31,930 1,780 1,100 2,600 50,910 55,510 2,160 600 440 n 3,670 2,460 410 16,590 3,480 9,020 2,840 420 3,210 ..k 46,040 47,930 8,260 910 9,230 890 ..f 960 950 ..e 8,654 w 523 3,251 2,073 7,852 2,780 2,644 7,350 6,768 3,237 963 1,077 39,687 38,839
80 75 188 54 166 95 201 33 56 46
287.9 2,192.2 10.8 603.5 21.7 76.3 4.3 232.0 116.0 54.9 .. 476.2 1,404.4 89.9 79.4 5.8 348.3 299.8 92.4 12.7 52.0n 523.1 5.2a 5.3 32.3a 77.0 991.7 30.9a 36.1 333.5 .. 2,225.5 14,724.7 41.8 72.6a 358.6 232.2 .. 50.9 15.5 .. 69,749.6 t 1,321.9 28,533.4 16,994.4 11,589.1 29,847.2 10,461.1 5,298.2 5,837.8 2,345.5 4,163.4 1,596.5 40,253.8 10,822.7
29 8 78 69 165 19 23 70 156 101 33 166 167 90 77 17 105 107 48 5 1 84 87 31 61 91 115
94 36 148 158 133 10 8 140 183 188 118 136 192 56 120 78 128 190 126 18 15 81 172 77 173 168 169
Per capita $ 2008
13,380 15,440 1,110 24,490 1,780 10,380 770 47,940 21,460 27,160 .. 9,780 30,830 4,460 1,920 5,000 37,780 39,210 4,490 1,860 1,260n 7,760 4,690a 830 24,230a 7,450 13,420 6,120a 1,140 7,210 .. 36,240 48,430 12,540 2,660a 12,840 2,690 .. 2,220 1,230 .. 10,415 w 1,354 6,133 4,589 12,208 5,303 5,421 11,953 10,312 7,343 2,695 1,949 37,665 33,193
Gross domestic product
Rank 2008
% growth 2007–08
Per capita % growth 2007–08
80 73 190 52 175 94 200 12 60 45
9.4 5.6 11.2 4.4 3.3 1.2 5.5 1.1 6.2 3.5 .. 3.1 1.2 6.0 8.3 2.4 –0.2 1.8 5.2 7.9 7.5n 2.5 13.2 1.1 3.5 4.5 0.9 9.8 9.5 2.1 6.3 0.7 0.4 8.9 9.0 4.8 6.2 .. 3.9 6.0 .. 1.7 w 6.3 5.8 7.4 4.2 5.8 8.0 4.1 4.3 5.5 5.6 5.1 0.5 0.7
9.6 5.7 8.2 2.4 0.6 1.7 2.9 –4.1 6.0 3.4 .. 1.3 –0.3 5.2 5.9 1.0 –0.9 0.5 2.7 6.2 4.4n 1.8 9.6 –1.4 3.1 3.5 –0.3 8.4 6.0 2.7 3.1 0.0 –0.5 8.6 7.2 3.1 4.9 .. 1.0 3.4 .. 0.5 w 4.1 4.7 6.1 3.3 4.5 7.2 3.8 3.2 3.7 4.1 2.5 –0.2 0.2
96 38 136 171 128 23 20 135 172 184 111 132 198 53 113 78 121 189 116 27 11 86 157 83 156 162 185
a. Based on regression; others are extrapolated from the 2005 International Comparison Program benchmark estimates. b. Private analysts estimate that GDP volume growth has been significantly lower than official reports have shown since the last quarter of 2008. c. Estimated to be upper middle income ($3,856–$11,905). d. Excludes the French overseas departments of French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, and Réunion. e. Estimated to be low income ($975 or less). f. Estimated to be lower middle income ($976–$3,855). g. Included in the aggregates for upper middle-income economies based on earlier data. h. Excludes Transnistria. i. Includes Former Spanish Sahara. j. Included in the aggregates for lower middle-income economies based on earlier data. k. Estimated to be high income ($11,906 or more). l. Provisional estimate. m. Included in the aggregates for low-income economies based on earlier data. n. Covers mainland Tanzania only.
34
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
1.1
WORLD VIEW
Size of the economy Definitions
Population, land area, income, and output are basic
conventional price indexes allow comparison of real
• Population is based on the de facto definition of
measures of the size of an economy. They also
values over time.
population, which counts all residents regardless of
provide a broad indication of actual and potential
PPP rates are calculated by simultaneously compar-
legal status or citizenship—except for refugees not
resources. Population, land area, income (as mea-
ing the prices of similar goods and services among a
permanently settled in the country of asylum, who
sured by gross national income, GNI), and output
large number of countries. In the most recent round
are generally considered part of the population of
(as measured by gross domestic product, GDP) are
of price surveys conducted by the International Com-
their country of origin. The values shown are midyear
therefore used throughout World Development Indica-
parison Program (ICP), 146 countries and territories
estimates. See also table 2.1. • Surface area is
tors to normalize other indicators.
participated in the data collection, including China
a country’s total area, including areas under inland
Population estimates are generally based on
for the first time, India for the first time since 1985,
bodies of water and some coastal waterways. • Pop-
extrapolations from the most recent national cen-
and almost all African countries. The PPP conver-
ulation density is midyear population divided by land
sus. For further discussion of the measurement of
sion factors presented in the table come from three
area in square kilometers. • Gross national income
population and population growth, see About the data
sources. For 45 high- and upper middle-income
(GNI) is the sum of value added by all resident pro-
for table 2.1.
countries conversion factors are provided by Euro-
ducers plus any product taxes (less subsidies) not
The surface area of an economy includes inland
stat and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation
included in the valuation of output plus net receipts
bodies of water and some coastal waterways. Sur-
and Development (OECD), with PPP estimates for
of primary income (compensation of employees and
face area thus differs from land area, which excludes
34 European countries incorporating new price data
property income) from abroad. Data are in current
bodies of water, and from gross area, which may
collected since 2005. For the remaining 2005 ICP
U.S. dollars converted using the World Bank Atlas
include offshore territorial waters. Land area is par-
countries the PPP estimates are extrapolated from
method (see Statistical methods). • GNI per capita is
ticularly important for understanding an economy’s
the 2005 ICP benchmark results, which account for
GNI divided by midyear population. GNI per capita in
agricultural capacity and the environmental effects
relative price changes between each economy and
U.S. dollars is converted using the World Bank Atlas
of human activity. (For measures of land area and
the United States. For countries that did not partici-
method. • Purchasing power parity (PPP) GNI is GNI
data on rural population density, land use, and agri-
pate in the 2005 ICP round, the PPP estimates are
converted to international dollars using PPP rates. An
cultural productivity, see tables 3.1–3.3.) Innova-
imputed using a statistical model.
international dollar has the same purchasing power
tions in satellite mapping and computer databases have resulted in more precise measurements of land and water areas.
More information on the results of the 2005 ICP is available at www.worldbank.org/data/icp.
over GNI that a U.S. dollar has in the United States. • Gross domestic product (GDP) is the sum of value
All 210 economies shown in World Development
added by all resident producers plus any product
GNI measures total domestic and foreign value
Indicators are ranked by size, including those that
taxes (less subsidies) not included in the valuation
added claimed by residents. GNI comprises GDP
appear in table 1.6. The ranks are shown only in
of output. Growth is calculated from constant price
plus net receipts of primary income (compensation
table 1.1. No rank is shown for economies for which
GDP data in local currency. • GDP per capita is GDP
of employees and property income) from nonresident
numerical estimates of GNI per capita are not pub-
divided by midyear population.
sources. The World Bank uses GNI per capita in U.S.
lished. Economies with missing data are included in
dollars to classify countries for analytical purposes
the ranking at their approximate level, so that the rel-
and to determine borrowing eligibility. For definitions
ative order of other economies remains consistent.
of the income groups in World Development Indicators, see Users guide. For discussion of the usefulness of national income and output as measures of productivity or welfare, see About the data for tables 4.1 and 4.2.
Data sources
When calculating GNI in U.S. dollars from GNI
Population estimates are prepared by World Bank
reported in national currencies, the World Bank fol-
staff from a variety of sources (see Data sources
lows the World Bank Atlas conversion method, using
for table 2.1). Data on surface and land area are
a three-year average of exchange rates to smooth
from the Food and Agriculture Organization (see
the effects of transitory fluctuations in exchange
Data sources for table 3.1). GNI, GNI per capita,
rates. (For further discussion of the World Bank Atlas
GDP growth, and GDP per capita growth are esti-
method, see Statistical methods.)
mated by World Bank staff based on national
Because exchange rates do not always refl ect
accounts data collected by World Bank staff during
differences in price levels between countries,
economic missions or reported by national statis-
the table also converts GNI and GNI per capita
tical offices to other international organizations
estimates into international dollars using purchas-
such as the OECD. PPP conversion factors are
ing power parity (PPP) rates. PPP rates provide
estimates by Eurostat/OECD and by World Bank
a standard measure allowing comparison of real
staff based on data collected by the ICP.
levels of expenditure between countries, just as
2010 World Development Indicators
35
1.2
Millennium Development Goals: eradicating poverty and saving lives Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger Share of poorest quintile Vulnerable in national employment consumption Unpaid family workers and or income own-account workers % % of total employment 1995– 2008 a,b 1990 2008
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
36
.. 7.8 6.9 2.0 3.6 d 8.6 .. 8.6 13.3 9.4 8.8 8.5 6.9 2.7 6.7 3.1 3.0 8.7 7.0 9.0 6.5 5.6 7.2 5.2 6.3 4.1 5.7 5.3 2.3 5.5 5.0 4.4 5.0 8.8 .. 10.2 8.3 4.4 3.4 9.0 4.3 .. 6.8 9.3 9.6 7.2 6.1 4.8 5.4 8.5 5.2 6.7 3.4 5.8 7.2 2.5 2.5
2010 World Development Indicators
.. .. .. .. .. .. 10 .. .. .. .. 16 .. 40e .. .. 29e .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 28e .. .. 25 .. .. .. .. 7 39 36 e .. .. .. 2 .. .. 11 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 49e
.. .. .. .. 20e,f .. 9 9 53 .. .. 10 .. .. .. .. 27 9 .. .. .. .. 10e .. .. 24 .. 7 46 .. .. 20 .. 16e .. 13 5 42 34e 25 36 .. 6 52e 9 6 .. .. 62 7 .. 27 .. .. .. .. ..
Prevalence of malnutrition Underweight % of children under age 5
Achieve universal primary education
Promote gender equality
Reduce child mortality
Primary completion rate %
Ratio of girls to boys enrollments in primary and secondary school %
Under-fi ve mortality rate per 1,000
1990
2000–08a
1991
2008c
1991
2008c
1990
2008
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 64.3 .. .. .. 8.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 18.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 8.4 .. 11.6 11.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 24.1 .. .. .. .. .. ..
32.9 6.6 11.1 27.5 2.3 4.2 .. .. 8.4 41.3 1.3 .. 20.2 5.9 1.6 10.7 2.2 1.6 37.4 38.9 28.8 16.6 .. 21.8 33.9 0.5 6.8 .. 5.1 28.2 11.8 .. 16.7 .. .. 2.1 .. 3.4 6.2 6.8 6.1 34.5 .. 34.6 .. .. 8.8 15.8 2.3 1.1 13.9 .. 17.7 22.5 17.4 18.9 8.6
.. .. 80 34 .. .. .. .. .. .. 94 79 22 71 .. 90 .. 101 20 46 .. 53 .. 28 18 .. 107 102 73 48 54 79 42 .. 99 .. 98 .. .. .. 65 .. .. .. 97 106 .. .. .. .. 64 .. .. 17 .. 27 64
.. .. 114 .. 100 98 .. 102 121 58 96 86 65 98 .. 99 .. 98 38 45 79 73 96 33 31 96 99 .. 110 53 73 93 48 102 90 94 101 91 106 95 89 47 100 52 98 .. .. 79 100 105 79 101 80 55 .. .. 90
54 96 83 .. .. .. 101 95 100 .. .. 101 50 .. .. 109 .. 99 62 82 73 83 99 61 42 100 86 103 108 .. 86 101 65 .. 106 98 101 .. .. 81 101 .. 103 68 109 102 .. 64 98 99 79 99 .. 45 .. 94 106
58 .. .. .. 104 104 98 97 98 106 101 98 .. 99 100 100 102 97 85f 91 90 84 99 .. 64 99 103 100 104 76 .. 102 .. 102 99 101 102 103 100 .. 98 77 101 85 102 100 .. 102 96 98 96 97 94 77 .. .. 107
260 46 64 260 29 56 9 9 98 149 24 10 184 122 23 50 56 18 201 189 117 149 8 178 201 22 46 .. 35 199 104 22 150 13 14 12 9 62 53 90 62 150 18 210 7 9 92 153 47 9 118 11 77 231 240 151 55
257 14 41 220 16 23 6 4 36 54 13 5 121 54 15 31 22 11 169 168 90 131 6 173 209 9 21 .. 20 199 127 11 114 6 6 4 4 33 25 23 18 58 6 109 3 4 77 106 30 4 76 4 35 146 195 72 31
Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger Share of poorest quintile Vulnerable in national employment consumption Unpaid family workers and or income own-account workers % % of total employment 1995– 2008 a,b 1990 2008
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
8.6 8.1 7.4 6.4 .. 7.4 5.7 6.5 5.2 .. 7.2 8.7 4.7 .. 7.9 .. .. 8.8 8.5 6.7 .. 3.0 6.4 .. 6.8 5.2 6.2 7.0 6.4 6.5 6.2 .. 3.8 6.7 7.1 6.5 5.4 .. .. 6.1 7.6 6.4 3.8 5.9 5.1 9.6 .. 9.1 2.5 4.5 3.4 3.6 5.6 7.3 5.8 .. 3.9
7 .. .. .. .. 20 .. 27 42 19 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 29 .. .. 12 26 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 8 13 .. .. .. .. .. .. 34 .. 23e 36e .. .. 25 .. ..
7 .. 63 43 .. 12 7 19 35 11 .. .. .. .. 25 .. .. 47 .. 7 .. .. .. .. 9 22 .. .. 22 .. .. 17 30 32 .. 51 .. .. .. .. 9 12 45 .. .. 6 .. 62 28 .. 47 40e 45 19 19 .. ..
Prevalence of malnutrition Underweight % of children under age 5
1.2
WORLD VIEW
Millennium Development Goals: eradicating poverty and saving lives Achieve universal primary education
Promote gender equality
Reduce child mortality
Primary completion rate %
Ratio of girls to boys enrollments in primary and secondary school %
Under-fi ve mortality rate per 1,000
1990
2000–08a
1991
2008c
1991
2008c
1990
2008
2.3 .. 31.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 35.5 24.4 .. .. .. .. 13.9 .. .. 8.1 .. .. 21.5 .. .. .. .. 41.0 35.1 .. .. 39.0 .. .. 2.8 8.8 .. .. .. .. ..
.. 43.5 19.6 .. 7.1 .. .. .. 2.2 .. 3.6 4.9 16.5 17.8 .. .. .. 2.7 31.6 .. 4.2 16.6 20.4 5.6 .. 1.8 36.8 15.5 .. 27.9 23.2 .. 3.4 3.2 5.3 9.9 21.2 29.6 17.5 38.8 .. .. 4.3 39.9 27.2 .. .. 31.3 .. 18.1 .. 5.4 26.2 .. .. .. ..
94 63 93 88 .. .. .. 98 94 102 95 .. .. .. 98 .. .. .. 45 .. .. 59 .. .. .. .. 36 28 91 12 33 115 88 .. .. 48 26 .. .. 50 .. 103 42 17 .. 100 65 .. .. 46 68 .. 88 98 95 .. 71
95 94 108 117 .. 97 102 101 89 .. 99 105f 80 .. 99 .. 98 92 75 95 87 73 58 .. 96 92 71 54 96 57 64 90 104 84 93 81 59 97 81 76 .. .. 75 40f .. 96 80 60 102 .. 95 103 92 96 .. .. 115
100 70 93 85 78 104 105 100 101 101 101 102 94 .. 99 .. 97 .. 76 101 .. 124 .. .. .. .. 98 81 101 58 71 102 97 105 109 70 71 95 106 59 97 100 109 53 78 102 89 .. .. 80 98 96 100 100 103 .. 98
99 92 98 116 .. 103 101 99 100 100 103 98 f 96 .. 97 .. 100 100 87 100 103 105 86 105 100 98 97 99 .. 78 104 100 101 102 104 88 87 99 104 93 98 102 102 74 85 99 99 80 101 .. 99 101 102 99 101 .. 120
17 116 86 73 53 9 11 10 33 6 38 60 105 55 9 .. 15 75 157 17 40 101 219 38 16 36 167 225 18 250 129 24 45 37 98 88 249 120 72 142 8 11 68 305 230 9 31 130 31 91 42 81 61 17 15 .. 20
7 69 41 32 44 4 5 4 31 4 20 30 128 55 5 .. 11 38 61 9 13 79 145 17 7 11 106 100 6 194 118 17 17 17 41 36 130 98 42 51 5 6 27 167 186 4 12 89 23 69 28 24 32 7 4 .. 10
2010 World Development Indicators
37
1.2
Millennium Development Goals: eradicating poverty and saving lives Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger Share of poorest quintile Vulnerable in national employment consumption Unpaid family workers and or income own-account workers % % of total employment 1995– 2008 a,b 1990 2008
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
7.9 5.6 5.4 .. 6.2 9.1 6.1 5.0 8.8 8.2 .. 3.1 7.0 6.8 .. 4.5 9.1 7.6 .. 7.8 7.3 6.1 8.9 5.4 .. 5.9 5.4 6.0 6.1 9.4 .. 6.1 5.4 4.3 7.1 4.9 7.1 .. 7.2 3.6 4.6
27 1 .. .. 83 .. .. 8 .. .. .. .. 22 .. .. .. .. 9 .. .. .. 70 .. .. 22 .. .. .. .. .. .. 10 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 65 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
31 6 .. .. .. 23 .. 10 11 11 .. 3 12 41e .. .. 7 10 .. .. 88e 53 .. .. .. .. 35 .. .. .. .. 11 .. 25 .. 30 .. 36 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 24 .. .. 19 31 37 .. .. .. 12
Prevalence of malnutrition Underweight % of children under age 5 1990
.. .. 24.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 25.1 .. .. 21.2 .. 8.5 .. .. 19.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 21.2 8.0 .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
2000–08a
3.5 .. 18.0 5.3 14.5 1.8 28.3 3.3 .. .. 32.8 .. .. 21.1 31.7 6.1 .. .. 10.0 14.9 16.7 7.0 40.6 22.3 4.4 3.3 3.5 .. 16.4 4.1 .. .. 1.3 6.0 4.4 .. 20.2 2.2 43.1 14.9 14.0 22.4 w 27.5 22.2 25.1 3.8 23.5 11.9 .. 4.5 12.2 41.1 25.3 .. ..
Achieve universal primary education
Promote gender equality
Reduce child mortality
Primary completion rate %
Ratio of girls to boys enrollments in primary and secondary school %
Under-fi ve mortality rate per 1,000
1991
100 .. 35 55 43 .. .. .. .. .. .. 76 103 101 40 61 96 53 89 .. 63 .. .. 35 102 74 90 .. .. 94 103 .. .. 94 .. 79 .. .. .. .. 97 79 w 44 83 82 88 78 101 93 84 .. 62 51 .. 101
2008c
120 94 54 95 56 104 88 .. 94 .. .. 86 98 105 57f 72 95 93 114 98 83 .. 80 61 92 102 99 .. 56 99 105 .. 96 104 96 95 .. 83 61 93 .. 89 w 66 94 92 100 88 100 98 101 94 79 62 .. ..
1991
99 104 95 84 68 .. 64 .. .. .. .. 104 104 102 78 98 102 97 85 .. 97 .. .. 59 101 86 81 .. 82 .. 104 102 100 .. 94 105 .. .. .. .. 92 87 w 80 85 81 98 84 89 98 99 80 69 82 100 ..
2008c
99 98 100 91 96 102 84 .. 100 99 .. 100 103 .. 89 f 92 99 97 97 91 .. .. .. 75 101 103 89 .. 99 99 101 102 100 98 98 102 .. 104 .. 95 97 96 w 91 97 96 100 96 102 97 102 96 91 88 99 ..
1990
32 27 174 43 149 29 278 7 15 10 200 56 9 29 124 84 7 8 37 117 157 32 184 150 34 50 84 99 186 21 17 9 11 24 74 32 56 38 127 172 79 92 w 160 85 93 47 101 55 50 53 76 125 185 12 9
2008
14 13 112 21 108 7 194 3 8 4 200 67 4 15 109 83 3 5 16 64 104 14 93 98 35 21 22 48 135 16 8 6 8 14 38 18 14 27 69 148 96 67 w 118 57 64 23 73 29 22 23 34 76 144 7 4
a. Data are for the most recent year available. b. See table 2.9 for survey year and whether share is based on income or consumption expenditure. c. Provisional data. d. Urban data. e. Limited coverage. f. Data are for 2009.
38
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
1.2
WORLD VIEW
Millennium Development Goals: eradicating poverty and saving lives Definitions
Tables 1.2–1.4 present indicators for 17 of the 21
nutrients, and undernourished mothers who give
• Share of poorest quintile in national consump-
targets specified by the Millennium Development
birth to underweight children.
tion or income is the share of the poorest 20 per-
Goals. Each of the eight goals includes one or more
Progress toward universal primary education is
cent of the population in consumption or, in some
targets, and each target has several associated
measured by the primary completion rate. Because
cases, income. • Vulnerable employment is the sum
indicators for monitoring progress toward the target.
many school systems do not record school comple-
of unpaid family workers and own-account workers
Most of the targets are set as a value of a specific
tion on a consistent basis, it is estimated from the
as a percentage of total employment. • Prevalence
indicator to be attained by a certain date. In some
gross enrollment rate in the final grade of primary
of malnutrition is the percentage of children under
cases the target value is set relative to a level in
school, adjusted for repetition. Official enrollments
age 5 whose weight for age is more than two standard
1990. In others it is set at an absolute level. Some
sometimes differ significantly from attendance, and
deviations below the median for the international ref-
of the targets for goals 7 and 8 have not yet been
even school systems with high average enrollment
erence population ages 0–59 months. The data are
quantified.
ratios may have poor completion rates.
based on the new international child growth stan-
The indicators in this table relate to goals 1–4.
Eliminating gender disparities in education would
dards for infants and young children, called the Child
Goal 1 has three targets between 1990 and 2015:
help increase the status and capabilities of women.
Growth Standards, released in 2006 by the World
to halve the proportion of people whose income is
The ratio of female to male enrollments in primary
Health Organization. • Primary completion rate is
less than $1.25 a day, to achieve full and productive
and secondary school provides an imperfect measure
the percentage of students completing the last year
employment and decent work for all, and to halve the
of the relative accessibility of schooling for girls.
of primary school. It is calculated as the total num-
proportion of people who suffer from hunger. Esti-
The targets for reducing under-five mortality rates
ber of students in the last grade of primary school,
mates of poverty rates are in tables 2.7 and 2.8.
are among the most challenging. Under-five mortal-
minus the number of repeaters in that grade, divided
The indicator shown here, the share of the poorest
ity rates are harmonized estimates produced by a
by the total number of children of official graduation
quintile in national consumption or income, is a dis-
weighted least squares regression model and are
age. • Ratio of girls to boys enrollments in primary
tributional measure. Countries with more unequal
available at regular intervals for most countries.
and secondary school is the ratio of the female to
distributions of consumption (or income) have a
Most of the 60 indicators relating to the Millennium
male gross enrollment rate in primary and secondary
higher rate of poverty for a given average income.
Development Goals can be found in World Develop-
school. • Under-five mortality rate is the probability
Vulnerable employment measures the portion of the
ment Indicators. Table 1.2a shows where to find the
that a newborn baby will die before reaching age 5,
labor force that receives the lowest wages and least
indicators for the first four goals. For more informa-
if subject to current age-specific mortality rates. The
security in employment. No single indicator captures
tion about data collection methods and limitations,
probability is expressed as a rate per 1,000.
the concept of suffering from hunger. Child malnutri-
see About the data for the tables listed there. For
tion is a symptom of inadequate food supply, lack
information about the indicators for goals 5–8, see
of essential nutrients, illnesses that deplete these
About the data for tables 1.3 and 1.4.
1.2a
Location of indicators for Millennium Development Goals 1–4 Goal 1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger 1.1 Proportion of population below $1.25 a day 1.2 Poverty gap ratio 1.3 Share of poorest quintile in national consumption 1.4 Growth rate of GDP per person employed 1.5 Employment to population ratio 1.6 Proportion of employed people living below $1 per day 1.7 Proportion of own-account and unpaid family workers in total employment 1.8 Prevalence of underweight in children under age five 1.9 Proportion of population below minimum level of dietary energy consumption Goal 2. Achieve universal primary education 2.1 Net enrollment ratio in primary education 2.2 Proportion of pupils starting grade 1 who reach last grade of primary 2.3 Literacy rate of 15- to 24-year-olds Goal 3. Promote gender equality and empower women 3.1 Ratio of girls to boys in primary, secondary, and tertiary education 3.2 Share of women in wage employment in the nonagricultural sector 3.3 Proportion of seats held by women in national parliament Goal 4. Reduce child mortality 4.1 Under-five mortality rate 4.2 Infant mortality rate 4.3 Proportion of one-year-old children immunized against measles
Table 2.8 2.7, 2.8 1.2, 2.9 2.4 2.4 — 1.2, 2.4 1.2, 2.20 2.20 Data sources 2.12 2.13 2.14
The indicators here and throughout this book have been compiled by World Bank staff from primary and secondary sources. Efforts have been made
1.2, 2.12* 1.5, 2.3* 1.5
to harmonize the data series used to compile this
1.2, 2.22 2.22 2.18
un.org/millenniumgoals), but some differences in
— No data are available in the World Development Indicators database. * Table shows information on related indicators.
table with those published on the United Nations Millennium Development Goals Web site (www. timing, sources, and definitions remain. For more information see the data sources for the indicators listed in table 1.2a.
2010 World Development Indicators
39
1.3
Millennium Development Goals: protecting our common environment Improve maternal health Maternal mortality ratio Modeled estimate per 100,000 live births 2005
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
40
Combat HIV/AIDS and other diseases
Contraceptive prevalence rate % of married women ages 15–49 1990 2003–08b
1,800 92 180 1,400 77 76 4 4 82 570 18 8 840 290 3 380 110 11 700 1,100 540 1,000 7 980 1,500 16 45 .. 130 1,100 740 30 810 7 45 4 3 150 210 130 170 450 25 720 7 8 520 690 66 4 560 3 290 910 1,100 670 280
2010 World Development Indicators
.. .. 47 .. .. .. .. .. .. 40 .. 78 .. 30 .. 33 59 .. .. .. .. 16 .. .. .. 56 85 86 66 8 .. .. .. .. .. 78 78 56 53 47 47 .. .. 4 77 81 .. 12 .. 75 13 .. .. .. .. 10 47
15 60 61 .. .. 53 .. .. 51 56 73 .. 17 61 36 .. 81 .. 17 9 40 29 .. 19 3 58 85 .. 78 21 44 96 13 .. 77 .. .. 73 73 60 73 .. .. 15 .. .. .. .. 47 .. 24 .. .. 9 10 32 65
Ensure environmental sustainability
HIV Incidence prevalence of tuberculosis Carbon dioxide emissions % of per capita population per 100,000 metric tons people ages 15–49 2007 2008 1990 2006
.. .. 0.1 2.1 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 .. 0.2 0.2 1.2 0.2 <0.1 23.9 0.6 .. 1.6 2.0 0.8 5.1 0.4 6.3 3.5 0.3 0.1 .. 0.6 .. 3.5 0.4 3.9 <0.1 0.1 .. 0.2 1.1 0.3 .. 0.8 1.3 1.3 2.1 0.1 0.4 5.9 0.9 0.1 0.1 1.9 0.2 0.8 1.6 1.8 2.2 0.7
189 16 58 292 30 73 7 0 110 225 43 9 92 144 51 712 46 43 220 357 490 187 5 336 291 11 97 91 36 382 393 11 410 25 6 9 7 73 72 20 32 97 34 368 7 6 452 263 107 5 202 6 63 302 224 246 64
0.1 2.3 3.1 0.4 3.5 1.1 17.2 7.9 6.0 0.1 9.6 10.8 0.1 0.8 1.2 1.6 1.4 8.8 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 16.2 0.1 0.0 2.7 2.1 4.8 1.7 0.1 0.5 1.0 0.5 3.8 3.1 12.7 9.8 1.3 1.6 1.3 0.5 .. 16.3 0.1 10.2 7.0 6.6 0.2 2.9 12.0 0.3 7.2 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.5
0.0 1.4 4.0 0.6 4.4 1.4 18.0 8.7 4.1 0.3 7.1 10.2 0.4 1.2 7.3 2.6 1.9 6.2 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.2 16.7 0.1 0.0 3.7 4.7 5.7 1.5 0.0 0.4 1.8 0.3 5.3 2.6 11.2 9.9 2.1 2.4 2.1 1.1 0.1 13.0 0.1 12.7 6.2 1.5 0.2 1.2 9.8 0.4 8.6 0.9 0.1 0.2 0.2 1.0
Proportion of species threatened with extinction % 2008
0.7 1.5 2.1 1.4 1.9 0.9 4.7 1.9 0.8 1.9 0.7 1.3 1.5 0.8 13.1 0.5 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.5 29.8 5.4 1.8 0.6 1.0 2.4 2.4 13.2 1.2 2.5 1.0 1.9 3.9 1.8 4.2 1.5 1.6 2.1 10.4 4.1 1.8 15.0 0.6 1.3 1.3 2.5 2.1 2.2 1.0 2.2 3.7 2.1 2.4 2.2 2.4 2.3 3.5
Develop a global partnership for development
Access to improved sanitation facilities % of population 1990 2006
.. .. 88 26 81 .. 100 100 .. 26 .. .. 12 33 .. 38 71 99 5 44 8 39 100 11 5 84 48 .. 68 15 .. 94 20 99 98 100 100 68 71 50 73 3 95 4 100 .. .. .. 94 100 6 97 70 13 .. 29 45
30 97 94 50 91 91 100 100 80 36 93 .. 30 43 95 47 77 99 13 41 28 51 100 31 9 94 65 .. 78 31 20 96 24 99 98 99 100 79 84 66 86 5 95 11 100 .. 36 52 93 100 10 98 84 19 33 19 66
Internet users per 100 peoplea 2008
1.7 23.9 11.9 3.1 28.1 6.2 70.8 71.2 28.2 0.3 32.1 68.1 1.8 10.8 34.7 6.2 37.5 34.7 0.9 0.8 0.5 3.8 75.3 0.4 1.2 32.5 22.5 67.0 38.5 .. 4.3 32.3 3.2 50.5 12.9 57.8 83.3 21.6 28.8 16.6 10.6 4.1 66.2 0.4 82.5 67.9 6.2 6.9 23.8 75.5 4.3 43.1 14.3 0.9 2.4 10.1 13.1
Improve maternal health Maternal mortality ratio Modeled estimate per 100,000 live births 2005
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
6 450 420 140 300 1 4 3 170 6 62 140 560 370 14 .. 4 150 660 10 150 960 1,200 97 11 10 510 1,100 62 970 820 15 60 22 46 240 520 380 210 830 6 9 170 1,800 1,100 7 64 320 130 470 150 240 230 8 11 18 12
Combat HIV/AIDS and other diseases
Contraceptive prevalence rate % of married women ages 15–49 1990 2003–08b
.. 43 50 49 14 60 68 .. 55 58 40 .. 27 62 79 .. .. .. .. .. .. 23 .. .. .. .. 17 13 50 .. 3 75 .. .. .. 42 .. 17 29 23 76 .. .. 4 6 74 9 15 .. .. 48 59 36 49 .. .. ..
.. 56 61 79 50 .. .. .. .. .. 57 51 39 .. .. .. .. 48 38 .. 58 37 11 .. .. 14 27 41 .. 8 9 .. 71 68 66 63 16 34 55 48 .. .. 72 11 15 .. .. 30 .. 32 79 71 51 .. .. .. ..
Ensure environmental sustainability
HIV Incidence prevalence of tuberculosis Carbon dioxide emissions % of per capita population per 100,000 metric tons people ages 15–49 2007 2008 1990 2006
0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 .. 0.2 0.1 0.4 1.6 .. .. 0.1 .. .. <0.1 .. .. 0.1 0.2 0.8 0.1 23.2 1.7 .. 0.1 <0.1 0.1 11.9 0.5 1.5 0.8 1.7 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 12.5 0.7 15.3 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.8 3.1 0.1 .. 0.1 1.0 1.5 0.6 0.5 .. 0.1 0.5 .. ..
16 168 189 20 64 9 6 7 7 22 6 175 328 344 88 .. 34 159 150 50 14 635 283 17 71 24 256 324 102 322 324 22 19 175 205 116 420 404 747 163 7 8 46 178 303 6 14 231 47 250 47 119 285 25 30 3 55
1.3
6.0 0.8 0.8 4.2 2.8 8.8 7.2 7.5 3.3 9.5 3.3 15.9 0.2 12.1 5.6 .. 19.2 2.4 0.1 5.1 3.1 .. 0.2 9.2 6.0 5.6 0.1 0.1 3.1 0.0 1.3 1.4 4.6 4.8 4.5 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 11.2 6.6 0.6 0.1 0.5 7.4 5.6 0.6 1.3 0.5 0.5 1.0 0.7 9.1 4.5 .. 25.2
5.7 1.4 1.5 6.7 3.2 10.3 10.0 8.0 4.6 10.1 3.7 12.6 0.3 3.6 9.8 .. 33.3 1.1 0.2 3.3 3.8 .. 0.2 9.2 4.2 5.3 0.2 0.1 7.2 0.0 0.5 3.1 4.2 2.1 3.7 1.5 0.1 0.2 1.4 0.1 10.3 7.3 0.8 0.1 0.7 8.6 15.5 0.9 2.0 0.7 0.7 1.4 0.8 8.3 5.7 .. 46.1
Proportion of species threatened with extinction % 2008
1.8 3.3 3.4 1.0 11.0 1.8 4.3 2.2 7.7 4.9 3.4 1.1 3.9 1.3 1.7 .. 6.3 0.8 1.2 1.4 1.2 0.6 3.8 1.6 0.9 0.9 6.4 3.3 6.9 1.0 2.9 24.3 3.2 1.3 1.1 1.9 2.9 2.7 2.1 1.1 1.3 5.1 1.3 1.0 4.3 1.5 4.2 1.7 2.9 3.6 0.5 2.8 6.6 1.2 2.8 3.6 ..
Develop a global partnership for development
Access to improved sanitation facilities % of population 1990 2006
100 14 51 83 .. .. .. .. 83 100 .. 97 39 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 40 97 .. .. 8 46 .. 35 20 94 56 .. .. 52 20 23 26 9 100 .. 42 3 26 .. 85 33 .. 44 60 55 58 .. 92 .. 100
WORLD VIEW
Millennium Development Goals: protecting our common environment
100 28 52 .. 76 .. .. .. 83 100 85 97 42 .. .. .. .. 93 48 78 .. 36 32 97 .. 89 12 60 94 45 24 94 81 79 50 72 31 82 35 27 100 .. 48 7 30 .. .. 58 74 45 70 72 78 .. 99 .. 100
2010 World Development Indicators
Internet users per 100 peoplea 2008
58.5 4.5 7.9 32.0 1.0 62.7 47.9 41.8 57.3 75.2 27.0 10.9 8.7 0.0 75.8 .. 36.7 16.1 8.5 60.4 22.5 3.6 0.5 5.1 54.4 41.5 1.7 2.1 55.8 1.6 1.9 22.2 22.2 23.4 12.5 33.0 1.6 0.2 5.3 1.7 87.0 71.4 3.3 0.5 15.9 82.5 20.0 11.1 27.5 1.8 14.3 24.7 6.2 49.0 42.1 25.3 34.0
41
1.3
Millennium Development Goals: protecting our common environment Improve maternal health Maternal mortality ratio Modeled estimate per 100,000 live births 2005
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Combat HIV/AIDS and other diseases
Contraceptive prevalence rate % of married women ages 15–49 1990 2003–08b
24 28 1,300 18 980 14 c 2,100 14 6 6 1,400 400 4 58 450 390 3 5 130 170 950 110 380 510 45 100 44 130 550 18 37 8 11 20 24 57 150 .. 430 830 880 400 w 790 320 370 110 440 150 45 130 200 500 900 10 5
.. 34 21 .. .. .. .. 65 74 .. 1 57 .. .. 9 20 .. .. .. .. 10 .. .. 34 .. 50 63 .. 5 .. .. .. 71 .. .. .. 53 .. 10 15 43 57 w 26 58 60 52 54 75 .. 56 42 40 15 72 ..
70 .. 36 .. 12 41 8 .. .. .. 15 60 .. 68 8 51 .. .. 58 37 26 77 20 17 43 60 73 48 24 67 .. .. .. .. 65 .. 76 50 28 41 60 61 w 38 66 65 72 61 77 .. 75 62 53 23 .. ..
Ensure environmental sustainability
HIV Incidence prevalence of tuberculosis Carbon dioxide emissions % of per capita population per 100,000 metric tons people ages 15–49 2007 2008 1990 2006
0.1 1.1 2.8 .. 1.0 0.1 1.7 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 0.5 18.1 0.5 .. 1.4 26.1 0.1 0.6 .. 0.3 6.2 1.4 .. 3.3 1.5 0.1 .. <0.1 5.4 1.6 .. 0.2 0.6 0.6 0.1 .. 0.5 .. .. 15.2 15.3 0.8 w 2.3 0.6 0.4 1.5 0.9 0.2 0.6 0.5 0.1 0.3 5.0 0.3 0.3
134 107 387 19 277 18 608 39 12 12 388 960 17 66 119 1,227 6 5 22 199 190 137 498 438 24 24 30 68 311 102 6 12 5 22 128 33 200 19 88 468 762 139 w 282 137 145 106 162 138 87 47 44 180 352 14 8
6.8 13.9 0.1 13.2 0.4 .. 0.1 15.4 8.4 6.2 0.0 9.5 5.9 0.2 0.2 0.5 6.0 6.4 2.9 3.9 0.1 1.7 .. 0.2 13.9 1.6 2.6 7.2 0.0 11.7 29.3 10.0 19.5 1.3 5.3 6.2 0.3 .. .. 0.3 1.6 4.3d w 0.6 1.8 1.4 3.8 1.6 1.9 9.4 2.4 2.5 0.7 0.9 12.1 7.5
4.6 11.0 0.1 16.1 0.4 .. 0.2 12.8 6.9 7.6 0.0 8.7 8.0 0.6 0.3 0.9 5.6 5.6 3.5 1.0 0.1 4.1 0.2 0.2 25.3 2.3 3.7 9.0 0.1 6.8 32.8 9.4 19.3 2.1 4.4 6.3 1.3 0.8 1.0 0.2 0.9 4.4d w 0.5 3.3 2.8 5.2 2.8 3.8 7.3 2.6 3.5 1.1 0.8 12.7 8.4
Proportion of species threatened with extinction % 2008
1.6 1.3 1.6 3.8 2.2 .. 3.2 9.7 1.1 2.1 3.2 1.6 3.8 14.0 2.4 0.8 1.4 1.4 2.0 0.8 5.1 3.4 .. 1.2 1.7 2.1 1.4 10.7 2.5 1.1 14.1 2.8 5.7 2.6 1.0 1.1 3.5 .. 12.6 0.7 0.9
Develop a global partnership for development
Access to improved sanitation facilities % of population 1990 2006
72 87 29 91 26 .. .. 100 100 .. .. 55 100 71 33 .. 100 100 81 .. 35 78 .. 13 93 74 85 .. 29 96 97 .. 100 100 93 83 29 .. 28 42 44 51 w 25 47 39 76 43 48 88 68 67 18 26 99 ..
72 87 23 99 28 92 11 100 100 .. 23 59 100 86 35 50 100 100 92 92 33 96 41 12 92 85 88 .. 33 93 97 .. 100 100 96 .. 65 80 46 52 46 60 w 38 58 52 82 55 66 89 78 74 33 31 100 ..
Internet users per 100 peoplea 2008
28.8 31.9 3.1 31.5 8.4 44.9 0.3 69.6 66.0 55.7 1.1 8.6 55.4 5.8 10.2 6.9 87.7 75.9 17.3 8.8 1.2 23.9 .. 5.4 17.0 27.1 34.4 1.5 7.9 10.5 65.2 76.0 75.9 40.2 9.0 25.7 24.2 9.0 1.6 5.5 11.4 23.9 w 4.6 17.3 13.9 30.6 15.3 19.4 28.6 28.9 18.9 4.7 6.5 69.1 62.6
a. Data are from the International Telecommunication Union’s (ITU) World Telecommunication Development Report database. Please cite ITU for third-party use of these data. b. Data are for the most recent year available. c. Includes Montenegro. d. Includes emissions not allocated to specific countries.
42
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
The Millennium Development Goals address concerns common to all economies. Diseases and environmental degradation do not respect national boundaries. Epidemic diseases, wherever they occur, pose a threat to people everywhere. And environmental damage in one location may affect the well-being of plants, animals, and humans far away. The indicators in the table relate to goals 5, 6, and 7 and the targets of goal 8 that address access to new technologies. For the other targets of goal 8, see table 1.4. The target of achieving universal access to reproductive health has been added to goal 5 to address the importance of family planning and health services in improving maternal health and preventing maternal death. Women with multiple pregnancies are more likely to die in childbirth. Access to contraception is an important way to limit and space births. Measuring disease prevalence or incidence can be difficult. Most developing economies lack reporting systems for monitoring diseases. Estimates are often derived from survey data and report data from sentinel sites, extrapolated to the general population. Tracking diseases such as HIV/AIDS, which has a long latency
1.3
WORLD VIEW
Millennium Development Goals: protecting our common environment Definitions
between contraction of the virus and the appearance of symptoms, or malaria, which has periods of dormancy, can be particularly difficult. The table shows the estimated prevalence of HIV among adults ages 15–49. Prevalence among older populations can be affected by life-prolonging treatment. The incidence of tuberculosis is based on case notifications and estimates of cases detected in the population. Carbon dioxide emissions are the primary source of greenhouse gases, which contribute to global warming, threatening human and natural habitats. In recognition of the vulnerability of animal and plant species, a new target of reducing biodiversity loss has been added to goal 7. Access to reliable supplies of safe drinking water and sanitary disposal of excreta are two of the most important means of improving human health and protecting the environment. Improved sanitation facilities prevent human, animal, and insect contact with excreta. Internet use includes narrowband and broadband Internet. Narrowband is often limited to basic applications; broadband is essential to promote e-business, e-learning, e-government, and e-health.
• Maternal mortality ratio is the number of women who die from pregnancy-related causes during pregnancy and childbirth, per 100,000 live births. Data are from various years and adjusted to a common 2005 base year. The values are modeled estimates (see About the data for table 2.19). • Contraceptive prevalence rate is the percentage of women ages 15–49 married or in union who are practicing, or whose sexual partners are practicing, any form of contraception. • HIV prevalence is the percentage of people ages 15–49 who are infected with HIV. • Incidence of tuberculosis is the estimated number of new tuberculosis cases (pulmonary, smear positive, and extrapulmonary). • Carbon dioxide emissions are those stemming from the burning of fossil fuels and the manufacture of cement. They include emissions produced during consumption of solid, liquid, and gas fuels and gas flaring (see table 3.8). • Proportion of species threatened with extinction is the total number of threatened mammal (excluding whales and porpoises), bird, and higher native, vascular plant species as a percentage of the total number of known species of the same categories.
1.3a
Location of indicators for Millennium Development Goals 5–7
• Access to improved sanitation facilities is the percentage of the population with at least adequate
Goal 5. Improve maternal health 5.1 Maternal mortality ratio 5.2 Proportion of births attended by skilled health personnel 5.3 Contraceptive prevalence rate 5.4 Adolescent fertility rate 5.5 Antenatal care coverage 5.6 Unmet need for family planning Goal 6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases 6.1 HIV prevalence among population ages 15–24 6.2 Condom use at last high-risk sex 6.3 Proportion of population ages 15–24 with comprehensive, correct knowledge of HIV/AIDS 6.4 Ratio of school attendance of orphans to school attendance of nonorphans ages 10–14 6.5 Proportion of population with advanced HIV infection with access to antiretroviral drugs 6.6 Incidence and death rates associated with malaria 6.7 Proportion of children under age 5 sleeping under insecticide-treated bednets 6.8 Proportion of children under age 5 with fever who are treated with appropriate antimalarial drugs 6.9 Incidence, prevalence, and death rates associated with tuberculosis 6.10 Proportion of tuberculosis cases detected and cured under directly observed treatment short course Goal 7. Ensure environmental sustainability 7.1 Proportion of land area covered by forest 7.2 Carbon dioxide emissions, total, per capita, and per $1 purchasing power parity GDP 7.3 Consumption of ozone-depleting substances 7.4 Proportion of fish stocks within safe biological limits 7.5 Proportion of total water resources used 7.6 Proportion of terrestrial and marine areas protected 7.7 Proportion of species threatened with extinction 7.8 Proportion of population using an improved drinking water source 7.9 Proportion of population using an improved sanitation facility 7.10 Proportion of urban population living in slums
Table 1.3, 2.19 2.19 1.3, 2.19 2.19 1.5, 2.19 2.19
access to excreta disposal facilities (private or shared, but not public) that can effectively prevent human, animal, and insect contact with excreta (facilities do not have to include treatment to render sewage outflows innocuous). Improved facilities range from simple but protected pit latrines to flush toilets with a sewerage connection. To be effective,
1.3*, 2.21* 2.21* —
facilities must be correctly constructed and properly maintained. • Internet users are people with access to the worldwide network.
— — — 2.18 2.18 1.3, 2.21 2.18
Data sources
3.1
The indicators here and throughout this book have
3.8 3.9* — 3.5 — 1.3 1.3, 2.18, 3.5 1.3, 2.18, 3.11 —
— No data are available in the World Development Indicators database. * Table shows information on related indicators.
been compiled by World Bank staff from primary and secondary sources. Efforts have been made to harmonize the data series used to compile this table with those published on the United Nations Millennium Development Goals Web site (www. un.org/millenniumgoals), but some differences in timing, sources, and definitions remain. For more information see the data sources for the indicators listed in table 1.3a.
2010 World Development Indicators
43
1.4
Millennium Development Goals: overcoming obstacles
Development Assistance Committee members
Net official development assistance (ODA) by donor
% of donor GNI 2008
Australia Canada European Union Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Portugal Spain Sweden United Kingdom Japan New Zealandc Norway Switzerland United States
0.34 0.32 0.42 0.47 0.82 0.43 0.39 0.38 0.20 0.58 0.20 0.92 0.80 0.27 0.43 0.98 0.43 0.18 0.30 0.88 0.41 0.18
For basic social services a % of total sector-allocable ODA 2008
15.6 16.2 4.7 17.6 12.6 10.9 10.2 7.7 3.7 27.6 8.8 34.4 20.9 3.0 20.5 11.7 20.9 2.4 22.7 13.1 9.4 32.1
Least developed countries’ access to high-income markets Goods (excluding arms) admitted free of tariffs % of exports from least developed countries 2001 2007
Support to agriculture
Average tariff on exports of least developed countries % Agricultural products 2001 2007
2001
Textiles 2007
2001
Clothing 2007
% of GDP 2008 b
94.5 48.3 99.8
100.0 99.9 98.2
0.2 0.3 1.7
0.0 0.1 1.5
5.0 5.8 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.1
19.6 18.8 0.0
0.0 1.7 1.2
0.29 0.55 0.91
82.2 64.2 97.6 93.3 46.2
99.6 99.2 99.8 95.0 76.8
4.9 0.0 3.1 6.0 6.3
1.3 0.0 0.2 2.8 6.0
0.2 9.3 4.5 0.0 6.8
2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.6
0.0 12.9 1.4 0.0 13.9
0.1 0.0 1.0 0.0 11.3
1.06 0.23 0.95 1.24 0.67
Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPCs) HIPC HIPC HIPC decision completion Initiative pointd pointd assistance
HIPC HIPC HIPC decision completion Initiative pointd pointd assistance
MDRI assistance
end-2008 net present value
end-2008 net present value
$ millions
Afghanistan Benin Boliviaf Burkina Fasof,g Burundi Cameroon Central African Republic Chad Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Côte d’Ivoire Ethiopiag Gambia, The Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyanaf Haiti
Jul. 2007 Jul. 2000 Feb. 2000 Jul. 2000 Aug. 2005 Oct. 2000 Sep. 2007 May 2001 Jul. 2003 Mar. 2006 Mar. 2009 Nov. 2001 Dec. 2000 Feb. 2002 Dec. 2000 Dec. 2000 Nov. 2000 Nov. 2006
Jan. 2010 Mar. 2003 Jun. 2001 Apr. 2002 Jan. 2009 Apr. 2006 Jun. 2009 Floating Floating Jan. 2010 Floating Apr. 2004 Dec. 2007 Jul. 2004 Floating Floating Dec. 2003 Jun. 2009
600 388 1,967 818 964 1,874 638 240 8,061 1,945 3,005 2,726 99 3,080 807 615 903 155
MDRI assistance
$ millions
38 e 633 1,655 638 70 h 778 146 .. .. 201e .. 1,512 191 2,181 .. .. 416 557
Honduras Liberia Madagascar Malawig Malif Mauritania Mozambiquef Nicaragua Niger g Rwandag São Tomé & Príncipeg Senegal Sierra Leone Tanzania Togo Ugandaf Zambia
Jul. 2000 Mar. 2008 Dec. 2000 Dec. 2000 Sep. 2000 Feb. 2000 Apr. 2000 Dec. 2000 Dec. 2000 Dec. 2000 Dec. 2000 Jun. 2000 Mar. 2002 Apr. 2000 Nov. 2008 Feb. 2000 Dec. 2000
Apr. 2005 Floating Oct. 2004 Aug. 2006 Mar. 2003 Jun. 2002 Sep. 2001 Jan. 2004 Apr.2004 Apr. 2005 Mar. 2007 Apr. 2004 Dec. 2006 Nov. 2001 Floating May 2000 Apr. 2005
822 2,988 1,236 1,388 797 920 3,169 4,894 953 963 173 722 906 2,997 270 1,520 3,697
1,599 .. 1,351 733 1,097 465 1,107 985 542 234 27 1,435 368 2,124 .. 1,879 1,701
a. Includes primary education, basic life skills for youth, adult and early childhood education, basic health care, basic health infrastructure, basic nutrition, infectious disease control, health education, health personnel development, population policy and administrative management, reproductive health care, family planning, sexually transmitted disease control including HIV/AIDS, personnel development for population and reproductive health, basic drinking water supply and basic sanitation, and multisector aid for basic social services. b. Provisional data. c. Calculated by World Bank staff using the World Integrated Trade Solution based on the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development’s Trade Analysis and Information Systems database. d. Refers to the Enhanced HIPC Initiative. e. Data are in nominal terms because data in end-2008 net present value terms are unavailable. f. Also reached completion point under the original HIPC Initiative. The assistance includes original debt relief. g. Assistance includes topping up at completion point. h. Includes $15 million (in nominal terms) of committed debt relief by the International Monetary Fund, converted to end-2008 net present value terms.
44
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
1.4
WORLD VIEW
Millennium Development Goals: overcoming obstacles Definitions
Achieving the Millennium Development Goals
lines with “international peaks”). The averages in the
• Net official development assistance (ODA) is grants
requires an open, rule-based global economy in
table include ad valorem duties and equivalents.
and loans (net of repayments of principal) that meet
which all countries, rich and poor, participate. Many
Subsidies to agricultural producers and exporters
the DAC definition of ODA and are made to countries
poor countries, lacking the resources to fi nance
in OECD countries are another barrier to developing
on the DAC list of recipients. • ODA for basic social
development, burdened by unsustainable debt, and
economies’ exports. Agricultural subsidies in OECD
services is aid reported by DAC donors for basic edu-
unable to compete globally, need assistance from
economies are estimated at $376 billion in 2008.
cation, primary health care, nutrition, population policies and programs, reproductive health, and water and
rich countries. For goal 8—develop a global part-
The Debt Initiative for Heavily Indebted Poor Countries
nership for development—many indicators therefore
(HIPCs), an important step in placing debt relief within
monitor the actions of members of the Organisa-
the framework of poverty reduction, is the first com-
tion for Economic Co-operation and Development’s
prehensive approach to reducing the external debt of
(OECD) Development Assistance Committee (DAC).
the world’s poorest, most heavily indebted countries. A
Official development assistance (ODA) has risen
1999 review led to an enhancement of the framework.
products are plant and animal products, including tree
in recent years as a share of donor countries’ gross
In 2005, to further reduce the debt of HIPCs and pro-
crops but excluding timber and fish products. • Tex-
national income (GNI), but the poorest economies
vide resources for meeting the Millennium Development
tiles and clothing are natural and synthetic fibers and
need additional assistance to achieve the Millennium
Goals, the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI), pro-
fabrics and articles of clothing made from them. • Sup-
Development Goals. Net ODA disbursements from
posed by the Group of Eight countries, was launched.
port to agriculture is the value of gross transfers from
DAC donors reached $120 billion in 2008—the high-
Under the MDRI four multilateral institutions—the
taxpayers and consumers arising from policy mea-
est level ever—representing a 16 percent increase
International Development Association (IDA), Inter-
sures, net of associated budgetary receipts, regard-
in nominal terms from the 2007 level.
national Monetary Fund (IMF), African Development
less of their objectives and impacts on farm production
One important action that high-income economies can
Fund (AfDF), and Inter-American Development Bank
and income or consumption of farm products. • HIPC
take is to reduce barriers to exports from low- and mid-
(IDB)—provide 100 percent debt relief on eligible
dle-income economies. The European Union has begun
debts due to them from countries having completed
to eliminate tariffs on developing economy exports of
the HIPC Initiative process. Data in the table refer
“everything but arms,” and the United States offers
to status as of February 2010 and might not show
special concessions to Sub-Saharan African exports.
countries that have since reached the decision or
However, these programs still have many restrictions.
completion point. Debt relief under the HIPC Initiative
Average tariffs in the table refl ect high-income
has reduced future debt payments by $57 billion (in
structural reforms agreed on at the decision point,
OECD member tariff schedules for exports of coun-
end-2008 net present value terms) for 35 countries
including implementing a poverty reduction strategy.
tries designated least developed countries by the
that have reached the decision point. And 28 coun-
The country then receives full debt relief under the
United Nations. Although average tariffs have been
tries that have reached the completion point have
HIPC Initiative without further policy conditions. • HIPC
falling, averages may disguise high tariffs on specific
received additional assistance of $25 billion (in end-
Initiative assistance is the debt relief committed as of
goods (see table 6.8 for each country’s share of tariff
2008 net present value terms) under the MDRI.
the decision point (assuming full participation of credi-
sanitation services. • Goods admitted free of tariffs are exports of goods (excluding arms) from least developed countries admitted without tariff. • Average tariff is the unweighted average of the effectively applied rates for all products subject to tariffs. • Agricultural
decision point is the date when a heavily indebted poor country with an established track record of good performance under adjustment programs supported by the IMF and the World Bank commits to additional reforms and a poverty reduction strategy and starts receiving debt relief. • HIPC completion point is the date when a country successfully completes the key
tors). Topping-up assistance and assistance provided
1.4a
Location of indicators for Millennium Development Goal 8 Goal 8. Develop a global partnership for development 8.1 Net ODA as a percentage of DAC donors’ gross national income 8.2 Proportion of ODA for basic social services 8.3 Proportion of ODA that is untied 8.4 Proportion of ODA received in landlocked countries as a percentage of GNI 8.5 Proportion of ODA received in small island developing states as a percentage of GNI 8.6 Proportion of total developed country imports (by value, excluding arms) from least developed countries admitted free of duty 8.7 Average tariffs imposed by developed countries on agricultural products and textiles and clothing from least developed countries 8.8 Agricultural support estimate for OECD countries as a percentage of GDP 8.9 Proportion of ODA provided to help build trade capacity 8.10 Number of countries reaching HIPC decision and completion points 8.11 Debt relief committed under new HIPC initiative 8.12 Debt services as a percentage of exports of goods and services 8.13 Proportion of population with access to affordable, essential drugs on a sustainable basis 8.14 Telephone lines per 100 people 8.15 Cellular subscribers per 100 people 8.16 Internet users per 100 people
Table 1.4, 6.14 1.4 6.15b — — 1.4 1.4, 6.8* 1.4 — 1.4 1.4 6.11*
under the original HIPC Initiative were committed in net present value terms as of the decision point and are converted to end-2008 terms. • MDRI assistance is 100 percent debt relief on eligible debt from IDA, IMF, AfDF, and IDB, delivered in full to countries having reached the HIPC completion point. Data sources Data on ODA are from the OECD. Data on goods admitted free of tariffs and average tariffs are from the World Trade Organization, in collaboration with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development and the International Trade Centre. These data are available at www.mdg-trade. org. Data on subsidies to agriculture are from
— 1.3*, 5.11 1.3*, 5.11 5.12
— No data are available in the World Development Indicators database. * Table shows information on related indicators.
the OECD’s Producer and Consumer Support Estimates, OECD Database 1986–2008. Data on the HIPC Initiative and MDRI are from the World Bank’s Economic Policy and Debt Department.
2010 World Development Indicators
45
1.5
Women in development Female population
Life expectancy at birth
Pregnant women receiving prenatal care
years % of total 2008
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
46
Male 2008
48.2 50.6 49.5 50.7 51.0 53.4 50.3 51.3 51.2 49.4 53.5 51.0 49.6 50.1 51.9 50.1 50.7 51.6 50.1 51.0 51.1 50.0 50.5 50.9 50.3 50.5 48.1c 52.5 50.8 50.5 50.1 49.2 49.0 51.8 49.9 51.0 50.5 49.7 49.9 49.7 52.7 50.9 53.9 50.3 51.0 51.4 50.1 50.4 52.9 51.0 49.3 50.4 51.3 49.5 50.5 50.6 50.1
2010 World Development Indicators
44 74 71 45 72 70 79 78 68 65 65 77 60 64 73 54 69 70 52 49 59 51 79 45 47 76 71c 79 69 46 53 77 56 72 77 74 77 70 72 68 67 57 69 54 76 78 59 54 68 78 56 78 67 56 46 59 70
Female 2008
44 80 74 49 79 77 84 83 73 67 77 83 63 68 78 54 76 77 54 52 63 52 83 49 50 82 75c 86 77 49 55 81 59 80 81 81 81 75 78 72 76 62 80 57 83 85 62 58 75 83 58 82 74 60 49 63 75
% 2003–08 a
36 97 89 80 99 93 .. .. 77 51 99 .. 84 77 99 .. 98 .. 85 92 69 82 .. 69 39 .. 91 .. 94 85 86 90 85 100 100 .. .. 99 84 74 94 .. .. 28 .. .. .. 98 94 .. 95 .. .. 88 78 85 92
Teenage mothers
Women in wage employment in nonagricultural sector
% of women ages 15–19 2003–08a
% of nonagricultural wage employment 2007
.. .. .. 29 .. 5 .. .. 6 33 .. .. 21 16 .. .. .. .. 23 .. 8 28 .. .. 37 .. .. .. 21 24 27 .. .. 4 .. .. .. 21 .. 9 .. .. .. 17 .. .. .. .. .. .. 13 .. .. 32 .. 14 22
.. .. .. .. 45 46 47 46 50 20 56 46 .. .. 35 42 .. 52 .. .. .. .. 50 .. .. 37 .. 48 49 .. .. 41 .. 46 44 46 49 39 37 18 49 .. 52 47 51 49 .. .. 49 47 .. 42 43 .. .. .. 33
Unpaid family workers
Women in parliaments
Male Female % of male % of female employment employment 2003–08a 2003–08 a
% of total seats 1990 2009
.. .. 7.1 .. 0.7b .. 0.2 2.0 0.0 9.7 .. 0.4 .. .. 2.0 2.2 4.6 0.6 .. .. .. .. 0.1b .. .. 0.9 .. 0.1 2.7 .. .. 1.3 .. 1.1b .. 0.3 0.3 2.9 4.4b 8.6 8.8 .. 0.0 7.8b 0.6 0.3 .. .. 19.0 0.4 .. 3.4 .. .. .. .. 12.1b
.. .. 13.6 .. 1.6 b .. 0.4 2.7 0.0 60.1 .. 2.2 .. .. 8.9 2.2 8.1 1.5 .. .. .. .. 0.2b .. .. 2.8 .. 1.1 6.3 .. .. 2.8 .. 3.7b .. 1.0 0.5 3.4 11.1b 32.6 9.9 .. 0.0 12.7b 0.4 0.9 .. .. 39.0 1.5 .. 9.8 .. .. .. .. 8.3 b
4 29 2 15 6 36 6 12 .. 10 .. 9 3 9 .. 5 5 21 .. .. .. 14 13 4 .. .. 21 .. 5 5 14 11 6 .. 34 .. 31 8 5 4 12 .. .. .. 32 7 13 8 .. .. .. 7 7 .. 20 .. 10
28 16 8 37 42 8 27 28 11 19 32 35 11 17 12 11 9 21 15 31 16 14 22 11 5 15 21 .. 8 8 7 37 9 21 43 16 38 20 32 2 19 22 21 22 42 18 17 9 5 33 8 15 12 19 10 4 23
Female population
Life expectancy at birth
Pregnant women receiving prenatal care
years
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
% of total 2008
Male 2008
Female 2008
52.5 48.3 50.1 49.1 49.4 49.9 50.4 51.4 51.1 51.3 48.7 52.3 50.0 50.6 50.5 .. 40.3 50.7 50.1 53.9 51.0 52.9 50.3 48.3 53.3 50.1 50.2 50.3 49.2 50.6 49.3 50.4 50.7 52.5 50.5 50.9 51.4 51.1 50.7 50.3 50.5 50.6 50.5 49.9 49.9 50.3 43.5 48.5 49.6 49.2 49.5 49.9 49.6 51.7 51.6 52.0 24.8
70 62 69 70 64 78 79 79 69 79 71 61 54 65 77 67 76 63 64 67 70 44 57 72 66 72 59 52 72 48 55 69 73 65 63 69 47 59 60 66 78 78 70 51 47 78 74 66 73 59 70 71 70 71 76 75 75
78 65 73 73 72 82 83 85 75 86 75 72 55 69 83 72 80 72 66 78 74 46 60 77 78 77 62 54 77 49 59 76 78 72 70 74 49 64 62 67 82 82 76 52 48 83 78 67 78 63 74 76 74 80 82 83 77
% 2003–08 a
.. 74 93 98 84 .. .. .. 91 .. 99 100 88 .. .. .. .. 97 35 .. 96 90 79 .. .. 94 80 92 79 70 75 .. 94 98 89 68 89 .. 95 44 .. .. 90 46 58 .. .. 61 .. 79 96 91 91 .. .. .. ..
Teenage mothers
Women in wage employment in nonagricultural sector
% of women ages 15–19 2003–08a
% of nonagricultural wage employment 2007
.. 16 9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4 7 23 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 20 32 .. .. .. 34 34 .. 36 .. .. .. 6 .. 7 41 .. 15 19 .. .. .. 39 25 .. .. 9 .. .. .. 26 8 .. .. .. ..
48 18 31 16 .. 48 49 43 46 42 26 .. .. .. 42 .. .. 51 50 52 .. .. .. .. 53 42 38 .. 39 .. .. 37 39 55 53 28 .. .. .. .. 47 49 39 .. 21 49 .. 13 43 .. 40 43 42 47 48 42 ..
1.5
WORLD VIEW
Women in development Unpaid family workers
Women in parliaments
Male Female % of male % of female employment employment 2003–08a 2003–08 a
% of total seats 1990 2009
0.3 .. 7.8 5.4 .. 0.6 0.1 1.2 0.5 1.1 .. 1.0 .. .. 1.2 .. .. 8.8 .. 1.4 .. .. .. .. 1.0 7.0 32.1 .. 2.7 18.4 .. 0.9 4.9 1.3 18.4 16.5 .. .. 3.2 .. 0.2 0.8 12.2 .. .. 0.2 .. 18.6 2.3 .. 10.8 4.7b 9.0 2.7 0.7 0.0 0.0
0.5 .. 33.6 32.7 .. 0.8 0.4 2.5 2.2 7.3 .. 1.3 .. .. 12.7 .. .. 19.3 .. 1.2 .. .. .. .. 2.0 14.9 73.0 .. 8.8 10.2 .. 4.7 10.0 3.4 31.7 51.8 .. .. 5.8 .. 0.8 1.5 9.1 .. .. 0.4 .. 61.9 4.0 .. 8.9 9.9 b 18.0 5.9 1.2 0.0 0.0
21 5 12 2 11 8 7 13 5 1 0 .. 1 21 2 .. .. .. 6 .. 0 .. .. .. .. .. 7 10 5 .. .. 7 12 .. 25 0 16 .. 7 6 21 14 15 5 .. 36 .. 10 8 0 6 6 9 14 8 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
11 11 18 3 26 13 18 21 13 11 6 16 10 16 14 .. 8 26 25 20 3 25 13 8 18 28 8 21 11 10 22 17 28 26 4 11 35 .. 27 33 41 34 19 12 7 36 0 23 9 1 13 28 21 20 28 .. 0
47
1.5
Women in development Female population
Life expectancy at birth
Pregnant women receiving prenatal care
years % of total 2008
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Male 2008
51.4 53.8 51.6 45.1 50.4 50.5 51.3 49.7 51.5 51.2 50.4 50.7 50.7 50.7 49.7 51.2 50.4 51.1 49.5 50.6 50.2 50.8 49.1 50.5 51.4 49.7 49.8 50.7 49.9 53.9 32.5 51.0 50.7 51.8 50.3 49.8 50.7 49.1 49.4 50.1 51.7 49.6 w 50.2 49.2 48.8 51.1 49.4 48.8 52.2 50.6 49.6 48.5 50.2 50.6 51.1
70 62 48 71 54 71 46 78 71 76 48 50 78 70 57 46 79 80 72 64 55 66 60 61 66 72 70 61 52 63 77 78 76 72 65 71 72 72 61 45 44 67 w 58 67 66 68 65 70 66 70 69 63 51 77 78
Female 2008
77 74 52 75 57 76 49 83 79 83 51 53 84 78 60 45 83 85 76 69 56 72 62 64 73 76 74 69 53 74 79 82 81 80 71 77 76 75 65 46 45 71 w 60 71 70 75 69 74 75 77 73 65 53 83 84
% 2003–08 a
94 .. 96 .. 87 98 81 .. .. .. 26 92 .. 99 64 85 .. .. 84 80 76 98 61 84 96 96 54 99 94 99 .. .. .. 97 99 .. 91 99 47 94 94 82 w 69 84 83 90 82 91 .. 95 83 69 72 .. ..
Teenage mothers
Women in wage employment in nonagricultural sector
% of women ages 15–19 2003–08a
% of nonagricultural wage employment 2007
.. .. 4 .. 19 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 23 .. .. .. .. 26 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 25 4 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 28 21
Unpaid family workers
Women in parliaments
Male Female % of male % of female employment employment 2003–08a 2003–08 a
% of total seats 1990 2009
46 51 .. 15 .. 14 d .. 45 50 47 .. 44 44 31 .. .. 50 47 .. 37 31 45 .. .. 44 .. 21 .. .. 55 14 52 47 46 .. 41 .. 17 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 45 .. .. 48 .. .. 18 .. 46 46
a. Data are for the most recent year available. b. Limited coverage. c. Includes Taiwan, China. d. Data are for 2008. e. Less than 0.5.
48
2010 World Development Indicators
6.0 0.1 .. .. .. 3.1 14.8 0.4 0.1 3.2 .. 0.3 0.8 4.4b .. .. 0.2 1.7 .. .. 9.7b 14.0 .. .. 0.3 .. 5.3 .. 10.3 b 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.9b .. 0.6 18.9 6.6 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 3.4 .. .. 2.0 4.0 .. .. .. 0.5 0.8
18.9 0.1 .. .. .. 11.9 21.6 1.3 0.2 5.4 .. 0.6 1.4 21.7b .. .. 0.3 3.2 .. .. 13.0 b 29.9 .. .. 1.7 .. 37.7 .. 40.5b 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.1 3.0 b .. 1.6 47.2 31.5 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 7.3 .. .. 5.4 7.5 .. .. .. 2.3 1.8
34 .. 17 .. 13 .. .. 5 .. .. 4 3 15 5 .. 4 38 14 9 .. .. 3 .. 5 17 4 1 26 12 .. 0 6 7 6 .. 10 18 .. 4 7 11 13 w .. 13 14 12 13 17 .. 12 4 6 .. 12 12
11 14 56 0 22 22 13 25 19 13 6 45 36 6 18 14 47 29 12 18 30 12 29 11 27 23 9 17 31 8 23 20 17 12 18 19 26 .. 0e 15 15 19 w 19 17 16 20 18 18 15 23 9 20 18 22 25
About the data
1.5
WORLD VIEW
Women in development Definitions
Despite much progress in recent decades, gender
Women’s wage work is important for economic
• Female population is the percentage of the popu-
inequalities remain pervasive in many dimensions of
growth and the well-being of families. But women
lation that is female. • Life expectancy at birth is
life—worldwide. But while disparities exist through-
often face such obstacles as restricted access to
the number of years a newborn infant would live if
out the world, they are most prevalent in developing
education and vocational training, heavy workloads
prevailing patterns of mortality at the time of its birth
countries. Gender inequalities in the allocation of
at home and in unpaid domestic and market activi-
were to stay the same throughout its life. • Pregnant
such resources as education, health care, nutrition,
ties, and labor market discrimination. These obsta-
women receiving prenatal care are the percentage
and political voice matter because of the strong
cles force women to limit their participation in paid
of women attended at least once during pregnancy
association with well-being, productivity, and eco-
economic activities. And even when women work,
by skilled health personnel for reasons related to
nomic growth. These patterns of inequality begin at
these obstacles cause women to be less productive
pregnancy. • Teenage mothers are the percentage of
an early age, with boys routinely receiving a larger
and to receive lower wages. When women are in paid
women ages 15–19 who already have children or are
share of education and health spending than do girls,
employment, they tend to be concentrated in the
currently pregnant. • Women in wage employment
for example.
nonagricultural sector. However, in many develop-
in nonagricultural sector are female wage employ-
Because of biological differences girls are
ing countries women are a large part of agricultural
ees in the nonagricultural sector as a percentage
expected to experience lower infant and child mor-
employment, often as unpaid family workers. Among
of total nonagricultural wage employment. • Unpaid
tality rates and to have a longer life expectancy
people who are unsalaried, women are more likely
family workers are those who work without pay in a
than boys. This biological advantage may be over-
than men to be unpaid family workers, while men
market-oriented establishment or activity operated
shadowed, however, by gender inequalities in nutri-
are more likely than women to be self-employed or
by a related person living in the same household.
tion and medical interventions and by inadequate
employers. There are several reasons for this.
• Women in parliaments are the percentage of par-
care during pregnancy and delivery, so that female
Few women have access to credit markets, capital,
rates of illness and death sometimes exceed male
land, training, and education, which may be required
rates, particularly during early childhood and the
to start a business. Cultural norms may prevent
reproductive years. In high-income countries women
women from working on their own or from super-
tend to outlive men by four to eight years on aver-
vising other workers. Also, women may face time
age, while in low-income countries the difference is
constraints due to their traditional family respon-
narrower—about two to three years. The difference
sibilities. Because of biases and misclassification
in child mortality rates (table 2.22) is another good
substantial numbers of employed women may be
indicator of female social disadvantage because
underestimated or reported as unpaid family workers
nutrition and medical interventions are particularly
even when they work in association or equally with
Data on female population are from the United
important for the 1–4 age group. Female child mor-
their husbands in the family enterprise.
Nations Population Division’s World Population
liamentary seats in a single or lower chamber held by women.
Data sources
tality rates that are as high as or higher than male
Women are vastly underrepresented in decision-
Prospects: The 2008 Revision, and data on life
child mortality rates may indicate discrimination
making positions in government, although there is
expectancy for more than half the countries in the
against girls.
some evidence of recent improvement. Gender parity
table (most of them developing countries) are from
Having a child during the teenage years limits
in parliamentary representation is still far from being
its World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision,
girls’ opportunities for better education, jobs, and
realized. In 2009 women accounted for 19 percent
with additional data from census reports, other
income. Pregnancy is more likely to be unintended
of parliamentarians worldwide, compared with 9 per-
statistical publications from national statistical
during the teenage years, and births are more likely
cent in 1987. Without representation at this level, it
offi ces, Eurostat’s Demographic Statistics, the
to be premature and are associated with greater
is difficult for women to influence policy.
Secretariat of the Pacific Community’s Statistics
risks of complications during delivery and of death.
For information on other aspects of gender, see
and Demography Programme, and the U.S. Bureau
In many countries maternal mortality (tables 1.3 and
tables 1.2 (Millennium Development Goals: eradicat-
of the Census International Data Base. Data on
2.19) is a leading cause of death among women of
ing poverty and saving lives), 1.3 (Millennium Devel-
pregnant women receiving prenatal care are from
reproductive age. Most maternal deaths result from
opment Goals: protecting our common environment),
household surveys, including Demographic and
preventable causes—hemorrhage, infection, and
2.3 (Employment by economic activity), 2.4 (Decent
Health Surveys by Macro International and Multi-
complications from unsafe abortions. Prenatal care
work and productive employment), 2.5 (Unemploy-
ple Indicator Cluster Surveys by the United Nations
is essential for recognizing, diagnosing, and promptly
ment), 2.6 (Children at work), 2.10 (Assessing vulner-
Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and UNICEF’s The State
treating complications that arise during pregnancy.
ability and security), 2.13 (Education efficiency), 2.14
of the World’s Children 2010. Data on teenage
In high-income countries most women have access
(Education completion and outcomes), 2.15 (Educa-
mothers are from Demographic and Health Sur-
to health care during pregnancy, but in developing
tion gaps by income and gender), 2.19 (Reproductive
veys by Macro International. Data on labor force
countries many women suffer pregnancy-related
health), 2.21 (Health risk factors and future chal-
and employment are from the International Labour
complications, and over half a million die every year
lenges), and 2.22 (Mortality).
Organization’s Key Indicators of the Labour Market,
(Glasier and others 2006). This is reflected in the
6th edition. Data on women in parliaments are
differences in maternal mortality ratios between
from the Inter-Parliamentary Union.
high- and low-income countries.
2010 World Development Indicators
49
1.6
Key indicators for other economies Population Surface Population area density
Gross national income
Atlas method thousands 2008
American Samoa Andorra Antigua and Barbuda Aruba Bahamas, The Bahrain Barbados Belize Bermuda Bhutan Brunei Darussalam Cape Verde Cayman Islands Channel Islands Comoros Cyprus Djibouti Dominica Equatorial Guinea Faeroe Islands Fiji French Polynesia Greenland Grenada Guam Guyana Iceland Isle of Man
66 84 87 105 338 776 255 322 64 687 392 499 54 150 644 862 849 73 659 49 844 266 56 104 176 763 317 81
thousand sq. km 2008
0.2 0.5 0.4 0.2 13.9 0.7 0.4 23.0 0.1 38.4 5.8 4.0 0.3 0.2 1.9 9.3 23.2 0.8 28.1 1.4 18.3 4.0 410.5 0.3 0.5 215.0 103.0 0.6
About the data
people per sq. km 2008
$ millions 2008
331 178 197 586 34 1,092 593 14 1,284 18 74 124 209 787 346 93 37 98 24 35 46 73 0e 305 325 4 3 141
.. 3,038 1,143 .. 7,136 19,713 .. 1,205 .. 1,307 10,211 1,399 .. 10,242 483 21,367d 957 348 9,875 .. 3,382 .. 1,682 609 .. 1,107 12,839 3,972
Per capita $ 2008
Gross domestic product
Life Adult expectancy literacy at birth rate
Carbon dioxide emissions
Purchasing power parity $ millions 2008
..a .. 36,970 .. 13,200 1,702b .. ..c 21,390 .. 25,420 25,906 .. ..c 3,740 1,913b .. ..c 1,900 3,310 27,050 19,540 2,800 1,537 .. ..c 68,610 .. 750 754 26,940d 19,811d 1,130 1,972 4,750 607b 14,980 14,305 .. ..c 4,010 3,647 .. ..c 29,740 .. 5,880 873b .. ..c 1,450 2,308 b 40,450 8,031 49,310 ..
Per capita $ 2008
% growth 2007–08
.. .. 19,650 b .. .. 33,400 .. 5,940b .. 4,820 50,770 3,080 .. .. 1,170 24,980d 2,320 8,290 b 21,700 .. 4,320 .. .. 8,430b .. 3,020 b 25,300 ..
.. 1.4 2.5 .. 2.8 6.3 .. 3.8 4.6 13.8 0.6 2.8 .. 5.9 1.0 3.6d 3.9 4.3 11.3 .. 0.2 .. 0.7 2.1 .. 3.0 0.3 7.5
Per capita % growth 2007–08
.. –1.4 1.3 .. 1.5 4.1 .. 0.4 4.3 12.0 –1.3 1.4 .. 5.7 –1.4 2.4 d 2.0 3.7 8.4 .. –0.4 .. 1.1 1.7 .. 3.1 –1.5 7.4
years 2008
.. .. .. 75 73 76 77 76 79 66 77 71 .. 79 65 80 55 .. 50 79 69 74 68 75 76 67 82 ..
% ages 15 thousand and older metric tons 2008 2006
.. .. .. 98 .. 91 .. .. .. .. 95 84 99 .. 74 98 .. .. 93 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. 410 2,308 2,107 19,668 1,315 817 564 392 5,903 297 502 .. 88 7,497 473 114 4,338 678 1,663 854 557 234 .. 1,491 2,184 ..
Definitions
The table shows data for 55 economies with popula-
• Population is based on the de facto definition of
included in the valuation of output plus net receipts
tions between 30,000 and 1 million and for smaller
population, which counts all residents regardless of
of primary income (compensation of employees and
economies if they are members of the World Bank.
legal status or citizenship—except for refugees not
property income) from abroad. Data are in current
Where data on gross national income (GNI) per capita
permanently settled in the country of asylum, who
U.S. dollars converted using the World Bank Atlas
are not available, the estimated range is given. For
are generally considered part of the population of
method (see Statistical methods). • Purchasing
more information on the calculation of GNI and pur-
their country of origin. The values shown are midyear
power parity (PPP) GNI is GNI converted to interna-
chasing power parity (PPP) conversion factors, see
estimates. For more information, see About the data
tional dollars using PPP rates. An international dollar
About the data for table 1.1. Additional data for the
for table 2.1. • Surface area is a country’s total
has the same purchasing power over GNI that a U.S.
economies in the table are available on the World
area, including areas under inland bodies of water
dollar has in the United States. • GNI per capita is
Development Indicators CD-ROM or in WDI Online.
and some coastal waterways. • Population density
GNI divided by midyear population. • Gross domes-
is midyear population divided by land area in square
tic product (GDP) is the sum of value added by all
kilometers. • Gross national income (GNI), Atlas
resident producers plus any product taxes (less sub-
method, is the sum of value added by all resident
sidies) not included in the valuation of output. Growth
producers plus any product taxes (less subsidies) not
is calculated from constant price GDP data in local
50
2010 World Development Indicators
Population Surface Population area density
Gross national income
Atlas method thousands 2008
Kiribati Liechtenstein Luxembourg Macau SAR, China Maldives Malta Marshall Islands Mayotte Micronesia, Fed. Sts. Monaco Montenegro Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia Northern Mariana Islands Palau Samoa San Marino São Tomé and Príncipe Seychelles Solomon Islands St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia St. Vincent & Grenadines Suriname Tonga Vanuatu Virgin Islands (U.S.)
97 36 489 526 305 412 60 191 110 33 622 195 247 85 20 179 31 160 87 511 49 170 109 515 104 234 110
thousand sq. km 2008
people per sq. km 2008
0.8 0.2 2.6 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.0 13.8 0.8 18.6 0.5 0.5 2.8 0.1 1.0 0.5 28.9 0.3 0.6 0.4 163.8 0.8 12.2 0.4
119 223 189 18,659 1,017 1,287 331 511 158 16,358 46 244 13 186 44 63 517 167 189 18 189 279 280 3 144 19 314
$ millions 2008
197 3,463 33,960 18,142 1,110 6,825 195 .. 272 .. 4,146 .. .. .. 175 504 1,430 164 889 518 535 921 551 2,454 279 442 ..
Gross domestic product
1.6
Life Adult expectancy literacy at birth rate
WORLD VIEW
Key indicators for other economies
Carbon dioxide emissions
Purchasing power parity
Per capita $ 2008
$ millions 2008
Per capita $ 2008
2,040 97,990 69,390 35,360 3,640 16,690 3,270 ..a 2,460 ..c 6,660 ..c ..c ..c 8,630 2,820 46,770 1,030 10,220 1,010 10,870 5,410 5,050 4,760 2,690 1,940 ..c
349 b 3,610b .. .. 25,785 52,770 26,811 52,260 1,613 5,290 8,418 20,580 .. .. .. .. 3,270 b 361b .. .. 8,350 13,420 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4,410 b 789 b .. .. 286 1,790 1,707b 19,630 b 2,130b 1,090 b 761 b 15,480 b 9,020b 1,535b 8,560 b 934b 6,680 b 3,439b 3,980 b 412b 3,480 b 793b .. ..
% growth 2007–08
Per capita % growth 2007–08
years 2008
3.0 3.1 –0.9 13.2 5.2 3.8 1.5 .. –2.9 .. 8.1 .. .. .. –1.0 –3.4 4.5 5.8 2.8 6.9 8.2 0.5 –1.1 5.1 0.8 6.6 ..
1.4 2.2 –2.7 10.4 3.7 3.1 –0.8 .. –3.1 .. 7.9 .. .. .. –1.6 –3.4 3.1 4.1 0.5 4.3 7.4 –0.6 –1.2 4.2 0.4 3.9 ..
.. 83 81 81 72 80 .. 76 69 .. 74 76 76 .. .. 72 82 66 73 66 .. .. 72 69 72 70 79
% ages 15 thousand and older metric tons 2008 2006
.. .. .. 93 98 .. .. .. .. .. .. 96 96 .. .. 99 .. 88 .. .. .. .. .. 91 99 81 ..
26 .. 11,318 2,308 678 2,587 84 .. .. .. .. 3,752 2,799 .. 117 158 .. 103 696 180 136 374 194 2,378 132 88 ..
a. Estimated to be upper middle income ($3,856–$11,905). b. Based on regression; others are extrapolated from the 2005 International Comparison Program benchmark estimates. c. Estimated to be high income ($11,906 or more). d. Data are for the area controlled by the government of the Republic of Cyprus. e. Less than 0.5.
currency. • GDP per capita is GDP divided by midyear population. • Life expectancy at birth is the number of years a newborn infant would live if prevailing patterns of mortality at the time of its birth were to stay the same throughout its life. • Adult literacy rate is the percentage of adults ages 15 and older who can,
Data sources
with understanding, read and write a short, simple
The indicators here and throughout the book
statement about their everyday life. • Carbon dioxide
are compiled by World Bank staff from primary
emissions are those stemming from the burning of
and secondary sources. More information about
fossil fuels and the manufacture of cement. They
the indicators and their sources can be found in
include carbon dioxide produced during consumption
the About the data, Definitions, and Data sources
of solid, liquid, and gas fuels and gas flaring.
entries that accompany each table in subsequent sections.
2010 World Development Indicators
51
Text figures, tables, and boxes
PEOPLE
Introduction
A
chieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) promises a better life for millions: lives saved; women empowered; illiteracy, hunger, and malnutrition reduced or eliminated; and children ensured access to high-quality education and health services. Because the MDGs are so important, countries have been striving to effectively monitor progress toward achieving them. Though the world overall has made progress, many countries remain off track—particularly fragile states and countries emerging from conflict. The global financial crisis could push an estimated 50 million people into poverty, with serious consequences for human development. Poor families cut short their children’s schooling, prolonging poverty into the next generation because dropouts earn less as adults. Families are also likely to have to cut back on consumption as recent increases in food prices put pressures on budgets, damaging children’s nutrition and health. But the story is not all bleak.
Monitoring the Millennium Development Goals: what do the available data tell us? Many countries and regions have made remarkable progress. Deaths of children under age 5 have declined steadily in developing countries, falling from 101 per 1,000 live births in 1990 to 73 in 2008, despite population growth. But many countries have made little progress, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, and large disparities persist between the richest and poorest children in countries across all regions (figure 2a). Interventions that could yield breakthroughs for children show mixed success. One child in four in developing countries is underweight—even more in low-income countries (figure 2b). But distribution of insecticide-treated nets has reduced the toll Child mortality is higher among the poorest children . . . Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000) 150
2a Poorest quintile Richest quintile
of malaria—a major killer of children—and higher immunization rates are making advances against measles (United Nations 2009a). Healthy births continue to be a privilege of the rich. Developed countries report 10 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births, compared with 440 in developing countries—and 14 developing countries have maternal mortality ratios of 1,000 or higher (United Nations 2009a). Interventions to prevent maternal deaths, such as prenatal care, have improved in all regions, but poor women in the world’s poorest countries have the least access to them (figure 2c). Access to contraception is increasing in all regions, but unmet need remains high at 11 percent (United Nations 2009a). Major accomplishments have also been made in education. Enrollment in primary school reached . . . as is child malnutrition
2b Poorest quintile Richest quintile
Prevalence of child malnutrition (percent of children under age 5) 60
100
40
50
20
0
2
0 Bangladesh (2007)
Haiti (2006)
Source: Demographic and Health Surveys.
Liberia (2007)
Cambodia (2005)
Nepal (2006)
Rwanda (2005)
Source: Demographic and Health Surveys.
2010 World Development Indicators
53
The poorest women have the least access to prenatal care
2c Poorest quintile Richest quintile
Pregnant women receiving prenatal care (percent) 100
Poorer children are more likely to die before age 5 . . . Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000)
2f Poorest quintile Richest quintile
250 200
75
150 50 100 25
50 0
0 Bangladesh (2007)
Congo, Dem. Rep. (2007)
Vietnam (2006)
Brazil (1996)
Source: Demographic and Health Surveys and Multiple Indicators Cluster Surveys.
Turkey (1998)
Source: Demographic and Health Surveys.
2d
Poor and rural children are less likely to complete primary school . . . Urban Poorest quintile
Primary completion rate (percent of relevant age group)
Côte d’Ivoire (2006)
Rural Richest quintile
125
. . . and to be out of school
2g
Children out of school (percent of children ages 6–11)
Poorest quintile Richest quintile
15
100 10
75 50
5 25 0 Bangladesh (2006)
Ghana (2003)
0
Yemen, Rep. (2006)
Georgia (2006)
Peru (2004)
Source: Demographic and Health Surveys.
Source: Demographic and Health Surveys.
2e
. . . and more likely to be out of school
Poorest quintile Richest quintile
Children out of school (percent of children ages 6–11) 80 60 40
20 0 Cambodia (2005)
Ethiopia (2005)
Kenya (2003)
Source: Demographic and Health Surveys.
86 percent in developing countries overall in 2007, up from 81 percent in 2000. Most of the progress was in regions lagging furthest behind—Sub-Saharan Africa (up 14 percentage points) and South Asia (up 10 percentage points). Primary school completion rates also improved, from 80 percent in 2000 to 88 percent in 2007, with the greatest improvements in the Middle East and North Africa. But the
54
Namibia (2006)
2010 World Development Indicators
improvement was not uniformly distributed: children from poorer households and rural areas are less likely to complete their primary education (figure 2d). In many countries and regions universal primary education (Millennium Development Goal 2) is jeopardized by the number of children who are out of school. In 2007 an estimated 72 million children were out of school, almost half of them in Sub- Saharan Africa and 18 million of them in South Asia. Nearly half of children out of school have had no contact with formal education. Another 23 percent were previously enrolled but dropped out (United Nations 2009a). Inequalities within countries mean that the poor are most likely to lose out: children from poor households are two to three times as likely to be out of school as their richest counterparts (figure 2e). And although some of the MDG targets and indicators may be less relevant for many upper middle-income countries, they continue to matter for others. Wide disparities in well-being and achievement between the poorest and the
PEOPLE
wealthiest populations persist, impeding countries’ ability to meet their targets (figures 2f and 2g). Under-five mortality for richer children is less than half that for poorer children.
Beyond data: what more do countries need to do? The MDGs continue to provide a focus for country efforts, along with the need to strengthen data collection and analysis to assess progress. At the same time governments need to concentrate on interventions that improve access to quality health and education services that can produce favorable outcomes for the MDGs. Health Slow progress on meeting the health MDGs has been associated with disappointing advances in access to health care. Many health systems are not equipped to provide health care for all, reflecting the inability of governments and societies to mobilize the requisite resources and institutions. In particular, countries need to improve three areas of service delivery that focus on people’s needs: infrastructure, available staff to deliver services, and adequate and effective funding (Gauthier and others 2009). Infrastructure. The quality of health services depends on the availability of basic infrastructure services such as electricity and water. Electricity—limited in many poor countries—is necessary for operating medical equipment and facilities. Because unclean water is an important vector of sickness, clean running water is fundamental to service quality. Yet data indicate that firstline facilities in many countries lack these basic services (figure 2h). And in some countries infrastructure is deteriorating (figure 2i). The accessibility and quality of health care services are often constrained by the unavailability of basic medical services and equipment (figure 2j). Poor countries often have fewer than 1.1 doctors and 0.9 nurse per 1,000 people, with access unevenly distributed across income groups. Wealthy people are better able to get to well staffed facilities and can afford to be seen by doctors (figure 2k). Staffing. In many developing countries staff absenteeism is high, reflecting inadequate incentives and weak local accountability. For example, on an average day 40 percent of primary
First-line health facilities in many countries lack electricity and clean water
2h Regular water
Percent
Electricity
80
60
40
20
0
Health center
Clinic
Health center
Ghana (2002)
Clinic
Health center
Clinic, health post, dispensary Rwanda (2007)
Kenya (2004)
Source: Ghana Service Provision Assessment Survey 2002; Kenya HIV/AIDS Service Provision Assessment Survey 2004; Rwanda Service Provision Assessment Survey 2007.
Fewer health facilities in Guinea had electricity in 2001 than in 1998, but more had running water
2i Electricity
Percent
Running water
60
40
20
0
1998
2001
Source: Guinea Health Facility Survey 2001.
Availability of child health services is weak in Egypt and Rwanda
2j
Share of facilities providing service (percent)
Egypt (2004)
Rwanda (2007)
100
75
50
25
0
Outpatient care for sick children
Growth monitoring
Childhood immunization
All basic child health services
Source: Egypt Service Provision Assessment Surveys 2004; Rwanda Service Provision Assessment Survey 2007.
2010 World Development Indicators
55
Wealthy people have better access to child health services
2k
Children with fever treated at a private facility (percent)
Poorest quintile
Richest quintile
50 40 30 20 10 0 Philippines (2003)
Bangladesh (2004)
Tanzania (2004)
Source: Demographic and Health Surveys.
Absenteeism among health workers reduces access to health care
2l
Absentee rate (percent) 40
times more common in urban areas—followed by pharmacists. Funding. As a country’s income grows, total spending on health care rises. In 2007 highincome economies spent an average of 11 percent of GDP on health services and developing economies 5 percent. Funding for front-line service providers is low in many developing countries because of leakages and allocation rules that favor other purposes. Industrialized countries have shown that the disproportionate focus on hospitals and tertiary care, which dominated practice worldwide for much of the last two decades of the 20th century, has been a major source of inefficiency and inequality. For example, less than 20 percent of doctors in Thailand were specialists 30 years ago; by 2003, 70 percent were (World Health Organization, World Health Report 2008).
30 20 10 0 India (2003)
Honduras (2001)
Uganda (2004)
Bangladesh (2004)
Mozambique (2003)
Source: Lewis 2006.
Distribution of health workers in Zambia, 2004 (per 100,000 people)
Classifi cation
National
2m
Rural
Urban
Ratio of urban to rural
Doctors
6.4
5.2
36.1
6.9
Nurses
41.6
17.7
44.7
2.5
Pharmacists/technicians
1.2
1.1
5.5
5.0
Laboratory technicians
2.7
2.5
7.9
3.2
119.8
115.0
234.6
2.0
All health workers
Source: Zambian Ministry of Health and WHO 2005.
health care workers in India are not at work (figure 2l). Because most people have to travel far to get to a health center, a high probability that the clinic will not be staffed may discourage patients from seeking care. Uneven distribution of health workers is a major problem in several countries, especially in rural and poorer areas. For example, Zambia has twice as many health workers in urban areas as in rural areas (table 2m). Distribution of doctors is most uneven—they are seven
56
2010 World Development Indicators
Education In 2002 the World Bank and development partners launched the Education for All Fast Track Initiative, a global partnership to help low-income countries meet the MDG target of universal primary education and the Education for All goal that all children complete a full cycle of primary education by 2015. The initiative encourages countries to design sound education plans and provides additional indicators for tracking progress toward the education MDG, including indicators to monitor infrastructure and capacity at the primary school level, availability and presence in the classroom of qualified teachers, and expenditures on primary education. At the school. Many schools lack the most basic infrastructure elements that are taken for granted in developed countries (figure 2n). For example, a 2008 survey of primary schools in Asia, Latin America, and North Africa found that more than one student in five in Paraguay, the Philippines, and Sri Lanka was in a school that lacked running water (UNESCO Institute for Statistics 2008b). No country in the survey had a library in every school. In India, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, and Tunisia, less than half the students were in schools with a telephone. The survey also showed major gaps in resources between urban and rural schools. In four states of India 27 percent of village schools have electricity while 76 percent of schools in towns and cities do. Only about half these rural
PEOPLE
schools have enough toilets for girls, and less than 4 percent have a telephone. In Peru less than half of village schools have electricity, a library, or toilets for boys or girls; nearly all urban schools have electricity, 65 percent have enough lavatories, and 74 percent have libraries. Teachers. To achieve Education for All goals, few inputs are more essential than having a teacher in the classroom. It is obvious that teacher absence will affect education quality. But teacher absence can also affect education access and school completion rates because poor quality discourages parents from making the sacrifices necessary to send their children to school. More important, high rates of teacher absence often signal deeper problems of accountability and governance that are themselves barriers to educational progress. How prevalent is the problem of teacher absence? One difficulty in studying teacher absence is that administrative records of teachers’ attendance may not be accurate. In countries with the highest absence rates, administrative records may be an especially poor guide to teacher attendance. If poor governance and low levels of accountability undermine teachers’ incentives to attend school, those same factors are likely to reduce the accuracy of offi cial attendance records. A study that measured attendance through direct observation of teachers during surprise visits to primary schools in six poor countries in 2002–03 found that teachers were absent about 19 percent of the time on average (Abadzi 2007; figure 2o). On an average day 27 percent of the teachers in Uganda were not at work compared with 5 percent in New York State. Few teachers face serious threats of being fired for excessive absences. In a survey of 3,000 Indian government schools only one teacher was fired for poor attendance (Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab 2009). Even in private schools, where teachers are less protected and schools have financial incentives to provide better service, only 35 of 600 schools reported a teacher being fired for poor attendance. Funding. Adequate resources are critical for ensuring good quality outcomes in education. Studies have repeatedly stressed the need to ensure adequate and stable funding for education (Bruns, Mingat, and Rakotomalala 2003).
2n
Many schools lack electricity, blackboards, seating, and libraries Share of students in schools with the resource, 2005–06 (percent) 100
Electricity Sufficient seating
Blackboard Library
75 50 25 0 Indiaa
Philippines
Peru
a. Data cover four states only: Assam, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Tamil Nadu. Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics 2008b.
Absenteeism is high among teachers in some poor countries, 2002–03
2o
Absentee rate (percent) 30
20
10
0 Uganda
India
Indonesia
Zambia
Bangladesh
Papua New Guinea
Ecuador
Peru
Source: Abadzi 2007.
2p
The cost of education
The allocation of public budgets is ultimately the result of competing demands for limited resources. Countries with rising demand for education and limited funding need to keep costs per student low. In 2005 in Sub-Saharan Africa average spending per primary school student was almost 13 percent of per capita GDP, though spending ranged from 4 percent in the Republic of Congo to 35 percent in Burkina Faso. In East Asia and Pacific average spending per primary school student was 15 percent, yet two countries reported the lowest spending levels in the world (Indonesia and Myanmar, at just 3 percent). By contrast, countries in North America and Western Europe tend to spend an average of about 22 percent and those in Central and Eastern Europe around 17 percent. Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics, Global Education Digest 2007.
Countries with higher primary gross enrollment ratios and primary completion rates tend to devote a greater share of national income or government budgets to public primary education. Governments struggle to fund free basic education for all (box 2p). Almost a third of education funding worldwide is allocated to the primary level ($741 billion, or 1.3 percent of global GDP in purchasing power parity terms; table 2q). Sub-Saharan Africa invests the greatest share (2.1 percent of GDP), followed by the Arab States (1.8 percent) and 2010 World Development Indicators
57
Latin America and the Caribbean (1.6 percent). In Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Dominican Republic, and Kenya the share of education funding going to primary education exceeded 60 percent in 2005. These large investments in primary education may reflect efforts to provide basic education to relatively Public expenditures on primary education, by region, 2004
2q Expenditure on primary education as share of total expenditure on education (percent)
Total expenditure on education (percent of GDP)
Expenditure on primary education (percent of GDP)
Arab states
4.9
1.8
37
Central Asia
2.8
0.6
21
Central and Eastern Europe
4.2
1.1
26
East Asia and Pacific
2.8
1.0
36
Latin America and Caribbean
4.4
1.6
36
North America and Western Europe
5.6
1.5
27
South and West Asia
3.6
1.2
33
Sub-Saharan Africa
4.5
2.1
47
World
4.3
1.3
30
Region
Note: Data are classified by United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization regions. Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics, Global Education Digest 2007.
large school-age populations—or they may indicate that few students pursue higher levels of education.
Achievements and gaps in data availability Attention to the MDGs has been accompanied by substantial increases in the availability of health and education statistics. But data availability remains inadequate in some countries, and some countries still lack sufficient information (two or more data points) to assess progress (figure 2r). Efforts to expand and improve statistical output have benefited from programs to strengthen institutions and individual skills within national statistical systems. Where administrative sources are weak, progress in closing data gaps has been made by mounting household surveys to supplement available data. One of the most serious gaps is the lack of reliable information on births and deaths in poor countries that lack vital registration systems. On average, only half the births in developing countries were reported from civil registration systems to the United Nations Statistics Division during 2000–07, with coverage especially low in South Asia and Sub-Saharan 2r
Available data on human development indicators vary by region
Percent
Two data points
One data point
No data points
100
75
50
Child malnutrition
Source: World Development Indicators data files.
58
2010 World Development Indicators
Births attended by skilled health staff
South Asia
Youth literacy rate
Sub-Saharan Africa
Middle East & North Africa
Latin America & Caribbean
Europe & Central Asia
East Asia & Pacific
All developing regions
South Asia
Net primary enrollment ratio
Sub-Saharan Africa
Middle East & North Africa
Latin America & Caribbean
Europe & Central Asia
East Asia & Pacific
All developing regions
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
Middle East & North Africa
Latin America & Caribbean
Europe & Central Asia
East Asia & Pacific
All developing regions
Sub-Saharan Africa
South Asia
Middle East & North Africa
Latin America & Caribbean
Europe & Central Asia
East Asia & Pacific
0
All developing regions
25
PEOPLE
In many regions fewer than half of births are reported to the United Nations Statistics Division . .
2s
Births reported to the United Nations Statistics Division, 2000–07 (percent) 100
75
50
25
0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America Middle East & & Caribbean North Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
All developing regions
Source: World Bank staff calculations, based on data from United Nations Statistics Division’s Population and Vital Statistics Report and United Nations Population Division (2009a).
. . . and even fewer child deaths are reported
2t
Infant deaths reported to the United Nations Statistics Division, 2000–07 (percent) 100
75
50
25
0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America Middle East & & Caribbean North Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
All developing regions
Source: World Bank staff calculations, based on data from United Nations Statistics Division’s Population and Vital Statistics Report and United Nations Population Division (2009a).
Out of school children are difficult to measure
2u Expected to drop out Expected to enter late Expected never to enroll
Percent of children out of school, 2006 80 60 40 20
World (75.3 million)
Sub-Saharan Africa (35.2 million)
South & West Asia (18.4 million)
North America & Western Europe (2.0 million)
Latin America & Caribbean (2.6 million)
East Asia & Pacific (9.5 million)
Central & Eastern Europe (1.6 million)
Central Asia (0.3 million)
0 Arab States (5.7 million)
Africa (figure 2s). Reporting of infant deaths is even lower: fewer than a third of infant deaths in developing countries were reported, with low coverage in all regions except Europe and Central Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean (figure 2t). For countries lacking vital registration systems, household surveys and censuses are important sources of fertility and mortality data. The 2010 round of censuses, covering 1996–2014, promises to be far more successful than the previous round. More than 500 million people in 27 countries and areas were not included in the 2000 census round. For 2010 only nine countries have not yet scheduled a census, reducing the number of people not enumerated to about 140 million, a drop of 75 percent from the previous census round. In education, despite improved reporting of school enrollment and completion rates, diffi culties remain in measuring dropouts and out of school children. Many children have had some contact with schooling (figure 2u), but there is still a lack of conceptual clarity in the definitions of the school-age population and school participation. Data from school censuses may overestimate enrollment rates because registered children may not show up or may drop out during the school year. Or the data may undercount students because some students who did not register or officially enroll did attend school. Likewise, household surveys may not use consistent definitions of school attendance or may fail to correct for seasonal variation in attendance. Another problem is inaccuracies in data for school-age populations (the denominator in calculations of enrollment rates). Different compilers may use different estimates of population size, or ministries of educations may use outdated population estimates. For example, some population estimates or enrollment numbers may include migrants while others exclude them. If the school enrollment data include migrant children while the population estimates exclude them, the resulting enrollment rates will not be accurate. Most critical is the problem of going from sample statistics to estimates for the universe if the sample frame or sample design is not accurate. Censuses, which will become available for virtually all developing countries, remain an important source of information on the age-sex structure of populations.
Note: Numbers in parentheses are total number of children out of school. Data are classified by United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization regions. Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics 2008a.
2010 World Development Indicators
59
Beyond the Millennium Development Goals: monitoring emerging challenges On the whole, people are healthier and better educated than they were 30 years ago, but progress has been deeply unequal. And the nature of some problems is changing at a rate that is wholly unexpected. Thirty years ago about 38 percent of the world’s population lived in cities. By 2008 more than 50 percent (3.3 billion people) did. A third of urban dwellers (more than 1 billion people) live in slum areas that lack basic social services. By 2030, 60 percent of the world’s population (almost 5 billion people) are projected to live in urban areas, and most of this growth will be concentrated in smaller cities in developing countries and in megacities of unprecedented size in Southern and Eastern Asia (World Health Organization, World Health Report 2008). While health and education outcomes are better in urban areas on average, economic and social stratification perpetuates inequities. These and other emerging challenges will raise demand for types of data different from those routinely collected today by statistical offi ces—and will call for increased national accountability. Experience shows that targeted interventions and funding have succeeded in expanding programs to deliver services to those most in need. But achieving the MDGs will also require stronger accountability and a clearer focus on data and statistics, analytic methods for new data collection, improved use of data by national policymakers and planners, and regular evaluations of programs and new initiatives. Achieving the MDGs will also require targeting areas and population groups that have been left behind—rural communities and the poorest households. Health Urbanization, aging populations, and a globalized lifestyle combine to make chronic and noncommunicable diseases, including diabetes, cancers, cardiovascular diseases, and injuries, increasingly important causes of mortality and morbidity in developing countries (World Health Organization, World Health Report 2008). In response, countries need to collect and strengthen statistics on cause of death and move away from fragmented attention to the needs of single- disease programs such as HIV/AIDS.
60
2010 World Development Indicators
The increase in noncommunicable diseases, accompanied by a shift in the distribution of death and disease from younger to older people as the population ages, will affect service delivery and the allocation of health budgets. Among the economically and socially deprived populations of poor countries, these changes are most likely to affect children and young adults, especially women. And this rise in chronic, noncommunicable diseases comes on top of an unfinished agenda on communicable diseases and maternal and child health. In addition to the shifting epidemiological burden of diseases, developing countries, especially low-income countries, continue to struggle with low access to health services. For people in these countries, out-of-pocket expenses make up more than half of health care costs, depriving many families of needed care because they cannot afford it (figure 2v). Also, more than 100 million people worldwide are pushed into poverty each year because of catastrophic health care expenditures (World Health Organization, Out-of-pocket health care costs are too high for many people to afford
2v
Public health expenditure Out-of-pocket health expenditure Other private health expenditure
Percent 100 75 50 25 0 Low income
Middle income
High income
Source: WHO’s National Health Account database.
Informal payments to health care providers are common
2w
Share of patients who made informal payments, selected countries, 1999 (percent) 100 75 50 25 0 Armenia
Moldova
Source: World Bank 2000a.
Tajikistan Slovak Republic
PEOPLE
World Health Report 2008). Compounding problems of access and equity is weak governance in the delivery of health services. In developing and transition economies, informal payments to health care providers are high (figure 2w). Reliable mortality statistics, the cornerstone of national health information systems, are necessary for assessing population health, planning health policies and health services, and evaluating epidemiological and other health system programs. And the data are essential for monitoring progress toward the health-related MDGs of reducing maternal and child mortality and mortality from HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. Yet in 2007 only 61 percent of developing countries had complete registration systems, and among these only a handful had reliable cause of death statistics. Few efforts have been made to systematically build or strengthen country capacities to collect and use data. The pace needs to quicken. Education Achieving universal primary education (Goal 2) is vital to meeting all the other MDGs. The steady increase in primary school enrollment in nearly all regions is an encouraging sign. But countries still need to translate these enrollment rates into opportunities for learning. Enrollment is not a sufficient measure of learning. Because school attendance is a better predictor of learning outcomes (Abadzi 2007), monitoring of student attendance needs to be strengthened. Many students enrolled on the first day of school do not actually attend during some or part of the year (table 2x). Retaining all enrolled children in school is a challenge for most countries, requiring varied strategies, concerted effort, and investment. And school retention should translate into instructional time for children, so that they can develop cognitive skills and knowledge. Instructional time varies greatly by country (figure 2y), and few countries systematically monitor learning outcomes by assessing student achievement or participating
Primary school enrollment and attendance, 2003–08
2x Primary school net enrollment rate (percent)
Economy or group
Male
Africa
Primary school net attendance rate (percent)
Female
Male
Female
79
74
69
66
Sub-Saharan Africa
76
70
65
63
Eastern and Southern Africa
83
82
69
70
West and Central Africa
68
58
63
58
Middle East and North Africa
92
88
85
81
92
89
84
81a
South Asia
87
82
83
79
East Asia and Pacific
98
97
88
88 a
95
95
92
93 92
Asia
Latin America and Caribbean CEE/CIS
92
90
94
Developed economies
94
95
..
Developing economies
89
86
80
78a
Least developed countries World
..
81
76
67
65
90
87
81
78 a
Note: CEE/CIS is Central and Eastern Europe and Commonwealth of Independent States. a. Excludes China. Source: UNICEF, The State of the World’s Children 2010.
Instructional time for children varies considerably by country, 2004–06
2y
Instructional time, 2004–06 (percent) 80 60 40 20 0 Tunisia
Morocco
Pernambuco, Brazil
Ghana
Source: Abadzi 2007.
in regional or international assessments. Countries must shift their focus from access to achievement, making learning outcomes a central part of the education agenda.
2010 World Development Indicators
61
Tables
2.1
Population dynamics Population
Average annual population growth
Population age composition
Dependency ratio
%
1990
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland Franceb Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
62
18.6 3.3 25.3 10.7 32.5 3.5 17.1 7.7 7.2 115.6 10.2 10 4.8 6.7 4.3 1.4 149.6 8.7 8.8 5.7 9.7 12.2 27.8 2.9 6.1 13.2 1,135.2 5.7 33.2 37 2.4 3.1 12.6 4.8 10.6 10.4 5.1 7.4 10.3 57.8 5.3 3.2 1.6 48.3 5.0 56.7 0.9 0.9 5.5 79.4 15.0 10.2 8.9 6.1 1.0 7.1 4.9
millions 2008
29.0 3.1 34.4 18.0 39.9 3.1 21.4 8.3 8.7 160.0 9.7 10.7 8.7 9.7 3.8 1.9 192.0 7.6 15.2 8.1 14.6 19.1 33.3 4.3 10.9 16.8 1,324.7 7.0 45.0 64.3 3.6 4.5 20.6 4.4 11.2 10.4 5.5 10.0 13.5 81.5 6.1 4.9 1.3 80.7 5.3 62.3 1.4 1.7 4.3 82.1 23.4 11.2 13.7 9.8 1.6 9.9 7.3
2010 World Development Indicators
2015
35.0 3.3 38.1 21.7 42.4 3.1 23.4 8.4 9.4 176.3 9.4 11.0 10.6 10.8 3.7 2.1 202.4 7.3 19.0 9.4 16.4 22.2 35.7 4.9 13.1 17.9 1,377.7 7.3 49.3 77.4 4.2 4.9 24.2 4.4 11.2 10.6 5.6 10.8 14.6 91.7 6.4 6.0 1.3 96.2 5.4 63.9 1.6 2.0 4.1 80.6 26.6 11.4 16.2 11.8 1.8 10.7 8.4
% 1990–2008 2008–15
2.5 –0.3 1.7 2.9 1.1 –0.8 1.3 0.4 1.1 1.8 –0.3 0.4 3.3 2.1 –0.7 2.0 1.4 –0.7 3.0 2.0 2.3 2.5 1.0 2.2 3.2 1.3 0.9 1.1 1.7 3.1 2.2 2.1 2.7 –0.4 0.3 0.0 0.4 1.7 1.5 1.9 0.8 2.5 –0.9 2.9 0.4 0.5 2.5 3.4 –1.3 0.2 2.5 0.6 2.4 2.6 2.4 1.8 2.2
2.7 0.5 1.5 2.6 0.9 0.2 1.3 0.2 1.1 1.4 –0.4 0.4 2.9 1.6 –0.2 1.3 0.8 –0.6 3.2 2.2 1.7 2.1 1.0 1.8 2.6 0.9 0.6 0.7 1.3 2.7 2.2 1.3 2.3 –0.2 0.0 0.3 0.3 1.1 1.1 1.7 0.6 2.8 –0.1 2.5 0.3 0.4 1.8 2.5 –0.8 –0.3 1.9 0.2 2.4 2.6 2.3 1.1 1.9
Ages 0–14 2008
Ages 15–64 2008
Ages 65+ 2008
46 24 28 45 25 21 19 15 25 32 15 17 43 37 16 34 26 13 46 39 34 41 17 41 46 23 21 a 13 30 47 41 26 41 15 18 14 18 32 31 32 33 42 15 44 17 18 37 42 17 14 39 14 42 43 43 37 38
51 66 68 52 64 68 67 68 69 64 71 66 54 59 71 63 67 69 52 58 62 55 70 55 51 68 72a 75 65 50 56 67 55 68 70 71 66 62 62 63 60 56 68 53 67 65 59 55 68 66 58 68 53 54 54 59 58
2 9 5 2 11 12 13 17 7 4 14 17 3 5 14 4 7 17 2 3 3 4 14 4 3 9 8a 13 5 3 4 6 4 17 12 15 16 6 6 5 7 2 17 3 17 17 4 3 14 20 4 18 4 3 3 4 4
% of working-age population Young Old 2008 2008
90 36 41 87 40 30 28 22 36 50 21 26 81 63 22 54 39 19 89 67 55 74 24 74 89 34 29a 17 45 93 73 39 74 23 26 20 28 51 51 52 55 74 22 83 25 28 62 78 25 21 67 21 79 80 79 62 66
4 14 7 5 16 17 20 25 10 6 19 26 6 8 20 6 10 25 4 5 5 6 20 7 6 13 11 a 17 8 5 7 9 7 25 16 21 24 9 10 7 12 4 25 6 25 26 7 5 21 30 6 27 8 6 6 7 7
Crude death rate
Crude birth rate
per 1,000 people 2008
per 1,000 people 2008
20 6 5 17 8 9 7 9 6 7 14 9 9 8 10 12 6 14 13 14 8 14 7 17 17 5 7 6 6 17 13 4 11 12 7 10 10 6 5 6 7 8 12 12 9 9 10 11 12 10 11 10 6 11 17 9 5
47 15 21 43 17 15 14 9 18 21 11 12 39 27 9 25 16 10 47 34 25 37 11 35 46 15 12 11 20 45 35 17 35 10 10 11 12 23 21 25 20 37 12 38 11 13 27 37 12 8 32 10 33 40 41 28 27
Population
Average annual population growth
Population age composition
Dependency ratio
%
1990
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
10.4 849.5 177.4 54.4 18.9 3.5 4.7 56.7 2.4 123.5 3.2 16.3 23.4 20.1 42.9 1.9 2.1 4.4 4.2 2.7 3.0 1.6 2.2 4.4 3.7 1.9 11.3 9.5 18.1 8.7 2.0 1.1 83.2 4.4 2.2 24.8 13.5 40.8 1.4 19.1 15.0 3.4 4.1 7.9 97.3 4.2 1.8 108.0 2.4 4.1 4.2 21.8 62.4 38.1 9.9 3.5 0.5
millions 2008
10.0 1,140.0 227.3 72.0 30.7 4.4 7.3 59.8 2.7 127.7 5.9 15.7 38.8 23.8 48.6 1.8 2.7 5.3 6.2 2.3 4.2 2.0 3.8 6.3 3.4 2.0 19.1 14.8 27.0 12.7 3.2 1.3 106.4 3.6 2.6 31.6 22.4 49.6 2.1 28.8 16.4 4.3 5.7 14.7 151.2 4.8 2.8 166.1 3.4 6.6 6.2 28.8 90.3 38.1 10.6 4.0 1.3
2015
9.9 1,246.9 247.5 78.6 36.3 4.8 8.2 60.8 2.8 125.3 6.8 16.9 46.4 24.4 49.3 1.9 3.2 5.7 7.0 2.2 4.4 2.2 4.8 7.2 3.2 2.0 22.8 18.0 30.0 15.4 3.7 1.3 113.1 3.5 2.9 34.3 25.9 53.0 2.4 32.5 16.8 4.6 6.3 19.1 178.7 5.1 3.2 193.5 3.8 7.7 7.0 31.2 102.7 38.0 10.7 4.0 1.6
% 1990–2008 2008–15
–0.2 1.6 1.4 1.6 2.7 1.3 2.5 0.3 0.7 0.2 3.5 –0.2 2.8 0.9 0.7 –0.2 1.4 1.0 2.2 –0.9 1.9 1.4 3.1 2.0 –0.5 0.4 2.9 2.5 2.2 2.1 2.7 1.0 1.4 –1.0 1.0 1.3 2.8 1.1 2.3 2.3 0.5 1.2 1.7 3.4 2.4 0.7 2.3 2.4 1.9 2.6 2.1 1.6 2.1 0.0 0.4 0.6 5.6c
–0.2 1.3 1.2 1.3 2.4 1.0 1.7 0.2 0.4 –0.3 2.0 1.0 2.6 0.3 0.2 0.6 2.1 1.2 1.8 –0.5 0.8 0.8 3.3 1.8 –0.7 0.0 2.5 2.7 1.5 2.7 2.1 0.4 0.9 –0.7 1.1 1.2 2.1 1.0 1.8 1.7 0.3 1.0 1.4 3.8 2.4 0.9 2.0 2.2 1.5 2.2 1.6 1.1 1.8 –0.1 0.0 0.3 3.4
Ages 0–14 2008
Ages 15–64 2008
Ages 65+ 2008
15 32 27 24 41 21 28 14 30 13 35 24 43 22 17 .. 23 30 38 14 26 39 43 30 15 18 43 46 30 44 40 23 29 17 27 29 44 27 37 37 18 21 36 50 43 19 32 37 30 40 34 31 34 15 15 21 16
69 63 67 71 55 68 62 66 62 65 61 69 55 68 72 .. 74 65 58 69 67 56 54 66 69 70 54 50 65 53 58 70 65 72 70 66 53 67 59 59 67 67 60 48 54 66 65 59 64 57 61 64 62 71 67 66 83
16 5 6 5 3 11 10 20 8 21 4 7 3 9 10 .. 2 5 4 17 7 5 3 4 16 12 3 3 5 2 3 7 6 11 4 5 3 5 4 4 15 13 4 2 3 15 3 4 6 2 5 6 4 13 18 13 1
% of working-age population Young Old 2008 2008
22 50 41 35 75 30 45 22 48 21 57 34 78 32 24 .. 31 46 66 20 39 70 80 46 22 26 81 92 46 83 69 33 45 24 38 44 84 40 63 63 27 31 60 103 79 29 49 63 46 70 57 48 56 21 23 31 20
23 8 9 7 6 16 16 31 12 33 6 11 5 14 14 .. 3 8 6 25 11 8 6 6 23 17 6 6 7 4 5 10 10 16 6 8 6 8 6 7 22 19 7 4 6 22 4 7 10 4 8 9 7 19 26 20 1
2.1
PEOPLE
Population dynamics
Crude death rate
Crude birth rate
per 1,000 people 2008
per 1,000 people 2008
13 7 6 6 6 6 5 10 6 9 4 10 12 10 5 7 2 7 7 14 7 17 10 4 13 9 9 12 4 16 10 7 5 13 7 6 16 10 9 6 8 7 5 15 16 9 3 7 5 8 6 5 5 10 10 8 2
10 23 19 19 31 17 22 10 17 9 26 23 39 14 9 19 18 24 27 11 16 29 38 23 10 11 36 40 20 43 34 13 18 12 19 20 39 21 28 25 11 15 25 54 40 13 22 30 21 31 25 21 25 11 10 12 12
2010 World Development Indicators
63
2.1
Population dynamics Population
Average annual population growth
Population age composition
Dependency ratio
%
1990
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
23.2 148.3 7.2 16.3 7.5 7.6 4.1 3.0 5.3 2.0 6.6 35.2 38.8 17.1 27.1 0.9 8.6 6.7 12.7 5.3 25.5 56.7 0.7 3.9 1.2 8.2 56.1 3.7 17.7 51.9 1.9 57.2 249.6 3.1 20.5 19.8 66.2 2.0 12.3 7.9 10.5 5,278.9 s 653.6 3,685.7 2,889.5 796.2 4,339.3 1,599.6 433.2 435.5 227.4 1,128.7 514.9 939.6 301.6
millions 2008
2015
21.5 21.0 142.0 139.0 9.7 11.7 24.6 28.6 12.2 14.5 7.4 7.2 5.6 6.6 4.8 5.4 5.4 5.4 2.0 2.1 8.9 10.7 48.7 51.1 45.6 47.9 20.2 21.2 41.3 47.7 1.2 1.3 9.2 9.6 7.6 7.9 20.6 24.1 6.8 7.8 42.5 52.1 67.4 69.9 1.1 1.4 6.5 7.6 1.3 1.4 10.3 11.1 73.9 79.9 5.0 5.5 31.7 39.7 46.3 44.4 4.5 5.2 61.4 63.8 304.1 323.5 3.3 3.4 27.3 30.2 27.9 31.0 86.2 92.8 3.9 4.8 22.9 27.8 12.6 15.0 12.5 14.0 6,697.3 s 7,241.2 s 976.2 1,127.4 4,652.3 5,006.3 3,703.0 4,011.2 949.3 995.1 5,628.5 6,133.7 1,929.6 2,035.6 443.3 449.2 566.1 606.8 325.2 366.1 1,545.1 1,706.5 819.3 969.5 1,068.7 1,107.4 326.1 331.0
% 1990–2008 2008–15
–0.4 –0.2 1.7 2.3 2.7 –0.2 1.7 2.6 0.1 0.1 1.7 1.8 0.9 0.9 2.3 1.7 0.4 0.7 2.7 1.4 2.8 1.0 2.2 2.8 0.5 1.3 1.5 1.8 3.2 –0.6 4.9 0.4 1.1 0.4 1.6 1.9 1.5 3.8 3.5 2.6 1.0 1.3 w 2.2 1.3 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.0 0.1 1.5 2.0 1.7 2.6 0.7 0.4
–0.4 –0.3 2.7 2.1 2.5 –0.3 2.4 1.5 0.1 0.4 2.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 2.0 1.4 0.6 0.4 2.2 1.8 2.9 0.5 3.3 2.3 0.3 1.1 1.1 1.3 3.2 –0.6 2.1 0.5 0.9 0.3 1.5 1.5 1.1 2.8 2.8 2.4 1.7 1.1 w 2.1 1.0 1.1 0.7 1.2 0.8 0.2 1.0 1.7 1.4 2.4 0.5 0.2
Ages 0–14 2008
15 15 42 33 44 18 d 43 17 16 14 45 31 15 24 40 40 17 16 35 38 45 22 45 40 21 24 27 30 49 14 19 18 20 23 30 30 27 45 44 46 40 27 w 38 27 28 25 29 23 19 29 31 33 43 18 15
Ages 15–64 2008
70 72 55 64 54 68d 55 73 72 70 52 65 68 68 57 57 66 68 61 59 52 71 52 56 73 70 67 66 48 70 80 66 67 63 65 65 67 52 53 51 56 65 w 58 66 66 67 65 70 70 65 64 63 54 67 67
Ages 65+ 2008
15 13 3 3 2 15d 2 9 12 16 3 4 17 7 4 3 18 17 3 4 3 7 3 3 7 7 6 4 3 16 1 16 13 14 5 5 6 3 2 3 4 7w 4 6 6 8 6 7 11 7 4 5 3 15 18
% of working-age population Young Old 2008 2008
22 20 76 51 81 26d 79 23 22 20 86 47 22 35 69 70 25 23 58 64 85 31 87 72 29 34 41 46 101 20 24 27 31 36 46 47 39 87 83 91 72 42 w 66 41 42 36 45 33 28 44 49 52 79 26 23
21 18 5 4 4 21d 3 13 17 23 5 7 25 11 6 6 27 25 5 6 6 11 6 6 9 10 9 7 5 23 1 25 19 22 7 8 9 6 4 6 7 11 w 6 10 9 12 9 10 16 10 7 7 6 23 27
Crude death rate
Crude birth rate
per 1,000 people 2008
per 1,000 people 2008
12 15 14 4 11 14 16 4 10 9 16 15 9 6 10 16 10 8 3 6 11 9 9 8 8 6 6 8 13 16 2 9 8 9 5 5 5 4 7 17 16 8w 11 8 8 8 8 7 11 6 6 7 14 8 9
10 12 41 23 38 9 40 10 11 10 44 22 11 19 31 30 12 10 28 28 42 15 40 33 15 18 18 22 46 11 14 13 14 15 22 21 17 36 37 43 30 20 w 32 19 20 17 21 14 14 19 24 24 38 12 10
a. Includes Taiwan, China. b. Excludes the French overseas departments of French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, and Réunion. c. Increase is due to a surge in the number of migrants since 2004. d. Includes Kosovo.
64
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
2.1
PEOPLE
Population dynamics Definitions
Population estimates are usually based on national
population is shrinking. Previously high fertility rates
• Population is based on the de facto definition of
population censuses, but the frequency and quality
and declining mortality rates are now reflected in the
population, which counts all residents regardless of
vary by country. Most countries conduct a complete
larger share of the working-age population.
legal status or citizenship—except for refugees not
enumeration no more than once a decade. Estimates
Dependency ratios capture variations in the pro-
permanently settled in the country of asylum, who
for the years before and after the census are inter-
portions of children, elderly people, and working-age
are generally considered part of the population of
polations or extrapolations based on demographic
people in the population that imply the dependency bur-
their country of origin. The values shown are mid-
models. Errors and undercounting occur even in high-
den that the working-age population bears in relation to
year estimates for 1990 and 2008 and projections
income countries; in developing countries errors may
children and the elderly. But dependency ratios show
for 2015. • Average annual population growth is
be substantial because of limits in the transport,
only the age composition of a population, not economic
the exponential change for the period indicated. See
communications, and other resources required to
dependency. Some children and elderly people are part
Statistical methods for more information. • Popula-
conduct and analyze a full census.
of the labor force, and many working-age people are not.
tion age composition is the percentage of the total
The quality and reliability of official demographic
Vital rates are based on data from birth and death
population that is in specific age groups. • Depen-
data are also affected by public trust in the govern-
registration systems, censuses, and sample surveys
dency ratio is the ratio of dependents—people
ment, government commitment to full and accurate
by national statistical offices and other organiza-
younger than 15 or older than 64—to the working-
enumeration, confidentiality and protection against
tions, or on demographic analysis. Data for 2008
age population—those ages 15–64. • Crude death
misuse of census data, and census agencies’ indepen-
for most high-income countries are provisional esti-
rate and crude birth rate are the number of deaths
dence from political influence. Moreover, comparability
mates based on vital registers. The estimates for
and the number of live births occurring during the
of population indicators is limited by differences in the
many countries are projections based on extrapola-
year, per 1,000 people, estimated at midyear. Sub-
concepts, definitions, collection procedures, and esti-
tions of levels and trends from earlier years or inter-
tracting the crude death rate from the crude birth
mation methods used by national statistical agencies
polations of population estimates and projections
rate provides the rate of natural increase, which is
and other organizations that collect the data.
from the United Nations Population Division.
equal to the population growth rate in the absence
Of the 155 economies in the table and the 55 econo-
Vital registers are the preferred source for these
mies in table 1.6, 180 (about 86 percent) conducted a
data, but in many developing countries systems for
census during the 2000 census round (1995–2004).
registering births and deaths are absent or incomplete
As of March 2010, 61 countries have completed a
because of deficiencies in the coverage of events or
census for the 2010 census round (2005–14). The
geographic areas. Many developing countries carry out
currentness of a census and the availability of comple-
special household surveys that ask respondents about
mentary data from surveys or registration systems
recent births and deaths. Estimates derived in this way
are objective ways to judge demographic data quality.
are subject to sampling errors and recall errors.
of migration.
Some European countries’ registration systems offer
The United Nations Statistics Division monitors
complete information on population in the absence of
the completeness of vital registration systems. The
a census. See table 2.17 and Primary data documenta-
share of countries with at least 90 percent complete
tion for the most recent census or survey year and for
vital registration rose from 45 percent in 1988 to
The World Bank’s population estimates are com-
the completeness of registration.
61 percent in 2007. Still, some of the most populous
piled and produced by its Development Data
Current population estimates for developing countries
developing countries—China, India, Indonesia, Bra-
Group in consultation with its Human Develop-
that lack recent census data and pre- and post-census
zil, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria—lack complete
ment Network, operational staff, and country
estimates for countries with census data are provided
vital registration systems. From 2000 to 2007, on
offices. The United Nations Population Division’s
by the United Nations Population Division and other
average 64 percent of births, 62 percent of deaths,
World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision
agencies. The cohort component method—a standard
and 45 percent of infant deaths were registered and
is a source of the demographic data for more
estimation method for estimating and projecting pop-
reported to the United Nations Statistics Division.
than half the countries, most of them developing
Data sources
ulation—requires fertility, mortality, and net migration
International migration is the only other factor
countries, and the source of data on age com-
data, often collected from sample surveys, which can
besides birth and death rates that directly determines
position and dependency ratios for all countries.
be small or limited in coverage. Population estimates
a country’s population growth. From 1990 to 2005 the
Other important sources are census reports and
are from demographic modeling and so are susceptible
number of migrants in high-income countries rose 40
other statistical publications from national sta-
to biases and errors from shortcomings in the model
million. About 195 million people (3 percent of the world
tistical offices; household surveys conducted by
and in the data. Because the five-year age group is the
population) live outside their home country. Estimat-
national agencies, Macro International, and the
cohort unit and five-year period data are used, interpo-
ing migration is difficult. At any time many people are
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;
lations to obtain annual data or single age structure
located outside their home country as tourists, work-
Eurostat’s Demographic Statistics; Secretariat of
may not reflect actual events or age composition.
ers, or refugees or for other reasons. Standards for the
the Pacific Community, Statistics and Demogra-
The growth rate of the total population conceals
duration and purpose of international moves that qualify
phy Programme; and U.S. Bureau of the Census,
age-group differences in growth rates. In many devel-
as migration vary, and estimates require information on
International Data Base.
oping countries the once rapidly growing under-15
flows into and out of countries that is difficult to collect.
2010 World Development Indicators
65
2.2
Labor force structure Labor force participation rate
Labor force
% ages 15 and older Male
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
66
Ages 15 and older average annual % growth
Total millions
Female
1990
2008
1990
2008
1990
2008
87 84 75 90 78 78 74 68 78 89 74 59 88 85 82 78 84 63 91 90 85 79 75 88 84 77 85 79 76 86 83 84 89 74 72 79 74 82 78 74 80 88 71 89 70 63 83 86 82 71 74 65 89 90 86 81 87
89 70 77 89 75 67 70 65 71 84 65 58 86 83 66 64 81 55 90 91 87 75 71 88 77 70 78 67 78 89 82 78 85 59 68 66 68 72 78 71 75 86 64 91 63 59 79 83 74 64 73 63 84 89 90 83 81
32 51 23 74 43 61 52 43 59 61 60 36 57 59 53 64 45 55 77 91 78 48 58 69 65 32 73 47 29 53 59 33 43 47 36 52 62 43 33 27 41 55 63 72 59 46 63 71 60 45 70 36 39 79 59 57 41
33 49 37 74 51 59 58 53 61 58 55 47 67 62 55 72 60 49 78 91 73 53 62 71 63 44 68 53 41 56 63 45 51 46 42 49 61 51 47 23 47 60 55 78 58 51 69 71 55 53 74 43 48 79 60 58 42
5.9 1.4 7.0 4.6 13.5 1.7 8.5 3.5 3.1 49.5 5.3 3.9 1.9 2.8 2.0 0.5 62.6 4.1 3.9 2.8 4.3 4.4 14.7 1.3 2.4 5.0 643.9 2.9 11.2 13.4 1.0 1.2 4.7 2.2 4.4 4.9 2.9 2.9 3.5 16.8 1.9 1.2 0.8 21.5 2.6 25.0 0.4 0.4 2.8 38.8 6.0 4.2 3.1 2.9 0.4 2.8 1.7
9.3 1.4 14.5 8.0 19.1 1.6 11.3 4.3 4.1 76.8 4.9 4.8 3.6 4.4 1.9 1.0 99.9 3.7 6.9 4.4 7.5 7.5 18.7 2.0 4.2 7.7 776.9 3.7 18.6 24.0 1.6 2.1 8.1 2.0 5.1 5.2 3.0 4.4 5.7 26.3 2.5 2.1 0.7 38.2 2.7 28.6 0.7 0.7 2.3 42.4 10.6 5.2 5.3 4.7 0.6 4.4 2.8
2010 World Development Indicators
Female % of labor force
1990–2008
1990
2008
2.5 0.1 4.0 3.1 1.9 –0.3 1.6 1.1 1.6 2.4 –0.4 1.1 3.5 2.6 0.0a 3.3 2.6 –0.6 3.2 2.5 3.1 3.0 1.3 2.4 3.1 2.4 1.0 1.5 2.8 3.2 2.6 3.3 3.1 –0.5 0.8 0.3 0.1 2.3 2.8 2.5 1.5 3.2 –1.0 3.2 0.2 0.7 3.0 3.4 –1.2 0.5 3.2 1.2 3.0 2.7 2.4 2.5 2.7
26.2 39.9 23.4 46.3 36.9 46.3 41.3 40.9 46.8 39.9 48.9 39.0 41.1 43.1 45.2 45.5 35.1 47.9 48.0 52.5 52.8 37.5 44.1 45.6 45.6 30.5 44.8 36.3 28.2 39.9 42.1 27.4 30.1 42.7 33.0 44.4 46.1 33.2 29.5 26.6 35.2 41.4 49.5 45.1 47.1 43.3 44.2 46.2 46.9 40.7 48.9 36.2 31.0 46.8 43.0 43.0 32.3
26.6 42.3 31.2 46.8 41.1 49.6 45.3 45.5 50.2 40.9 49.5 44.9 45.7 43.9 47.1 47.5 43.5 46.3 47.0 52.7 48.8 39.8 46.9 46.6 45.3 37.5 44.6 45.8 35.7 40.6 43.5 35.2 36.7 45.5 38.0 43.4 46.9 38.9 37.9 23.9 42.2 43.6 49.2 47.1 48.1 47.0 46.4 46.2 47.0 45.4 49.2 40.4 37.8 46.8 42.4 42.7 34.0
Labor force participation rate
Labor force
% ages 15 and older Male
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
2.2
PEOPLE
Labor force structure
Ages 15 and older average annual % growth
Total millions
Female
1990
2008
1990
2008
1990
2008
64 85 81 80 73 68 61 64 80 77 68 78 90 79 73 .. 81 74 83 76 83 85 86 78 73 73 85 80 80 70 84 82 84 73 65 82 84 87 64 80 69 73 85 87 75 71 81 85 81 75 82 75 83 71 72 59 93
57 81 86 75 69 72 59 58 73 69 70 75 87 78 72 .. 81 75 80 69 77 75 85 77 60 65 89 80 80 66 80 75 79 48 61 79 77 86 60 76 69 73 87 88 71 69 77 85 79 73 84 82 80 60 68 56 90
46 34 50 22 11 35 42 35 65 50 15 62 75 55 47 .. 36 58 80 63 20 68 65 15 59 46 83 76 43 37 53 38 34 61 63 25 85 71 48 52 43 54 39 27 36 57 19 14 39 71 47 49 48 55 49 31 40
43 33 52 31 13 54 54 38 57 49 23 66 76 55 50 .. 44 56 78 56 22 70 67 24 51 43 84 75 44 37 59 42 43 47 67 27 85 64 52 63 59 62 46 38 39 64 25 21 49 71 56 57 49 47 56 37 48
4.5 317.8 74.9 15.5 4.3 1.3 1.7 23.7 1.1 63.9 0.7 7.8 9.8 10.0 19.2 .. 0.9 1.8 1.9 1.4 0.9 0.7 0.8 1.2 1.9 0.8 5.4 3.9 7.0 2.5 0.7 0.4 29.9 2.1 0.9 7.8 6.3 20.7 0.4 7.5 6.9 1.7 1.4 2.3 29.4 2.2 0.6 31.0 0.9 1.8 1.7 8.3 24.1 18.1 4.7 1.2 0.3
4.3 449.9 112.8 27.8 7.5 2.2 3.1 25.2 1.2 66.9 1.9 8.5 18.2 12.2 24.4 .. 1.4 2.5 3.0 1.2 1.4 0.9 1.5 2.3 1.6 0.9 9.4 6.1 11.7 3.7 1.4 0.6 46.7 1.5 1.4 11.8 10.8 26.8 0.8 12.9 8.9 2.3 2.3 4.6 48.6 2.6 1.1 55.8 1.6 2.9 2.9 13.3 37.9 17.7 5.6 1.5 0.9
Female % of labor force
1990–2008
1990
2008
–0.3 1.9 2.3 3.2 3.0 2.8 3.5 0.3 0.5 0.3 5.2 0.4 3.4 1.1 1.3 .. 2.8 1.8 2.4 –1.0 2.8 1.9 3.3 3.7 –0.9 0.6 3.1 2.5 2.9 2.1 3.4 1.4 2.5 –2.0 2.5 2.3 3.0 1.4 3.0 3.0 1.4 1.7 2.8 3.8 2.8 1.0 3.4 3.3 3.0 2.7 3.1 2.6 2.5 –0.1 0.9 1.3 6.7
44.5 27.1 38.4 20.1 13.1 33.9 40.6 36.5 46.6 40.7 16.2 47.0 46.0 42.6 39.7 .. 22.4 46.1 49.8 49.6 23.3 51.7 46.7 14.8 48.1 40.7 48.4 50.7 34.5 36.1 39.8 32.1 30.0 48.7 45.6 23.7 53.2 45.3 44.9 38.0 38.8 43.0 32.3 24.7 33.0 44.7 13.7 12.7 32.4 46.9 34.9 39.7 36.5 45.4 42.4 35.8 13.5
45.4 27.8 38.4 30.1 16.1 42.8 46.0 40.4 45.1 41.5 22.8 50.0 46.5 42.6 41.9 .. 24.3 42.6 50.6 48.9 24.9 52.4 47.6 21.9 48.9 39.7 49.2 49.9 35.2 36.8 41.7 36.4 36.0 50.7 47.4 26.1 52.1 44.5 46.7 45.4 45.5 46.2 37.8 30.8 34.9 47.6 18.3 19.2 36.9 48.9 38.7 43.3 38.2 44.8 46.8 41.7 11.6
2010 World Development Indicators
67
2.2
Labor force structure Labor force participation rate
Labor force
% ages 15 and older Male 1990
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
66 75 88 80 90 .. 65 79 78 75 89 64 68 79 78 79 70 77 81 83 93 87 81 88 76 75 81 74 91 71 92 73 75 71 85 82 81 66 70 81 80 80 w 85 82 83 78 83 84 75 81 77 85 82 72 67
a. Less than 0.05.
68
2010 World Development Indicators
Female 2008
58 69 80 80 87 .. 67 75 68 64 88 60 66 74 72 68 67 72 78 68 90 80 83 87 78 70 70 70 90 64 94 67 70 73 70 81 75 67 66 81 78 77 w 83 78 79 73 79 79 67 79 73 82 80 68 62
1990
60 60 87 15 62 .. 66 51 59 47 58 36 34 37 27 45 63 57 18 59 87 75 58 56 39 21 34 58 81 56 25 52 57 48 53 36 74 11 16 61 67 52 w 65 51 53 46 53 69 56 40 22 35 57 49 42
Ages 15 and older average annual % growth
Total millions 2008
47 57 86 21 65 .. 66 54 51 54 57 47 49 35 31 53 61 61 21 56 86 66 59 63 54 26 25 61 78 52 42 55 59 53 58 51 68 16 20 60 60 52 w 65 49 49 50 52 64 50 52 26 35 60 53 49
1990
11.8 76.8 3.2 5.0 3.0 .. 1.6 1.6 2.6 0.8 2.6 10.4 15.6 6.8 8.0 0.3 4.7 3.8 3.3 2.1 12.3 32.1 0.3 1.5 0.5 2.4 20.7 1.4 7.9 25.5 1.0 29.0 129.2 1.4 7.3 7.2 31.1 0.4 2.6 3.0 4.1 2,322.0 t 276.8 1,612.4 1,290.3 322.0 1,889.1 847.3 199.9 163.3 62.4 421.5 194.7 432.9 130.4
2008
10.0 76.0 4.8 9.0 5.2 .. 2.1 2.6 2.7 1.0 3.5 18.6 22.8 8.3 13.1 0.4 5.0 4.4 6.7 2.8 20.8 38.5 0.4 2.9 0.7 3.8 25.8 2.4 13.6 23.1 2.8 31.5 158.2 1.6 12.3 12.7 45.6 0.9 6.0 4.7 4.9 3,102.8 t 441.4 2,159.8 1,727.9 432.0 2,601.3 1,079.8 200.0 264.5 111.1 618.6 327.2 501.5 147.6
1990–2008
–0.9 –0.1 2.3 3.2 3.0 .. 1.6 2.9 0.3 1.2 1.6 3.2 2.1 1.1 2.7 2.7 0.3 0.8 4.0 1.7 2.9 1.0 1.7 3.5 2.3 2.5 1.2 2.8 3.0 –0.6 6.0 0.5 1.1 0.9 2.9 3.2 2.1 4.6 4.5 2.5 1.0 1.6 w 2.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.3 0.0a 2.7 3.2 2.1 2.9 0.8 0.7
Female % of labor force 1990
2008
46.3 48.6 52.1 11.5 40.8 .. 50.9 39.1 46.8 46.8 41.8 37.5 34.8 31.8 26.0 41.2 47.7 42.9 18.3 43.3 49.8 47.0 40.4 40.1 35.0 21.6 29.7 46.1 47.7 49.2 9.8 43.2 44.4 40.8 45.5 30.5 50.7 13.8 18.0 44.3 46.3 39.2 w 44.1 37.8 37.7 38.0 38.7 44.1 45.8 32.1 21.4 28.1 42.2 41.1 39.4
44.5 49.7 52.8 16.3 43.1 .. 51.4 41.7 44.7 46.5 40.9 43.7 43.0 32.7 29.5 43.4 47.4 46.5 20.7 43.6 49.4 46.2 40.9 43.3 43.0 26.6 26.2 46.7 46.6 48.9 15.5 45.7 46.1 43.7 45.9 39.1 48.7 18.0 20.8 43.8 47.8 40.4 w 44.5 38.8 38.1 42.0 39.8 44.6 45.2 41.1 26.5 29.4 43.6 43.3 43.7
About the data
2.2
PEOPLE
Labor force structure Definitions
The labor force is the supply of labor available for pro-
further information on source, reference period, or
• Labor force participation rate is the proportion
ducing goods and services in an economy. It includes
definition, consult the original source.
of the population ages 15 and older that is eco-
people who are currently employed and people who
The labor force participation rates in the table are
nomically active: all people who supply labor for the
are unemployed but seeking work as well as first-time
from the ILO’s Key Indicators of the Labour Market,
production of goods and services during a specified
job-seekers. Not everyone who works is included,
6th edition, database. These harmonized estimates
period. • Total labor force is people ages 15 and
however. Unpaid workers, family workers, and stu-
use strict data selection criteria and enhanced
older who meet the ILO definition of the economi-
dents are often omitted, and some countries do not
methods to ensure comparability across countries
cally active population. It includes both the employed
count members of the armed forces. Labor force size
and over time, including collection and tabulation
and the unemployed. • Average annual percentage
tends to vary during the year as seasonal workers
methodologies and methods applied to such country-
growth of the labor force is calculated using the
enter and leave.
specific factors as military service requirements.
exponential endpoint method (see Statistical meth-
Data on the labor force are compiled by the Inter-
Estimates are based mainly on labor force surveys,
ods for more information). • Female labor force as as
national Labour Organization (ILO) from labor force
with other sources (population censuses and nation-
a percentage of the labor force shows the extent to
surveys, censuses, establishment censuses and
ally reported estimates) used only when no survey
which women are active in the labor force.
surveys, and administrative records such as employ-
data are available.
ment exchange registers and unemployment insur-
Participation rates indicate the relative size of
ance schemes. For some countries a combination
the labor supply. Beginning in the 2008 edition of
of these sources is used. Labor force surveys are
World Development Indicators, the indicator covers
the most comprehensive source for internationally
the population ages 15 and older, to include peo-
comparable labor force data. They can cover all
ple who continue working past age 65. In previous
noninstitutionalized civilians, all branches and sec-
editions the indicator was for the population ages
tors of the economy, and all categories of workers,
15–64, so participation rates are not comparable
including people holding multiple jobs. By contrast,
across editions.
labor force data from population censuses are often
The labor force estimates in the table were calcu-
based on a limited number of questions on the eco-
lated by applying labor force participation rates from
nomic characteristics of individuals, with little scope
the ILO database to World Bank population estimates
to probe. The resulting data often differ from labor
to create a series consistent with these population
force survey data and vary considerably by country,
estimates. This procedure sometimes results in
depending on the census scope and coverage. Estab-
labor force estimates that differ slightly from those
lishment censuses and surveys provide data only on
in the ILO’s Yearbook of Labour Statistics and its data-
the employed population, not unemployed workers,
base Key Indicators of the Labour Market.
workers in small establishments, or workers in the
Estimates of women in the labor force and employ-
informal sector (ILO, Key Indicators of the Labour
ment are generally lower than those of men and are
Market 2001–2002).
not comparable internationally, reflecting that demo-
The reference period of a census or survey is
graphic, social, legal, and cultural trends and norms
another important source of differences: in some
determine whether women’s activities are regarded
countries data refer to people’s status on the day
as economic. In many countries many women work
of the census or survey or during a specific period
on farms or in other family enterprises without pay,
before the inquiry date, while in others data are
and others work in or near their homes, mixing work
recorded without reference to any period. In devel-
and family activities during the day.
oping countries, where the household is often the basic unit of production and all members contribute to output, but some at low intensity or irregularly, the estimated labor force may be much smaller than the numbers actually working. Differing definitions of employment age also affect
Data sources
comparability. For most countries the working age is
Data on labor force participation rates are from
15 and older, but in some countries children younger
the ILO’s Key Indicators of the Labour Market, 6th
than 15 work full- or part-time and are included in
edition, database. Labor force numbers were cal-
the estimates. Similarly, some countries have an
culated by World Bank staff, applying labor force
upper age limit. As a result, calculations may sys-
participation rates from the ILO database to popu-
tematically over- or underestimate actual rates. For
lation estimates.
2010 World Development Indicators
69
2.3
Employment by economic activity Agriculture
Male % of male employment 1990–92a 2004–08 a
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
70
.. .. .. .. 0 b,c .. 6 6 .. 54 .. 3 .. 3c .. .. 31c .. .. .. .. .. 6c .. .. 24 .. 1 2c .. .. 32 .. .. .. .. 7 26 10 c 35 48 .. 23 .. 11 7 .. .. .. 4 66 20 19c .. .. 76 53 c
.. .. 20 .. 3c 46 4 6 40 42 .. 2 .. .. .. 35 23 9 .. .. .. .. 3c .. .. 16 .. 0b 27 .. .. 18 .. 12 25 4 4 21 11c 28 29 .. 5 12c 6 4 .. .. 51 3 .. 8 44 .. .. .. 51c
2010 World Development Indicators
Industry
Female % of female employment 1990–92a
.. .. .. .. 0b,c .. 4 8 .. 85 .. 2 .. 1c .. .. 25c .. .. .. .. .. 2c .. .. 6 .. 0b 1c .. .. 5 .. .. .. .. 3 3 2c 52 15 .. 13 .. 6 5 .. .. .. 4 59 26 3c .. .. 50 6c
2004–08 a
.. .. 22 .. 0b,c 46 2 6 38 68 .. 1 .. .. .. 24 15 6 .. .. .. .. 2c .. .. 6 .. 0b 6 .. .. 5 .. 14 9 2 1 2 4c 43 5 .. 2 6c 3 2 .. .. 57 2 .. 9 16 .. .. .. 13c
Male % of male employment 1990–92a
.. .. .. .. 40c .. 32 47 .. 16 .. 41 .. 42c .. .. 27c .. .. .. .. .. 31c .. .. 32 .. 37 35c .. .. 27 .. .. .. .. 37 23 29c 25 23 .. 42 .. 38 39 .. .. .. 50 10 29 36c .. .. 9 18 c
2004–08 a
.. .. 26 .. 34 c 21 31 37 17 15 .. 36 .. .. .. 19 28 42 .. .. .. .. 32c .. .. 31 .. 21 22 .. .. 28 .. 40 22 51 32 26 28 c 26 26 .. 48 27c 39 34 .. .. 17 41 .. 22 24 .. .. .. 20 c
Services
Female % of female employment 1990–92a
.. .. .. .. 18 c .. 12 20 .. 9 .. 16 .. 17c .. .. 10 c .. .. .. .. .. 11c .. .. 15 .. 27 25c .. .. 25 .. .. .. .. 16 21 17c 10 23 .. 30 .. 15 17 .. .. .. 24 10 17c 27c .. .. 9 25c
2004–08 a
.. .. 28 .. 11c 10 9 12 9 13 .. 11 .. .. .. 11 13 29 .. .. .. .. 11c .. .. 11 .. 6 16 .. .. 13 .. 18 12 27 12 14 13c 6 19 .. 23 17c 11 11 .. .. 4 16 .. 7 21 .. .. .. 23c
Male % of male employment 1990–92a
.. .. .. .. 59 c .. 61 46 .. 25 .. 56 .. 55c .. .. 43c .. .. .. .. .. 64c .. .. 45 .. 63 63c .. .. 41 .. .. .. .. 56 52 62c 41 29 .. 36 .. 51 54 .. .. .. 46 23 51 45 c .. .. 13 29c
2004–08 a
.. .. 54 .. 63c 33 64 57 44 43 .. 61 .. .. .. 46 50 49 .. .. .. .. 65 c .. .. 53 .. 78 51 .. .. 54 .. 48 54 45 64 53 61c 46 45 .. 46 61c 54 61 .. .. 33 56 .. 44 32 .. .. .. 29 c
Female % of female employment 1990–92a
.. .. .. .. 81c .. 84 72 .. 2 .. 81 .. 82c .. .. 65c .. .. .. .. .. 87c .. .. 79 .. 73 74c .. .. 69 .. .. .. .. 82 76 81c 37 63 .. 57 .. 78 78 .. .. .. 73 32 57c 70 c .. .. 38 69c
2004–08 a
.. .. 49 .. 88c 45 89 82 53 19 .. 88 .. .. .. 65 72 65 .. .. .. .. 88c .. .. 84 .. 94 78 .. .. 82 .. 67 79 71 86 84 83c 51 76 .. 75 77c 86 86 .. .. 39 83 .. 59 63 .. .. .. 63c
Agriculture
Male % of male employment 1990–92a 2004–08 a
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
19 .. 54 .. .. 19 5 8 36 6 .. .. .. .. 14 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 23 .. .. 15 34 .. .. 4c .. .. 45 75 5 13c .. .. .. 7 .. 45 35 .. .. 1c 53 .. 10 5 ..
6 .. 41 21 14 9 3 5 26 4 .. 35 .. .. 7 .. .. 37 .. 10 .. .. .. .. 10 19 82 .. 18 50 .. 10 19 36 41 37 .. .. 34 .. 3 9 42 .. .. 4 .. 36 21 .. 31 12c 44 15 11 2 4
Industry
Female % of female employment 1990–92a
13 .. 57 .. .. 3 2 9 16 7 .. .. .. .. 18 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 20 .. .. 13 11 .. .. 3c .. .. 52 91 2 8c .. .. .. 3 .. 69 3 .. .. 0b,c 32 .. 13 0b ..
2004–08 a
2 .. 41 33 33 2 1 3 8 4 .. 32 .. .. 8 .. .. 35 .. 6 .. .. .. .. 6 17 83 .. 10 30 .. 8 4 30 35 61 .. .. 25 .. 2 5 8 .. .. 1 .. 72 3 .. 19 6c 24 14 12 0b 0
Male % of male employment 1990–92a
43 .. 15 .. .. 33 38 41 25 40 .. .. .. .. 40 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 31 .. .. 36 25 .. .. 33c .. .. 21 4 33 31c .. .. .. 34 .. 20 20 .. .. 30 c 17 .. 39 27 ..
2004–08 a
42 .. 21 33 20 38 32 39 27 35 .. 24 .. .. 33 .. .. 26 .. 40 .. .. .. .. 41 33 5 .. 32 18 .. 36 31 25 21 22 .. .. 19 .. 27 32 20 .. .. 33 .. 23 25 .. 24 41c 18 41 40 26 48
PEOPLE
2.3
Employment by economic activity
Services
Female % of female employment 1990–92a
29 .. 13 .. .. 18 15 23 12 27 .. .. .. .. 28 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 32 .. .. 48 19 .. .. 46c .. .. 8 1 10 13c .. .. .. 10 .. 15 11 .. .. 13 c 14 .. 24 19 ..
2004–08 a
21 .. 15 29 7 10 11 16 5 17 .. 10 .. .. 16 .. .. 11 .. 17 .. .. .. .. 19 29 2 .. 23 15 .. 26 18 12 15 15 .. .. 9 .. 8 10 18 .. .. 8 .. 13 10 .. 10 43c 11 18 17 10 4
Male % of male employment 1990–92a
38 .. 31 .. .. 48 57 52 39 54 .. .. .. .. 46 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 46 .. .. 48 41 .. .. 63c .. .. 34 20 60 56c .. .. .. 58 .. 35 45 .. .. 69c 29 .. 51 67 ..
2004–08 a
52 .. 38 47 66 53 65 57 47 59 .. 41 .. .. 60 .. .. 37 .. 49 .. .. .. .. 49 48 13 .. 51 32 .. 54 50 39 39 41 .. .. 47 .. 63 58 38 .. .. 63 .. 41 54 .. 45 46c 39 44 49 72 48
Female % of female employment 1990–92a
58 .. 31 .. .. 78 83 68 72 65 .. .. .. .. 54 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 48 .. .. 39 70 .. .. 51c .. .. 40 8 81 79c .. .. .. 86 .. 16 85 .. .. 87c 55 .. 63 80 ..
2010 World Development Indicators
2004–08 a
77 .. 44 38 60 88 88 81 87 77 .. 58 .. .. 76 .. .. 54 .. 77 .. .. .. .. 75 54 16 .. 67 55 .. 66 77 58 50 24 .. .. 65 .. 85 85 73 .. .. 90 .. 15 87 .. 71 51c 65 68 71 89 96
71
2.3
Employment by economic activity Agriculture
Male % of male employment 1990–92a 2004–08 a
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
29 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 .. .. .. .. 11 .. .. .. 5 5 23 .. .. 59 .. .. 15 .. 33 .. .. .. .. 3 4 7c .. 17 .. .. 44 47 .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 21 .. .. .. 6 7
27 11 .. 5 34 24 66 2 6 10 .. 11 6 28 c .. .. 3 5 .. 42 71 43 .. .. 6 .. 19 .. .. .. 6 2 2 16 .. 13 56 11 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 16 .. .. 16 20 .. .. .. 4 5
Industry
Female % of female employment 1990–92a
38 .. .. .. .. .. .. 0b .. .. .. .. 8 .. .. .. 2 4 54 .. .. 62 .. .. 6 .. 72 .. .. .. .. 1 1 1c .. 2 .. .. 83 56 .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 13 .. .. .. 5 6
2004–08 a
30 7 .. 0b 33 26 71 1 2 10 .. 7 3 37c .. .. 1 3 .. 75 78 40 .. .. 2 .. 46 .. .. .. 0b 1 1 5 .. 2 60 36 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 9 .. .. 16 9 .. .. .. 2 3
Male % of male employment 1990–92a
2004–08 a
44 .. .. .. .. .. .. 36 .. .. .. .. 41 .. .. .. 40 39 28 .. .. 17 .. .. 34 .. 26 .. .. .. .. 41 34 36c .. 32 .. .. 14 15 .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 30 .. .. .. 38 42
Note: Data across sectors may not sum to 100 percent because of workers not classified by sector. a. Data are for the most recent year available. b. Less than 0.5. c. Limited coverage.
72
2010 World Development Indicators
38 38 .. 23 20 34 10 26 52 44 .. 35 40 26 c .. .. 33 34 .. 27 7 22 .. .. 41 .. 30 .. .. .. 45 32 30 29 .. 30 21 27 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 33 .. .. 35 29 .. .. .. 34 38
Services
Female % of female employment 1990–92a
30 .. .. .. .. .. .. 32 .. .. .. .. 17 .. .. .. 12 15 8 .. .. 13 .. .. 14 .. 11 .. .. .. .. 16 14 21c .. 16 .. .. 2 3 .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 14 .. .. .. 19 20
2004–08 a
24 20 .. 1 5 16 3 18 24 23 .. 14 11 27 .. .. 9 12 .. 5 3 19 .. .. 16 .. 15 .. .. .. 6 9 9 13 .. 12 14 10 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 19 .. .. 19 16 .. .. .. 12 13
Male % of male employment 1990–92a
28 .. .. .. .. .. .. 63 .. .. .. .. 49 .. .. .. 55 57 49 .. .. 24 .. .. 51 .. 41 .. .. .. .. 55 62 57c .. 52 .. .. 38 22 .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 49 .. .. .. 55 50
2004–08 a
35 51 .. 72 33 42 23 72 43 45 .. 54 55 41 .. .. 64 62 .. 31 22 35 .. .. 52 .. 51 .. .. .. 49 66 68 56 .. 56 23 61 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 51 .. .. 48 51 .. .. .. 62 56
Female % of female employment 1990–92a
33 .. .. .. .. .. .. 68 .. .. .. .. 75 .. .. .. 86 81 38 .. .. 25 .. .. 80 .. 17 .. .. .. .. 82 85 78 c .. 82 .. .. 13 18 .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 72 .. .. .. 76 73
2004–08 a
46 73 .. 99 42 58 26 82 74 65 .. 80 86 34 .. .. 90 86 .. 20 19 41 .. .. 82 .. 39 .. .. .. 92 90 90 83 .. 86 26 53 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 72 .. .. 65 75 .. .. .. 85 83
About the data
2.3
PEOPLE
Employment by economic activity Definitions
The International Labour Organization (ILO) classi-
aggregated into three broad groups: agriculture,
• Agriculture corresponds to division 1 (ISIC revi-
fies economic activity using the International Stan-
industry, and services. Such broad classification may
sion 2) or tabulation categories A and B (ISIC revi-
dard Industrial Classification (ISIC) of All Economic
obscure fundamental shifts within countries’ indus-
sion 3) and includes hunting, forestry, and fishing.
Activities, revision 2 (1968) and revision 3 (1990).
trial patterns. A slight majority of countries report
• Industry corresponds to divisions 2–5 (ISIC revi-
Because this classification is based on where work
economic activity according to the ISIC revision 2
sion 2) or tabulation categories C–F (ISIC revision
is performed (industry) rather than type of work per-
instead of revision 3. The use of one classification or
3) and includes mining and quarrying (including oil
formed (occupation), all of an enterprise’s employees
the other should not have a significant impact on the
production), manufacturing, construction, and public
are classified under the same industry, regardless
information for the three broad sectors presented
utilities (electricity, gas, and water). • Services corre-
of their trade or occupation. The categories should
in the table.
spond to divisions 6–9 (ISIC revision 2) or tabulation
sum to 100 percent. Where they do not, the differ-
The distribution of economic wealth in the world
categories G–P (ISIC revision 3) and include whole-
ences are due to workers who cannot be classified
remains strongly correlated with employment by
sale and retail trade and restaurants and hotels;
by economic activity.
economic activity. The wealthier economies are
transport, storage, and communications; financing,
Data on employment are drawn from labor force
those with the largest share of total employment in
insurance, real estate, and business services; and
surveys, household surveys, official estimates, cen-
services, whereas the poorer economies are largely
community, social, and personal services.
suses and administrative records of social insurance
agriculture based.
schemes, and establishment surveys when no other
The distribution of economic activity by gender
information is available. The concept of employment
reveals some clear patterns. Men still make up the
generally refers to people above a certain age who
majority of people employed in all three sectors, but
worked, or who held a job, during a reference period.
the gender gap is biggest in industry. Employment in
Employment data include both full-time and part-time
agriculture is also male-dominated, although not as
workers.
much as industry. Segregating one sex in a narrow
There are many differences in how countries define
range of occupations significantly reduces economic
and measure employment status, particularly mem-
efficiency by reducing labor market flexibility and thus
bers of the armed forces, self-employed workers, and
the economy’s ability to adapt to change. This seg-
unpaid family workers. Where members of the armed
regation is particularly harmful for women, who have
forces are included, they are allocated to the service
a much narrower range of labor market choices and
sector, causing that sector to be somewhat over-
lower levels of pay than men. But it is also detri-
stated relative to the service sector in economies
mental to men when job losses are concentrated
where they are excluded. Where data are obtained
in industries dominated by men and job growth is
from establishment surveys, data cover only employ-
centered in service occupations, where women have
ees; thus self-employed and unpaid family workers
better chances, as has been the recent experience
are excluded. In such cases the employment share
in many countries.
of the agricultural sector is severely underreported.
There are several explanations for the rising impor-
Caution should be also used where the data refer
tance of service jobs for women. Many service jobs—
only to urban areas, which record little or no agricul-
such as nursing and social and clerical work—are
tural work. Moreover, the age group and area covered
considered “feminine” because of a perceived simi-
could differ by country or change over time within a
larity to women’s traditional roles. Women often do
country. For detailed information on breaks in series,
not receive the training needed to take advantage of
consult the original source.
changing employment opportunities. And the greater
Countries also take different approaches to the
availability of part-time work in service industries may
treatment of unemployed people. In most countries
lure more women, although it is unclear whether this
unemployed people with previous job experience are
is a cause or an effect.
classified according to their last job. But in some countries the unemployed and people seeking their first job are not classifiable by economic activity. Because of these differences, the size and distribution of employment by economic activity may not be fully comparable across countries. The ILO’s Yearbook of Labour Statistics and its data-
Data sources
base Key Indicators of the Labour Market report data
Data on employment are from the ILO’s Key Indica-
by major divisions of the ISIC revision 2 or revision 3.
tors of the Labour Market, 6th edition, database.
In the table the reported divisions or categories are
2010 World Development Indicators
73
2.4
Decent work and productive employment Employment to population ratio
Gross enrollment ratio, secondary
Vulnerable employment
Labor productivity
Unpaid family workers and own-account workers Total
Youth
% ages 15 and older
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
74
% ages 15–24
% of relevant age group
Male % of male employment
Female % of female employment
1991
2008
1991
2008
1991
2008a
1990
2008
1990
2008
54 49 39 77 53 38 56 52 57 74 58 44 70 61 42 47 56 45 82 85 77 59 58 73 67 51 75 62 52 68 66 56 63 50 52 58 59 44 52 43 59 66 61 71 57 47 58 73 57 54 68 44 55 82 66 56 59
55 46 49 76 57 38 59 55 60 68 52 47 72 71 42 46 64 46 82 84 75 59 61 73 70 50 71 57 62 67 65 57 60 46 54 54 60 53 61 43 54 66 55 81 55 48 58 72 54 52 65 48 62 81 67 55 56
45 37 25 71 42 24 58 61 38 66 40 31 64 48 17 34 54 27 77 74 66 37 57 59 51 34 71 54 38 60 49 48 52 27 40 48 65 28 39 22 42 60 43 64 45 28 37 59 28 58 40 31 50 75 57 37 49
47 36 31 69 36 25 64 53 39 56 35 27 59 49 18 27 53 27 74 73 68 33 61 58 50 24 55 38 43 62 46 43 45 29 32 29 61 34 40 23 39 54 29 74 44 29 33 55 22 44 40 28 52 73 63 47 43
16 88 60 10 74 .. 82 102 88 20 93 101 11 44 .. 49 61 86 7 5 25 26 101 12 7 73 41 80 53 21 46 45 20 .. 94 91 109 .. 55 69 38 .. 100 14 116 100 39 19 95 98 35 94 23 10 6 21 33
29 .. .. .. 85 88 148 100 106 44 95 110 .. 82 89 80 100 105 20 c 18 40 37 101 .. 19 94 74 83 91 35 .. 89 .. 94 91 95 119 75 70 .. 64 30 100 33 111 113 .. 51 90 101 54 102 57 36 36 .. 65
.. .. .. .. .. .. 12 .. .. .. .. 17 .. 32b .. .. 29b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 30 b .. .. 26 .. .. .. .. 7 42 33b .. .. .. 2 .. .. 11 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 48 b
.. .. .. .. 22b .. 11 9 41 .. .. 11 .. .. .. .. 30 10 .. .. .. .. 12b .. .. 25 .. 10 48 .. .. 20 .. 15b .. 15 7 49 29 b 20 29 .. 8 48b 11 7 .. .. .. 7 .. 27 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. 9 .. .. .. .. 15 .. 50b .. .. 30b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 26 b .. .. 21 .. .. .. .. 6 30 41b .. .. .. 3 .. .. 10 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 50b
.. .. .. .. 17b .. 7 9 66 .. .. 9 .. .. .. .. 24 8 .. .. .. .. 9b .. .. 21 .. 4 46 .. .. 20 .. 17b .. 9 3 30 41b 44 44 .. 4 56 b 7 5 .. .. .. 6 .. 27 .. .. .. .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
GDP per person employed % growth 1990–92
.. –17.5 –4.0 –5.0 9.0 –24.8 3.3 0.7 –12.6 1.9 –4.0 1.6 .. 2.6 –14.8 .. –0.3 3.1 1.3 .. 4.0 –6.7 0.8 .. .. 6.6 6.8 5.3 –0.7 –12.9 .. 2.4 –3.6 –7.7 .. –5.2 2.5 0.7 –0.1 2.1 .. .. –9.4 –8.4 1.4 1.4 .. .. –25.3 3.7 2.8 2.4 1.0 .. .. .. ..
2003–05
.. 5.4 1.3 12.0 2.1 12.7 0.3 2.4 24.8 4.2 10.3 1.4 .. 1.0 4.6 .. 0.4 3.7 2.1 .. 6.5 1.1 1.4 .. .. 2.9 9.2 5.5 2.2 4.2 .. 1.3 –0.3 3.0 .. 4.7 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.6 .. .. 7.4 7.3 2.3 1.8 .. .. 9.8 0.8 3.0 2.8 2.1 .. .. .. ..
Employment to population ratio
Gross enrollment ratio, secondary
Vulnerable employment
Labor productivity
Unpaid family workers and own-account workers Total
Youth
% ages 15 and older
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
% ages 15–24
% of relevant age group
Male % of male employment
2.4
PEOPLE
Decent work and productive employment
Female % of female employment
1991
2008
1991
2008
1991
2008a
1990
2008
1990
2008
48 58 63 46 37 44 45 43 61 61 36 63 73 62 59 .. 62 58 80 58 44 48 66 45 54 37 79 72 60 49 67 56 57 58 50 46 80 74 45 60 51 55 57 59 53 58 53 48 50 70 61 53 59 53 58 37 73
45 56 62 49 37 58 50 44 56 54 38 64 73 64 58 .. 65 58 78 55 46 54 66 49 50 35 83 72 61 47 47 54 57 45 52 46 78 74 43 62 59 63 58 60 52 62 51 52 59 70 73 69 60 48 56 41 77
37 46 46 33 27 38 25 30 40 43 25 46 62 46 36 .. 29 41 74 43 31 40 57 28 36 17 65 48 47 40 54 45 50 39 39 40 67 62 24 52 55 55 46 50 29 49 30 38 33 57 51 34 42 31 53 21 35
20 40 41 36 23 44 27 25 29 40 20 42 59 39 28 .. 30 40 64 35 29 40 57 27 18 13 71 49 45 35 23 37 42 17 35 35 66 53 14 46 67 56 48 52 24 56 29 44 40 54 58 53 39 27 35 29 47
86 42 46 53 44 100 92 79 66 97 82 100 46 .. 90 .. 43 100 23 92 62 24 .. .. 92 .. 18 8 57 7 13 55 54 80 82 36 7 23 43 33 120 92 43 7 23 103 45 23 62 12 31 67 70 87 66 .. 84
97 57 76 80 .. 113 91 100 90 101 86 95 c 58 .. 97 .. 91 85 44 115 82 40 32 93 99 84 30 29 .. 35 23 88 87 83 95 56 21 49 66 43 120 120 68 11 30 113 88 33 71 .. 66 98 81 100 101 .. 93
8 .. .. .. .. 25 .. 29 46 15 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 31 .. .. 13 29 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 7 15 .. .. .. .. .. .. 44 .. 17b 30 b .. .. 22 .. ..
8 .. 60 40 .. 17 9 21 38 10 .. .. .. .. 23 .. .. 47 .. 8 .. .. .. .. 11 24 .. .. 23 .. .. 18 28 35 .. 46 .. .. .. .. 10 14 45 .. .. 8 .. 58 30 .. 45 33b 44 20 18 .. ..
7 .. .. .. .. 9 .. 24 37 26 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 25 .. .. 7 15 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 10 10 .. .. .. .. .. .. 19 .. 31b 46b .. .. 30 .. ..
6 .. 68 56 .. 5 5 15 31 12 .. .. .. .. 28 .. .. 47 .. 6 .. .. .. .. 8 20 .. .. 21 .. .. 15 32 30 .. 65 .. .. .. .. 8 10 46 .. .. 3 .. 75 24 .. 50 47b 47 18 19 .. ..
GDP per person employed % growth 1990–92
0.3 1.0 6.2 6.5 –33.6 2.4 0.0 0.6 0.7 0.7 –5.5 –15.1 –3.9 .. 5.0 .. –0.2 –13.1 .. –19.6 .. .. .. .. –13.9 –5.6 –5.9 –1.9 6.0 0.4 .. .. 1.0 –22.0 .. –1.7 –3.0 2.0 .. .. 0.4 0.5 .. –5.7 –2.9 3.9 0.2 6.5 .. .. .. –0.8 –3.3 2.8 2.2 .. 0.1
2010 World Development Indicators
2003–05
4.6 5.8 4.7 0.4 17.5 1.6 3.1 0.6 –0.4 2.0 3.9 7.5 2.1 .. 2.8 .. 1.4 –0.4 .. 8.1 .. .. .. .. 6.3 4.1 1.5 1.9 5.1 1.0 .. .. 1.6 9.0 .. 1.7 6.2 8.9 .. .. 2.3 0.3 .. 0.2 4.6 2.4 3.7 4.4 .. .. .. 2.7 2.5 2.7 1.4 .. 7.4
75
2.4
Decent work and productive employment Employment to population ratio
Gross enrollment ratio, secondary
Vulnerable employment
Labor productivity
Unpaid family workers and own-account workers Total
Youth
% ages 15 and older 1991
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
56 57 87 50 67 49d 64 64 55 55 66 39 41 51 46 54 62 65 47 54 87 77 64 66 45 41 53 56 82 57 71 56 59 53 54 51 75 30 38 57 70 62 w 70 62 65 54 63 73 55 55 43 59 64 55 48
2008
48 57 80 51 66 47d 65 62 53 54 67 41 49 55 47 50 58 61 45 55 78 72 67 65 61 41 42 58 83 54 76 56 59 56 58 61 69 30 39 61 65 60 w 69 60 62 56 62 69 52 61 45 57 64 55 50
% ages 15–24 1991
42 34 79 26 60 28 d 38 56 43 38 59 19 36 31 29 34 59 69 38 36 79 70 51 58 33 29 48 35 73 37 43 66 56 42 36 35 75 19 23 40 48 52 w 60 52 55 41 53 67 38 46 29 48 50 47 41
% of relevant age group
2008
24 33 64 25 55 30d 42 38 30 32 58 15 37 36 23 26 45 63 32 38 70 46 58 53 46 22 31 34 75 34 46 56 51 39 39 40 51 15 22 46 50 45 w 56 42 43 38 45 51 32 45 29 42 49 43 37
a. Provisional data. b. Limited coverage. c. Data are for 2009. d. Includes Montenegro.
76
2010 World Development Indicators
1991
2008a
92 93 9 44 15 .. 16 .. .. 89 .. 69 105 72 20 43 90 98 48 102 5 30 .. 20 82 45 48 .. 11 94 68 87 92 84 99 53 32 .. .. 23 49 50 w 26 47 42 67 44 41 85 57 54 37 22 91 ..
87 84 22 95 31 90 35 .. 93 94 .. 95 119 .. 38 c 53 103 96 74 84 .. .. .. 41 89 90 82 .. 25 94 94 97 94 92 102 81 .. 92 .. 52 41 66 w 41 67 62 90 62 73 89 88 72 52 33 100 ..
Male % of male employment 1990
21 1 .. .. 77 .. .. 10 .. .. .. .. 20 .. .. .. .. 8 .. .. .. 67 .. .. 22 .. .. .. .. .. .. 13 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 56 .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
2008
31 6 .. .. .. 20 .. 12 14 12 .. 2 13 39 b .. .. 9 10 .. .. 82b 51 .. .. .. .. 30 .. .. .. .. 14 .. 26 .. 28 .. 34 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 25 .. .. 19 32 33 .. .. .. 12
Female % of female employment 1990
33 1 .. .. 91 .. .. 6 .. .. .. .. 24 .. .. .. .. 11 .. .. .. 74 .. .. 21 .. .. .. .. .. .. 6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 81 .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
2008
32 6 .. .. .. 14 .. 7 6 10 .. 3 10 44b .. .. 4 11 .. .. 93 b 56 .. .. .. .. 49 .. .. .. .. 7 .. 24 .. 33 .. 44 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 24 .. .. 18 32 52 .. .. .. 9
GDP per person employed % growth 1990–92
2003–05
–9.3 –7.9 .. 4.9 –1.0 .. .. 1.5 –0.8 –2.3 .. –4.5 2.4 5.5 –1.3 .. 1.9 –0.6 6.5 –20.4 –2.4 6.8 .. .. –3.5 2.6 1.0 –13.0 –1.1 –7.9 –3.9 2.0 1.7 5.2 –7.8 4.5 4.6 .. 0.9 –2.5 –4.7 0.7 w –2.8 1.3 3.2 –2.1 1.1 6.5 –8.0 1.8 1.5 3.1 –5.3 2.3 2.4
8.0 6.1 .. 1.8 3.4 .. .. 6.7 5.2 4.2 .. 3.9 –1.2 2.2 –0.2 .. 3.9 2.0 0.6 2.5 4.8 3.3 .. .. 4.5 2.1 6.7 6.0 3.3 6.0 2.2 1.7 1.9 5.1 4.1 15.0 5.7 .. 0.6 3.2 –5.6 3.3 w 4.5 5.9 6.7 3.9 5.8 7.8 6.3 2.5 0.9 5.5 3.7 1.8 1.0
About the data
2.4
PEOPLE
Decent work and productive employment Definitions
Four targets were added to the UN Millennium Dec-
small group of countries. The labor force survey is
• Employment to population ratio is the proportion
laration at the 2005 World Summit High-Level Ple-
the most comprehensive source for internationally
of a country’s population that is employed. People
nary Meeting of the 60th Session of the UN General
comparable employment, but there are still some
ages 15 and older are generally considered the work-
Assembly. One was full and productive employment
limitations for comparing data across countries and
ing-age population. People ages 15–24 are generally
and decent work for all, which is seen as the main
over time even within a country. Information from
considered the youth population. • Gross enrollment
route for people to escape poverty. The four indi-
labor force surveys is not always consistent in what
ratio, secondary, is the ratio of total enrollment in
cators for this target have an economic focus, and
is included in employment. For example, informa-
secondary education, regardless of age, to the popu-
three of them are presented in the table.
tion provided by the Organisation for Economic Co-
lation of the age group that officially corresponds to
The employment to population ratio indicates
operation and Development relates only to civilian
secondary education. • Vulnerable employment is
how efficiently an economy provides jobs for people
employment, which can result in an underestimation
unpaid family workers and own-account workers as a
who want to work. A high ratio means that a large
of “employees” and “workers not classified by sta-
percentage of total employment. • Labor productiv-
propor tion of the population is employed. But a
tus,” especially in countries with large armed forces.
ity is the growth rate of gross domestic product
lower employment to population ratio can be seen
While the categories of unpaid family workers and
(GDP) divided by total employment in the economy.
as a positive sign, especially for young people, if it
self-employed workers, which include own-account
is caused by an increase in their education. This
workers, would not be affected, their relative shares
indicator has a gender bias because women who do
would be. Geographic coverage is another factor that
not consider their work employment or who are not
can limit cross-country comparisons. The employment
perceived as working tend to be undercounted. This
by status data for most Latin American countries cov-
bias has different effects across countries.
ers urban areas only. Similarly, in some countries
Comparability of employment ratios across coun-
in Sub-Saharan Africa, where limited information is
tries is also affected by variations in definitions of
available anyway, the members of producer coopera-
employment and population (see About the data for
tives are usually excluded from the self-employed
table 2.3). The biggest difference results from the
category. For detailed information on definitions and
age range used to define labor force activity. The
coverage, consult the original source.
population base for employment ratios can also vary
Labor productivity is used to assess a country’s
(see table 2.1). Most countries use the resident,
economic ability to create and sustain decent employ-
noninstitutionalized population of working age living
ment opportunities with fair and equitable remunera-
in private households, which excludes members of
tion. Productivity increases obtained through invest-
the armed forces and individuals residing in men-
ment, trade, technological progress, or changes in
tal, penal, or other types of institutions. But some
work organization can increase social protection
countries include members of the armed forces in
and reduce poverty, which in turn reduce vulner-
the population base of their employment ratio while
able employment and working poverty. Productivity
excluding them from employment data (International
increases do not guarantee these improvements,
Labour Organization, Key Indicators of the Labour
but without them—and the economic growth they
Market, 6th edition).
bring—improvements are highly unlikely. For compa-
The proportion of unpaid family workers and own-
rability of individual sectors labor productivity is esti-
account workers in total employment is derived from
mated according to national accounts conventions.
information on status in employment. Each status
However, there are still significant limitations on the
group faces different economic risks, and unpaid
availability of reliable data. Information on consis-
family workers and own-account workers are the
tent series of output in both national currencies and
most vulnerable—and therefore the most likely to
purchasing power parity dollars is not easily avail-
fall into poverty. They are the least likely to have for-
able, especially in developing countries, because the
mal work arrangements, are the least likely to have
definition, coverage, and methodology are not always
social protection and safety nets to guard against
consistent across countries. For example, countries
economic shocks, and often are incapable of gen-
employ different methodologies for estimating the
Data on employment to population ratio, vulner-
erating sufficient savings to offset these shocks. A
missing values for the nonmarket service sectors
able employment, and labor productivity are from
high proportion of unpaid family workers in a country
and use different definitions of the informal sector.
the International Labour Organization’s Key Indi-
Data sources
indicates weak development, little job growth, and
cators of the Labour Market, 6th edition, data-
often a large rural economy.
base. Data on gross enrollment ratios are from
Data on employment by status are drawn from labor force surveys and household surveys, supple-
the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization Institute for Statistics.
mented by offi cial estimates and censuses for a
2010 World Development Indicators
77
2.5
Unemployment Unemployment
Total % of total labor force 1990–92a 2005–08a
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
78
.. .. 23.0 .. 6.7b .. 10.8 3.6 .. .. .. 6.7 1.5 5.5b 17.6 .. 6.4b .. .. 0.5 .. .. 11.2b .. .. 4.4 2.3b 2.0 9.5b .. .. 4.1 6.7 .. .. .. 9.0 20.7 8.9b 9.0 7.9 b .. 3.7 .. 11.6 10.2 .. .. .. 6.3 4.7 7.8 .. .. .. 12.7 3.2b
8.5 .. 13.8 .. 7.3b .. 4.2 3.8 6.5 4.3 .. 7.0 .. .. 29.0 17.6 7.9 b 5.7 .. .. .. .. 6.1 .. .. 7.8 4.2b 3.5 11.7 .. .. 4.6 .. 8.4 1.8 4.4 3.3 15.6 6.9 8.7 6.6 .. 5.5 17.0 b 6.4 7.4 .. .. 13.3 7.5 .. 7.7 1.8 .. .. .. 3.1b
2010 World Development Indicators
Male % of male labor force 1990–92a 2005–08a
.. .. 24.2 .. 6.4b .. 11.4 3.5 .. .. .. 4.8 2.2 5.5b 15.5 .. 5.4b .. .. 0.7 .. .. 12.0 b .. .. 3.9 .. 2.0 6.8 b .. .. 3.5 .. .. .. .. 8.3 12.0 6.0 b 6.4 8.4b .. 3.9 .. 13.3 8.1 .. .. .. 4.9 3.7 4.9 .. .. .. 11.9 3.3b
7.6 .. 12.9 .. 6.0b .. 4.0 3.6 7.8 3.4 .. 6.5 .. .. 26.7 15.3 6.1b 5.5 .. .. .. .. 6.6 .. .. 6.8 .. 4.5 8.9 .. .. 3.3 .. 7.0 1.7 3.5 3.0 9.3 5.6b 5.9 8.5 .. 5.8 11.7b 6.1 6.9 .. .. 13.9 7.4 .. 5.1 1.5 .. .. .. 2.5b
Female % of female labor force 1990–92a 2005–08a
.. .. 20.3 .. 7.0 b .. 10.0 3.8 .. .. .. 9.5 0.6 5.6b 21.6 .. 7.9b .. .. 0.3 .. .. 10.2b .. .. 5.3 .. 1.9 13.0b .. .. 5.4 .. .. .. .. 9.9 35.2 13.2b 17.0 7.2b .. 3.5 .. 9.6 12.8 .. .. .. 8.2 5.5 12.9 .. .. .. 13.8 3.0 b
9.5 .. 18.4 .. 8.9 b .. 4.6 4.1 5.3 7.0 .. 7.6 .. .. 33.0 19.9 10.0 b 5.8 .. .. .. .. 5.7 .. .. 9.5 .. 3.4 14.5 .. .. 6.8 .. 10.0 1.9 5.6 3.7 25.4 10.9 b 19.3 3.9 .. 5.2 22.6 b 6.7 7.9 .. .. 12.6 7.5 .. 11.4 2.4 .. .. .. 4.2b
Long-term unemployment
Unemployment by educational attainment
% of total unemployment Total Male Female 2005–08a 2005–08a 2005–08a
% of total unemployment Primary Secondary Tertiary 2005–08a 2005–08a 2005–08a
.. .. .. .. .. .. 14.9 b 24.2 .. .. .. 52.6 .. .. .. .. .. 51.7 .. .. .. .. 7.1b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 61.5 .. 50.2 16.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 18.2 37.9 .. .. .. 53.4 .. 49.6 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. 15.7b 25.8 .. .. .. 49.9 .. .. .. .. .. 50.1 .. .. .. .. 7.9b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 57.2 .. 50.4 19.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 20.1 39.3 .. .. .. 54.0 .. 42.8 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. 13.9b 22.6 .. .. .. 55.7 .. .. .. .. .. 53.5 .. .. .. .. 6.1b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 65.3 .. 50.0 13.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 16.2 36.5 .. .. .. 52.7 .. 53.8 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 48.1b 5.2 48.0 37.9 6.3 33.0 10.0 42.1 .. .. 95.7 .. 51.6 41.8 .. .. .. .. 27.7b .. .. 17.8 .. 40.8 76.6 .. .. 65.2 .. 20.4 43.0 26.8 35.9 35.0 74.0 b .. .. .. 23.1 35.9 35.5 39.9 .. .. 5.1 33.1 .. 29.3 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 36.7b 83.0 34.1 52.1 78.9 24.4 39.0 38.2 .. .. .. .. 33.6 49.7 .. .. .. .. 41.1b .. .. 58.5 .. 41.4 .. .. .. 27.3 .. 67.8 52.4 68.8 35.1 44.5 .. .. .. .. 57.8 13.3 45.9 39.6 .. .. 52.5 56.3 .. 48.4 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 15.3b 11.9 17.9 10.0 14.9 15.9 51.0 19.7 .. .. 4.0 .. 3.6 8.6 .. .. .. .. 31.2b .. .. 23.5 .. 16.6 20.6 .. .. 6.4 .. 11.8 4.6 4.3 23.0 16.4 23.6b .. .. .. 16.6 3.2 18.6 19.9 .. .. 42.3 10.6 .. 21.8 .. .. .. .. ..
Unemployment
Total % of total labor force 1990–92a 2005–08a
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
9.9 .. 2.8 11.1 .. 15.0 11.2 9.3 15.4 2.2 .. .. .. .. 2.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 3.7 .. .. .. 3.1 .. .. 16.0 b .. 6.0 19.0 .. 5.5 10.4b 14.4 .. .. 5.9 .. 5.2 14.7 7.7 5.3b 9.4b 8.6 13.3 4.1b 16.9 ..
7.8 .. 8.4 10.5 .. 6.0 6.2b 6.7 10.6 4.0 12.7 .. .. .. 3.2 .. .. 8.3 1.4 7.5 .. .. 5.6 .. 5.8 33.8 2.6 .. 3.2 .. .. 7.3 4.0 4.0 2.8 9.6 .. .. .. .. 2.8 4.1 5.2 .. .. 2.6 .. 5.1 6.8 .. 5.7 7.0 b 7.4 7.1 7.6 11.6 ..
Male % of male labor force 1990–92a 2005–08a
11.0 .. 2.7 9.5 .. 14.9 9.2 6.7 9.4 2.1 .. .. .. .. 2.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.7 .. .. 13.0 b .. 4.7 20.0 .. 4.3 11.0b 11.3 .. .. 6.6 .. 3.8 10.8 9.0 6.4b 7.5b 7.9 12.2 3.5b 19.1 ..
7.6 .. 8.1 9.3 .. 7.0 5.7b 5.5 7.3 4.1 10.1 .. .. .. 3.6 .. .. 7.7 1.3 8.0 .. .. 6.8 .. 6.1 33.5 1.7 .. 3.1 .. .. 4.1 3.9 4.6 2.3 9.6 .. .. .. .. 2.5 4.0 5.4 .. .. 2.7 .. 4.2 5.3 .. 4.6 5.9b 7.6 6.4 6.5 12.0 ..
Female % of female labor force 1990–92a 2005–08a
8.7 .. 3.0 24.4 .. 15.3 13.9 13.9 22.2 2.2 .. .. .. .. 2.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4.0 .. .. 25.3b .. 8.8 19.0 .. 7.3 9.6 b 19.5 .. .. 5.1 .. 14.0 22.3 5.9 3.8 b 12.5b 9.9 14.7 5.0 b 13.3 ..
8.1 .. 10.8 15.7 .. 4.6 7.0 b 8.5 14.6 3.8 24.3 .. .. .. 2.6 .. .. 9.0 1.4 6.9 .. .. 4.2 .. 5.6 34.2 3.5 .. 3.4 .. .. 12.8 4.2 3.4 3.2 9.8 .. .. .. .. 3.0 4.2 4.9 .. .. 2.4 .. 8.6 9.3 .. 7.4 8.2b 7.1 8.0 8.8 9.5 ..
2.5
PEOPLE
Unemployment Long-term unemployment
Unemployment by educational attainment
% of total unemployment Total Male Female 2005–08a 2005–08a 2005–08a
% of total unemployment Primary Secondary Tertiary 2005–08a 2005–08a 2005–08a
47.6 .. .. .. .. 29.4 .. 47.5 .. 33.3 .. .. .. .. 2.7 .. .. .. .. 25.7 .. .. .. .. 52.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 36.3 4.4b .. .. .. 6.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 29.0 48.3 .. ..
48.8 .. .. .. .. 33.2 .. 44.9 .. 39.9 .. .. .. .. 3.7 .. .. .. .. 44.6 .. .. .. .. 54.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 38.3 5.5b .. .. .. 6.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 27.3 49.9 .. ..
46.3 .. .. .. .. 21.7 .. 49.9 .. 23.8 .. .. .. .. 0.4 .. .. .. .. 39.7 .. .. .. .. 50.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 34.4 3.2b .. .. .. 6.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 30.8 46.9 .. ..
33.1 29.0 44.4 41.8 .. 39.8 12.2 46.5 9.7 67.2 .. .. .. .. 15.2 .. 19.4 13.3 .. 24.3 .. .. .. .. 14.2 .. 43.9 .. 13.3 .. .. 44.2 50.7 .. .. 51.1b .. .. .. .. 41.3 30.6 72.8 .. .. 25.4 .. 14.3 36.0 .. 49.9 30.0 b 13.6 16.4 68.1 .. ..
58.7 37.7 40.7 34.7 .. 37.2 12.8 40.6 4.3 .. .. .. .. .. 49.7 .. 41.4 77.1 .. 59.9 .. .. .. .. 70.4 .. 23.8 .. 61.6 .. .. 48.5 24.5 .. .. 22.4b .. .. .. .. 39.7 38.8 2.1 .. .. 49.2 .. 11.4 39.6 .. 38.0 31.9 b 46.2 73.2 15.4 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
8.1 33.3 9.6 19.6 .. 18.2 72.5 11.3 8.4 32.8 .. .. .. .. 35.2 .. 9.6 9.6 .. 14.6 .. .. .. .. 15.4 .. 9.3 .. 25.1 .. .. 6.4 22.9 .. .. 21.6b .. .. .. .. 17.0 26.9 18.0 .. .. 20.6 .. 26.0 24.0 .. 9.9 37.6b 39.4 10.4 13.2 .. ..
79
2.5
Unemployment Unemployment
Total % of total labor force 1990–92a 2005–08a
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
.. 5.3 0.3 .. .. .. .. 2.7 .. .. .. .. 18.1 14.6b .. .. 5.7 2.8 6.8 .. 3.6 b 1.4 .. .. 19.6 .. 8.5 .. .. .. .. 9.8 7.5b 9.0 b .. 7.7 .. .. .. 18.9 .. .. w .. .. .. 7.2 .. 2.5 .. 6.6 12.7 .. .. 7.2 9.0
5.8 6.2 .. 5.6 11.1 13.6 .. 3.2 9.5 4.4 .. 22.9 11.3 5.2b .. 28.2 6.2 3.4 .. .. 4.3 1.4 .. .. 6.5 14.2 9.4 .. .. 6.4 3.1 5.6 5.8 7.6 .. 7.4 .. 26.0 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 8.0 .. 4.7 6.9 7.3 10.6 .. .. 5.9 7.5
Male % of male labor force 1990–92a 2005–08a
.. 5.4 0.6 .. .. .. .. 2.7 .. .. .. .. 13.9 10.6 b .. .. 6.7 2.3 5.2 .. 2.8b 1.3 .. .. 17.0 .. 8.8 .. .. .. .. 11.6 7.9b 6.8 b .. 8.2 .. .. .. 16.3 .. .. w .. .. .. 6.7 .. .. .. 5.4 10.8 .. .. 6.9 7.1
a. Data are for the most recent year available. b. Limited coverage.
80
2010 World Development Indicators
6.7 6.4 .. 4.2 7.9 11.9 .. 3.0 8.4 4.0 .. 20.0 10.1 3.6b .. .. 5.9 2.8 .. .. 2.8 1.5 .. .. 4.4 13.1 9.4 .. .. 6.7 2.5 6.1 6.0 5.4 .. 7.1 .. 26.4 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 7.3 .. .. 7.9 5.9 9.0 .. .. 5.8 6.8
Female % of female labor force 1990–92a 2005–08a
.. 5.2 0.2 .. .. .. .. 2.6 .. .. .. .. 25.8 21.0 b .. .. 4.6 3.5 14.0 .. 4.3b 1.5 .. .. 23.9 .. 7.8 .. .. .. .. 7.4 7.0 b 11.8 b .. 6.8 .. .. .. 22.4 .. .. w .. .. .. 8.0 .. .. .. 8.3 21.6 .. .. 7.7 11.9
4.7 5.8 .. 13.2 13.6 15.8 .. 3.5 10.9 4.9 .. 26.3 13.0 8.0 b .. .. 6.6 4.0 .. .. 5.8 1.3 .. .. 9.6 17.3 9.4 .. .. 6.0 7.1 5.1 5.4 10.1 .. 7.8 .. 23.8 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 10.0 .. .. 7.2 9.0 16.2 .. .. 6.0 8.3
Long-term unemployment
Unemployment by educational attainment
% of total unemployment Total Male Female 2005–08a 2005–08a 2005–08a
% of total unemployment Primary Secondary Tertiary 2005–08a 2005–08a 2005–08a
41.3 .. .. .. .. 71.1 .. .. 66.1 42.2 .. .. 23.8 .. .. .. 12.4 34.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 26.9 .. .. .. .. 25.5 10.6b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 25.2 42.4
43.0 .. .. .. .. 70.1 .. .. 65.6 38.5 .. .. 18.8 .. .. .. 13.5 27.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 24.0 .. .. .. .. 30.5 10.9b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 26.4 41.6
38.4 .. .. .. .. 72.1 .. .. 66.6 40.0 .. .. 28.9 .. .. .. 11.3 39.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 34.4 .. .. .. .. 18.4 10.3b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 23.2 42.8
25.8 13.7 .. 26.2 40.2 20.3 .. 31.0 29.2 25.0 .. 36.2 54.8 45.4b .. .. 32.2 28.8 .. 66.5 .. 40.5 .. .. .. 41.4 52.3 .. .. 8.5 24.3 37.3 18.7 59.1 .. .. .. 54.3 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 37.3 .. .. 25.7 51.6 .. .. .. 35.3 41.4
66.3 54.2 .. 44.6 6.9 68.4 .. 25.6 65.3 60.4 .. 56.3 23.6 22.0 b .. .. 46.0 53.2 .. 28.8 .. 45.5 .. .. .. 37.7 28.2 .. .. 52.2 36.0 47.7 35.5 27.0 .. .. .. 14.2 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 43.2 .. .. 52.4 34.5 .. .. .. 41.5 42.9
6.1 32.1 .. 28.7 2.5 11.2 .. 43.2 5.3 12.5 .. 4.5 20.4 32.6b .. .. 17.1 17.9 .. 4.6 .. 0.1 .. .. .. 13.6 12.7 .. .. 39.3 21.6 14.3 45.7 13.8 .. .. .. 23.5 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 17.9 .. .. 22.8 12.1 .. .. .. 26.6 14.9
About the data
2.5
PEOPLE
Unemployment Definitions
Unemployment and total employment are the broad-
generate statistics that are more comparable inter-
• Unemployment is the share of the labor force with-
est indicators of economic activity as reflected by
nationally. But the age group, geographic coverage,
out work but available for and seeking employment.
the labor market. The International Labour Organiza-
and collection methods could differ by country or
Definitions of labor force and unemployment may
tion (ILO) defines the unemployed as members of the
change over time within a country. For detailed infor-
differ by country (see About the data). • Long-term
economically active population who are without work
mation, consult the original source.
unemployment is the number of people with continu-
but available for and seeking work, including people
Women tend to be excluded from the unemploy-
ous periods of unemployment extending for a year or
who have lost their jobs or who have voluntarily left
ment count for various reasons. Women suffer more
longer, expressed as a percentage of the total unem-
work. Some unemployment is unavoidable. At any
from discrimination and from structural, social, and
ployed. • Unemployment by educational attainment
time some workers are temporarily unemployed—
cultural barriers that impede them from seeking
is the unemployed by level of educational attainment
between jobs as employers look for the right workers
work. Also, women are often responsible for the
as a percentage of the total unemployed. The levels
and workers search for better jobs. Such unemploy-
care of children and the elderly and for household
of educational attainment accord with the ISCED97
ment, often called frictional unemployment, results
affairs. They may not be available for work during
of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and
from the normal operation of labor markets.
the short reference period, as they need to make
Cultural Organization.
Changes in unemployment over time may reflect
arrangements before starting work. Furthermore,
changes in the demand for and supply of labor; they
women are considered to be employed when they
may also refl ect changes in reporting practices.
are working part-time or in temporary jobs, despite
Paradoxically, low unemployment rates can disguise
the instability of these jobs or their active search for
substantial poverty in a country, while high unemploy-
more secure employment.
ment rates can occur in countries with a high level of
Long-term unemployment is measured by the
economic development and low rates of poverty. In
length of time that an unemployed person has been
countries without unemployment or welfare benefits
without work and looking for a job. The data in the
people eke out a living in vulnerable employment. In
table are from labor force surveys. The underlying
countries with well developed safety nets workers
assumption is that shorter periods of joblessness
can afford to wait for suitable or desirable jobs. But
are of less concern, especially when the unem-
high and sustained unemployment indicates serious
ployed are covered by unemployment benefi ts or
inefficiencies in resource allocation.
similar forms of support. The length of time that a
The ILO definition of unemployment notwithstand-
person has been unemployed is difficult to measure,
ing, reference periods, the criteria for people consid-
because the ability to recall that time diminishes as
ered to be seeking work, and the treatment of people
the period of joblessness extends. Women’s long-
temporarily laid off or seeking work for the first time
term unemployment is likely to be lower in countries
vary across countries. In many developing countries
where women constitute a large share of the unpaid
it is especially difficult to measure employment and
family workforce.
unemployment in agriculture. The timing of a survey,
Unemployment by level of educational attainment
for example, can maximize the effects of seasonal
provides insights into the relation between the edu-
unemployment in agriculture. And informal sector
cational attainment of workers and unemployment
employment is difficult to quantify where informal
and may be used to draw inferences about changes
activities are not tracked.
in employment demand. Information on educational
Data on unemployment are drawn from labor force
attainment is the best available indicator of skill
sample surveys and general household sample
levels of the labor force. Besides the limitations to
surveys, censuses, and offi cial estimates, which
comparability raised for measuring unemployment,
are generally based on information from different
the different ways of classifying the education level
sources and can be combined in many ways. Admin-
may also cause inconsistency. Education level is
istrative records, such as social insurance statistics
supposed to be classifi ed according to Interna-
and employment office statistics, are not included
tional Standard Classifi cation of Education 1997
in the table because of their limitations in cover-
(ISCED97). For more information on ISCED97, see
age. Labor force surveys generally yield the most
About the data for table 2.11.
comprehensive data because they include groups not covered in other unemployment statistics, particularly people seeking work for the first time. These
Data sources
surveys generally use a definition of unemployment
Data on unemployment are from the ILO’s Key Indi-
that follows the international recommendations more
cators of the Labour Market, 6th edition, database.
closely than that used by other sources and therefore
2010 World Development Indicators
81
2.6
Children at work Survey year
% of children ages 7–14 in employment
% of children ages 7–14
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angolab Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodiac Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep.c Congo, Rep Costa Ricac Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republicc Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
82
2000 2001 2004
2005 2006 2005 2006 2008 2006 2007 2006 2005 2003–04 2007 2000 2004 2003
2007 2000 2005 2004 2006
2005 2006 2005 2007
2005
2005
2006 2006 1994 2006 2005 2004
Employment by economic activitya
Status in employmenta
% of children ages 7–14 in employment
% of children ages 7–14 in employment SelfUnpaid employed Wage family
Children in employment
Total
Male
Female
Work only
Study and work
.. 36.6 .. 30.1 12.9 .. .. .. 5.2 16.2 11.7 .. 74.4 32.1 10.6 .. 6.1 .. 42.1 11.7 48.9 43.6 .. 67.0 60.4 4.1 .. .. 3.9 39.8 30.1 5.7 45.7 .. .. .. .. 5.8 14.3 7.9 7.1 .. .. 56.0 .. .. .. 43.5 .. .. 48.9 .. 18.2 48.3 50.5 33.4 6.8
.. 41.1 .. 30.0 15.7 .. .. .. 5.8 25.7 12.1 .. 72.8 33.0 11.7 .. 8.1 .. 49.0 12.5 49.6 43.7 .. 66.5 64.4 5.1 .. .. 5.3 39.9 29.9 8.1 47.7 .. .. .. .. 9.0 16.9 11.5 10.1 .. .. 64.3 .. .. .. 33.9 .. .. 49.9 .. 24.5 47.2 52.8 37.3 10.4
.. 31.8 .. 30.1 9.8 .. .. .. 4.5 6.4 11.2 .. 76.1 31.1 9.5 .. 4.0 .. 34.5 11.0 48.1 43.5 .. 67.6 56.2 3.1 .. .. 2.3 39.8 30.2 3.5 43.6 .. .. .. .. 2.7 11.6 4.3 3.8 .. .. 47.1 .. .. .. 52.3 .. .. 48.0 .. 11.7 49.5 48.1 29.6 3.2
.. 43.1 .. 26.6 4.8 .. .. .. 6.3 37.8 0.0 .. 36.1 5.0 0.1 .. 6.6 .. 67.7 38.9 13.8 21.9 .. 54.9 49.1 3.2 .. .. 24.8 35.7 9.9 44.6 46.8 .. .. .. .. 6.2 21.0 21.0 24.9 .. .. 69.4 .. .. .. 32.1 .. .. 18.7 .. 30.5 98.6 36.4 17.7 48.6
.. 56.9 .. 73.4 95.2 .. .. .. 93.7 62.2 100.0 .. 63.9 95.0 99.9 .. 93.4 .. 32.3 61.1 86.2 78.1 .. 45.1 50.9 96.8 .. .. 75.2 64.3 90.1 55.4 53.2 .. .. .. .. 93.8 79.0 79.0 75.1 .. .. 30.6 .. .. .. 67.9 .. .. 81.3 .. 69.5 1.4 63.6 82.3 51.4
2010 World Development Indicators
Agriculture Manufacturing
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 91.7 .. .. .. .. 73.2 .. .. 55.5 .. 70.9 .. 82.3 88.8 .. .. .. 24.1 .. .. 41.2 .. .. 40.3 .. .. .. .. .. 18.5 69.3 .. 50.1 .. .. 94.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 63.7 .. .. .. 63.4
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.7 .. .. .. .. 6.1 .. .. 8.7 .. 1.4 .. 4.2 3.2 .. .. .. 6.9 .. .. 10.8 .. .. 9.5 .. .. .. .. .. 9.8 6.3 .. 13.3 .. .. 1.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 9.7 .. .. .. 8.3
Services
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 7.4 .. .. .. .. 19.2 .. .. 33.5 .. 24.9 25.9 12.9 8.0 .. .. .. 66.9 .. .. 46.1 .. .. 49.0 .. .. .. .. .. 57.5 22.8 .. 35.2 .. .. 3.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 24.7 .. .. .. 24.7
.. .. .. .. 34.2 .. .. .. 4.1 – .. .. .. 1.4 .. .. 6.8 .. 1.9 68.6 6.0 2.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. 22.7 .. .. 15.8 .. .. .. .. .. 23.8 3.6 11.4 2.2 .. .. 1.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.0 .. .. .. 2.7
.. 1.4 .. 6.2 8.1 .. .. .. 3.8 17.0 9.2 .. .. 8.7 1.6 .. 23.1 .. 2.2 .. 4.1 0.8 .. 2.0 1.8 .. .. .. 29.1 6.6 4.2 57.7 2.4 .. .. .. .. 19.5 15.2 87.4 23.6 .. .. 2.4 .. .. .. 1.1 .. .. 6.1 .. 18.8 .. 4.0 1.8 19.9
.. 93.1 .. 80.1 56.2 .. .. .. 92.1 77.8 78.8 .. .. 89.9 92.1 .. 70.1 .. 95.8 .. 89.4 96.1d .. 56.4 77.2 .. .. .. 45.6 76.7 84.5 26.6 88.0 .. .. .. .. 56.2d 81.2 .. 74.2 .. .. 95.8 .. .. .. 87.3 .. .. 76.2 .. 79.2 .. 87.7 79.4 73.8
Survey year
Children in employment
% of children ages 7–14 in employment
% of children ages 7–14
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambiquec Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguayc Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
2004–05 2000 2006
2005
2006 2000
2006
2002 2007
2005 2007 2006 2006
2007 2000 2006–07 1998–99 1996 1999 1999
2005 2006
2008 2005 2007 2001 2001
Total
Male
Female
.. 4.2 8.9 .. 14.7 .. .. .. 9.8 .. .. 3.6 37.7 .. .. .. .. 5.2 .. .. .. 2.6 37.4 .. .. 11.8 26.1 40.3 .. 49.5 .. .. 8.3 33.5 10.1 13.2 1.8 .. 15.4 47.2 .. .. 10.1 47.1 .. .. .. .. 8.9 .. 15.3 42.2 13.3 .. 3.6 .. ..
.. 4.2 8.8 .. 17.9 .. .. .. 11.3 .. .. 4.4 40.1 .. .. .. .. 5.8 .. .. .. 4.0 37.8 .. .. 14.8 28.0 41.3 .. 55.0 .. .. 10.9 34.1 11.4 13.5 1.9 .. 16.2 42.2 .. .. 16.2 49.2 .. .. .. .. 12.1 .. 22.6 44.8 16.3 .. 4.6 .. ..
.. 4.2 9.1 .. 11.3 .. .. .. 8.3 .. .. 2.8 35.2 .. .. .. .. 4.6 .. .. .. 1.3 37.1 .. .. 8.6 24.1 39.4 .. 44.1 .. .. 5.6 32.8 8.6 12.8 1.7 .. 14.7 52.4 .. .. 3.9 45.0 .. .. .. .. 5.4 .. 7.7 39.4 10.0 .. 2.6 .. ..
Work only
.. 84.9 24.9 .. 32.4 .. .. .. 2.5 .. .. 1.6 14.1 .. .. .. .. 7.9 .. .. .. 74.4 45.0 .. .. 2.8 40.6 10.5 .. 59.5 .. .. 17.2 3.8 16.4 93.2 100.0 .. 9.5 35.6 .. .. 30.8 66.5 .. .. .. .. 14.6 .. 24.2 4.0 14.8 .. 3.6 .. ..
Study and work
.. 15.2 75.1 .. 67.6 .. .. .. 97.5 .. .. 98.4 85.9 .. .. .. .. 92.1 .. .. .. 25.6 55.0 .. .. 97.2 59.4 89.5 .. 40.5 .. .. 82.8 96.2 83.6 6.8 0.0 .. 90.5 64.4 .. .. 69.2 33.5 .. .. .. .. 85.4 .. 75.7 96.0 85.2 .. 96.4 .. ..
2.6
PEOPLE
Children at work Employment by economic activitya
Status in employmenta
% of children ages 7–14 in employment
% of children ages 7–14 in employment SelfUnpaid employed Wage family
Agriculture Manufacturing
.. 69.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 58.0 .. .. .. .. 86.9 .. .. .. .. .. 36.7 .. 91.3 60.6 .. .. 91.5 87.0 .. .. 70.5 .. .. .. .. .. 73.3 .. 60.8 62.6 64.3 .. 48.5 .. ..
.. 16.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. .. 2.5 .. .. .. .. .. 10.8 .. 0.3 8.3 .. .. 0.4 1.4 .. .. 9.7 .. .. .. .. .. 2.9 .. 6.2 5.0 4.1 .. 11.2 .. ..
Services
.. 12.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 10.4 .. .. .. .. 8.6 .. .. .. .. .. 48.5 .. 6.3 10.1 .. .. 8.0 11.1 .. .. 19.3 .. .. .. .. .. 22.9 .. 32.1 31.2 30.6 .. 33.3 .. ..
.. 7.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. – .. .. .. .. .. – .. .. .. 3.7 .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. .. .. 3.4 .. 5.4 2.1 .. .. 0.1 4.2 .. .. 1.2 4.8 .. .. .. .. 12.6 .. 9.3 3.9 4.1 .. .. .. ..
.. 6.8 17.8 .. 7.0 .. .. .. 16.3 .. .. 4.0 .. .. .. .. .. 3.7 .. .. .. 36.6 1.7 .. .. 3.9 10.4 6.7 .. 1.6 .. .. 33.7 2.9 0.2 10.0 .. .. 4.5 3.3 .. .. 13.8 74.5 .. .. .. .. 11.3 .. 24.8 6.1 22.8 .. .. .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
.. 59.3 75.8 d .. 85.3 .. .. .. 74.9 .. .. 75.0 .. .. .. .. .. 81.9 .. .. .. 59.7e 79.3 .. .. 89.5 89.6 75.5 .. 80.4 .. .. 62.9 82.0 94.5 81.7 .. .. 95.0 92.4 .. .. 85.0e .. .. .. .. .. 76.1d .. 65.8 90.0 73.1 .. .. .. ..
83
2.6
Children at work Survey year
Children in employment
% of children ages 7–14 in employment
% of children ages 7–14
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudanf Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Lestec Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkeyh Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RBc Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe
2000 2008 2005 2005 2005
2006 1999 1999 2000 2000
2006 2005 2006 2005 2001 2006 2000 2006 2005–06 2005
2006 2006 2006 2005 1999
Total
Male
Female
Work only
Study and work
1.4 .. 7.5 .. 18.5 6.9 62.7 .. .. .. 43.5 27.7 .. 17.0 19.1 11.2 .. .. 6.6 8.9 31.1 15.1 7.6 38.7 3.9 .. 2.6 .. 38.2 17.3 .. .. .. .. .. 5.1 21.3 .. 18.3 47.9 14.3
1.7 .. 8.0 .. 24.4 7.2 63.6 .. .. .. 45.5 29.0 .. 20.4 21.5 11.4 .. .. 8.8 8.7 35.0 15.7 7.1 39.8 5.2 .. 3.3 .. 39.8 18.0 .. .. .. .. .. 6.9 21.0 .. 20.7 48.9 15.3
1.1 .. 7.0 .. 12.6 6.6 61.8 .. .. .. 41.5 26.4 .. 13.4 16.8 10.9 .. .. 4.3 9.1 27.1 14.4 8.1 37.4 2.8 .. 1.8 .. 36.5 16.6 .. .. .. .. .. 3.3 21.6 .. 15.9 46.8 13.3
20.7 .. 18.5 .. 61.9 2.1 29.9 .. .. .. 53.5 5.1 .. 5.4 55.9 14.0 .. .. 34.6 9.0 28.2 4.2 26.8 29.8 12.8 .. 38.8 .. 7.7 0.1 .. .. .. .. .. 19.8 11.9 .. 30.9 25.9 12.0
79.3 .. 81.5 .. 38.1 97.9 70.1 .. .. .. 46.5 94.9 .. 94.6 44.1 86.0 .. .. 65.4 91.0 71.8 95.8 73.2 70.2 87.2 .. 61.2 .. 92.3 99.9 .. .. .. .. .. 80.2 88.1 .. 69.1 74.1 88.0
Employment by economic activitya
Status in employmenta
% of children ages 7–14 in employment
% of children ages 7–14 in employment SelfUnpaid employed Wage family
Agriculture Manufacturing
97.1 .. 80.8 .. 79.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 71.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. 85.3 .. 91.8 82.9 .. .. 57.1 .. 95.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. 32.3 .. .. .. 95.9 ..
0.0 .. 0.6 .. 5.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 13.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.7 .. 0.0 1.3 .. .. 14.3 .. 1.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. 7.2 .. .. .. 0.6 ..
Services
2.3 .. 9.4 .. 14.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 15.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 14.0 .. 8.2 15.1 .. .. 20.9 .. 3.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 55.7 .. .. .. 3.5 ..
4.5 .. 14.9 .. 6.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. 7.1 .. 2.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. 56.3 g .. 28.0 5.0 .. .. 2.1 .. 1.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. 31.6 .. .. .. 2.6 3.4
92.9d .. 12.8 .. 4.4 5.2 1.0 .. .. .. 1.6 7.1 .. 8.3 7.3 10.4 .. .. 21.5 24.2 0.9 13.5 0.0 1.6 29.8 .. 34.1 .. 1.5 3.1 .. .. .. .. .. 33.1 5.9 .. 6.1 0.7 28.4
..
.. 72.4 .. 84.1 89.4 71.1 .. .. .. 94.8 85.8 .. 88.0 81.3 85.9 .. .. 68.8 71.3 42.8 80.0 72.0 93.4 64.9 .. 63.8 .. 97.1 79.3 .. .. .. .. .. 35.3 91.2 .. 86.1 96.5 68.2
a. Shares may not sum to 100 percent because of a residual category not included in the table. b. Covers only Angola-secured territory. c. Covers children ages 10–14. d. Refers to family workers, regardless of whether they are paid. e. Refers to unpaid workers, regardless of whether they are family workers. f. Covers northern Sudan only. g. Includes workers who are selfemployed in the nonagricultural sector and workers who are working on their own or family farm or shamba. h. Covers children ages 6–14.
84
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
2.6
PEOPLE
Children at work Definitions
The data in the table refer to children’s work in the
data in the table have been recalculated to present
• Survey year is the year in which the underlying
sense of “economic activity”—that is, children in
statistics for children ages 7–14.
data were collected. • Children in employment are
Although efforts are made to harmonize the defini-
children involved in any economic activity for at least
tion of employment and the questions on employ-
one hour in the reference week of the survey. • Work
In line with the definition of economic activity
ment in survey questionnaires, significant differences
only refers to children who are employed and not
adopted by the 13th International Conference of
remain in the survey instruments that collect data on
attending school. • Study and work refer to chil-
Labour Statisticians, the threshold for classifying
children in employment and in the sampling design
dren attending school in combination with employ-
a person as employed is to have been engaged at
underlying the surveys. Differences exist not only
ment. • Employment by economic activity is the
least one hour in any activity during the reference
across different household surveys in the same coun-
distribution of children in employment by the major
period relating to the production of goods and
try but also across the same type of survey carried
industrial categories (ISIC revision 2 or revision 3).
services set by the 1993 UN System of National
out in different countries, so estimates of working
• Agriculture corresponds to division 1 (ISIC revi-
Accounts. Children seeking work are thus excluded.
children are not fully comparable across countries.
sion 2) or categories A and B (ISIC revision 3) and
employment, a broader concept than child labor (see ILO 2009a for details on this distinction).
Economic activity covers all market production and
The table aggregates the distribution of children
includes agriculture and hunting, forestry and log-
certain nonmarket production, including production
in employment by the industrial categories of the
ging, and fishing. • Manufacturing corresponds to
of goods for own use. It excludes unpaid household
International Standard Industrial Classification
division 3 (ISIC revision 2) or category D (ISIC revi-
services (commonly called “household chores”)—
(ISIC): agriculture, manufacturing, and services.
sion 3). • Services correspond to divisions 6–9 (ISIC
that is, the production of domestic and personal
A residual category—which includes mining and
revision 2) or categories G–P (ISIC revision 3) and
services by household members for own-household
quarrying; electricity, gas, and water; construction;
include wholesale and retail trade, hotels and restau-
consumption.
extraterritorial organization; and other inadequately
rants, transport, financial intermediation, real estate,
Data are from household surveys conducted by
defined activities—is not presented. Both ISIC revi-
public administration, education, health and social
the International Labor Organization (ILO), the United
sion 2 and revision 3 are used, depending on the
work, other community services, and private house-
Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the World Bank,
country’s codification for describing economic activ-
hold activity. • Self-employed workers are people
and national statistical offi ces. The surveys yield
ity. This does not affect the definition of the groups
whose remuneration depends directly on the profits
data on education, employment, health, expendi-
in the table.
derived from the goods and services they produce,
ture, and consumption indicators related to chil-
The table also aggregates the distribution of
with or without other employees, and include employ-
children in employment by status in employment,
ers, own-account workers, and members of produc-
Household survey data generally include informa-
based on the International Classification of Status
ers cooperatives. • Wage workers (also known as
tion on work type—for example, whether a child is
in Employment (1993), which shows the distribu-
employees) are people who hold explicit (written or
working for payment in cash or in kind or is involved
tion in employment by three major categories: self-
oral) or implicit employment contracts that provide
in unpaid work, working for someone who is not a
employed workers, wage workers (also known as
basic remuneration that does not depend directly on
member of the household, or involved in any type of
employees), and unpaid family workers. A residual
the revenue of the unit for which they work. • Unpaid
family work (on the farm or in a business). Country
category—which includes those not classifiable by
family workers are people who work without pay in a
surveys define the ages for child labor as 5–17. The
status—is not presented.
market-oriented establishment operated by a related
dren’s work.
2.6a
Brazil has rapidly reduced children’s employment and raised school attendance
Data sources
Children’s school attendance
Children’s employment Percent of children ages 7–15 50
Percent of children ages 7–15 100
Data on children at work are estimates produced 2008
by the Understanding Children’s Work project based on household survey data sets made avail-
1992
40
person living in the same household.
90
able by the ILO’s International Programme on the
1997
Elimination of Child Labour under its Statistical 30
80
1997
Monitoring Programme on Child Labour, UNICEF under its Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey pro-
20
70 2008
gram, the World Bank under its Living Standards
1992
Measurement Study program, and national sta-
60
10
tistical offices. Information on how the data were collected and some indication of their reliability
0
50 7
8
9
10
11 12 Age
13
14
15
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Age
15
can be found at www.ilo.org/public/english/ standards/ipec/simpoc/, www.childinfo.org, and www.worldbank.org/lsms. Detailed country statis-
Source: Understanding Children’s Work project calculations based on Brazilian Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios Surveys.
tics can be found at www.ucw-project.org.
2010 World Development Indicators
85
2.7
Poverty rates at national poverty lines Population below national poverty line
Survey year
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Argentinaa Armenia Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroona Chad Chilea Chinaa Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Croatia Dominican Republic a Ecuador a Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador a Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Gambia, The Georgia Ghana Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras Hungary India Indonesia Jamaica Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kosovo Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia
86
2007 2002 1988 2001 1998–99 1995 2000 2002 1999 2000 2001–02 1998 1997 1998 1998 2004 2001 1995–96 2003 2000 2002 2004–05 2005 1989 2002 2000 1999 1995–96 2000 1993–94 1995 1995–96 1998 2002 1998–99 2000 1994 2002 1987 1998–99 1993 1993–94 1996 1995 1997 2001 1997 2003–04 2003 1997–98 2002
2010 World Development Indicators
Rural %
45.0 29.6 16.6 .. 50.8 .. 52.3 .. 33.0 75.0 19.9 51.4 .. 61.1 64.6 39.2 52.1 48.6 .. 3.5 70.1 75.7 49.2 35.8 .. 50.8 75.1 23.3 53.7b .. 14.7 47.0 61.0 55.4 49.6 .. .. .. .. 71.2 .. 37.3 19.8 37.0 27.0 .. 53.0 44.2 57.5 41.0 11.6
Urban %
National %
27.0 19.5 7.3 35.9 58.3 .. 35.1 .. 23.3 27.9 13.8 14.7 .. 22.4 66.5
42.0 25.4 12.2 .. 55.1 68.1 48.9 30.5 29.0 45.2 19.5 22.0 36.0 54.6 68.0 34.7 40.2 43.4 18.7 .. 55.7 71.3 42.3 31.7 11.2 36.5 52.2 22.9 38.8b 53.0 8.9 45.5 57.6 52.1 39.5 56.2 40.0 65.7 65.0 52.5 14.5 36.0 17.6 27.5 21.3 17.6 52.0 43.5 49.9 38.6 7.5
17.9 .. .. .. 50.4 61.5 26.2 .. 28.9 36.4 22.5 29.9b .. 6.8 33.3 48.0 48.5 19.4 .. .. 52.6 .. 28.6 .. 32.4 13.6 18.7 19.7 .. 49.0 42.1 35.7 26.9 ..
Survey year
2005 1995 2001 2001 2005 2004 2003 2007 2002–03 2001 2003 2007 2007 2006 2005 2006
2004 2004 2007 2006 1999–2000 2006
1999–2000 2003 2003 2005–06 2006
1995 2004 1997 1999–2000 2004 2000 2002 2002 2005/06 2005–06 2005 2002–03 2004
Rural %
.. 24.2 30.3 .. 48.7 42.0 43.8 .. 46.0 63.9 .. 41.0 .. 52.4 .. 34.7 55.0 .. .. 2.5 62.1 .. .. 28.3 .. 54.1 61.5 .. 36.0 b .. .. 45.0 63.0 52.7 39.2 72.0 .. .. 66.0 70.4 .. 30.2 20.1 25.1 18.7 .. 49.7 49.2 50.8 .. 12.7
Poverty gap at national poverty line
Urban %
National %
.. 11.2 14.7 .. 51.9 55.0 28.4 .. 29.0 23.7 .. 17.5 .. 19.2 ..
.. 18.5 22.6 .. 50.9 49.6 40.0 17.4 39.0 37.7 .. 21.5 12.8 46.4 .. 30.1 39.9 .. 13.7 .. 45.1 .. .. 23.9 11.1 48.5 38.3 16.7 30.7b .. .. 44.2 61.3 54.5 28.5 51.0 .. .. .. 50.7 17.3 28.6 16.7 18.7 14.2 15.4 46.6 45.1 43.1 33.5 5.9
12.2 .. .. .. 39.1 .. .. 20.8 .. 45.4 24.9 .. 27.8b .. .. 37.0 57.0 56.2 10.8 28.0 .. .. .. 29.5 .. 24.7 12.1 12.8 12.9 .. 34.4 37.4 29.8 .. ..
Survey year
2005 1995 2001 2001 2005 2003 2001–02 2002–03 2001 2003 2007 2007 1995–96
2004–05 2004
1999–2000
1995 1999–2000 2003 2005–06
2000 2004 1997 1999–2000 2004 2002 2002 2005/06 2005–06 2005 2002–03 2004
Rural %
.. 5.3 4.5 .. .. .. 9.8 .. 14.0 .. 4.9 28.4 .. 17.6 .. 8.3 17.5 26.3 .. .. .. 34.9 .. 10.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. 6.6 12.0 .. .. 13.5 .. .. .. .. 34.5 4.1 5.6 .. .. 4.7 4.5 14.1 .. 12.0 .. ..
Urban %
.. 2.3 1.8 .. .. .. 6.5 .. 8.0 .. 2.8 17.8 .. 5.1 .. .. 2.8 .. .. .. .. 26.2 .. 7.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1.8 10.0 .. .. 3.1 .. .. 17.5 .. 9.1 .. 6.9 .. .. 2.9 2.0 2.5 .. 7.0 .. ..
National %
.. 4.0 3.2 .. 15.1 15.5 9.0 .. 12.0 .. 4.6 19.6 4.2 15.3 .. 7.2 13.2 27.5 .. .. .. 32.2 .. 8.6 .. .. .. 3.0 .. .. 3.1 12.0 25.9 .. 9.6 .. .. 25.7 .. 22.3 .. .. 2.9 .. 3.3 3.1 16.6 13.3 10.0 8.0 1.2
Population below national poverty line
Lesothoa Macedonia, FYR Madagascar a Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Nepal Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay c Peru Philippines Poland Romania Russian Federation Rwandaa Senegal Sierra Leone Slovak Republic South Africaa Sri Lanka Swaziland Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Ugandaa Ukraine Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe
Survey year
Rural %
Urban %
National %
1994/95 2002 1999 1997–98 1989 1998 1996 1992 2002 2001 1998 1990–91 1996–97 2004–05 1995–96 1998 1989–93 1985 1993 1997 1996 1990 2003 1994 1996 1995 1998 1999–2000 1992 1989 2004 2000 1995–96 2000–01 2003 1991 1994 2001 1987–89 1992 1990 1994 2002–03 2000 1994 2000–01 1989 1998 1998 1998 1990–91
68.9 25.3 76.7 66.5 .. 75.9 65.5 .. 65.4 64.1 32.6 18.0 71.3 36.0 43.3 68.5 66.0 49.5 33.4 64.9 41.3 28.5 75.7 45.4 .. .. .. 65.7 40.4 .. .. .. 27.0 75.0 73.8 40.8 .. .. .. 20.0 13.1 .. 42.7 34.9 .. 33.6 .. 45.5 45.0 83.1 35.8
36.7 .. 52.1 54.9 .. 30.1 30.1 .. 41.5 58.0 39.4 7.6 62.0 22.0 21.6 30.5 52.0 31.7 17.2 15.3 16.1 19.7 39.5 18.6 .. .. .. 14.3 23.7 .. .. .. 15.0 49.0 68.8 31.2 .. .. .. 24.0 3.5 .. 14.4 .. 20.2 27.8 .. 9.2 30.8 56.0 3.4
66.6 21.4 71.3 65.3 15.5 63.8 50.0 10.6 50.6 62.4 35.6 13.1 69.4 32.0 41.8 47.9 63.0 43.0 28.6 37.3 37.5 20.5 52.2 32.1 14.6 25.4 31.4 60.3 33.4 82.8 16.8 38.0 25.0 69.2 72.4 38.6 9.8 39.7 32.3 21.0 7.4 28.3 38.8 31.5 .. 31.5 31.3 37.4 41.8 72.9 25.8
Poverty gap at national poverty line
Survey year
Rural %
Urban %
National %
2002/03 2003 2005 2004–05
60.5 22.3 53.5 55.9 .. .. 61.2 .. 56.9 67.2 43.4 27.2 54.1 .. 34.6 64.3 .. 36.4 35.9 .. .. .. 72.5 36.9 .. .. .. 62.5 .. 79.0 .. .. 7.9 .. 55.0 38.7 .. .. .. .. 13.9 34.5 34.2 28.4 .. 29.8 .. 35.6 .. 78.0 48.0
41.5 .. 52.0 25.4 .. .. 25.4 .. 41.0 42.6 30.3 12.0 51.6 .. 9.6 28.7 .. 30.4 24.2 .. .. .. 40.3 11.9 .. .. ..
56.3 21.7 68.7 52.4 .. .. 46.3 .. 47.0 48.5 36.1 19.0 55.2 .. 30.9 45.8 .. 34.1 32.6 36.8 .. .. 51.6 25.1 14.8 28.9 19.6 56.9 .. 70.2 .. 22.0 22.7 .. 53.5 35.7 13.6 .. .. .. 7.6 27.0 31.1 19.5 .. 27.2 52.0 28.9 .. 68.0 34.9
2000 2004 2002 2002 1998–99 2002–03 2003–04 2001 1992–93 1998–99 2003
2004 1997 2001 2002 2002 2005–06 2003–04 2008 2002 2007 2000–01 1998
1995 2002 2005–06 2003 1998 2003 1997–99 2002 2004 1995–96
PEOPLE
2.7
Poverty rates at national poverty lines
.. 56.4 .. .. 24.7 .. 49.4 29.5 .. .. .. .. 3.6 22.0 13.7 .. 24.7 22.6 .. 6.6 .. 53.0 7.9
Survey year
2003 2005 2004–05
2002 2002 1998–99 2002–03 2004–05 2003–04 2001
1998–99 1997 1996 1990 2004 1997 2002 2002 1992 2003–04 2004 2008 2002 2000–01 2003 1998 2001 1987–89 1992 1990 2002 2005–06 1998 1997–99 2002 1998 2004
Rural %
Urban %
National %
.. 6.5 28.9 8.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. 13.2 6.7 19.9 7.0 8.5 25.9 .. .. 7.9 32.1 13.8 10.5 28.3 10.0 .. .. .. .. 16.4 34.0 .. .. 5.6 .. 12.4 .. .. .. .. 6.2 3.3 .. 9.7 .. .. .. .. 8.7 14.7 44.0 ..
.. .. 19.3 2.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. 9.2 2.5 18.9 4.0 2.2 8.7 .. .. 5.0 3.9 4.3 5.6 12.4 2.6 .. .. .. .. 3.1 .. .. .. 1.7 .. 12.5 .. .. .. .. 7.4 0.9 .. 3.5 .. 8.6 .. .. 1.3 8.2 22.0 ..
.. 6.7 26.8 8.0 .. .. .. .. .. 16.5 11.0 4.4 20.4 7.0 7.5 17.0 .. .. 7.0 16.4 12.4 6.0 18.0 6.4 .. 7.6 5.1 .. 13.9 29.0 5.5 6.0 5.1 32.9 12.4 .. 3.0 11.9 10.0 7.3 1.7 0.3 8.7 .. .. .. 24.0 6.9 13.2 36.0 ..
a. Data are from national sources. b. Data refer to share of households rather than share of population. c. Covers Asunción metropolitan area only.
2010 World Development Indicators
87
2.7
Poverty rates at national poverty lines
About the data
Definitions
The World Bank periodically prepares poverty
made about every three years. A complete overview
• Survey year is the year in which the underlying data
assessments of countries in which it has an active
of data availability by year and country is available at
were collected. • Rural population below national
program, in close collaboration with national institu-
http://iresearch.worldbank.org/povcalnet/.
poverty line is the percentage of the rural population
tions, other development agencies, and civil society
living below the national rural poverty line. • Urban
groups, including poor people’s organizations. Pov-
Data quality
population below national poverty line is the per-
erty assessments report the extent and causes of
Poverty assessments are based on surveys fielded to
centage of the urban population living below the
poverty and propose strategies to reduce it. Since
collect, among other things, information on income
national urban poverty line. • National population
1992 the World Bank has conducted about 200 pov-
or consumption from a sample of households. To be
below national poverty line is the percentage of the
erty assessments, which are the main source of the
useful for poverty estimates, surveys must be nation-
country’s population living below the national poverty
poverty estimates presented in the table. Countries
ally representative and include sufficient information
line. National estimates are based on population-
report similar assessments as part of their Poverty
to compute a comprehensive estimate of total house-
weighted subgroup estimates from household sur-
Reduction Strategies.
hold consumption or income (including consumption
veys. • Poverty gap at national poverty line is the
The poverty assessments are the best available
or income from own production), from which it is pos-
mean shortfall from the poverty line (counting the
source of information on poverty estimates using
sible to construct a correctly weighted distribution
nonpoor as having zero shortfall) as a percentage of
national poverty lines. They often include separate
of consumption or income per person. There remain
the poverty line. This measure reflects the depth of
assessments of urban and rural poverty. Data are
many potential problems with household survey data,
poverty as well as its incidence.
derived from nationally representative household
including selective nonresponse and differences in
surveys conducted by national statistical offices or
the menu of consumption items presented and the
by private agencies under the supervision of govern-
length of the period over which respondents must
ment or international agencies and obtained from
recall their expenditures. These issues are dis-
government statistical offices and World Bank Group
cussed in About the data for table 2.8.
country departments. Some poverty assessments analyze the current
National poverty lines
poverty status of a country using the latest available
National poverty lines are used to make estimates
household survey data, while others use survey data
of poverty consistent with the country’s specific eco-
for several years to analyze poverty trends. Thus,
nomic and social circumstances and are not intended
poverty estimates for more than one year might be
for international comparisons of poverty rates. The
derived from a single poverty assessment. A poverty
setting of national poverty lines reflects local percep-
assessment might not use all available household
tions of the level of consumption or income needed
surveys, or survey data might become available at
not to be poor. The perceived boundary between
a later date even though data were collected before
poor and not poor rises with the average income of
the poverty assessment date. Thus poverty assess-
a country and so does not provide a uniform measure
ments may not fully represent all household survey
for comparing poverty rates across countries. Never-
data.
theless, national poverty estimates are clearly the
Many developing countries, particularly middleincome countries, have their own poverty monitor-
appropriate measure for setting national policies for poverty reduction and for monitoring their results.
ing programs with well documented estimation meth-
Almost all the national poverty lines use a food
odologies. The programs regularly publish what the
bundle based on prevailing diets that attains pre-
countries consider official poverty estimates. Such
determined nutritional requirements for good health
The poverty measures are prepared by the World
estimates are reviewed by World Bank researchers
and normal activity levels, plus an allowance for non-
Bank’s Development Research Group, based on
and included in the table.
food spending. The rise in poverty lines with average
data from World Bank’s country poverty assess-
income is driven more by the gradient in the non-
ments and country Poverty Reduction Strategies.
Data availability
food component of the poverty lines than in the food
Summaries of poverty assessments are available
The number of data sets within two years of any given
component, although there is still an appreciable
at www.worldbank.org/povertynet, by selecting
year rose dramatically, from 13 between 1978 and
share attributable to the gradient in food poverty
“Poverty assessments” from the left side bar.
1982 to 158 between 2001 and 2006. Data cover-
lines. While nutritional requirements tend to be fairly
Poverty assessment documents are available at
age is improving in all regions, but the Middle East
similar even across countries at different levels of
www-wds.worldbank.org, under “By topic,” “Pov-
and North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa continue to
economic development, richer countries tend to use
erty reduction,” “Poverty assessment.” Further
lag. The database, maintained by a team in the World
a more expensive food bundle—more meat and veg-
discussion of how national poverty lines vary
Bank’s Development Research Group, is updated
etables, less starchy staples, and more processed
across countries can be found in Ravallion, Chen,
annually as new survey data become available, and
foods generally—for attaining the same nutritional
and Sangraula’s “Dollar a Day Revisited” (2008).
a major reassessment of progress against poverty is
needs.
88
2010 World Development Indicators
Data sources
International poverty line in local currency
Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belize Benin Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Croatia Czech Republic Côte d’Ivoire Djibouti Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Estonia Ethiopia Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Ghana Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Jamaica Jordan Kazakhstan
$1.25 a day
$2 a day
2005
2005
75.51 48.42b 88.13 1.69 245.24 2,170.94 31.87 949.53 1.83 343.99 23.08 3.21 1.09 4.23 1.96 0.92 303.02 558.79 2,019.12 368.12 97.72 384.33 409.46 484.20 5.11f 1,489.68 368.01 395.29 469.46 348.70 b 5.58 19.00 407.26 134.76 25.50 b 0.63 2.53 6.02b 11.04 3.44 554.69 12.93 0.98 5,594.78 5.68 b 355.34 1,849.46 131.47b 24.21b 12.08b 171.90 19.50h 5,241.03h 3,393.53 54.20b 0.62 81.21
120.82 77.48 b 141.01 2.71 392.38 3,473.51 50.99 1,519.25 2.93 550.38 36.93 5.14 1.74 6.77 3.14 1.47 484.83 894.07 3,230.60 588.99 156.35 614.93 655.14 774.72 8.17f 2,383.48 588.82 632.46 751.14 557.92b 8.92 30.39 651.62 215.61 40.79 b 1.00 4.04 9.62b 17.66 5.50 887.50 20.69 1.57 8,951.64 9.08 b 568.55 2,959.13 210.35b 38.73 b 19.32b 275.03 31.20 h 8,385.65h 5,429.65 86.72b 0.99 129.93
PEOPLE
2.8
Poverty rates at international poverty lines International poverty line
Survey year
2002a 1988a 2000a 2005c,d 2003 a 2001a 2000a 2005a 1995a 2003a 2003a 2005b 2004 a 1985–86a 2005d 2001a 1998a 1998 a 2004a 1996 a 2001a 1993a 2002–03a 2003d 2002a 2003d 2004 a 2005–06a 2005a 2005d 2001a 1993d 1998a 1996 a 2005d 2005d 1999–00a 2005d 2002a 1999–00a 2005a 1998a 2002a 1998–99 a 2002d 1993a 1994 a 1993d 2001d 2005d 2002a 1993–94 a 2005a 1998 a 2002a 2002–03a 2003a
Population below $1.25 a day %
<2 6.6 54.3 4.5 10.6 6.3 57.8e <2 13.4 47.3 26.2 19.6 <2 35.6 7.8 2.6 70.0 86.4 40.2 51.5 20.6 82.8 61.9 <2 28.4g 15.4 46.1 59.2 54.1 2.4 <2 <2 24.1 4.8 5.0 9.8 <2 11.0 <2 55.6 4.8 66.7 15.1 39.1 16.9 52.1 36.8 5.8 54.9 22.2 <2 49.4g 21.4g <2 <2 <2 3.1
Poverty gap at $1.25 a day %
<0.5 1.8 29.9 1.0 1.9 1.1 17.3e <0.5 5.4 15.7 7.0 9.7 <0.5 13.8 1.6 <0.5 30.2 47.3 11.3 18.9 5.9 57.0 25.6 <0.5 8.7g 6.1 20.8 25.3 22.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 6.7 1.6 0.9 3.2 <0.5 4.8 <0.5 16.2 0.9 34.7 4.7 14.4 6.5 20.6 11.5 2.6 28.2 10.2 <0.5 14.4g 4.6g <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Population below $2 a day %
8.7 23.8 70.2 11.3 43.4 27.1 85.4 e <2 23.1 75.3 49.5 30.3 <2 54.7 18.3 7.8 87.6 95.4 68.2 74.4 40.2 90.7 83.3 5.3 51.1 g 26.3 65.0 79.5 74.4 8.6 <2 <2 49.1 15.1 15.1 20.4 19.3 20.5 2.5 86.4 19.6 82.0 34.2 63.3 29.8 75.7 63.8 15.0 72.1 34.8 <2 81.7g 53.8 g 8.3 8.7 11.0 17.2
Poverty gap at $2 a day %
Survey year
1.4 2005a 6.6 1995a 42.3 3.6 2006c,d 11.3 2007a 6.8 2005a 38.7e 2005a <0.5 2007a 10.3 33.5 18.8 15.5 2007b <0.5 2007a 25.8 1993–94a 5.9 2007d 2.2 2003a 49.1 2003a 64.1 2006a 28.0 2007a 36.0 2001a 14.9 68.4 2003a 43.9 1.3 2006d 20.6g 2005a 10.9 2006d 34.2 42.4 38.8 2.3 2007d <0.5 2005a <0.5 1996d 18.1 2002a 4.5 2002a 4.3 2007d 7.6 2007d 3.5 2004–05a 8.9 2007d 0.6 2004a 37.9 2005a 5.0 50.0 2003a 12.2 2005a 28.5 2006a 12.9 2006d 37.4 2002a 26.4 2003a 5.4 1998d 41.8 16.7 2006d <0.5 2004a 35.3g 2004–05a 17.3g 2007a 1.8 2005a 1.6 2004a 2.1 2006a 3.9 2007a
Population below $1.25 a day %
<2 6.8 .. 3.4 3.7 <2 49.6e <2 .. .. .. 11.9 <2 31.2 5.2 <2 56.5 81.3 25.8 32.8 .. 62.4 .. <2 15.9g 16.0 .. .. .. <2 <2 <2 23.3 18.8 4.4 4.7 <2 6.4 <2 39.0 .. 34.3 13.4 30.0 11.7 48.8 70.1 7.7 .. 18.2 <2 41.6g 29.4 <2 <2 <2 <2
Poverty gap at $1.25 a day %
<0.5 1.4 .. 1.2 0.7 <0.5 13.1e <0.5 .. .. .. 5.6 <0.5 11.0 1.3 <0.5 20.3 36.4 6.1 10.2 .. 28.3 .. <0.5 4.0 g 5.7 .. .. .. <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 6.8 5.3 1.3 1.2 <0.5 2.7 <0.5 9.6 .. 12.1 4.4 10.5 3.5 16.5 32.2 3.9 .. 8.2 <0.5 10.8 g 7.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Population below $2 a day %
7.8 23.6 .. 7.3 21.0 <2 81.3e <2 .. .. .. 21.9 <2 49.4 12.7 <2 81.2 93.4 57.8 57.7 .. 81.9 .. 2.4 36.3g 27.9 .. .. .. 4.3 <2 <2 46.8 41.2 12.3 12.8 18.4 13.2 <2 77.5 .. 56.7 30.4 53.6 24.3 77.9 87.2 16.8 .. 29.7 <2 75.6g 60.0 8.0 5.8 3.5 <2
2010 World Development Indicators
Poverty gap at $2 a day %
1.4 6.4 .. 2.7 4.6 <0.5 33.8e <0.5 .. .. .. 9.5 <0.5 22.3 4.1 0.9 39.2 56.0 20.1 23.6 .. 45.3 .. 0.39 12.2g 11.9 .. .. .. 1.3 <0.5 <0.5 17.6 14.6 3.9 4.0 3.5 5.3 <0.5 28.8 .. 24.9 10.9 22.3 8.9 34.8 50.2 6.9 .. 14.2 <0.5 30.4g 21.8 1.8 0.9 0.6 <0.5
89
2.8
Poverty rates at international poverty lines International poverty line in local currency
Kenya Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lesotho Liberia Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mexico Moldova Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Namibia Nepal Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Romania Russian Federation Rwanda São Tomé and Príncipe Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Slovak Republic Slovenia South Africa Sri Lanka St. Lucia Suriname Swaziland Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda
90
$1.25 a day
$2 a day
2005
2005
40.85 65.37 16.25 26.00 4,677.02 7,483.24 0.43 0.69 4.28 6.85 0.64 1.02 2.08 3.32 29.47 47.16 945.48 1,512.76 71.15 113.84 2.64 4.23 362.10 579.36 157.08 251.33 9.56 15.30 6.03 9.65 653.12 1,044.99 0.62 1.00 6.89 11.02 14,532.12 23,251.39 6.33 10.13 33.08 52.93 14.59 b 9.12b 334.16 534.66 98.23 157.17 25.89 41.42 1.22b 0.76b 3.37b 2.11b 2,659.74 4,255.59 2.07 3.31 30.22 48.36 2.69 4.31 2.15 3.44 16.74 26.78 295.93 473.49 7,949.55 12,725.55 372.81 596.49 42.86 68.62 6.53 10.46 1,745.26 2,792.42 23.53 37.66 198.25 317.20 5.71 9.14 50.05 80.08 3.80 b 2.37b 3.67b 2.29 b 4.66 7.45 1.16 1.85 603.06 964.90 21.83 34.93 0.98 b 0.61b 352.82 564.51 9.23 b 5.77b 0.87 1.39 1.25 2.00 5,961.06b 9,537.69 b 930.77 1,489.24
2010 World Development Indicators
International poverty line
Survey year
1997a 2004 a 1997–98 2004 a 1995a 2007a 2002a 2003a 2001a 1997–98d 1997d 2001a 1995–96a 2006a 2004 a 2002a 2005a 2000a 1996–97a 1993 d 1995–96a 2001d 1994 a 1996–97a 2001–02a 2004d 1996a 2005 d 2005d 2003a 2002a 2002a 2002a 1984–85a 2000–01a 2001a 2003 a 1999–00a 1989–90a 1992d 2002a 1995a 1995–96a 1995d 1999 d 1994–95a 2003a 1991–92a 2002a 2001a 2006 a 1988d 1995a 2002a 1993d 2002a
Population below $1.25 a day %
19.6 21.8 49.3e <2 47.6 83.7 <2 <2 76.3 83.1 <2 61.2 23.4 <2 8.1 15.5 <2 6.3 81.3 49.1 68.4 19.4 78.2 68.5 35.9 9.2 35.8 9.3 8.2 22.0 <2 2.9 <2 63.3 28.4 44.2 <2 <2 62.8 <2 <2 21.4 16.3 20.9 15.5 78.6 36.3 72.6 <2 52.9 38.7 <2 6.5 2.0 63.5 57.4
Poverty gap at $1.25 a day %
4.6 4.4 14.9e <0.5 26.7 40.8 <0.5 <0.5 41.4 46.0 <0.5 25.8 7.1 <0.5 1.7 3.6 <0.5 0.9 42.0 24.6 26.7 6.7 38.6 32.1 7.9 2.7 12.3 3.4 2.0 5.5 <0.5 0.8 <0.5 19.7 8.4 14.3 <0.5 <0.5 44.8 <0.5 <0.5 5.2 3.0 7.2 5.9 47.7 10.3 29.7 <0.5 19.1 11.4 <0.5 1.3 <0.5 25.8 22.7
Population below $2 a day %
42.7 51.9 79.9e <2 61.1 94.8 <2 3.2 88.7 93.5 6.8 82.0 48.3 4.8 28.9 38.8 5.7 24.3 92.9 62.2 88.1 37.5 91.5 86.4 73.9 18.0 57.4 18.4 19.4 43.8 <2 13.0 3.7 88.4 56.6 71.3 <2 <2 75.0 <2 <2 39.9 46.7 40.6 27.2 89.3 68.8 91.3 15.1 77.5 69.3 8.6 20.4 9.6 85.7 79.8
Poverty gap at $2 a day %
14.7 16.8 34.4 e <0.5 37.3 59.5 <0.5 0.7 57.2 62.3 1.3 43.6 17.8 1.0 7.9 12.3 1.1 6.3 59.4 36.5 46.8 14.4 56.5 49.7 26.4 6.8 25.5 7.3 6.3 16.0 <0.5 3.2 0.6 41.8 21.6 31.2 <0.5 <0.5 54.0 <0.5 <0.5 15.0 13.7 15.5 11.7 61.6 26.7 50.1 2.8 37.0 27.9 1.9 5.8 2.3 44.8 40.6
Survey year
2005–06a 2007a 2002–03a 2007a 2002–03a 2004a 2006a 2005a 2004–05a,i 2004d 2006a 2000a 2008d 2007a 2007–08a 2007a 2007a 2002–03a 2003–04a 2005d 2005a 2003–04a 2004–05a 2006d 2007d 2007d 2006a 2005a 2007a 2007a 2000a 2005a 2008a 2006–07a 2003a 1996d 2004a 2000a 2002a
2000–01a 2004 a 2000–01a 2004a 2007a 1992d 2000a 2006a 1998a 2005a
Population below $1.25 a day %
19.7 3.4 44.0 e <2 43.4 .. <2 <2 67.8 73.9 <2 51.4 21.2 4.0 2.4 2.2 <2 2.5 74.7 .. 55.1 15.8 65.9 64.4 22.6 9.5 .. 6.5 7.7 22.6 <2 <2 <2 76.6 .. 33.5 <2 <2 53.4 <2 <2 26.2 14.0 .. .. 62.9 21.5 88.5 <2 37.2 .. 4.2 2.6 2.6 24.8 51.5
Poverty gap at $1.25 a day %
6.1 <0.5 12.1e <0.5 20.8 .. <0.5 <0.5 26.5 32.3 <0.5 18.8 5.7 1.8 0.5 0.4 <0.5 0.5 35.4 .. 19.7 5.2 28.1 29.6 4.4 3.1 .. 2.7 2.3 5.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 38.2 .. 10.8 <0.5 <0.5 20.3 <0.5 <0.5 8.2 2.6 .. .. 29.4 5.1 46.8 <0.5 8.7 .. 1.1 <0.5 <0.5 7.0 19.1
Population below $2 a day %
39.9 27.5 76.8e <2 62.2 .. <2 5.3 89.6 90.4 7.8 77.1 44.1 8.2 11.5 13.6 <2 14.0 90.0 .. 77.6 31.8 85.6 83.9 60.3 17.8 .. 14.2 17.8 45.0 <2 4.1 <2 90.3 .. 60.3 <2 <2 76.1 <2 <2 42.9 39.7 .. .. 81.0 50.8 96.6 11.5 72.8 .. 13.5 12.8 8.2 49.6 75.6
Poverty gap at $2 a day %
15.1 5.2 31.0e <0.5 33.0 .. <0.5 1.3 46.9 51.8 1.4 36.5 15.9 3.3 2.7 2.9 <0.5 3.1 53.5 .. 37.8 12.3 46.6 46.9 18.7 7.1 .. 5.5 6.2 16.3 <0.5 0.1 <0.5 55.7 .. 24.6 <0.5 <0.5 37.5 <0.5 <0.5 18.3 11.8 .. .. 45.8 16.8 64.4 2.0 27.0 .. 3.9 3.0 2.4 18.4 36.4
International poverty line in local currency
Ukraine Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam Yemen, Rep. Zambia
$1.25 a day
$2 a day
2005
2005
2.14 3.42 19.14 30.62 752.14b 470.09b 1,563.90 2,502.24 7,399.87 11,839.79 113.83 182.12 3,537.91 5,660.65
PEOPLE
2.8
Poverty rates at international poverty lines International poverty line
Survey year
2005a 2005c,d 2003d 2004a 1998a 2002–03a
Population below $1.25 a day %
Poverty gap at $1.25 a day %
Population below $2 a day %
Poverty gap at $2 a day %
<2 <2 .. 18.4 24.2 12.9 64.6
<0.5 <0.5 .. 8.8 5.1 3.0 27.1
<2 4.5 .. 31.7 52.5 36.3 85.1
<0.5 0.7 .. 14.6 17.9 11.1 45.8
Survey year
Population below $1.25 a day %
Poverty gap at $1.25 a day %
Population below $2 a day %
Poverty gap at $2 a day %
<2 <2 .. 3.5 21.5 17.5 64.3
<0.5 <0.5 .. 1.2 4.6 4.2 32.8
<2 4.3 .. 10.2 48.4 46.6 81.5
<0.5 1.0 .. 3.2 16.2 14.8 48.3
2008a 2007d 2006d 2006a 2005a 2004–05a
a. Expenditure based. b. In purchasing power parity (PPP) dollars imputed using regression. c. Covers urban areas only. d. Income based. e. Adjusted by spatial consumer price index information. f. PPP conversion factor based on urban prices. g. Weighted average of urban and rural estimates. h. Weighted average of urban and rural poverty lines. i. Due to change in survey design, the most recent survey is not strictly comparable with the previous one.
Regional poverty estimates and progress toward
84 percent to 16 percent, leaving 620 million fewer
$1.25 a day poverty line than had been expected
the Millennium Development Goals
people in poverty.
before the crisis.
Global poverty measured at the $1.25 a day poverty
Over the same period the poverty rate in South
Most of the people who have escaped extreme
line has been decreasing since the 1980s. The share
Asia fell from 59 percent to 40 percent (table 2.8c).
poverty remain very poor by the standards of mid-
of population living on less than $1.25 a day fell
In contrast, the poverty rate fell only slightly in Sub-
dle-income economies. The median poverty line for
10 percentage points, to 42 percent, in 1990 and
Saharan Africa—from less than 54 percent in 1981
developing countries in 2005 was $2.00 a day. The
then fell nearly 17 percentage points between 1990
to more than 58 percent in 1999 then down to
poverty rate for all developing countries measured
and 2005. The number of people living in extreme
51 percent in 2005. But the number of people living
at this line fell from nearly 70 percent in 1981 to
poverty fell from 1.9 billion in 1981 to 1.8 billion
below the poverty line has nearly doubled.
47 percent in 2005, but the number of people liv-
in 1990 to about 1.4 billion in 2005 (figure 2.8a).
Only East Asia and Pacific is consistently on track
ing on less than $2.00 a day has remained nearly
This substantial reduction in extreme poverty over
to meet the Millennium Development Goal target of
constant at 2.5 billion. The largest decrease, both
the past quarter century, however, disguises large
reducing 1990 poverty rates by half by 2015. A slight
in number and proportion, occurred in East Asia
regional differences.
acceleration over historical growth rates could lift
and Pacifi c, led by China. Elsewhere, the number of
The greatest reduction in poverty occurred in East
Latin America and the Caribbean and South Asia
people living on less than $2.00 a day increased,
Asia and Pacific, where the poverty rate declined
to the target. However, the recent slowdown in the
and the number of people living between $1.25
from 78 percent in 1981 to 17 percent in 2005 and
global economy may leave these regions and many
and $2.00 a day nearly doubled, to 1.2 billion.
the number of people living on less than $1.25 a day
countries short of the target. Preliminary estimates
In 2009 the global growth deceleration will likely
dropped more than 750 million (figure 2.8b). Much
for 2009 suggest that lower economic growth rates
leave 57 million more people below the $2 a day
of this decline was in China, where poverty fell from
will likely leave 50 million more people below the
poverty line.
While the number of people living on less than $1.25 a day has fallen, the number living on $1.25–$2.00 a day has increased 2.8a
80
2.5
1.5 1.0
People living on less than $1.25 a day, other developing regions
People living on more than $1.25 and less than $2.00 a day, all developing regions
Sub-Saharan Africa
60
40
South Asia
People living on less than $1.25 a day, East Asia & Pacific 20
0.5
2.8b
Share of population living on less than $1.25 a day, by region (percent)
People living in poverty (billions) 3.0
2.0
Poverty rates have begun to fall
People living on less than $1.25 a day, South Asia
People living on less than $1.25 a day, Sub-Saharan Africa
0 1981
1984
1987
Source: PovcalNet, World Bank.
1990
1993
1996
1999
2002
2005
East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia Middle East & North Africa
Latin America & Caribbean
0 1981
1984
1987
1990
1993
1996
1999
2002
2005
Source: PovcalNet, World Bank.
2010 World Development Indicators
91
2.8
Poverty rates at international poverty lines 2.8c
Regional poverty estimates Region or country
1981
1984
1987
1990
1993
1996
1999
2002
2005
People living on less than 2005 PPP $1.25 a day (millions) East Asia & Pacific China Europe & Central Asia
1,072
947
822
873
845
622
635
507
316
835
720
586
683
633
443
447
363
208
7
6
5
9
20
22
24
22
17 45
Latin America & Caribbean
47
59
57
50
47
53
55
57
Middle East & North Africa
14
12
12
10
10
11
12
10
11
548
548
569
579
559
594
589
616
596
South Asia India Sub-Saharan Africa Total
420
416
428
436
444
442
447
460
456
211
242
258
297
317
356
383
390
388
1,900
1,814
1,723
1,818
1,799
1,658
1,698
1,601
1,374
Share of people living on less than 2005 PPP $1.25 a day (percent) East Asia & Pacific
77.7
65.5
54.2
54.7
50.8
36.0
35.5
27.6
16.8
84.0
69.4
54.0
60.2
53.7
36.4
35.6
28.4
15.9
1.7
1.3
1.1
2.0
4.3
4.6
5.1
4.6
3.7
Latin America & Caribbean
12.9
15.3
13.7
11.3
10.1
10.9
10.9
10.7
8.2
Middle East & North Africa
7.9
6.1
5.7
4.3
4.1
4.1
4.2
3.6
3.6
59.4
55.6
54.2
51.7
46.9
47.1
44.1
43.8
40.3
China Europe & Central Asia
South Asia
59.8
55.5
53.6
51.3
49.4
46.6
44.8
43.9
41.6
Sub-Saharan Africa
India
53.4
55.8
54.5
57.6
56.9
58.8
58.4
55.0
50.9
Total
51.9
46.7
41.9
41.7
39.2
34.5
33.7
30.5
25.2
People living on less than 2005 PPP $2.00 a day (millions) East Asia & Pacific
1,278
1,280
1,238
1,274
1,262
1,108
1,105
954
729
972
963
907
961
926
792
770
655
474
Europe & Central Asia
35
28
25
32
49
56
68
57
42
Latin America & Caribbean
90
110
103
96
96
107
111
114
94
Middle East & North Africa
46
44
47
44
48
52
52
51
51
799
836
881
926
950
1,009
1,031
1,084
1,092
609
635
669
702
735
757
783
813
828
294
328
351
393
423
471
509
536
556
2,542
2,625
2,646
2,765
2,828
2,803
2,875
2,795
2,564
China
South Asia India Sub-Saharan Africa Total
Share of people living on less than 2005 PPP $2.00 a day (percent) East Asia & Pacific China Europe & Central Asia
92.6
88.5
81.6
79.8
75.8
64.1
61.8
51.9
38.7
97.8
92.9
83.7
84.6
78.6
65.1
61.4
51.2
36.3
8.3
6.5
5.6
6.9
10.3
11.9
14.3
12.0
8.9
Latin America & Caribbean
24.6
28.1
24.9
21.9
20.7
22.0
21.8
21.6
17.1
Middle East & North Africa
26.7
23.1
22.7
19.7
19.8
20.2
19.0
17.6
16.9
South Asia
86.5
84.8
83.9
82.7
79.7
79.9
77.2
77.1
73.9
86.6
84.8
83.8
82.6
81.7
79.8
78.4
77.6
75.6
Sub-Saharan Africa
73.8
75.5
74.0
76.1
75.9
77.9
77.6
75.6
72.9
Total
69.4
67.7
64.3
63.4
61.6
58.3
57.1
53.3
47.0
India
Source: World Bank PovcalNet.
92
2010 World Development Indicators
2.8
PEOPLE
Poverty rates at international poverty lines About the data The World Bank produced its first global poverty esti-
The statistics reported here are based on con-
PPP exchange rates are used to estimate global
mates for developing countries for World Development
sumption data or, when unavailable, on income
poverty, because they take into account the local
Report 1990: Poverty using household survey data for
surveys. Analysis of some 20 countries for which
prices of goods and services not traded internation-
22 countries (Ravallion, Datt, and van de Walle 1991).
income and consumption expenditure data were
ally. But PPP rates were designed for comparing
Since then there has been considerable expansion in
both available from the same surveys found income
aggregates from national accounts, not for mak-
the number of countries that field household income
to yield a higher mean than consumption but also
ing international poverty comparisons. As a result,
and expenditure surveys. The World Bank’s poverty
higher inequality. When poverty measures based on
there is no certainty that an international poverty line
monitoring database now includes more than 600
consumption and income were compared, the two
measures the same degree of need or deprivation
surveys representing 115 developing countries. More
effects roughly cancelled each other out: there was
across countries. So-called poverty PPPs, designed
than 1.2 million randomly sampled households were
no significant statistical difference.
to compare the consumption of the poorest people in the world, might provide a better basis for com-
interviewed in these surveys, representing 96 percent of the population of developing countries.
International poverty lines
parison of poverty across countries. Work on these
International comparisons of poverty estimates entail
measures is ongoing.
Data availability
both conceptual and practical problems. Countries
The number of data sets within two years of any given
have different definitions of poverty, and consistent
year rose dramatically, from 13 between 1978 and
comparisons across countries can be difficult. Local
• International poverty line in local currency is the
1982 to 158 between 2001 and 2006. Data cover-
poverty lines tend to have higher purchasing power in
international poverty lines of $1.25 and $2.00 a day
age is improving in all regions, but the Middle East
rich countries, where more generous standards are
in 2005 prices, converted to local currency using
and North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa continue to
used, than in poor countries.
the PPP conversion factors estimated by the Interna-
Definitions
lag. The database, maintained by a team in the World
Poverty measures based on an international pov-
tional Comparison Program. • Survey year is the year
Bank’s Development Research Group, is updated
erty line attempt to hold the real value of the poverty
in which the underlying data were collected. • Popu-
annually as new survey data become available, and
line constant across countries, as is done when mak-
lation below $1.25 a day and population below $2
a major reassessment of progress against poverty is
ing comparisons over time. Since World Development
a day are the percentages of the population living
made about every three years. A complete overview
Report 1990 the World Bank has aimed to apply a
on less than $1.25 a day and $2.00 a day at 2005
of data availability by year and country is available at
common standard in measuring extreme poverty,
international prices. As a result of revisions in PPP
http://iresearch.worldbank.org/povcalnet/.
anchored to what poverty means in the world’s poor-
exchange rates, poverty rates for individual countries
est countries. The welfare of people living in different
cannot be compared with poverty rates reported in
Data quality
countries can be measured on a common scale by
earlier editions. • Poverty gap is the mean shortfall
Besides the frequency and timeliness of survey data,
adjusting for differences in the purchasing power of
from the poverty line (counting the nonpoor as having
other data quality issues arise in measuring house-
currencies. The commonly used $1 a day standard,
zero shortfall), expressed as a percentage of the pov-
hold living standards. The surveys ask detailed ques-
measured in 1985 international prices and adjusted
erty line. This measure reflects the depth of poverty
tions on sources of income and how it was spent,
to local currency using purchasing power parities
as well as its incidence.
which must be carefully recorded by trained person-
(PPPs), was chosen for World Development Report
nel. Income is generally more difficult to measure
1990 because it was typical of the poverty lines in
accurately, and consumption comes closer to the
low-income countries at the time. Data sources
notion of living standards. And income can vary over
Early editions of World Development Indicators
time even if living standards do not. But consumption
used PPPs from the Penn World Tables to convert
The poverty measures are prepared by the World
data are not always available: the latest estimates
values in local currency to equivalent purchasing
Bank’s Development Research Group. The interna-
reported here use consumption for about two-thirds
power measured in U.S dollars. Later editions used
tional poverty lines are based on nationally repre-
of countries.
1993 consumption PPP estimates produced by the
sentative primary household surveys conducted by
However, even similar surveys may not be strictly
World Bank. International poverty lines were recently
national statistical offices or by private agencies
comparable because of differences in timing or in the
revised using the new data on PPPs compiled in
under the supervision of government or interna-
quality and training of enumerators. Comparisons
the 2005 round of the International Comparison
tional agencies and obtained from government
of countries at different levels of development also
Program, along with data from an expanded set of
statistical offices and World Bank Group country
pose a potential problem because of differences
household income and expenditure surveys. The new
departments. The World Bank Group has prepared
in the relative importance of the consumption of
extreme poverty line is set at $1.25 a day in 2005
an annual review of its poverty work since 1993.
nonmarket goods. The local market value of all con-
PPP terms, which represents the mean of the poverty
For details on data sources and methods used in
sumption in kind (including own production, particu-
lines found in the poorest 15 countries ranked by per
deriving the World Bank’s latest estimates, and fur-
larly important in underdeveloped rural economies)
capita consumption. The new poverty line maintains
ther discussion of the results, see Shaohua Chen
should be included in total consumption expenditure,
the same standard for extreme poverty—the poverty
and Martin Ravallion’s “The Developing World Is
but may not be. Most survey data now include valu-
line typical of the poorest countries in the world—but
Poorer Than We Thought, but No Less Successful
ations for consumption or income from own produc-
updates it using the latest information on the cost of
in the Fight against Poverty?” (2008).
tion, but valuation methods vary.
living in developing countries.
2010 World Development Indicators
93
2.9
Distribution of income or consumption Survey year
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentinac Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Comoros Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece
94
2005b 1995b 2000b 2006d 2007b 1994d 2000d 2005b 2005b 2007b 2000d 1995b 2003b 2003 b 2007b 2007b 1993–94b 2007d 2003 b 2003b 2006b 2007b 2001b 2000d 2001b 2003b 2002–03b 2006 d 2005d 1996d 2006d 2004b 2005–06 b 2005b 2007d 2002b 2005b 1996d 1997d 2002b 2007d 2007d 2004–05b 2007d 2004b 2005 b 2000d 1995d 2005b 2003b 2005b 2000d 2006b 2000d
2010 World Development Indicators
Gini index
.. 33.0 35.3 58.6 48.8 30.2 35.2 29.1 16.8 31.0 28.8 33.0 59.6 38.6 46.7 57.2 36.3 61.0 55.0 29.2 39.6 33.3 44.2 44.6 32.6 50.4 43.6 39.8 52.0 41.5 43.4 58.5 64.3 44.4 47.3 48.9 48.4 29.0 .. 25.8 24.7 39.9 48.4 54.4 32.1 46.9 .. 36.0 29.8 26.9 32.7 41.5 47.3 40.8 28.3 42.8 34.3
Percentage share of income or consumptiona
Lowest 10%
Lowest 20%
Second 20%
Third 20%
Fourth 20%
Highest 20%
Highest 10%
.. 3.2 2.8 0.6 1.2 3.6 2.0 3.3 6.1 4.3 3.6 3.4 0.6 2.9 2.2 0.7 2.6 1.3 1.1 3.5 3.0 4.1 2.7 2.4 2.6 1.7 2.1 2.6 1.6 2.4 2.0 0.8 0.9 2.3 2.1 1.6 2.0 3.6 .. 4.3 2.6 2.3 1.6 1.2 3.9 1.3 .. 2.7 4.1 4.0 2.8 2.5 2.0 1.9 3.2 1.9 2.5
.. 7.8 6.9 2.0 3.6 8.6 5.9 8.6 13.3 9.4 8.8 8.5 2.1 6.9 5.4 2.7 6.7 3.1 3.0 8.7 7.0 9.0 6.5 5.6 7.2 4.5 5.2 6.3 4.1 5.7 5.3 2.3 2.6 5.5 5.0 4.4 5.0 8.8 .. 10.2 8.3 6.0 4.4 3.4 9.0 4.3 .. 6.8 9.3 9.6 7.2 6.1 4.8 5.4 8.5 5.2 6.7
.. 12.2 11.5 5.7 8.2 13.0 12.0 13.3 16.2 12.6 13.4 13.0 5.4 10.9 8.8 6.5 11.4 5.8 6.9 13.5 10.6 11.9 9.7 9.3 12.7 8.1 9.4 10.4 7.7 9.8 9.4 6.0 5.4 9.2 8.4 8.5 8.7 13.3 .. 14.3 14.7 10.6 8.5 7.2 12.6 9.2 .. 11.6 13.2 14.1 12.6 10.1 8.6 10.5 13.7 9.8 11.9
.. 16.6 16.3 10.8 13.4 17.1 17.2 17.4 18.7 16.1 17.5 16.3 10.4 15.1 12.9 11.0 16.0 9.6 11.8 17.4 14.7 15.4 12.9 13.7 17.2 12.2 14.3 15.0 12.2 14.7 13.9 11.0 8.9 13.8 13.0 12.7 12.9 17.3 .. 17.5 18.2 15.1 13.1 11.8 16.1 13.7 .. 16.2 16.8 17.5 17.2 14.6 13.2 15.3 17.8 14.8 16.8
.. 22.6 22.8 19.7 21.7 22.1 23.6 22.9 21.7 21.1 22.6 20.8 19.2 21.2 20.0 18.6 22.9 16.4 19.6 22.3 20.6 21.0 18.9 20.5 23.0 19.1 21.7 21.8 19.3 22.0 20.7 19.1 15.1 20.9 20.5 19.7 19.3 22.7 .. 21.7 22.9 21.8 20.2 19.2 20.9 20.8 .. 22.5 21.4 22.1 22.8 21.2 20.6 22.2 23.1 21.9 23.0
.. 40.9 42.4 61.9 53.0 39.2 41.3 37.8 30.2 40.8 37.7 41.4 62.9 45.9 53.0 61.2 43.1 65.0 58.7 38.1 47.1 42.8 52.0 50.9 39.9 56.1 49.4 46.6 56.8 47.8 50.7 61.6 68.1 50.6 53.1 54.6 54.1 37.9 .. 36.2 35.8 46.5 53.8 58.5 41.5 52.0 .. 43.0 39.4 36.7 40.2 47.9 52.8 46.7 36.9 48.3 41.5
.. 25.9 26.9 44.7 36.1 24.5 25.4 23.0 17.5 26.6 23.0 28.1 45.8 31.0 37.5 45.3 27.1 51.2 43.0 23.8 32.4 28.0 36.9 35.5 24.8 40.5 33.0 30.8 41.7 31.4 34.9 45.9 55.0 34.7 37.1 38.6 39.6 23.1 .. 22.7 21.3 30.8 37.7 43.3 27.6 36.1 .. 27.7 25.6 22.6 25.1 32.7 36.9 30.6 22.1 32.5 26.0
Survey year
Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Micronesia Moldova Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan
2006d 2003b 2002b 1998 d 2001d 2006d 2004b 2004–05b 2007b 2005b 2000d 2001d 2000d 2004 b 1993d 2006 b 2007b 2005–06 b 1998d
2007b 2002–03b 2007b 2002–03 b 2007b 2004b 2006b 2005b 2004–05b 2004d 2004b 2006b 2000b 2008 d 2000b 2007b 2007–08b 2007b 2007b 2002–03b 1993d 2003–04b 1999 d 1997d 2005 d 2005b 2003–04b 2000d 2004–05 b
Gini index
53.7 43.3 35.5 43.2 59.5 55.3 30.0 36.8 37.6 38.3 .. 34.3 39.2 36.0 45.5 24.9 37.7 30.9 47.7 .. 31.6 .. .. 33.5 32.6 36.3 .. 52.5 52.6 .. 35.8 42.8 47.2 39.0 37.9 37.4 39.0 39.0 .. 51.6 0.5 37.4 36.6 36.9 40.9 47.1 .. 74.3 47.3 30.9 36.2 52.3 43.9 42.9 25.8 .. 31.2
2.9
PEOPLE
Distribution of income or consumption Percentage share of income or consumptiona
Lowest 10%
Lowest 20%
Second 20%
Third 20%
Fourth 20%
Highest 20%
Highest 10%
1.3 2.4 2.9 1.1 0.9 0.7 3.5 3.6 3.1 2.6 .. 2.9 2.1 2.3 2.1 4.8 3.0 3.6 1.8 .. 2.9 .. .. 3.9 3.7 2.6 .. 1.0 2.4 .. 2.7 1.9 2.6 2.9 2.6 2.6 2.7 2.5 .. 1.2 1.6 2.7 2.9 2.6 2.7 2.1 .. 0.6 2.7 2.5 2.2 1.4 2.3 2.0 3.9 .. 3.9
3.4 5.8 7.2 4.3 2.5 2.5 8.6 8.1 7.4 6.4 .. 7.4 5.7 6.5 5.2 10.6 7.2 8.7 4.7 .. 7.9 .. .. 8.8 8.5 6.7 .. 3.0 6.4 .. 6.8 5.2 6.2 7.0 6.4 6.5 6.5 6.2 .. 3.8 5.1 6.7 7.1 6.5 6.5 5.4 .. 1.5 6.1 7.6 6.4 3.8 5.9 5.1 9.6 .. 9.1
7.2 9.6 11.6 9.8 5.9 6.7 13.1 11.3 11.0 10.9 .. 12.3 10.5 12.0 9.0 14.2 11.1 12.8 8.8 .. 13.6 .. .. 11.9 12.3 11.5 .. 7.2 11.4 .. 11.5 10.0 9.6 10.8 10.8 10.9 10.7 10.5 .. 8.1 10.2 11.1 11.2 11.4 10.5 9.2 .. 2.8 8.9 13.2 11.4 7.7 9.8 9.7 14.0 .. 12.8
12.0 14.1 16.0 14.5 10.5 12.1 17.1 14.9 14.9 15.6 .. 16.3 15.9 16.8 13.8 17.6 15.2 16.6 13.3 .. 18.0 .. .. 15.1 16.2 15.9 .. 12.5 15.7 .. 16.3 14.5 13.1 14.9 15.8 15.6 15.2 15.4 .. 12.4 19.0 15.6 15.6 16.1 14.5 13.1 .. 5.5 12.5 17.2 15.8 12.3 13.9 14.7 17.2 .. 16.3
19.5 20.8 22.1 21.3 18.1 20.4 22.5 20.4 21.3 22.2 .. 21.9 23.0 22.8 20.9 22.0 21.1 22.0 20.3 .. 23.1 .. .. 21.6 21.6 22.6 .. 21.0 21.6 .. 22.7 21.5 17.7 20.9 22.8 22.6 21.6 22.3 .. 19.2 64.0 22.0 22.1 22.2 20.6 19.0 .. 12.0 18.4 23.3 22.6 19.4 20.1 21.9 22.0 .. 21.3
57.8 49.7 43.0 50.1 63.0 58.4 38.7 45.3 45.5 45.0 .. 42.0 44.9 42.0 51.2 35.7 45.4 39.9 53.0 .. 37.5 .. .. 42.6 41.4 43.3 .. 56.4 45.0 .. 42.8 48.8 53.5 46.4 44.4 44.3 46.0 45.7 .. 56.4 47.1 44.6 44.0 43.7 47.9 53.3 .. 78.3 54.2 38.7 43.8 56.9 50.3 48.6 37.2 .. 40.5
42.4 34.4 28.0 34.4 47.8 42.2 24.1 31.1 30.1 29.6 .. 27.2 28.8 26.8 35.6 21.7 30.7 25.1 37.8 .. 22.5 .. .. 27.6 27.0 27.8 .. 39.4 30.1 .. 27.4 32.3 41.5 31.7 28.5 27.9 30.5 29.6 .. 41.3
2010 World Development Indicators
28.9 28.3 28.6 33.2 39.2 .. 65.0 40.4 22.9 27.8 41.8 35.7 32.4 23.4 .. 26.5
95
2.9
Distribution of income or consumption Survey year
Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Romania Russian Federation Rwanda São Tomé and Príncipe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka St. Lucia Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe
2006d 1996 b 2007d 2007d 2006b 2005b 1997d 2006–07b 2007b 2007b 2000 b 2000–01b 2005b 2008b 2006–07b 2003b 1998d 1996d 2004b 2000b 2000d 2002b 1995d 1999 d 2000–01b 2000d 2000 d 2004b 2000–01b 2004b 2007b 2006b 1992d 2000b 2006b 1998b 2005b 2008b 1999 d 2000 d 2007d 2003b 2006d 2006b 2005b 2004–05b 1995b
Gini index
54.9 50.9 53.2 50.5 44.0 34.9 38.5 .. 41.1 32.1 43.7 46.7 50.6 .. 39.2 28.2 1.6 42.5 42.5 25.8 31.2 .. 57.8 34.7 41.1 42.6 .. 52.8 50.7 25.0 33.7 .. 33.6 34.6 42.5 31.9 34.4 40.3 40.81 41.2 40.8 42.6 27.6 .. 36.0 40.8 47.1 36.7 43.4 37.8 .. 37.7 50.7 50.1
Percentage share of income or consumptiona
Lowest 10%
Lowest 20%
Second 20%
Third 20%
Fourth 20%
Highest 20%
Highest 10%
0.8 1.9 1.1 1.3 2.4 3.0 2.0 .. 1.3 3.2 2.2 2.3 2.1 .. 2.5 3.8 3.7 2.6 1.9 3.1 3.4 .. 1.3 2.6 2.9 1.7 .. 1.0 1.8 3.6 2.9 .. 3.2 3.1 2.6 3.9 2.0 2.1 2.4 2.0 2.5 2.6 3.9 .. 2.1 1.9 1.6 2.9 1.7 3.1 .. 2.9 1.3 1.8
2.5 4.5 3.4 3.6 5.6 7.3 5.8 .. 3.9 7.9 5.6 5.4 5.2 .. 6.2 9.1 5.7 6.1 5.0 8.8 8.2 .. 3.1 7.0 6.8 5.1 .. 3.1 4.5 9.1 7.6 .. 7.8 7.3 6.1 8.9 5.4 5.5 5.9 5.4 6.0 6.1 9.4 .. 6.1 5.4 4.3 7.1 4.9 7.1 .. 7.2 3.6 4.6
6.6 7.7 7.6 7.8 9.1 11.7 11.0 .. .. 12.7 9.6 9.0 8.7 .. 10.6 13.6 8.4 9.7 9.4 14.9 12.8 .. 5.6 12.1 10.4 10.3 .. 7.5 8.0 14.0 12.2 .. 12.0 11.8 9.8 12.5 10.3 10.3 10.2 10.3 10.2 9.8 13.6 .. 11.4 10.7 8.6 11.5 9.6 10.8 .. 11.3 7.8 8.1
12.1 12.1 12.2 13.0 13.7 16.2 15.5 .. .. 16.8 13.9 13.2 12.1 .. 15.3 17.4 12.4 14.0 14.6 18.6 17.0 .. 9.9 16.4 14.4 14.4 .. 12.2 12.3 17.6 16.3 .. 16.4 16.3 14.2 16.0 15.2 15.5 14.9 15.2 14.9 14.1 17.4 .. 16.0 15.7 13.6 15.7 14.8 15.2 .. 15.3 12.8 12.2
20.8 19.3 19.4 20.8 21.2 22.4 21.9 .. .. 22.3 20.7 19.6 17.6 .. 22.0 22.5 69.8 20.9 22.0 22.9 22.6 .. 18.8 22.5 20.5 21.4 .. 19.9 19.4 22.7 22.6 .. 21.9 22.3 21.0 21.2 22.0 22.7 21.8 22.0 21.7 20.7 22.6 .. 22.5 22.4 21.4 21.5 22.1 21.6 .. 21.0 20.6 19.3
58.0 56.4 57.4 54.8 50.4 42.4 45.9 .. 52.0 40.3 50.2 52.8 56.5 .. 45.9 37.5 60.0 49.3 49.0 34.8 39.4 .. 62.7 42.0 48.0 48.8 .. 57.4 55.9 36.6 41.3 .. 41.9 42.3 49.0 41.3 47.1 45.9 47.2 47.1 47.2 49.3 37.0 .. 44.0 45.8 52.1 44.2 48.6 45.4 .. 45.3 55.2 55.7
41.4 40.9 42.3 38.4 33.9 27.2 29.8 .. 35.9 25.6 34.3 38.2 43.6 .. 30.1 22.7 33.6 32.8 20.8 24.6 .. 44.9 26.6 33.3 31.6 .. 40.0 40.8 22.2 25.9 .. 26.6 27.0 33.7 27.0 31.3 29.9 31.6 31.3 31.8 34.1 22.5 .. 28.5 29.9 35.5 29.5 32.7 29.8 .. 30.8 38.9 40.3
a. Percentage shares by quintile may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding. b. Refers to expenditure shares by percentiles of population, ranked by per capita expenditure. c. Urban data. d. Refers to income shares by percentiles of population, ranked by per capita income.
96
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
2.9
PEOPLE
Distribution of income or consumption Definitions
Inequality in the distribution of income is refl ected
improve and become more standardized, but achiev-
• Survey year is the year in which the underlying
in the percentage shares of income or consumption
ing strict comparability is still impossible (see About
data were collected. • Gini index measures the
accruing to portions of the population ranked by
the data for tables 2.7 and 2.8).
extent to which the distribution of income (or con-
income or consumption levels. The portions ranked
Two sources of noncomparability should be noted
sumption expenditure) among individuals or house-
lowest by personal income receive the smallest
in particular. First, the surveys can differ in many
holds within an economy deviates from a perfectly
shares of total income. The Gini index provides
respects, including whether they use income or con-
equal distribution. A Lorenz curve plots the cumula-
a convenient summary measure of the degree of
sumption expenditure as the living standard indi-
tive percentages of total income received against the
inequality. Data on the distribution of income or
cator. The distribution of income is typically more
cumulative number of recipients, starting with the
consumption come from nationally representa-
unequal than the distribution of consumption. In
poorest individual. The Gini index measures the area
tive household surveys. Where the original data
addition, the definitions of income used differ more
between the Lorenz curve and a hypothetical line
from the household survey were available, they
often among surveys. Consumption is usually a
of absolute equality, expressed as a percentage of
have been used to directly calculate the income
much better welfare indicator, particularly in devel-
the maximum area under the line. Thus a Gini index
or consumption shares by quintile. Otherwise,
oping countries. Second, households differ in size
of 0 represents perfect equality, while an index of
shares have been estimated from the best avail-
(number of members) and in the extent of income
100 implies perfect inequality. • Percentage share
able grouped data.
sharing among members. And individuals differ in
of income or consumption is the share of total
The distribution data have been adjusted for
age and consumption needs. Differences among
income or consumption that accrues to subgroups of
household size, providing a more consistent mea-
countries in these respects may bias comparisons
population indicated by deciles or quintiles.
sure of per capita income or consumption. No adjust-
of distribution.
ment has been made for spatial differences in cost
World Bank staff have made an effort to ensure
of living within countries, because the data needed
that the data are as comparable as possible. Wher-
for such calculations are generally unavailable. For
ever possible, consumption has been used rather
further details on the estimation method for low- and
than income. Income distribution and Gini indexes for
middle-income economies, see Ravallion and Chen
high-income economies are calculated directly from
(1996).
the Luxembourg Income Study database, using an
Because the underlying household surveys differ in method and type of data collected, the distribution
estimation method consistent with that applied for developing countries.
data are not strictly comparable across countries. These problems are diminishing as survey methods The Gini coefficient and ratio of income or consumption of the richest quintile to the poorest quintiles are closely correlated
2.9a
Gini coefficient (percent) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ratio of income or consumption of richest quintile to poorest quintile (percent)
Data sources
There are many ways to measure income or consumption inequality. The Gini coefficient shows inequal-
Data on distribution are compiled by the World
ity over the entire population; the ratio of income or consumption of the richest quintile to the poorest
Bank’s Development Research Group using pri-
quintiles shows differences only at the tails of the population distribution. Both measures are closely
mary household survey data obtained from govern-
correlated and provide similar information. At low levels of inequality the Gini coefficient is a more sensi-
ment statistical agencies and World Bank country
tive measure, but above a Gini value of 45–55 percent the inequality ratio rises faster.
departments. Data for high-income economies are
Source: World Development Indicators data files.
from the Luxembourg Income Study database.
2010 World Development Indicators
97
2.10
Assessing vulnerability and security Youth unemployment
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
98
Female-headed households
Pension contributors
Male % of male labor force ages 15–24
Female % of female labor force ages 15–24
% of total
2005–08a
2005–08a
2005–08a
Year
.. .. .. .. 16b .. 9b 8 18 8 .. 17 .. .. 55 .. .. 14 .. .. .. .. 12b .. .. 17 .. 11 16 .. .. 8 .. 19 .. 10 7 21 12b 23 14 .. 12 20b 17 18 .. .. 28 11 .. 17 .. .. .. .. 5b
.. .. .. .. 24b .. 9b 8 10 14 .. 19 .. .. 62 .. .. 11 .. .. .. .. 10 b .. .. 22 .. 7 28 .. .. 15 .. 27 .. 10 8 45 23 b 62 10 .. 12 29 b 16 18 .. .. 37 10 .. 29 .. .. .. .. 11b
.. .. .. 25 34 36 .. .. 25 13 54 .. 23 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 24 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 19 21 23 .. .. .. 46 .. .. 35 .. 12 .. .. .. 23 .. .. .. .. .. .. 34 .. .. 17 .. 44 26
2005 2007 2002
2010 World Development Indicators
2007 2007 2005 2005 2007 2004 2008 2005 1996 2007 2005 2007 2007 1993 1993 1993 2005 2004 1990 2007 2005 2008 2007 1992 2004 1997 2007 2008 2007 2007 2004 2004 2007 2004 2005 2005 1995 2003 2004 2005 2004 2005 2005 1993 2004 2006
Public expenditure on pensions
% of labor force
% of workingage population
.. 49.8 36.7 .. 42.5 88.0 92.6 96.4 36.8 2.8 94.7 94.2 4.8 11.5 35.5 .. 51.0 83.5 3.1 3.3 .. 13.7 90.5 1.5 1.1 57.3 20.5 77.0 24.9 .. 5.8 55.3 9.3 75.2 .. 93.0 94.4 21.4 27.0 55.5 24.0 .. 95.2 .. 88.7 89.9 15.0 3.8 29.9 88.2 9.1 85.2 24.0 1.5 1.9 .. 16.1
2.2 34.1 22.1 .. 30.8 65.7 69.6 68.7 30.2 2.1 67.0 61.6 .. 9.2 25.5 .. 39.2 48.3 3.0 3.0 .. 11.5 71.4 1.3 1.0 35.5 17.2 55.6 19.0 .. 5.6 37.6 9.1 51.0 .. 66.0 86.9 15.1 20.8 27.7 16.6 .. 68.6 .. 67.2 61.4 14.0 2.9 22.7 65.5 7.1 58.5 18.0 1.8 1.5 .. 12.4
Year
2005 2007 2002 2007 2006 2005 2005 2006 2001 2008 2005 2006 2000 2005 2004 2007 1992 1991 2001 2005 2004 1997 2001 1996 2006 2004 2006 1997 2007 1992 2008 2005 2000 2002 2004 2006 2001 2003 2007 2005 2005
2004 2005 2002 2005 2005 2005 1994
% of GDP
0.5 5.9 3.2 .. 8.0 3.2 3.5c 12.6c 3.7 0.5 10.2 9.0c 1.5 4.5 7.7 .. 12.6 9.8 0.3 0.2 .. 0.8 4.1c 0.8 0.1 2.9 2.7 .. 2.7 .. 0.9 2.4 0.3 11.3 12.6 8.1 5.4c 0.8 2.5 4.1 1.9 0.3 6.0 0.3 8.4c 12.4c .. .. 3.0 11.4c 1.3 11.5c 1.0 .. 2.1 .. 0.6
Year
2000 2007
2006 2002
2004
2006
2005 2005
2007
2003
Average pension % of average wage
.. .. .. .. 43.8 20.3 .. .. 24.3 .. 41.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. 42.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 53.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 32.4 .. 40.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. 35.4 .. .. .. .. .. 13.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
Youth unemployment
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Female-headed households
Pension contributors
Male % of male labor force ages 15–24
Female % of female labor force ages 15–24
% of total
2005–08a
2005–08a
2005–08a
Year
19 .. 24 20 .. 15 15 19 .. 8 .. .. .. .. 11 .. .. 14 .. 13 .. .. 6 .. 13 57 2 .. 11 .. .. 20 6 15 .. 18 .. .. .. .. 7 10b 8 .. .. 8 .. 7 13 .. 9 14b 14 15 13 24 ..
21 .. 27 30 .. 10 17 25 .. 7 .. .. .. .. 7 .. .. 16 .. 13 .. .. 4 .. 15 58 3 .. 12 .. .. 31 8 14 .. 16 .. .. .. .. 8 10 b 10 .. .. 7 .. 9 24 .. 18 15b 17 20 20 19 ..
.. 14 13 .. 11 .. .. .. .. .. 41 .. .. .. .. .. .. 25 .. .. .. .. 31 .. .. 8 .. .. .. 12 .. .. .. 34 29 .. .. .. 44 23 .. .. .. 19 .. .. .. 10 .. .. .. 22 19 .. .. .. ..
2008 2004 2002 2001 2005 1992 2005 2004 2005 2004 2004 2005 2005 2005 2006 2003 2003 2005 2004 2007 2008 1993 2008 1990 1995 2000 2006 2007 2005 2003 1995
2006 2005 2003 2005 2006 2005 2005 2004 2008 2004 2007 2007 2005 2005
2.10
Public expenditure on pensions
% of labor force
% of workingage population
92.0 9.0 15.5 35.1 .. 88.0 82.0 92.4 17.4 95.3 32.2 33.8 8.0 .. 78.0 23.0 .. 42.2 .. 92.4 33.1 5.7 .. 65.5 .. 48.4 5.4 .. 46.9 2.5 5.0 51.4 36.2 42.0 33.6 22.4 2.0 .. .. 3.5 90.3 92.7 17.9 1.3 1.7 90.8 .. 6.4 .. .. 11.6 16.5 20.8 84.9 91.4 .. ..
56.0 5.7 11.3 20.0 .. 63.9 63.0 58.4 12.6 75.0 18.6 26.4 6.7 .. 55.0 .. .. 28.9 .. 66.5 19.9 3.6 .. 38.1 68.7 30.4 4.8 .. 32.5 2.0 4.0 33.6 24.3 77.8 21.4 12.8 2.1 .. .. 2.5 70.4 72.2 11.5 1.2 1.2 75.7 .. 4.0 42.0 .. 9.1 13.1 15.5 54.5 71.9 .. ..
Year
2008 2007 2000 2005 1996 2005 1996 2005 2001 2004 2003 2005 2005 1990 2006 2002 2003
2001 2007 2008 1990 1999 1991 1992 1999 2005 2007 2007 2003 1996
2003 2005 2005 1996 2006 1991 2005 1993 1996 2001 2000 1993 2005 2005
% of GDP
10.5 2.0 .. 1.1 .. 3.4c 5.9 14.0c .. 8.7c 2.2 4.9 1.1 .. 1.6c 3.4 3.5 4.8 .. 7.5 2.1 .. .. 2.1 6.3 9.4 0.2 .. 6.5 0.4 0.2 4.4 1.3c 7.2 6.5d 1.9 0.0 .. .. 0.3 5.0c 4.4 c 2.5 0.7 0.1 4.8 c .. 0.9 4.3 .. 1.2 2.6 1.0 11.4c 10.2c .. ..
Year
2005
2003
2003 2005
2005 2006
2003
2007
2010 World Development Indicators
Average pension % of average wage
39.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 24.9 .. .. .. .. .. 27.5 .. 33.1 .. .. .. .. 30.9 55.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 20.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 47.1 .. .. ..
99
PEOPLE
Assessing vulnerability and security
2.10
Assessing vulnerability and security Youth unemployment
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Female-headed households
Pension contributors
Male % of male labor force ages 15–24
Female % of female labor force ages 15–24
% of total
2005–08a
2005–08a
2005–08a
Year
.. .. 34 .. 23 29 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 19 48 .. .. .. .. 25 30 .. .. .. .. .. .. 30 49 .. .. .. .. 18 .. .. .. .. 24 38
2007
19 14 .. .. .. 41 .. 7 19 10 .. 43 24 17b .. .. 20 7 .. .. 7 5 .. .. 13 31 18 .. .. 15 7 17 12b 20 .. 13 .. 34 .. .. .. .. w .. .. 17 .. .. 18 .. .. .. .. 13 16
18 15 .. .. .. 48 .. 11 20 11 .. 52 26 28 b .. .. 21 7 .. .. 10 4 .. .. 22 29 18 .. .. 14 13 13 9b 30 .. 17 .. 43 .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. 21 .. .. 18 .. .. .. .. 12 17
2004 2003 2003 2004 2008 2005 2007
2005 2004 1995 2005 2005 2004 2006 2005 1997 2004 2004 2007 2004 2007 2005 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005 2008 2005 2006 1995
Public expenditure on pensions
% of labor force
% of workingage population
53.4 .. 4.8 .. 5.3 46.0e 4.6 62.0 85.5 87.3 .. .. 91.0 35.6 12.1 .. 91.0 100.0 17.4 .. 4.3 27.2 .. 15.9 55.6 45.3 55.0 .. 10.7 68.2 .. 92.7 92.5 55.0 86.0 31.8 13.2 17.0 10.0 10.9 12.0
36.3 .. 4.1 .. 3.9 32.2e 3.6 45.3 55.3 62.7 .. .. 63.2 22.2 12.0 .. 72.3 79.1 11.4 .. 4.1 21.8 .. 15.0 .. 25.4 30.5 .. 9.3 47.4 .. 71.4 72.5 44.3 57.0 23.8 10.8 7.8 5.5 8.0 10.0
Year
2007 2007 1998 2003 2007 1996 2005 2007
2005 2002
2005 2005 2004 2005 2006
1997 1996 2003 2007 1996 2003 2007 2005 2005 2007 2005 2001 1998 2008 1999 2006 2002
% of GDP
5.7 4.7 .. 0.2 1.3 13.3e .. 1.4 6.2c 11.8 .. .. 8.1c 2.0 .. .. 7.7c 6.8c 1.3 2.4 0.9 .. .. 0.6 0.6 4.3 9.6 2.3 0.3 15.5 .. 5.7c 6.0 c 10.0 6.5 2.7 1.6 4.0 0.9 1.0 2.3
Year
2005 2003
Average pension % of average wage
41.5 29.2 .. .. .. ..
2005 2005
2006
.. .. 44.7 44.3 .. .. 58.6 .. .. .. ..
2000 2003
2007
2007
2006 2005
40.0 .. 25.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. 61.3 .. .. 48.3 .. .. 29.2 .. 40.0 .. .. .. .. .. ..
a. Data are for the most recent year available. b. Limited coverage. c. Includes expenditure on old-age and survivors benefi ts only. d. Includes old-age, survivors, disability, military, and work accident or disease pensions. e. Includes Montenegro.
100
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
2.10
Definitions
As traditionally measured, poverty is a static con-
residency, or income status. In contribution-related
• Youth unemployment is the share of the labor force
cept, and vulnerability a dynamic one. Vulnerabil-
schemes, however, eligibility is usually restricted
ages 15–24 without work but available for and seek-
ity reflects a household’s resilience in the face of
to individuals who have contributed for a minimum
ing employment. • Female-headed households are
shocks and the likelihood that a shock will lead to a
number of years. Definitional issues—relating to the
the percentage of households with a female head.
decline in well-being. Thus, it depends primarily on
labor force, for example—may arise in comparing
• Pension contributors are the share of the labor
the household’s assets and insurance mechanisms.
coverage by contribution-related schemes over time
force or working-age population (here defined as
Because poor people have fewer assets and less
and across countries (for country-specific informa-
ages 15 and older) covered by a pension scheme.
diversified sources of income than do the better-off,
tion, see Hinz and others forthcoming). The share
• Public expenditure on pensions is all government
fluctuations in income affect them more.
of the labor force covered by a pension scheme may
expenditures on cash transfers to the elderly, the
be overstated in countries that do not try to count
disabled, and survivors and the administrative costs
informal sector workers as part of the labor force.
of these programs. • Average pension is the aver-
Enhancing security for poor people means reducing their vulnerability to such risks as ill health, providing them the means to manage risk themselves,
Public interventions and institutions can provide
age pension payment of all pensioners of the main
and strengthening market or public institutions for
services directly to poor people, although whether
pension schemes (including old-age, survivors, dis-
managing risk. Tools include microfinance programs,
these interventions and institutions work well for the
ability, military, and work accident or disease pen-
public provision of education and basic health care,
poor is debated. State action is often ineffective,
sions) divided by the average wage of all formal sec-
and old age assistance (see tables 2.11 and 2.16).
in part because governments can influence only a
tor workers.
Poor households face many risks, and vulnerability
few of the many sources of well-being and in part
is thus multidimensional. The indicators in the table
because of difficulties in delivering goods and ser-
focus on individual risks—youth unemployment,
vices. The effectiveness of public provision is further
female-headed households, income insecurity in
constrained by the fiscal resources at governments’
old age—and the extent to which publicly provided
disposal and the fact that state institutions may not
services may be capable of mitigating some of these
be responsive to the needs of poor people.
risks. Poor people face labor market risks, often hav-
The data on public pension spending cover the
ing to take up precarious, low-quality jobs and to
pension programs of the social insurance schemes
increase their household’s labor market participa-
for which contributions had previously been made.
tion by sending their children to work (see tables
In many cases noncontributory pensions or social
2.4 and 2.6). Income security is a prime concern
assistance targeted to the elderly and disabled are
for the elderly.
also included. A country’s pattern of spending is cor-
Youth unemployment is an important policy issue for many economies. Experiencing unemployment
related with its demographic structure—spending increases as the population ages.
may permanently impair a young person’s productive potential and future employment opportunities. The table presents unemployment among youth ages 15–24, but the lower age limit for young people in a country could be determined by the minimum age for leaving school, so age groups could differ across countries. Also, since this age group is likely to include school leavers, the level of youth unemployment varies considerably over the year as a result of different school opening and closing dates. The youth unemployment rate shares similar limitations on comparability as the general unemployment rate. For further information, see About the data for table 2.5 and the original source.
Data sources Data on youth unemployment are from the ILO’s
The definition of female-headed household differs
Key Indicators of the Labour Market, 6th edition,
greatly across countries, making cross-country com-
database. Data on female-headed household are
parison difficult. In some cases it is assumed that a
from Demographic and Health Surveys by Macro
woman cannot be the head of any household with an
International. Data on pension contributors and
adult male, because of sex-biased stereotype. Cau-
pension spending are from Hinz and others’
tion should be used in interpreting the data.
“International Patterns of Pension Provision II”
Pension scheme coverage may be broad or even uni-
(forthcoming).
versal where eligibility is determined by citizenship,
2010 World Development Indicators
101
PEOPLE
Assessing vulnerability and security
2.11
Education inputs Public expenditure per student
1999
2008 a
% of GDP per capita Secondary 1999 2008 a
.. .. 12.0 .. 12.9 .. 16.9 24.9 6.9 .. .. 18.2 11.9 14.2 .. .. 10.8 15.5 .. 14.7 5.9 .. .. .. 9.2 14.4 .. 12.4 15.2 .. 15.2 16.0 17.9 .. 27.9 11.2 24.6 7.1 4.5 .. 8.6 15.1 21.0 .. 17.4 17.3 .. .. .. 14.8 .. 11.7 6.7 11.4 .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 13.2 .. 18.2 .. 5.2 10.5 .. 20.5 12.4 13.7 .. 12.6 .. 23.6 29.1 18.8 .. 7.6 .. 5.5 .. 11.9 .. 12.7 12.4 .. .. .. .. .. 51.1 13.6 24.5 7.4 .. .. 8.5 8.2 .. 12.4 17.9 17.1 .. .. 14.7 16.1 17.9 .. 10.3 5.0 .. .. 1.1
.. .. .. .. 18.2 .. 15.4 29.9 17.0 13.6 .. 23.7 24.2 11.7 .. .. 9.5 18.8 .. .. 11.5 .. .. .. 28.3 14.8 11.6 17.7 16.1 .. .. 23.2 56.1 .. 41.4 21.7 38.1 .. 9.7 .. 7.5 37.6 27.3 .. 25.8 28.5 .. .. .. 20.5 .. 15.5 4.3 .. .. .. ..
Primary
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
102
2010 World Development Indicators
.. .. .. .. 20.3 .. 16.2 .. 8.0 14.3 .. .. .. 14.5 .. 38.3 .. 22.0 30.3 58.2 .. 39.1 .. .. .. 13.4 .. 15.6 14.8 .. .. .. .. .. 60.1 23.1 34.4 6.5 .. .. 9.1 8.1 .. 8.9 31.5 26.6 .. .. 15.4 20.7 28.3 .. 5.9 4.4 .. .. 1.1
Public expenditure on education
Tertiary 1999
2008 a
.. .. .. .. 17.7 .. 27.2 51.6 19.1 50.7 .. 38.3 157.0 44.1 .. .. 57.1 17.9 .. 1,051.5 43.7 .. 47.1 .. .. 19.4 90.1 .. 37.8 .. 362.2 55.0 218.9 35.8 86.6 33.7 65.9 .. .. .. 8.9 433.2 32.0 .. 40.3 29.7 .. .. .. .. .. 26.2 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. 80.8 14.2 .. 24.7 .. 9.2 39.8 18.1 35.5 153.4 .. .. .. .. 23.2 308.3 563.9 .. 126.1 .. 305.2 .. 11.5 .. 47.3 26.0 .. .. .. .. .. 43.5 37.4 53.4 .. .. .. 31.5 .. .. 642.7 33.1 33.5 .. .. 11.4 .. .. .. 19.0 71.5 .. .. ..
% of GDP 2008 a
.. .. .. 2.6 5.5 3.0 5.2 .. 1.9 2.4 5.2 6.0 3.6 6.3 .. 8.1 5.0 4.2 4.6 7.2 1.6 3.9 .. 1.3 .. 3.4 .. 3.3 3.9 .. .. 5.0 4.6 .. 13.3 4.6 7.9 2.2 .. 3.7 3.6 2.0 .. 5.5 6.1 5.6 .. .. 2.9 4.4 .. .. 3.0 1.7 .. .. ..
Trained Primary teachers school in primary pupil–teacher education ratio
% of total government expenditure
% of total
pupils per teacher
2008 a
2008 a
2008 a
.. .. .. .. 15.0 15.0 14.0 .. 11.9 14.0 9.3 12.4 15.9 .. .. 21.0 16.2 11.6 15.4 22.3 12.4 17.0 .. 12.0 .. 18.2 .. 23.0 14.9 .. .. 22.8 24.6 .. 18.5 10.5 15.5 11.0 .. 12.1 13.1 .. .. 23.3 12.6 10.6 .. .. 7.2 9.7 .. .. .. 19.2 .. .. ..
.. .. 98.9 .. .. .. .. .. 99.9 54.4 99.9 .. 71.8 .. .. 94.3 .. .. 87.7 87.4 98.2 61.8 .. .. 35.5 .. .. 95.1 100.0 93.3 89.0 86.0 100.0 .. 100.0 .. .. 89.2 71.6 .. 93.2 89.3 .. 89.7 .. .. .. .. 95.0 .. 49.1 .. .. 82.1 .. .. 36.4
43 .. 23 .. 16 19 .. 12 11 44 15 11 45 24 .. 25 24 16 49 b 52 49 46 .. 90 62 27 18 17 29 39 52 19 42 17 10 19 .. 20 23 27 33 47 13 59 15 19 .. 34 9 14 31 10 29 44 62 .. 33
Public expenditure per student
1999
2008 a
% of GDP per capita Secondary 1999 2008 a
18.0 11.9 .. 9.1 .. 11.0 20.6 24.0 13.4 21.1 13.7 .. 22.5 .. 18.4 .. 19.2 .. 2.2 19.5 .. 34.4 .. .. .. .. 8.9 .. 12.5 13.5 11.2 9.7 11.7 .. .. 17.0 .. .. 22.1 9.1 15.2 20.1 .. 20.2 .. 19.8 11.2 .. 13.7 .. 13.6 7.6 12.8 .. 19.5 .. ..
25.6 8.9 .. 13.5 .. 15.0 20.2 25.1 17.3 21.9 13.0 .. 22.3 .. 17.2 .. 11.1 .. .. 37.3 .. 22.3 5.7 .. 16.4 .. 7.4 .. 10.8 10.4 12.8 10.3 13.4 34.3 14.7 16.3 14.5 .. 15.7 15.1 17.8 17.6 9.8 27.1 .. 18.2 .. .. 7.5 .. .. 7.3 .. 27.0 22.4 .. ..
19.1 24.7 .. 9.9 .. 16.8 22.0 27.7 21.0 20.9 15.8 .. 15.1 .. 15.7 .. .. .. 4.5 23.7 .. 76.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. 21.7 53.0 35.3 15.3 14.2 .. .. 44.5 .. 6.8 36.2 13.1 22.2 24.3 .. 60.9 .. 26.8 21.8 .. 19.1 .. 18.4 10.8 11.0 16.5 27.5 .. ..
Primary
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
23.2 16.2 .. 20.3 .. 22.8 20.5 28.6 19.9 22.4 16.5 .. 22.0 .. 22.2 .. 14.6 .. .. 19.3 .. 50.2 8.4 .. 20.3 .. 13.0 .. .. 34.5 36.7 17.4 13.8 32.4 14.7 38.3 83.7 .. 16.0 11.2 25.4 19.8 4.5 49.6 .. .. .. .. 10.0 .. .. 8.9 .. 24.9 34.0 .. ..
Public expenditure on education
Tertiary 1999
2008 a
34.2 90.8 .. 34.8 .. 28.5 31.1 27.6 70.4 15.1 .. .. 207.8 .. 8.4 .. .. 24.3 68.6 27.9 14.2 1,385.2 .. 23.9 34.2 .. 171.7 .. 81.1 227.7 77.8 40.4 47.8 .. .. 94.9 .. 27.5 156.9 141.6 47.4 41.6 .. .. .. 45.8 .. .. 33.6 .. 58.9 21.2 15.4 21.1 28.1 .. ..
23.8 55.0 .. 20.7 .. 26.4 23.1 23.4 .. 19.1 .. 7.9 .. .. 9.5 .. 82.8 22.8 .. 15.9 12.5 1,182.4 .. .. 17.0 .. 137.2 .. 59.7 114.8 .. 29.8 35.4 38.9 .. 72.1 .. .. 117.8 .. 43.9 29.2 .. 398.0 .. 44.8 .. .. .. .. .. 10.9 .. 18.4 28.8 .. ..
% of GDP 2008 a
5.4 3.2 3.5 4.8 .. 4.8 6.2 4.7 5.5 3.5 .. 2.8 6.6 .. 4.2 .. 3.8 6.6 2.3 5.1 2.0 12.4 2.7 .. 4.8 4.7 2.9 .. 4.7 3.8 4.4 3.9 4.8 8.2 5.1 5.5 5.0 .. 6.5 3.8 5.5 6.2 .. 3.7 .. 6.5 4.0 2.9 3.8 .. .. 2.5 .. 5.7 5.3 .. ..
2.11 Trained Primary teachers school in primary pupil–teacher education ratio
% of total government expenditure
% of total
pupils per teacher
2008 a
2008 a
2008 a
10.4 .. 17.5 20.0 .. 14.0 .. 9.7 .. 9.5 .. .. 20.2 .. .. .. 12.9 25.6 12.2 13.4 8.1 23.7 12.1 .. 14.4 13.3 13.4 .. .. 19.5 15.6 12.7 .. 19.8 .. 26.1 21.0 .. 22.4 .. 12.0 19.7 .. 15.5 .. 16.2 31.1 11.2 18.0 .. .. 16.4 .. 12.0 11.3 .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 98.4 .. .. .. 100.0 64.4 96.9 .. 12.8 71.4 40.2 .. .. .. 52.1 .. .. 50.1 100.0 100.0 .. .. 99.0 100.0 67.0 99.0 95.0 66.4 .. .. 72.7 98.0 b 51.2 .. 100.0 85.1 91.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 52.3
10 .. 19 20 .. 16 13 10 .. 18 .. 16 b 47 .. 26 .. 9 24 30 12 14 37 24 .. 13 18 47 93 16 51 37 22 28 16 30 b 27 64 29 29 38 .. 16 29 39 b 46 .. 12 41 24 36 .. 22 34 11 12 .. 13
2010 World Development Indicators
103
PEOPLE
Education inputs
2.11
Education inputs Public expenditure per student
1999
2008 a
% of GDP per capita Secondary 1999 2008 a
8.5 .. 7.7 .. 14.1 .. .. .. 10.2 26.3 .. 14.2 18.0 .. .. 8.4 22.5 22.7 11.2 .. .. 17.8 .. 8.5 11.6 15.6 8.2 .. .. .. 8.7 14.1 17.9 7.2 .. .. .. .. .. 7.2 12.7 .. m .. .. .. 13.5 .. .. .. 12.7 .. .. .. 17.9 17.3
.. .. 8.2 18.4 17.0 .. .. 11.2b 15.3 .. .. 13.7 19.4 .. .. 16.3 24.7 23.3 18.4 .. .. .. 27.6 9.4 .. .. .. .. 7.5 b .. 4.9 22.1 22.2 8.5 .. 9.1 19.7 .. .. .. .. .. m .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 11.0 .. .. .. 18.2 17.8
16.0 .. 29.4 .. .. .. .. .. 18.4 25.7 .. 20.0 24.4 .. .. 23.7 26.2 27.3 21.7 .. .. 15.9 .. 30.3 12.3 27.1 10.4 .. .. .. 11.6 24.2 22.5 9.9 .. .. .. .. .. 19.4 19.3 .. m .. .. .. 18.1 .. .. .. 13.7 .. 13.6 .. 22.4 24.4
Primary
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
a. Provisional data. b. Data are for 2009.
104
2010 World Development Indicators
.. .. 34.3 18.3 31.3 .. .. 16.6b .. .. .. 16.0 24.0 .. .. 41.1 32.0 26.5 14.0 .. .. .. .. 19.1 .. .. .. .. 20.3b .. 6.9 27.3 24.6 10.4 .. 8.1 17.3 .. .. .. .. .. m .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 10.7 .. .. .. 23.2 26.0
Public expenditure on education
Tertiary 1999
2008 a
32.6 .. 680.7 .. .. .. .. .. 32.9 27.9 .. 60.7 19.6 .. .. 351.5 52.1 53.8 .. .. .. 36.0 .. .. 149.3 89.4 33.5 .. .. 36.5 41.5 26.0 27.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 164.6 193.0 .. m .. .. .. 34.2 .. 38.2 .. 44.0 .. 90.8 .. 32.9 29.1
.. 16.0 222.8 .. 207.7 .. .. 26.9 b .. 21.6 .. .. 23.5 .. .. 347.5 39.5 53.5 .. 21.8 .. 30.5 .. 155.2 .. 54.0 28.1 .. 121.1 25.1 .. 29.2 25.4 18.1 .. .. 61.7 .. .. .. .. .. m .. .. .. 18.4 .. .. 18.4 .. .. .. .. 29.0 28.8
% of GDP 2008 a
.. 4.0 4.1 .. 4.8 .. .. 3.2b 3.8 5.7 .. 5.1 4.3 .. .. 7.9 6.9 5.5 4.9 3.5 .. 4.0 7.1 3.7 .. 7.1 .. .. 3.3b 5.3 .. 5.6 5.7 3.9 .. 3.7 5.3 .. 5.2 1.4 .. 4.6 m .. 4.5 4.0 4.6 4.0 .. 4.5 3.6 5.2 2.9 .. 5.4 5.3
Trained Primary teachers school in primary pupil–teacher education ratio
% of total government expenditure
% of total
pupils per teacher
2008 a
2008 a
2008 a
.. .. 94.2 91.5 .. 100.0 49.4 97.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. 59.7b 94.0 .. .. .. 88.3 100.0 .. .. 14.6 86.6 .. .. .. 89.4 99.8 100.0 .. .. .. 100.0 83.5 98.6 100.0 .. .. ..
17 17 68 11 36 17 44 19 15 16 .. 31 13 24 38b 32 10 .. 18 23 52 16 41 39 17 18 .. .. 50 16 17 17 14 15 18 16 20 30 .. 61 38 24 w 45 23 .. 22 27 19 16 25 24 .. 49 15 14
.. 11.8 20.4 .. 26.3 .. .. 11.6b 10.2 12.9 .. 16.2 11.1 .. .. 21.6 12.6 16.3 16.7 18.7 .. 20.9 7.3 17.2 .. 20.5 .. .. 15.6b 20.2 .. 11.9 14.8 14.4 .. .. .. .. 16.0 .. .. .. m .. .. .. 14.0 .. .. 14.4 .. 18.5 .. .. 12.6 11.3
About the data
2.11
Definitions
Data on education are compiled by the United
private spending adds to the complexity of collecting
• Public expenditure per student is public current
Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organi-
accurate data on public spending.
and capital spending on education divided by the
zation (UNESCO) Institute for Statistics from official
The share of trained teachers in primary educa-
number of students by level as a percentage of gross
responses to surveys and from reports provided by
tion measures the quality of the teaching staff. It
domestic product (GDP) per capita. • Public expen-
education authorities in each country. The data are
does not take account of competencies acquired by
diture on education is current and capital public
used for monitoring, policymaking, and resource
teachers through their professional experience or
expenditure on education as a percentage of GDP
allocation. However, coverage and data collection
self-instruction or of such factors as work experi-
and as a percentage of total government expendi-
methods vary across countries and over time within
ence, teaching methods and materials, or classroom
ture. • Trained teachers in primary education are
countries, so comparisons should be made with
conditions, which may affect the quality of teaching.
the percentage of primary school teachers who have
caution.
Since the training teachers receive varies greatly
received the minimum organized teacher training
(pre-service or in-service), care should be taken in
(pre-service or in-service) required for teaching in
making comparisons across countries.
their country. • Primary school pupil–teacher ratio
For most countries the data on education spending in the table refer to public spending—government spending on public education plus subsidies for pri-
The primary school pupil–teacher ratio refl ects
is the number of pupils enrolled in primary school
vate education—and generally exclude foreign aid for
the average number of pupils per teacher. It differs
divided by the number of primary school teachers
education. They may also exclude spending by reli-
from the average class size because of the differ-
(regardless of their teaching assignment).
gious schools, which play a significant role in many
ent practices countries employ, such as part-time
developing countries. Data for some countries and
teachers, school shifts, and multigrade classes. The
some years refer to ministry of education spending
comparability of pupil–teacher ratios across coun-
only and exclude education expenditures by other
tries is affected by the definition of teachers and by
ministries and local authorities.
differences in class size by grade and in the number
Many developing countries seek to supplement
of hours taught, as well as the different practices
public funds for education, some with tuition fees
mentioned above. Moreover, the underlying enroll-
to recover part of the cost of providing education
ment levels are subject to a variety of reporting errors
services or to encourage development of private
(for further discussion of enrollment data, see About
schools. Fees raise diffi cult questions of equity,
the data for table 2.12). While the pupil–teacher ratio
efficiency, access, and taxation, however, and some
is often used to compare the quality of schooling
governments have used scholarships, vouchers, and
across countries, it is often weakly related to the
other public finance methods to counter criticism.
value added of schooling systems.
For greater detail, consult the country- and indicatorspecific notes in the original source.
In 1998 UNESCO introduced the new International Standard Classification of Education 1997 (ISCED
The share of public expenditure devoted to edu-
1997). Consistent historical time series with reclas-
cation allows an assessment of the priority a gov-
sification of the pre–ISCED 1997 series were pro-
ernment assigns to education relative to other
duced for a selection of indicators in 2008. The full
public investments, as well as a government’s
set of the historical series is forthcoming.
commitment to investing in human capital develop-
In 2006 the UNESCO Institute for Statistics also
ment. It also reflects the development status of a
changed its convention for citing the reference year
country’s education system relative to that of oth-
of education data and indicators to the calendar year
ers. However, returns on investment to education,
in which the academic or financial year ends. Data
especially primary and lower secondary education,
that used to be listed for 2006, for example, are
cannot be understood simply by comparing current
now listed for 2007. This change was implemented
education indicators with national income. It takes
to present the most recent data available and to
a long time before currently enrolled children can
align the data reporting with that of other interna-
productively contribute to the national economy
tional organizations (in particular the Organisation
(Hanushek 2002).
for Economic Co-operation and Development and
Data on education finance are generally of poor quality. This is partly because ministries of education,
Eurostat). Data sources
from which the UNESCO Institute for Statistics col-
Data on education inputs are from the UNESCO
lects data, may not be the best source for education
Institute for Statistics, which compiles inter-
finance data. Other agencies, particularly ministries
national data on education in cooperation with
of finance, need to be consulted, but coordination is
national commissions and national statistical
not easy. It is also difficult to track actual spending
services.
from the central government to local institutions. And
2010 World Development Indicators
105
PEOPLE
Education inputs
2.12
Participation in education Gross enrollment ratio
Preprimary
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
106
% of relevant age group Primary Secondary
Net enrollment ratio
Adjusted net enrollment ratio, primary
% of primary-schoolage children Male Female
% of relevant age group Primary Secondary
Tertiary
Children out of school
thousand primary-schoolage children Male Female
2008a
2008a
2008a
2008a
1991
2008 a
1999
2008a
2008a
2008a
2008a
2008a
.. .. 23 .. 67 33 101 92 26 .. 102 121 13 49 11 16 62 82 3 3 13 25 70 3 .. 56 42 .. 49 3 12 69 3 51 111 114 96 35 100 16 60 13 95 4 64 113 .. 22 63 108 67 69 29 11 .. .. 40
106 .. 108 .. 115 80 105 101 116 94 99 102 117 108 111 110 130 101 79 b 136 116 111 99 77 83 105 112 .. 120 90 114 110 74 99 102 102 99 104 118 100 115 52 99 98 98 110 .. 86 107 106 102 101 114 90 120 .. 116
29 .. .. .. 85 88 148 100 106 44 95 110 .. 82 89 80 100 105 20b 18 40 37 101 .. 19 94 74 83 91 35 .. 89 .. 94 91 95 119 75 70 .. 64 30 100 33 111 113 .. 51 90 101 54 102 57 36 36 .. 65
.. .. 24 3 68 34 75 50 16 7 73 62 6 38 34 .. 30 50 3 3 7 8 .. 2 2 50 22 34 35 5 .. .. 8 47 122 54 80 .. 35 .. 25 2b 65 4 94 55 .. .. 34 .. 6 91 18 9 3 .. 19
25 .. 89 49 95 .. 98 88 89 70 85 96 46 .. 79 89 .. .. 27 53 72 69 98 53 34 89 97 92 71 56 81 87 46 .. 94 87 98 .. 98 81 .. 15 88 24 98 100 91 50 97 84 56 95 64 27 40 21 88
.. .. 95 .. .. 74 97 98 96 88 94 98 93 94 .. 86 93 95 63b 99 89 88 .. 59 .. 94 .. .. 90 .. 59 .. .. 90 99 92 96 80 97 94 94 39 94 78 96 99 .. 69 99 98 74 99 95 71 .. .. 97
.. 70 .. .. 76 86 90 .. 75 40 82 .. 18 68 .. 60 66 85 9 .. 15 .. 95 .. 7 .. .. 74 56 .. .. .. 18 81 73 .. 88 38 46 71 47 17 84 12 95 94 .. 26 76 .. 33 82 24 12 10 .. ..
27 .. .. .. 79 86 88 .. 98 41 87 87 .. 70 .. .. 77 88 15b .. 34 .. .. .. .. 85 .. 75 71 .. .. .. .. 88 84 .. 90 58 59 .. 55 26 90 25 97 98 .. 42 81 .. 46 91 40 28 .. .. ..
.. .. 96 .. .. 73 97 97 97 88 94 98 99 95 .. .. 93 97 68b 91 90 94 .. 68 .. 95 .. .. 93 .. 66 .. .. 98 100 91 95 82 .. 97 95 43 96 82 96 99 .. 69 96 .. 74 99 98 77 .. .. 96
.. .. 95 .. .. 75 98 98 95 94 96 98 86 95 .. .. 94 96 60 b 89 87 82 .. 50 .. 94 .. .. 94 .. 62 .. .. 100 99 94 97 83 .. 93 96 37 97 76 97 99 .. 74 93 .. 75 100 95 67 .. .. 98
.. .. 68 .. .. 22 32 5 7 1,028 12 8 7 39 .. 10 465 5 392b 55 99 83 .. 107 .. 41 .. .. 147 .. 91 .. .. 2 2 22 10 117 .. 137 23 173 1 1,180 7 16 .. 40 6 .. 460 2 23 175 .. .. 22
.. .. 88 .. .. 18 22 3 9 518 7 6 91 32 .. 2 440 5 473b 67 131 255 .. 168 .. 46 .. .. 138 .. 102 .. .. 0c 2 14 6 103 .. 324 15 187 1 1,552 6 13 .. 33 10 .. 422 0c 55 245 .. .. 9
2010 World Development Indicators
Gross enrollment ratio
Preprimary
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
% of relevant age group Primary Secondary
Net enrollment ratio
Adjusted net enrollment ratio, primary
% of primary-schoolage children Male Female
% of relevant age group Primary Secondary
Tertiary
2.12 Children out of school
thousand primary-schoolage children Male Female
2008a
2008a
2008a
2008a
1991
2008 a
1999
2008a
2008a
2008a
2008a
2008a
89 47 45 52 .. .. 98 101 89 88 33 39b 48 .. 105 .. 76 17 15 90 72 .. 84 9 69 38 9 .. 57 4 .. 98 113 72 57 57 .. 6 31 35 101 93 56 3b 16 92 34 .. 69 .. 34 68 47 60 80 .. 51
98 113 121 128 .. 105 111 104 90 102 96 109 b 112 .. 104 .. 95 95 112 97 101 108 91 110 96 93 152 120 98 91 98 99 113 89 102 107 114 115 112 124 107 101 117 62b 93 98 75 85 111 55 108 113 108 97 115 .. 109
97 57 76 80 .. 113 91 100 90 101 86 95b 58 .. 97 .. 91 85 44 115 82 40 32 93 99 84 30 29 .. 35 23 88 87 83 95 56 21 49 66 43 120 120 68 11 30 113 88 33 71 .. 66 98 81 100 101 .. 93
67 13 18 36 .. 61 60 67 .. 58 38 41b 4b .. 96 .. 18 52 13 69 52 4 .. .. 76 36 3 0 30 5 4 16 b 26 40 50 12 .. 11 9 .. 60 79 .. 1b .. 76 26 5 45 .. .. 34 28 67 57 .. 11
.. .. 98 91 92 90 .. 98 97 100 .. 88 .. .. 99 .. 49 92 60 94 66 72 .. .. .. .. 72 48 93 23 35 93 98 89 90 56 42 96 84 62 95 100 70 23 54 100 69 33 92 66 94 87 96 .. 98 .. 89
89 90 95 .. .. 97 97 99 85 100 89 89 b 82 .. 99 .. 88 84 82 .. 88 73 .. .. 91 87 98 91 97 72 80 93 98 83 89 89 80 .. 89 .. 99 99 92 54 b 61 98 68 66 98 .. 92 97 90 96 99 .. ..
82 .. 50 .. 30 84 86 88 83 99 79 87 33 .. 97 .. 89 .. 26 .. .. 17 20 .. 90 79 12 29 65 .. 14 67 56 80 58 30 3 31 39 .. 91 90 35 6 .. 96 65 22 59 .. .. 62 50 90 82 .. 74
90 .. 70 75 .. 88 88 92 77 98 84 87b 49 .. 96 .. 80 80 36 .. 75 25 .. .. 92 .. 24 25 .. 29 16 .. 71 79 82 .. 6 46 54 .. 89 .. 45 9 26 97 78 33 66 .. 58 76 60 94 88 .. 79
95 97 .. .. .. 96 97 100 86 .. 93 99 b 82 .. 100 .. 94 91 84 .. 90 71 .. .. 94 91 99 88 98 81 78 93 99 86 99 92 82 .. 88 .. 99 99 93 60 b 66 98 71 72 99 .. 93 .. 90 95 99 .. ..
95 94 .. .. .. 97 98 99 85 .. 94 100 b 83 .. 98 .. 93 91 81 .. 89 75 .. .. 94 92 100 94 97 68 83 94 100 85 99 88 77 .. 93 .. 98 100 94 48 b 60 98 73 60 98 .. 93 .. 92 96 99 .. ..
10 1,782 .. .. .. 8 13 5 24 .. 32 4b 563 .. 4 .. 6 19 65 .. 25 54 .. .. 4 5 16 155 39 190 54 4 52 12 1 148 378 .. 22 .. 5 2 29 510 b 4,023 4 54 3,060 2 .. 31 .. 635 60 2 .. ..
10 3,781 .. .. .. 6 8 14 26 .. 23 2b 524 .. 41 .. 8 19 76 .. 25 47 .. .. 4 4 3 80 41 316 40 4 28 12 1 217 486 .. 12 .. 11 1 24 636b 4,626 3 48 4,201 3 .. 27 .. 481 49 4 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
107
PEOPLE
Participation in education
2.12
Participation in education Gross enrollment ratio
Preprimary 2008a
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
72 89 .. 11 11 57 5 .. 94 80 .. 51 123 .. 28b .. 101 101 10 9 34 .. .. 4 82 .. 16 .. 19 98 87 73 61 81 27 69 .. 30 .. .. .. 45 w .. 46 41 64 41 42 54 66 29 47 16 79 106
% of relevant age group Primary Secondary 2008a
105 97 151 98 84 101 158 .. 102 103 .. 105 105 105 74 b 108 94 102 124 102 110 .. 107 105 103 108 98 .. 120 98 108 104 98 114 94 103 .. 80 85 119 104 106 w 101 109 108 110 107 112 98 117 106 108 97 102 ..
a. Provisional data. b. Data are for 2009. c. Less than 0.5.
108
2010 World Development Indicators
2008a
87 84 22 95 31 90 35 .. 93 94 .. 95 119 .. 38b 53 103 96 74 84 .. .. .. 41 89 90 82 .. 25 94 94 97 94 92 102 81 .. 92 .. 52 41 66 w 41 67 62 90 62 73 89 88 72 52 33 100 ..
Net enrollment ratio
58 75 4 30 8 49 .. .. 50 85 .. .. 68 .. .. 4 75 47 .. 20 1 .. 15b 5 .. 32 37 .. 4 79 25 59 82 64 10 78 .. 47 10 .. .. 26 w 6 23 18 43 20 .. 55 35 26 11 6 69 ..
% of primary-schoolage children Male Female
% of relevant age group Primary Secondary
Tertiary 2008a
Adjusted net enrollment ratio, primary
1991
81 99 67 59 45 .. 40 .. .. 96 .. 90 100 83 .. 74 100 84 91 77 51 .. .. 65 90 94 89 .. 51 81 99 98 97 91 78 .. 89 .. .. 80 84 .. w .. .. .. .. .. 96 90 .. .. 68 .. 95 ..
2008 a
94 .. 96 85 73 97 .. .. .. 96 .. 87 100 100 .. 83 94 93 .. 97 99 .. 76 83 92 98 94 .. 97 89 92 97 91 98 90 90 .. 73 73 95 90 87 w 80 88 87 94 86 .. 92 94 91 86 73 95 ..
1999
75 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 90 .. 63 88 .. .. 32 87 84 36 63 5 .. 23 20 70 69 .. .. 8 91 69 95 88 .. .. 47 59 77 32 17 40 .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 60 60 .. .. .. ..
2008a
73 .. .. 73 25 90 25 .. .. 89 .. 72 94 .. .. 29 99 85 68 83 .. .. 31 .. 74 .. 71 .. 19 85 84 91 88 68 92 69 .. 89 .. 49 38 .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 71 .. .. .. .. ..
2008a
96 .. 95 85 75 98 .. .. .. 97 .. 92 100 .. .. 82 94 98 .. 99 96 .. 79 91 96 99 95 .. 96 89 99 98 92 98 94 92 .. 77 80 96 90 90 w 83 92 91 95 90 .. 94 94 94 92 76 94 ..
2008a
97 .. 97 84 76 98 .. .. .. 96 .. 94 100 .. .. 84 94 99 .. 96 95 .. 76 80 95 100 92 .. 99 90 99 99 93 98 91 92 .. 78 66 98 91 88 w 79 90 89 95 87 .. 93 95 90 86 71 95 ..
Children out of school
thousand primary-schoolage children Male Female 2008a
16 .. 38 244 248 3 .. .. .. 2 .. 284 1 .. .. 19 20 5 .. 2 138 .. 20 44 3 6 194 .. 134 89 1 42 1,018 4 74 141 .. 56 395 47 121
2008a
14 .. 22 259 233 3 .. .. .. 2 .. 219 5 .. .. 18 20 3 .. 15 179 .. 22 99 3 0c 313 .. 49 81 1 24 797 3 98 123 .. 52 641 29 103
About the data
2.12
Definitions
School enrollment data are reported to the United
at other than the official age. Age at enrollment may
• Gross enrollment ratio is the ratio of total enroll-
Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organi-
be inaccurately estimated or misstated, especially
ment, regardless of age, to the population of the age
zation (UNESCO) Institute for Statistics by national
in communities where registration of births is not
group that officially corresponds to the level of educa-
education authorities and statistical offices. Enroll-
strictly enforced.
tion shown. • Preprimary education refers to the ini-
ment ratios help monitor whether a country is on
Other problems of cross-country comparison stem
tial stage of organized instruction, designed primarily
track to achieve the Millennium Development Goal
from errors in school-age population estimates. Age-
to introduce very young children to a school-type envi-
of universal primary education by 2015, and whether
sex structures drawn from censuses or vital registra-
ronment. • Primary education provides children with
an education system has the capacity to meet the
tions, the primary data sources on school-age popu-
basic reading, writing, and mathematics skills along
needs of universal primary education, as indicated
lation, commonly underenumerate (especially young
with an elementary understanding of such subjects
in part by gross enrollment ratios.
children) to circumvent laws or regulations. Errors are
as history, geography, natural science, social sci-
Enrollment ratios, while a useful measure of participa-
also introduced when parents round children’s ages.
ence, art, and music. • Secondary education com-
tion in education, have limitations. They are based on
While census data are often adjusted for age bias,
pletes the provision of basic education that began
annual school surveys, which are typically conducted
adjustments are rarely made for inadequate vital
at the primary level and aims at laying the founda-
at the beginning of the school year and do not reflect
registration systems. Compounding these problems,
tions for lifelong learning and human development
actual attendance or dropout rates during the year. And
pre- and postcensus estimates of school-age children
by offering more subject- or skill-oriented instruction
school administrators may exaggerate enrollments,
are model interpolations or projections that may miss
using more specialized teachers. • Tertiary educa-
especially if there is a financial incentive to do so.
important demographic events (see discussion of
tion refers to a wide range of post-secondary educa-
demographic data in About the data for table 2.1).
tion institutions, including technical and vocational
Also, the gross and net primary enrollment ratios have an inherent weakness: the length of primary education
Gross enrollment ratios indicate the capacity of
education, colleges, and universities, whether or not
differs across countries, although the International
each level of the education system, but a high ratio
leading to an advanced research qualification, that
Standard Classification of Education tries to minimize
may reflect a substantial number of overage children
normally require as a minimum condition of admis-
the difference. A shorter duration for primary education
enrolled in each grade because of repetition rather
sion the successful completion of education at the
tends to increase the ratio; a longer one to decrease
than a successful education system. The net enroll-
secondary level. • Net enrollment ratio is the ratio
it (in part because more older children drop out).
ment ratio excludes overage and underage students
of total enrollment of children of official school age
Overage or underage enrollments are frequent, par-
to capture more accurately the system’s coverage and
based on the International Standard Classification of
ticularly when parents prefer children to start school
internal efficiency but does not account for children
Education 1997 to the population of the age group
who fall outside the official school age because of
that officially corresponds to the level of education
late or early entry rather than grade repetition. Differ-
shown. • Adjusted net enrollment ratio, primary,
ences between gross and net enrollment ratios show
is the ratio of total enrollment of children of official
the incidence of overage and underage enrollments.
school age for primary education who are enrolled in
Adjusted net primary enrollment (called total net
primary or secondary education to the total primary-
primary enrollment in the 2008 edition), recently
school-age population. • Children out of school
added as a Millennium Development Goal indica-
are the number of primary-school-age children not
tor, captures primary-school-age children who have
enrolled in primary or secondary school.
The situations of out of school children vary widely
2.12a
Not expected to enroll Expected to enroll Drop out
Percent 100
75
progressed to secondary education, which the traditional net enrollment ratio excludes. Data on children out of school (primary-school-age
50
children not enrolled in school—dropouts, children never enrolled, and children of primary age enrolled 25
in preprimary education) are compiled from administrative data. Large numbers of children out of school create pressure to enroll children and provide class-
0 2003
2006
rooms, teachers, and educational materials, a task
Some children who are out of school can be
made difficult in many countries by limited education
expected to enter school late, some have already
budgets. However, getting children into school is a
had some contact with schooling but will drop
high priority for countries and crucial for achieving
out, and others will never enter school. For coun-
the Millennium Development Goal of universal pri-
tries to reach the goal of education for all, poli-
mary education.
cies that address all three situations will need
Data sources
In 2006 the UNESCO Institute for Statistics
Data on gross and net enrollment ratios and out
to be implemented.
changed its convention for citing the reference
of school children are from the UNESCO Institute
Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics 2008b.
year. For more information, see About the data for
for Statistics.
table 2.11.
2010 World Development Indicators
109
PEOPLE
Participation in education
2.13
Education efficiency Gross intake rate in grade 1
Cohort survival rate
Repeaters in primary school
Transition to secondary school
% of grade 1 students Reaching grade 5
% of relevant age group Male Female
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
110
Male
Reaching last grade of primary education Female
Male
Female
2008a
2008a
1991
2007a
1991
2007a
2007a
2007a
119 .. 104 .. 112 90 .. 106 115 97 97 99 171 121 .. 116 .. 109 90 c 151 129 127 98 93 114 103 92 .. 127 105 107 95 81 94 96 112 98 110 141 98 123 44 100 162 99 .. .. 91 114 104 109 102 123 97 .. .. 126
82 .. 102 .. 111 93 .. 102 114 99 102 101 157 120 .. 113 .. 110 83 c 142 122 110 98 70 84 102 95 .. 124 128 98 95 69 94 98 110 99 98 139 96 119 37 99 144 99 .. .. 96 118 102 112 103 121 87 .. .. 122
.. .. 95 .. .. .. 98 .. .. .. .. 90 54 .. .. 81 .. .. 71 65 .. .. 95 24 56 94 58 .. .. 58 56 83 75 .. .. .. 94 .. .. .. .. .. .. 16 100 69 .. .. .. .. 81 100 .. 64 .. .. ..
.. .. 95 .. 95 .. .. .. .. 52 .. 95 .. 83 .. 94 .. .. 78 59 60 63 .. 61 41 96 .. 100 85 80 76 95 83 .. 96 98 100 70 46 96 78 77 98 46 100 .. .. 71 94 .. .. 99 71 74 .. .. 75
.. .. 94 .. .. .. 99 .. .. .. .. 92 56 .. .. 87 .. .. 68 58 .. .. 98 22 41 91 78 .. .. 50 65 85 70 .. .. .. 94 .. .. .. .. .. .. 23 100 95 .. .. .. .. 79 100 .. 48 .. .. ..
.. .. 97 .. 97 .. .. .. .. 58 .. 97 .. 83 .. 95 .. .. 81 65 65 63 .. 57 34 97 .. 100 93 79 80 98 73 .. 97 99 100 77 39 97 82 69 98 49 100 .. .. 72 97 .. .. 98 70 65 .. .. 80
.. .. 91 .. 93 29 .. 97 100 52 99 92 .. 81 .. 90 .. 94 68 51 52 57 .. 53 33 .. .. 100 85 82 70 93 83 100 95 98 .. 64 38 94 74 77 99 39 100 .. .. 68 94 98 .. 98 65 60 .. .. 74
.. .. 95 .. 96 27 .. 99 98 58 100 95 .. 80 .. 94 .. 94 71 57 57 56 .. 47 25 .. .. 100 93 76 71 96 66 100 97 99 .. 74 32 96 78 69 98 42 100 .. .. 72 97 99 .. 98 64 49 .. .. 79
2010 World Development Indicators
% of enrollment Male Female 2008a
2008a
0 .. 10 .. 8 0b .. .. 0b 13 0b 3 14 3 1 6 .. 3 11 33 12 17 0 26 21 5 0b 1 4 15 23 8 18 0b 1 1 0 4 2 4 7 16 0 5 1 .. .. 6 0b 1 7 1 13 15 .. .. 6
0 .. 6 .. 5 0b .. .. 0b 13 0b 3 14 2 0b 4 .. 2 10 34 10 16 0 27 23 3 0b 1 3 16 22 6 18 0b 0b 0b 0 3 1 2 5 15 0 5 0b .. .. 5 0b 1 6 1 11 16 .. .. 5
% Male
Female
2007a
2007a
.. .. 90 .. 93 100 .. 100 100 95 100 100 72 90 .. 98 .. 94 54 37 80 46 .. 44 64 .. .. 100 98 64 63 100 50 99 98 99 97 90 72 .. 92 84 .. 88 100 .. .. 84 99 99 90 100 93 34 .. .. 68
.. .. 92 .. 95 98 .. 99 99 100 100 99 70 90 .. 98 .. 95 50 31 79 50 .. 51 65 .. .. 100 99 54 63 94 43 100 99 99 96 94 67 .. 92 81 .. 89 100 .. .. 84 100 98 96 99 90 26 .. .. 74
Gross intake rate in grade 1
Cohort survival rate
Repeaters in primary school
2.13 Transition to secondary school
% of grade 1 students Reaching grade 5
% of relevant age group Male Female
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Male
Reaching last grade of primary education Female
Male
Female
2008a
2008a
1991
2007a
1991
2007a
2007a
2007a
99 132 131 118 .. 100 100 106 90 102 94 108c .. .. 113 .. 95 97 124 100 97 101 117 .. 100 92 188 137 96 104 117 100 118 95 134 107 165 138 101 .. 103 .. 158 97c .. 101 73 114 109 33 107 108 134 97 113 .. 106
98 124 125 159 .. 102 103 105 86 101 96 108 c .. .. 110 .. 93 96 115 101 95 94 107 .. 99 93 185 144 96 91 125 102 118 91 133 105 155 132 101 .. 102 .. 148 83 c .. 100 73 98 106 29 103 111 126 98 110 .. 107
.. .. 34 91 .. 99 .. .. .. 100 .. .. .. .. 99 .. .. .. .. .. .. 58 .. .. .. .. 22 71 97 71 76 97 35 .. .. 75 36 .. 60 51 .. .. 11 61 .. 99 97 .. .. 70 73 .. .. .. .. .. 63
.. 66 92 .. .. 97 100 99 .. .. .. .. 71 .. 98 .. 100 .. 66 .. 91 55 .. .. .. .. 42 44 92 87 48 100 94 .. 94 83 63 .. 97 60 .. .. 48 72d .. 100 99 .. 87 .. 82 93 73 .. .. .. 93
.. .. 78 89 .. 100 .. .. .. 100 .. .. .. .. 100 .. .. .. .. .. .. 73 .. .. .. .. 21 57 97 67 75 98 71 .. .. 76 32 .. 65 51 .. .. 37 65 .. 100 96 .. .. 68 75 .. .. .. .. .. 65
.. 65 94 .. .. 100 99 100 .. .. .. .. 74 .. 98 .. 99 .. 68 .. 95 69 .. .. .. .. 43 43 92 81 51 98 95 .. 95 82 58 .. 99 64 .. .. 55 66d .. 99 100 .. 88 .. 82 93 81 .. .. .. 100
98 66 78 .. .. .. 100 99 .. .. .. 99 d .. .. 97 .. 100 98 66 97 86 37 .. .. 98 98 42 37 89 79 40 100 91 94 94 77 46 .. 87 60 .. .. 45 69d .. 100 99 .. 85 .. 75 90 69 .. .. .. 94
98 65 81 .. .. .. 99 100 .. .. .. 99d .. .. 97 .. 99 98 68 97 93 56 .. .. 98 97 43 35 90 72 42 97 94 97 95 76 42 .. 87 64 .. .. 52 64d .. 99 100 .. 86 .. 78 90 78 .. .. .. 100
% of enrollment Male Female 2008a
2 3 4 3 .. 1 2 0b 3 .. 1 0b,c .. .. 0b .. 1 0b 18 4 10 24 6 .. 1 0b 21 21 .. 14 2 5 5 0b 0b 14 6 1 22 17 .. .. 13 5c 3 .. 1 5 6 .. 3 8 3 1 .. .. 1
2008a
2 3 3 1 .. 1 1 0b 2 .. 1 0 b,c .. .. 0b .. 1 0b 16 2 7 18 7 .. 1 0b 19 20 .. 14 2 3 3 0b 0b 10 5 0b 14 17 .. .. 9 5c 3 .. 1 4 4 .. 4 8 2 0b .. .. 1
% Male
Female
2007a
2007a
100 86 99 84 .. .. 71 100 .. .. 98 100 d 61d .. 99 .. 100 100 80 97 83 68 .. .. 99 100 61 79 100 68 45 63 95 99 96 80 56 75 76 81 .. .. .. 49 d .. 100 97 73 98 .. .. 99 98 .. .. .. 97
95 84 98 74 .. .. 71 99 .. .. 97 100d 59d .. 98 .. 100 100 77 97 89 66 .. .. 99 99 59 75 98 64 39 74 94 98 98 78 60 70 79 81 .. .. .. 44d .. 99 97 71 99 .. .. 96 97 .. .. .. 100
2010 World Development Indicators
111
PEOPLE
Education efficiency
2.13
Education efficiency Gross intake rate in grade 1
Cohort survival rate
Repeaters in primary school
Transition to secondary school
% of grade 1 students Reaching grade 5
% of relevant age group Male Female
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Male
Female
Male
Female
2008a
2008a
1991
2007a
1991
2007a
2007a
2007a
98 102 213 100 97 101 201 .. 102 100 .. 112 107 104 86 105 100 93 118 106 107 .. 144 106 97 104 100 .. 158 100 110 .. 100 104 94 103 .. 80 110 122 .. 114 w 120 115 115 106 116 103 99 .. 105 126 121 102 105
98 101 207 101 102 100 182 .. 102 100 .. 104 106 105 76 101 100 96 116 101 105 .. 134 99 96 105 96 .. 160 100 109 .. 106 103 91 101 .. 79 98 127 .. 110 w 113 110 111 104 111 104 98 .. 112 117 113 104 104
.. .. 61 82 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 92 90 74 100 .. 97 .. 81 .. .. 52 .. 94 98 .. .. .. 80 .. .. 96 .. .. .. .. .. .. 72 .. w .. .. .. .. .. 55 .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. 100 70 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 100 98 89 76 100 .. .. .. 85 .. .. 58 .. 96 100 .. 59 .. 100 .. 96 93 .. 82 .. .. .. 92 .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 65 .. .. ..
.. .. 59 84 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 93 99 80 100 .. 95 .. 82 .. .. 42 .. 77 97 .. .. .. 80 .. .. 98 .. .. .. .. .. .. 81 .. w .. .. .. .. .. 78 .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. 94 72 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 100 99 100 88 100 .. .. .. 89 .. .. 50 .. 96 94 .. 59 .. 100 .. 98 96 .. 87 .. .. .. 88 .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 65 .. .. ..
95 .. .. 100 57 98 .. .. 98 .. .. .. 100 98 88 71 100 .. 96 100 81 .. .. 49 .. 94 .. .. 34 96 100 .. .. 92 99 78 .. 99 .. 82 .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 65 .. .. 98
95 .. .. 93 60 99 .. .. 98 .. .. .. 100 99 100 76 100 .. 97 97 85 .. .. 39 .. 94 .. .. 31 98 100 .. .. 95 99 83 .. 99 .. 75 .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 65 .. .. 99
a. Provisional data. b. Less than 0.5. c. Data are for 2009. d. Data are for 2008.
112
Reaching last grade of primary education
2010 World Development Indicators
% of enrollment Male Female 2008a
2 1 18 3 8 1 10 0b 3 1 .. 8 3 1 4c 21 0 2 8 0b 4 12 13 23 8 9 3 .. 11 0b 2 0 0 8 0b 4 .. 1 6 6 .. 4w .. 4 3 6 5 2 1 .. 7 4 10 1 1
2008a
1 1 18 3 8 1 10 0b 2 0b .. 8 2 1 4c 15 0 1 6 0b 4 6 12 24 5 6 3 .. 11 0b 2 0 0 6 0b 3 .. 1 5 6 .. 4w .. 3 3 4 4 1 1 .. 4 4 10 1 1
% Male
Female
2007a
2007a
99 .. .. 92 65 99 .. 88 97 .. .. 93 .. 98 90 90 100 99 95 98 47 85 100 56 88 86 .. .. 63 100 98 .. .. 71 100 95 .. 97 .. 69 .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 85 .. .. ..
98 .. .. 97 58 99 .. 95 98 .. .. 94 .. 99 98 87 100 100 96 98 45 89 100 49 92 90 .. .. 60 100 99 .. .. 83 100 96 .. 98 .. 72 .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 83 .. .. ..
About the data
2.13
Definitions
The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cul-
The transition rate from primary to secondary
• Gross intake rate in grade 1 is the number of
tural Organization (UNESCO) Institute for Statistics
school conveys the degree of access or transition
new entrants in the first grade of primary education
estimates indicators of students’ progress through
between the two levels. As completing primary edu-
regardless of age as a percentage of the population
school. These indicators measure an education sys-
cation is a prerequisite for participating in lower
of the official primary school entrance age. • Cohort
tem’s success in reaching all students, efficiently
secondary school, growing numbers of primary
survival rate is the percentage of children enrolled
moving students from one grade to the next, and
completers will inevitably create pressure for more
in the first grade of primary school who eventually
imparting a particular level of education.
available places at the secondary level. A low transi-
reach grade 5 or the last grade of primary educa-
The gross intake rate indicates the level of access to
tion rate can signal such problems as an inadequate
tion. The estimate is based on the reconstructed
primary education and the education system’s capac-
examination and promotion system or insufficient
cohort method (see About the data). • Repeaters in
ity to provide access to primary education. Low gross
secondary school capacity. The quality of data on
primary school are the number of students enrolled
intake rates in grade 1 reflect the fact that many chil-
the transition rate is affected when new entrants and
in the same grade as in the previous year as a per-
dren do not enter primary school even though school
repeaters are not correctly distinguished in the first
centage of all students enrolled in primary school.
attendance, at least through the primary level, is
grade of secondary school. Students who interrupt
• Transition to secondary school is the number of
mandatory in all countries. Because the gross intake
their studies after completing primary school could
new entrants to the first grade of secondary school
rate includes all new entrants regardless of age, it
also affect data quality.
in a given year as a percentage of the number of
can exceed 100 percent in some situations, such as
In 2006 the UNESCO Institute for Statistics
immediately after fees have been abolished or when
changed its convention for citing the reference
the number of reenrolled children is large. The quality
year. For more information, see About the data for
of data is reduced when new entrants and repeaters
table 2.11.
students enrolled in the final grade of primary school in the previous year.
are not correctly distinguished in grade 1. The cohort survival rate is the estimated proportion of an entering cohort of grade 1 students that eventually reaches grade 5 or the last grade of primary education. It measures an education system’s holding power and internal efficiency. Rates approaching 100 percent indicate high retention and low dropout levels. Cohort survival rates are typically estimated from data on enrollment and repetition by grade for two consecutive years. This procedure, called the reconstructed cohort method, makes three simplifying assumptions: dropouts never return to school; promotion, repetition, and dropout rates remain constant over the period in which the cohort is enrolled in school; and the same rates apply to all pupils enrolled in a grade, regardless of whether they previously repeated a grade (Fredricksen 1993). Crosscountry comparisons should thus be made with caution, because other flows—caused by new entrants, reentrants, grade skipping, migration, or transfers during the school year—are not considered. Data on repeaters are often used to indicate an education system’s internal efficiency. Repeaters not only increase the cost of education for the family and the school system, but also use limited school resources. Country policies on repetition and promotion differ. In some cases the number of repeaters is controlled because of limited capacity. In other cases the number of repeaters is almost 0 because of automatic promotion—suggesting a system that
Data sources
is highly efficient but that may not be endowing stu-
Data on education efficiency are from the UNESCO
dents with enough cognitive skills. Care should be
Institute for Statistics.
taken in interpreting this indicator.
2010 World Development Indicators
113
PEOPLE
Education efficiency
2.14
Education completion and outcomes Primary completion rate
% of relevant age group Total
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
114
Male
1991
2008 a
1991
2008 a
Female 1991 2008 a
.. .. 80 34 .. .. .. .. .. .. 94 79 22 71 .. 90 .. 101 20 46 .. 53 .. 28 18 .. 107 102 73 48 54 79 42 .. 99 .. 98 .. .. .. 65 .. .. .. 97 106 .. .. .. .. 64 .. .. 17 .. 27 64
.. .. 114 .. 100 98 .. 102 121 58 96 86 65 98 .. 99 .. 98 38 45 79 73 96 33 31 96 99 .. 110 53 73 93 48 102 90 94 101 91 106 95 89 47 100 52 98 .. .. 79 100 105 79 101 80 55 .. .. 90
.. .. 86 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 76 30 78 .. 83 .. 101 25 49 .. 57 .. 37 29 .. .. .. 70 61 59 77 53 .. .. .. 98 .. .. .. 64 .. .. .. 98 .. .. .. .. .. 71 .. .. 24 .. 29 67
.. .. 119 .. 98 97 .. 102 123 56 93 84 75 98 .. 96 .. 99 42 48 80 79 96 41 40 94 98 .. 109 63 75 91 57 102 90 95 100 89 105 97 88 52 101 56 98 .. .. 76 103 104 81 102 83 62 .. .. 87
.. .. 73 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 82 14 64 .. 98 .. 101 15 43 .. 49 .. 20 7 .. .. .. 76 36 49 81 32 .. .. .. 98 .. .. .. 66 .. .. .. 97 .. .. .. .. .. 56 .. .. 9 .. 26 61
2010 World Development Indicators
.. .. 108 .. 102 98 .. 102 119 60 92 88 55 98 .. 102 .. 98 34 42 79 67 96 25 22 96 102 .. 112 44 71 95 39 101 90 94 101 92 107 93 91 42 100 48 98 .. .. 83 97 105 77 101 77 47 .. .. 93
Youth literacy rate
Adult literacy rate
% ages 15–24
% ages 15 and older
Male 1990 2005–08 b
Female 1990 2005–08 b
.. .. .. .. 98 100 .. .. .. 52 100 .. 55 96 .. 86 .. .. 27 59 .. .. .. 63 .. 98 97 .. .. .. .. .. 60 100 .. .. .. .. 97 .. 85 .. 100 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 99 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 99 100 .. .. .. 38 100 .. 27 92 .. 92 .. .. 14 48 .. .. .. 35 .. 99 91 .. .. .. .. .. 38 100 .. .. .. .. 96 .. 85 .. 100 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 99 .. .. .. .. ..
.. 99 94 81 99 100 .. .. 100 73 100 .. 64 100 100 94 97 97 47 77 90 88 .. 72 54 99 99 .. 98 69 .. 98 72 100 100 .. .. 95 95 88 95 91 100 .. .. .. 98 70 100 .. 81 99 89 .. 78 .. 93
.. 100 89 65 99 100 .. .. 100 76 100 .. 42 99 99 96 99 97 33 75 84 84 .. 56 37 99 99 .. 98 62 .. 99 60 100 100 .. .. 97 96 82 96 84 100 .. .. .. 96 58 100 .. 78 99 84 .. 62 .. 95
Male 2005–08b
Female 2005–08b
.. 99 81 83 98 100 .. .. 100 60 100 .. 54 96 99 83 90 99 37 72 86 84 .. 69 44 99 97 .. 93 78 .. 96 64 100 100 .. .. 88 87 75 87 77 100 .. .. .. 91 57 100 .. 72 98 80 .. 66 .. 84
.. 99 64 57 98 99 .. .. 99 50 100 28 86 96 84 90 98 22 60 69 68 .. 41 22 99 91 .. 93 56 .. 96 44 98 100 .. .. 88 82 58 81 55 100 .. .. .. 83 34 100 .. 59 96 69 .. 37 .. 83
Primary completion rate
% of relevant age group Total
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Male
1991
2008 a
1991
2008 a
Female 1991 2008 a
94 63 93 88 .. .. .. 98 94 102 95 .. .. .. 98 .. .. .. 45 .. .. 59 .. .. .. .. 36 28 91 12 33 115 88 .. .. 48 26 .. .. 50 .. 103 42 17 .. 100 65 .. .. 46 68 .. 88 98 95 .. 71
95 94 108 117 .. 97 102 101 89 .. 99 105 d 80 .. 99 .. 98 92 75 95 87 73 58 .. 96 92 71 54 96 57 64 90 104 84 93 81 59 97 81 76 .. .. 75 40 d .. 96 80 60 102 .. 95 103 92 96 .. .. 115
93 75 .. 93 .. .. .. 98 90 102 94 .. .. .. 97 .. .. .. .. .. .. 42 .. .. .. .. 35 36 91 15 39 115 .. .. .. 57 32 .. .. .. .. 104 .. 21 .. 100 67 .. .. 51 68 .. .. .. 94 .. 71
95 95 109 108 .. 96 101 101 88 .. 98 105d 85 .. 101 .. 98 93 78 97 84 62 .. .. 96 92 71 54 97 65 63 90 103 85 94 85 67 94 76 79 .. .. 71 47d .. 96 80 67 102 .. 95 103 90 .. .. .. 119
95 51 .. 82 .. .. .. 97 98 102 95 .. .. .. 98 .. .. .. .. .. .. 76 .. .. .. .. 37 21 91 9 26 115 .. .. .. 39 21 .. .. .. .. 102 .. 13 .. 100 62 .. .. 42 69 .. .. .. 95 .. 72
94 92 107 126 .. 98 104 100 90 .. 100 105 d 75 .. 97 .. 98 92 71 94 89 84 53 .. 96 92 71 54 96 48 66 91 105 84 92 78 52 100 86 72 .. .. 78 34 d .. 97 81 53 102 .. 95 102 95 .. .. .. 112
2.14
Youth literacy rate
Adult literacy rate
% ages 15–24
% ages 15 and older
Male 1990 2005–08 b
Female 1990 2005–08 b
.. 74c 97 92 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 100 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 100 .. .. .. .. 100 .. .. .. 96 .. .. 91 96 100 .. .. .. .. 86 68 .. .. .. .. 81 .. .. .. 95 .. 96 .. 96 .. 99 92 ..
.. 49c 95 81 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 100 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 100 .. .. .. .. 100 .. .. .. 95 .. .. 92 95 100 .. .. .. .. 90 33 .. .. .. .. 62 .. .. .. 95 .. 95 .. 97 .. 99 94 ..
98 88 97 97 85 .. .. 100 92 .. 99 100 92 .. .. .. 98 100 89 100 98 86 70 100 100 99 .. 87 98 47 71 95 98 99 93 85 78 96 91 86 .. .. 85 52 78 .. 98 79 97 65 99 98 94 100 100 86 99
99 74 96 96 80 .. .. 100 98 .. 99 100 93 .. .. .. 99 100 79 100 99 98 80 100 100 99 .. 85 99 31 63 97 98 100 97 68 62 95 95 75 .. .. 89 23 65 .. 98 59 96 69 99 97 96 100 100 85 99
Male 2005–08b
Female 2005–08b
99 75 95 87 86 .. .. 99 81 .. 95 100 90 .. .. .. 95 100 82 100 93 83 63 95 100 99 .. 80 94 35 64 90 95 99 97 69 70 95 89 71 .. .. 78 43 72 .. 90 67 94 64 96 95 93 100 97 90 94
99 51 89 77 69 .. .. 99 91 .. 89 100 83 .. .. .. 93 99 63 100 86 95 53 81 100 95 .. 66 90 18 50 85 91 98 98 44 40 89 88 45 .. .. 78 15 49 .. 81 40 93 56 93 85 94 99 93 90 90
2010 World Development Indicators
115
PEOPLE
Education completion and outcomes
2.14
Education completion and outcomes Primary completion rate
% of relevant age group Total
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Male
1991
2008 a
1991
2008 a
Female 1991 2008 a
100 .. 35 55 43 .. .. .. .. .. .. 76 103 101 40 61 96 53 89 .. 63 .. .. 35 102 74 90 .. .. 94 103 .. .. 94 .. 79 .. .. .. .. 97 .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 101
120 94 54 95 56 104 88 .. 94 .. .. 86 98 105 57d 72 95 93 114 98 83 .. 80 61 92 102 99 .. 56 99 105 .. 96 104 96 95 .. 83 61 93 .. 89 w 66 94 92 100 88 100 98 101 94 79 62 .. ..
100 .. 39 60 52 .. .. .. .. .. .. 72 104 101 45 57 96 53 94 .. 62 .. .. 48 99 79 93 .. .. .. 104 .. .. 91 .. .. .. .. .. .. 99 .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 100
120 .. 52 99 57 104 101 .. 94 .. .. 86 99 105 53 75 94 92 114 97 85 .. 80 71 92 103 104 .. 57 98 103 .. 95 102 97 94 .. 83 72 98 .. 90 w 69 95 93 .. 90 99 .. 102 95 82 67 .. ..
100 .. 32 51 33 .. .. .. .. .. .. 80 103 101 36 64 96 54 84 .. 64 .. .. 22 105 70 86 .. .. .. 103 .. .. 96 .. .. .. .. .. .. 96 .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 100
121 .. 56 92 56 105 75 .. 94 .. .. 86 98 105 47 69 95 94 113 93 81 .. 79 51 92 102 94 .. 55 99 107 .. 97 105 95 97 .. 83 49 88 .. 88 w 62 93 91 .. 86 101 .. 103 92 76 57 .. ..
Youth literacy rate
Adult literacy rate
% ages 15–24
% ages 15 and older
Male 1990 2005–08 b
Female 1990 2005–08 b
99 100 75 94 49 99e .. 99 .. 100 .. .. 100 .. .. .. .. .. .. 100 86 .. .. .. 99 .. 97 .. 77 .. .. .. .. .. .. 95 94 .. .. 67 97 87 w .. 89 88 96 87 97 99 .. 82 71 .. .. ..
99 100 75 81 28 98e .. 99 .. 100 .. .. 100 .. .. .. .. .. .. 100 78 .. .. .. 99 .. 88 .. 63 .. .. .. .. .. .. 96 93 .. .. 66 94 76 w .. 79 76 94 76 92 97 .. 62 48 .. .. ..
97 100 77 98 58 .. 66 100 .. 100 .. 96 100 97 89 92 .. .. 96 100 79 98 .. 87 100 97 99 100 89 100 94 .. .. 99 100 98 97 99 95 82 98 92 w 81 93 92 98 92 98 99 97 92 86 79 .. ..
98 100 77 96 45 .. 46 100 .. 100 .. 98 100 99 82 95 .. .. 93 100 76 98 .. 80 100 95 94 100 86 100 97 .. .. 99 100 99 96 99 70 68 99 86 w 77 88 85 98 86 98 99 98 86 73 71 .. ..
Male 2005–08b
98 100 75 90 52 .. 52 97 .. 100 .. 90 98 92 79 87 .. .. 90 100 79 96 .. 77 99 86 96 100 82 100 89 .. .. 98 100 95 95 97 79 81 94 87 w 76 88 87 95 87 96 99 92 82 73 74 .. ..
a. Provisional data. b. Data are for the most recent year available. c. Includes the Indian-held part of Jammu and Kashmir. d. Data are for 2009. e. Includes Montenegro.
116
2010 World Development Indicators
Female 2005–08b
97 99 66 80 33 .. 29 92 .. 100 .. 88 97 89 60 86 .. .. 77 100 66 92 .. 54 98 70 81 99 67 100 91 .. .. 98 99 95 90 91 43 61 89 76 w 63 77 73 92 76 90 97 91 65 50 57 .. ..
About the data
2.14
Definitions
Many governments publish statistics that indi-
Institute for Statistics has established literacy as
• Primary completion rate is the percentage of stu-
cate how their education systems are working and
an outcome indicator based on an internationally
dents completing the last year of primary school. It is
developing—statistics on enrollment and such effi -
agreed definition.
calculated by taking the total number of students in
ciency indicators as repetition rates, pupil–teacher
The literacy rate is the percentage of people who
the last grade of primary school, minus the number of
ratios, and cohort progression. The World Bank and
can, with understanding, both read and write a
repeaters in that grade, divided by the total number
the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cul-
short, simple statement about their everyday life. In
of children of official completing age. • Youth literacy
tural Organization (UNESCO) Institute for Statistics
practice, literacy is difficult to measure. To estimate
rate is the percentage of people ages 15–24 that
jointly developed the primary completion rate indica-
literacy using such a definition requires census or
can, with understanding, both read and write a short,
tor. Increasingly used as a core indicator of an educa-
survey measurements under controlled conditions.
simple statement about their everyday life. • Adult
tion system’s performance, it reflects an education
Many countries estimate the number of literate
literacy rate is the literacy rate among people ages
system’s coverage and the educational attainment
people from self-reported data. Some use educa-
15 and older.
of students. The indicator is a key measure of edu-
tional attainment data as a proxy but apply different
cation outcome at the primary level and of progress
lengths of school attendance or levels of completion.
toward the Millennium Development Goals and the
Because definitions and methodologies of data col-
Education for All initiative. However, because curri-
lection differ across countries, data should be used
cula and standards for school completion vary across
cautiously.
countries, a high primary completion rate does not necessarily mean high levels of student learning.
The reported literacy data are compiled by the UNESCO Institute for Statistics based on national
The primary completion rate reflects the primary
censuses and household surveys during 1985–2007.
cycle as defined by the International Standard Clas-
For countries that have not reported national esti-
sification of Education, ranging from three or four
mates, the UNESCO Institute for Statistics derived
years of primary education (in a very small number
the modeled estimates. For detailed information on
of countries) to five or six years (in most countries)
sources, definitions, and methodology, consult the
and seven (in a small number of countries).
original source.
The table shows the proxy primary completion rate,
Literacy statistics for most countries cover the pop-
calculated by subtracting the number of repeaters
ulation ages 15 and older, but some include younger
in the last grade of primary school from the total
ages or are confined to age ranges that tend to inflate
number of students in that grade and dividing by the
literacy rates. The literacy data in the narrower age
total number of children of official graduation age.
range of 15–24 better captures the ability of partici-
Data limitations preclude adjusting for students who
pants in the formal education system and reflects
drop out during the final year of primary school. Thus
recent progress in education. The youth literacy rate
proxy rates should be taken as an upper estimate of
reported in the table measures the accumulated out-
the actual primary completion rate.
comes of primary education over the previous 10
There are many reasons why the primary comple-
years or so by indicating the proportion of people who
tion rate can exceed 100 percent. The numerator
have passed through the primary education system
may include late entrants and overage children who
and acquired basic literacy and numeracy skills.
have repeated one or more grades of primary school as well as children who entered school early, while the denominator is the number of children of official completing age. Other data limitations contribute to completion rates exceeding 100 percent, such as the use of population estimates of varying reliability, the conduct of school and population surveys at different times of year, and other discrepancies in the numbers used in the calculation. Basic student outcomes include achievements in reading and mathematics judged against established standards. In many countries national assessments are enabling the ministry of education to monitor progress in these outcomes. Internationally comparable assessments are not yet available, except for a few, mostly industrialized, countries. The UNESCO
Data sources Data on primary completion rates and literacy rates are from the UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
2010 World Development Indicators
117
PEOPLE
Education completion and outcomes
2.15
Education gaps by income and gender Survey year
Armenia Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belize Benin Bolivia Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Colombia Côte d’Ivoire Dominican Republic Egypt, Arab Rep. Ethiopia Georgia Ghana Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Kazakhstan Kenya Kosovo Lesotho Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Mali Mauritania Moldova Mozambique Namibia Nepal Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Panama Peru Rwanda Serbia Somalia Swaziland Syrian Arab Republic Tanzania Togo Turkey Uganda Vietnam Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe
2005 2006 2006 2006 2006 2003 2005 2005 2006 2005 2006 2007 2005 2005 2006 2006 2000 2005 2006 2006 2005 2006 2003 2000 2004 2005 2003–04 2006 2006 2007 2005 2003 2006 2001 2001 2006 2003 2003 2004 2005 2005 2005 2006 2006 2004 2006 2003 2006 2006 2006 2007 1999
Gross intake rate in grade 1
Gross primary participation rate
Average years of schooling
Primary completion rate
Children out of school
% of relevant age group Poorest Richest quintile quintile
% of relevant age group Poorest Richest quintile quintile
Ages 15–19 Poorest Richest quintile quintile
% of relevant age group Richest quintile Male
% of relevant age group Poorest Richest quintile quintile
93 92 144 80 67 92 201 208 108 161 51 130 107 86 90 107 176 55 135 74 177 118 134 104 169 102 250 234 41 67 96 128 112 184 149 50 78 125 121 274 90 13 147 110 123 115 108 180 99 66 135 106
a. Less than 0.5.
118
2010 World Development Indicators
80 118 147 89 107 95 191 151 75 84 77 112 97 124 104 121 124 119 184 76 188 101 125 119 111 190 153 207 98 96 84 143 104 141 106 90 101 116 90 195 98 44 117 149 123 148 111 144 100 109 123 111
106 100 96 106 61 108 91 113 93 127 57 113 95 47 101 81 81 52 94 105 87 106 92 95 116 89 118 133 46 62 99 75 118 109 85 35 70 108 118 131 98 8 117 102 82 99 97 107 108 50 105 144
102 108 105 113 114 129 144 134 116 99 110 107 99 112 103 117 114 121 166 101 159 103 106 104 124 97 145 169 110 116 95 143 109 139 105 89 108 102 96 151 100 93 114 107 119 128 97 124 100 101 112 144
9 9 8 8 6 6 4 5 6 6 5 7 9 3 15 5 4 5 4 10 4 9 6 9 5 8 3 5 5 5 9 3 7 5 4 4 7 7 7 3 9 8 6 7 5 6 6 5 13 7 5 7
10 11 13 11 8 9 7 8 14 10 8 11 12 6 14 8 8 7 7 10 7 9 9 11 8 10 8 7 8 9 12 6 10 8 9 7 10 11 11 5 10 10 9 8 7 7 7 8 18 10 9 10
Poorest quintile
119 94 65 59 31 76 20 42 43 94 47 69 84 14 102 62 15 32 34 109 31 102 40 82 36 120 42 30 36 17 97 13 81 49 34 31 48 100 106 31 86 2 69 92 32 40 95 27 99 25 50 36
116 109 97 130 95 98 70 121 111 109 127 109 92 90 102 88 80 93 125 118 136 115 76 94 122 119 141 80 79 89 100 100 109 96 124 71 71 94 99 88 96 58 110 93 108 82 85 68 104 103 101 80
113 103 83 107 67 90 44 88 90 100 88 88 92 46 106 93 34 76 80 91 73 102 71 98 69 133 77 49 55 48 96 57 94 69 78 60 70 105 100 48 94 26 85 93 58 67 100 50 96 84 88 51
Female
112 105 86 72 52 81 39 85 74 103 71 106 88 33 104 86 36 48 54 112 82 97 72 83 85 78 77 52 41 52 98 43 90 62 83 30 54 88 97 42 89 20 98 92 60 56 81 42 103 31 73 57
2 20 12 5 57 22 5 37 3 11 4 12 12 74 2 22 7 60 12 2 69 0a 38 1 18 0a 33 0a 67 2 2 46 11 33 40 74 52 1 6 13 1 87 17 0a 44 1 20 25 3 2 22 22
1 11 6 7 12 5 3 13 2 2 3 4 1 30 1 12 3 16 11 1 24 1 11 4 3 0a 3 0a 20 2 1 7 2 6 4 28 6 1 1 8 0a 46 4 0a 15 1 5 7 2 2 3 8
About the data
2.15
Definitions
The data in the table describe basic information on
Socioeconomic status as displayed in the table
• Survey year is the year in which the underlying data
school participation and educational attainment by
is based on a household’s assets, including owner-
were collected. • Gross intake rate in grade 1 is
individuals in different socioeconomic groups within
ship of consumer items, features of the household’s
the number of students in the first grade of primary
countries. The data are from Demographic and Health
dwelling, and other characteristics related to wealth.
education regardless of age as a percentage of the
Surveys conducted by Macro International with the
Each household asset on which information was
population of the official primary school entrance
support of the U.S. Agency for International Develop-
collected was assigned a weight generated through
age. These data may differ from those in table 2.13.
ment, Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys conducted
principal-component analysis, which is used to cre-
• Gross primary participation rate is the ratio of
by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF),
ate break-points defining wealth quintiles, expressed
total students attending primary school regardless
and Living Standards Measurement Studies con-
as quintiles of individuals in the population.
of age to the population of the age group that offi -
ducted by the World Bank’s Development Econom-
The selection of the asset index for defining socio-
cially corresponds to primary education. • Average
ics Research Group. These large-scale household
economic status was based on pragmatic rather than
years of schooling are the years of formal school-
sample surveys, conducted periodically in developing
conceptual considerations: Demographic and Health
ing received, on average, by youths and adults ages
countries, collect information on a large number of
Surveys do not collect income or consumption data
15–19. • Primary completion rate is the number of
health, nutrition, and population measures as well as
but do have detailed information on households’ own-
students in the last year of primary school minus
on respondents’ social, demographic, and economic
ership of consumer goods and access to a variety
the number of repeaters in that grade, divided by the
characteristics using a standard set of question-
of goods and services. Like income or consumption,
number of students of official graduation age. These
naires. The data presented here draw on responses
the asset index defines disparities primarily in eco-
data differ from those in table 2.14 because the defi -
to individual and household questionnaires.
nomic terms. It therefore excludes other possibilities
nition and methodology are different. • Children out
Typically, the surveys collect basic information on
of disparities among groups, such as those based
of school are the percentage of children of official
educational attainment and enrollment levels from
on gender, education, ethnic background, or other
primary school age who are not attending primary
every household member ages 5 or 6 and older as
facets of social exclusion. To that extent the index
or secondary education. Children of official primary
part of household socioeconomic characteristics.
provides only a partial view of the multidimensional
school age who are attending preprimary education
The surveys are not intended for the collection of
concepts of poverty, inequality, and inequity.
are considered out of school. These data differ from
detailed education data; thus the education sec-
Creating one index that includes all asset indica-
tion of the surveys is not as detailed as the Demo-
tors limits the types of analysis that can be per-
graphic and Health Surveys health section and the
formed. In particular, the use of a unified index does
data obtained from them do not replace other data
not permit a disaggregated analysis to examine
on education flows. Still, the education data provide
which asset indicators have a more or less important
micro-level information on education that cannot be
association with education status. In addition, some
obtained from administrative data, such as informa-
asset indicators may reflect household wealth better
tion on children not attending school.
in some countries than in others—or reflect differ-
those in table 2.12 because the definition and methodology are different.
ent degrees of wealth in different countries. Taking Gender disparities in net primary school attendance are largest in poor and rural households
such information into account and creating countryspecific asset indexes with country-specific choices
2.15a
of asset indicators might produce a more effective and accurate index for each country. The asset index
Primary school net attendance ratio of boys and girls, by background characteristics, 2000–06 (percent) 100 Boys Girls
used in the table does not have this flexibility. The analysis was carried out for about 80 countries. The table shows the most recent estimates for the poorest and richest quintiles and by gender
75
only; the full set of estimates for all other subgroups,
50
25
0 Urban
Rural
Source: UNICEF 2007.
Poorest 20 percent
Middle 20 percent
Richest 20 percent
Data sources
including by urban and rural location and for other
Data on education gaps by income and gender
years, is available in the country reports (see Data
are from an analysis by the World Bank’s Human
sources). The data in the table differ from data for
Development Network Education Group of Demo-
similar indicators in preceding tables either because
graphic and Health Surveys conducted by Macro
the indicator refers to a period a few years preceding
International, Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys
the survey date or because the indicator definition
conducted by UNICEF, and Living Standards Mea-
or methodology is different. Findings should be used
surement Studies conducted by the World Bank’s
with caution because of measurement error inherent
Development Economics Research Group and the
in the use of survey data.
World Bank. Country reports are available at www. worldbank.org/education/edstats/.
2010 World Development Indicators
119
PEOPLE
Education gaps by income and gender
2.16
Health services Health expenditure
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
120
Health workers
Outpatient visits
PPP $
per 1,000 people Nurses and Physicians midwives
per 1,000 people
per capita
2007
2007
2003–08 a
2003–08 a
2003–08 a
2000–08a
42 244 173 86 c 663 133 3,986 4,523 140 15 302 4,056 32 69 397 372 606 384 29 17c 36 54c 4,409 16 32 615 108 .. 284 9 52 488 41 1,009 585 1,141 5,551 224 200 101 24 9c 837 9 3,809 4,627 373c 22 191 4,209 54 2,679 186 26 16c 35 107
126 505 338 131c 1,322 246 3,261 3,763 279 42 704 3,323 70 219 766 762 799 800 67 51c 108 104 c 3,899 30 72 768 233 .. 516 18 90 878 67 1,398 1,001 1,626 3,558 411 434 310 402 20c 1,106 30 2,840 3,709 650c 90 384 3,588 113 2,727 336 62 33c 58 260
0.5 4.0 1.9 1.4 0.5 4.9 10.9 6.6 8.4 0.3 12.6 0.5 0.8 .. 4.7 2.7 2.9 4.7 0.7 0.2 .. 1.6 10.1 0.4 0.3 0.6 1.0 .. .. 0.5 0.8 .. 0.5 5.6 8.6 9.0 9.8 .. .. 3.4 .. 0.6 7.0 0.2 8.9 8.1 5.0 0.6 3.9 8.0 1.0 3.5 .. 0.0d 0.6 .. ..
0.4 2.9 1.7 0.8 4.0 4.1 4.0 7.8 7.9 0.4 11.2 5.3 0.5 1.1 3.0 1.8 2.4 6.4 0.9 0.7 0.1 1.5 3.4 1.2 0.4 2.3 2.2 .. 1.0 0.8 1.6 1.3 0.4 5.3 6.0 8.1 3.5 1.0 0.6 2.1 0.8 1.2 5.6 0.2 6.8 7.2 1.3 1.1b 3.3 8.3 0.9 b 4.8 0.6 0.3 1.0b 1.3 0.7
.. 1.5 .. .. .. 2.8 6.2 6.7 4.6 .. 13.2 7.0 .. .. 3.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6.4 .. 15.0 4.1 .. .. .. .. .. 6.9 .. 4.3 6.9 .. .. 2.2 7.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
Per capita
Total % of GDP
Public % of total
Out of pocket % of private
$
2007
2007
2007
7.6 7.0 4.4 2.5 c 10.0 4.4 8.9 10.1 3.7 3.4 6.5 9.4 4.8 5.0 9.8 5.7 8.4 7.3 6.1 13.9 c 5.9 4.9 c 10.1 4.1 4.8 6.2 4.3 .. 6.1 5.8 2.4 8.1 4.2 7.6 10.4 6.8 9.8 5.4 5.8 6.3 6.2 3.3c 5.4 3.8 8.2 11.0 4.6c 5.5 8.2 10.4 8.3 9.6 7.3 5.6 6.1c 5.3 6.2
23.6 41.2 81.6 80.3 c 50.8 47.3 67.5 76.4 26.8 33.6 74.9 74.1 51.8 69.2 56.8 74.6 41.6 57.2 56.1 37.7c 29.0 25.9 c 70.0 34.7 56.3 58.7 44.7 .. 84.2 20.8 70.4 72.9 24.0 87.0 95.5 85.2 84.5 35.9 39.1 38.1 58.9 45.3c 76.5 58.1 74.6 79.0 64.5c 47.9 18.4 76.9 51.6 60.3 29.3 11.0 25.9 c 23.3 65.7
98.9 93.9 94.7 100.0c 42.9 91.4 55.5 65.2 87.8 97.4 69.4 76.4 94.9 79.4 100.0 27.3 58.8 86.4 91.3 60.5c 84.7 94.5 c 49.6 95.0 96.2 53.2 92.0 .. 48.7 51.7 100.0 84.6 88.7 91.9 91.3 89.0 89.0 65.3 75.2 95.1 89.0 100.0c 94.1 80.6 74.3 32.5 100.0c 48.4 86.8 56.6 79.3 94.5 92.6 99.5 55.7c 57.4 96.0
2010 World Development Indicators
Hospital beds
2.0b 1.1 1.2 0.1 3.2 3.7 1.0 3.8 3.8 0.3 4.9 4.2 0.1 .. 1.4 0.4 1.7 3.7 0.1 0.0 d .. 0.2 1.9 0.1 0.0 d 1.3 1.5 .. 1.4 0.1 0.1 .. 0.1 2.6 6.4 3.6 3.2 .. .. 2.4 1.5 0.1 3.3 0.0d 3.3 3.7 0.3 0.0 d 4.5 3.5 0.1 5.4 .. 0.1 0.0 d .. ..
Health expenditure
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Health workers
2.16 Hospital beds
Outpatient visits
PPP $
per 1,000 people Nurses and Physicians midwives
per 1,000 people
per capita
2007
2007
2003–08 a
2003–08 a
2003–08 a
2000–08a
1,019 40 42 253 62e 4,556 1,893 3,136 224 2,751 248 f 253 34 22 1,362 .. 901 46 27 784 525 51 22c 299 c 717 277 16 17 307 34 22c 247 564 127g 64 120 18 7 319 20 4,243 2,790 92 16 74 7,354 375 23 396 31 114 160 63 716 2,108 .. 2,403
1,388 109 81 689 121e 3,424 2,181 2,686 357 2,696 434f 405 72 .. 1,688 .. 911 111 84 1,071 921 92 39c 453c 1,109 698 32 50 604 67 47c 502 823 281 g 176 215 38 26 467 55 3,621 2,497 258 34 131 4,774 513 64 773 65 253 327 130 1,035 2,284 .. 2,571
9.2 1.3 0.8 1.6 1.0 15.8 6.1 6.9 1.7 9.5 3.2 7.8 .. 4.1 4.4 .. 3.7 5.7 1.0 5.7 1.3 0.6 0.3 4.8 7.6 4.3 0.3 0.3 .. 0.2 0.7b 3.7 4.0 6.6 .. 0.8 0.3 1.0 3.1 0.5 15.1 8.9 1.1 0.1 1.6 16.3 3.9 0.4 .. .. .. .. .. 5.2 4.8 .. 7.4
7.1 0.9 .. 1.4 1.3 5.3 5.8 3.9 1.7 14.0 1.8 7.7 1.4 .. 8.6 .. 1.8 5.1 1.2 7.6 3.4 1.3 0.7b 3.7 8.1 4.6 0.3 1.1 1.8 0.6 0.4 3.3 1.7 6.1 6.1 1.1 0.8 0.6 2.7b 5.0 4.8 .. 0.9 0.3 0.5 3.9 2.0 0.6 2.2 .. 1.3 1.5 1.1 5.2 3.5 .. 2.5
12.9 .. .. .. .. .. 7.1 6.1 .. 14.4 .. 6.6 .. .. .. .. .. 3.6 .. 5.5 .. .. .. .. 6.6 6.0 0.5 .. .. .. .. .. 2.5 6.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 5.4 4.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6.1 3.9 .. ..
Per capita
Total % of GDP
Public % of total
Out of pocket % of private
$
2007
2007
2007
7.4 4.1 2.2 6.4 2.5e 7.6 8.0 8.7 4.7 8.0 8.9 f 3.7 4.7 3.6 6.3 .. 2.2 6.5 4.0 6.2 8.8 6.2 10.6c 2.7c 6.2 7.1 4.1 9.9 4.4 5.7 2.4c 4.2 5.9 10.3g 4.3 5.0 4.9 1.9 7.6 5.1 8.9 9.0 8.3 5.3 6.6 8.9 2.4 2.7 6.7 3.2 5.7 4.3 3.9 6.4 10.0 .. 3.8
70.6 26.2 54.5 46.8 75.0e 80.7 55.9 76.5 50.3 81.3 60.6f 66.1 42.0 83.7 54.9 .. 77.5 54.0 18.9 57.9 44.7 58.3 26.2c 71.8c 73.0 65.6 66.2 59.7 44.4 51.4 65.3c 49.0 45.4 50.8 g 81.7 33.8 71.8 11.7 42.1 39.7 82.0 78.9 54.9 52.8 25.3 84.1 78.7 30.0 64.6 81.3 42.4 58.4 34.7 70.9 70.6 .. 75.6
84.7 89.9 66.2 95.4 100.0e 51.2 74.4 85.9 71.0 80.8 88.3f 98.4 77.2 100.0 79.2 .. 91.6 91.9 76.1 97.1 77.6 68.9 52.2c 100.0c 98.3 100.0 67.9 28.4 73.2 99.5 100.0c 81.5 93.1 97.6g 84.4 86.3 42.1 95.1 5.8 90.8 33.5 71.7 93.0 96.4 95.9 95.1 61.3 82.1 82.7 41.3 97.0 75.3 83.7 83.2 77.5 .. 88.2
2.8 0.6 0.1 0.9 0.5 3.1 3.6 3.7 0.9 2.1 2.6 3.9 0.1 3.3 1.7 .. 1.8 2.3 0.4 3.0 3.3 0.1 0.0 d 1.3 4.0 2.6 0.2 0.0 d .. 0.1 0.1b 1.1 2.9 2.7 .. 0.6 0.0d 0.4 0.3 0.2 3.9 2.2 0.4 0.0d 0.4 3.9 1.8 0.8 .. .. .. .. .. 2.0 3.4 .. 2.8
2010 World Development Indicators
121
PEOPLE
Health services
2.16
Health services Health expenditure
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Health workers
Public % of total
Out of pocket % of private
$
2007
2007
2007
2007
4.7 5.4 10.3 3.4 5.7 9.9 h 4.4c 3.1 7.7 7.8 .. 8.6 8.5 4.2 3.5c 6.0 9.1 10.8 3.6 5.3 5.3 3.7 13.6 6.1 4.8 6.0 5.0 2.6 c 6.3 6.9 2.7 8.4 15.7 8.0 5.0 5.8 7.1 .. 3.9 6.2 8.9c 9.7 w 5.4 5.4 4.3 6.4 5.4 4.1 5.6 7.1 5.5 4.0 6.4 11.2 9.7
80.3 64.2 47.0 79.5 56.0 61.8h 31.3c 32.6 66.8 71.5 .. 41.4 71.8 47.5 36.8c 62.5 81.7 59.3 45.9 21.5 65.8 73.2 84.6 24.9 56.1 50.5 69.0 52.1c 26.2 57.6 70.5 81.7 45.5 74.0 46.1 46.5 39.3 .. 39.6 57.7 46.3c 59.6 w 42.7 50.2 42.4 55.2 49.9 46.3 65.7 48.5 50.8 27.5 41.1 61.3 76.4
98.8 83.0 44.4 32.2 78.5 91.7h 58.8 c 93.9 79.1 48.6 .. 29.7 74.6 86.7 100.0c 42.3 87.0 75.0 100.0 94.4 75.0 71.7 37.2 84.2 89.7 84.3 71.8 100.0c 51.0 92.4 64.9 62.7 22.6 50.3 98.0 88.1 90.2 .. 97.8 67.6 50.4 c 43.9 w 83.2 78.8 90.5 69.0 78.9 89.1 83.8 68.2 93.1 89.8 60.2 36.1 60.8
369 493 37 531 54 408 h 14 c 1,148 1,077 1,836 .. 497 2,712 68 40c 151 4,495 6,108 68 29 22 136 58 33 785 211 465 139c 28 210 1,253 3,867 7,285 582 41 477 58 .. 43 57 79c 806 w 27 164 80 488 140 95 396 473 151 36 69 4,406 3,695
Outpatient visits
PPP $
per 1,000 people Nurses and Physicians midwives
per 1,000 people
per capita
2007
2003–08 a
2003–08 a
2003–08 a
2000–08a
1.9 4.3 0.0 d 1.6 0.1 2.0 0.0 d 1.5 3.1 2.4 0.0d 0.8 3.8 0.6 0.3 0.2 3.6 4.0 0.5 2.0 0.0 d .. 0.1 0.1 1.2 1.3 1.5 2.4 0.1 3.1 1.5 2.2 2.7 4.2 2.6 .. .. .. 0.3 0.1 0.2 .. w .. 1.3 1.1 .. .. 1.5 3.1 .. .. 0.6 .. .. 3.6
4.2 8.5 0.4 3.6 0.4 4.4 0.2 4.4 6.6 7.8 0.1 4.1 7.6 1.7 0.9 6.3 11.6 .. 1.4 5.0 0.2 .. 2.2 0.3 3.6 2.9 1.9 4.5 1.3 8.5 4.6 0.6 9.8 .. 10.8 .. 0.7 .. 0.7 0.7 0.7 .. w .. .. .. .. .. 1.0 6.6 .. .. 1.3 .. .. 7.9
6.5 9.7 1.6 2.2 0.3 5.4 0.4 3.2 6.8 4.7 .. 2.8 3.4 3.1 0.7 2.1 .. 5.5 1.5 5.4 1.1 .. .. 0.9 2.7 2.0 2.8 4.1 0.4b 8.7 1.9 3.9 3.1 2.9 4.8 1.3 2.7 .. 0.7 1.9 3.0 .. w .. 2.2 1.7 4.8 .. 2.1 7.1 .. 1.6 0.9 .. 6.2 6.0
5.6 9.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 12.5 6.6 .. .. 9.5 .. .. .. 2.8 .. .. 8.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. 4.6 3.7 .. 10.8 .. 4.9 9.0 .. 8.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. 7.6 .. .. .. .. 8.6 6.8
Per capita
Total % of GDP
Hospital beds
592 797 90 768 101 784h 32c 1,643 1,555 2,099 .. 819 2,671 179 71c 287 3,323 4,417 154 93 63 286 116 68 1,178 463 677 1c 74 470 1,414 2,992 7,290 994 114 641 183 .. 104 79 1c 871 w 69 299 182 753 261 208 647 715 364 98 124 4,182 3,189
a. Data are for the most recent year available. b. Data are for 2009. c. Derived from incomplete data. d. Less than 0.05. e. Excludes northern Iraq. f. Includes contributions from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. g. Excludes Transnistria. h. Excludes Metohija.
122
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
2.16
Definitions
Health systems—the combined arrangements of
funded by donors to obtain health system data. Data
• Total health expenditure is the sum of public and
institutions and actions whose primary purpose
on health worker (physicians, nurses, and midwives)
private health expenditure. It covers the provision
is to promote, restore, or maintain health (World
density shows the availability of medical personnel.
of health services (preventive and curative), family
Health Organization, World Health Report 2000)—are
The WHO estimates that at least 2.5 physicians,
planning and nutrition activities, and emergency aid
increasingly being recognized as key to combating
nurses, and midwives per 1,000 people are needed
for health but excludes provision of water and sani-
disease and improving the health status of popu-
to provide adequate coverage with primary care
tation. • Public health expenditure is recurrent and
lations. The World Bank’s (2007a) Healthy Develop-
interventions associated with achieving the Millen-
capital spending from central and local governments,
ment: Strategy for Health, Nutrition, and Population
nium Development Goals (WHO, World Health Report
external borrowing and grants (including donations
Results emphasizes the need to strengthen health
2006). The WHO compiles data from household and
from international agencies and nongovernmental
systems, which are weak in many countries, in order
labor force surveys, censuses, and administrative
organizations), and social (or compulsory) health
to increase the effectiveness of programs aimed at
records. Data comparability is limited by differences
insurance funds. • Out-of-pocket health expendi-
reducing specific diseases and further reduce mor-
in definitions and training of medical personnel var-
ture, part of private health expenditure, is direct
bidity and mortality (World Bank 2007a). To evaluate
ies. In addition, human resources tend to be concen-
household outlays, including gratuities and in-kind
health systems, the World Health Organization (WHO)
trated in urban areas, so that average densities do
payments, for health practitioners and pharmaceu-
has recommended that key components—such as
not provide a full picture of health personnel avail-
tical suppliers, therapeutic appliances, and other
financing, service delivery, workforce, governance,
able to the entire population.
goods and services whose primary intent is to restore
and information—be monitored using several key
Availability and use of health services, shown by
or enhance health. • Health expenditure per capita
indicators (WHO 2008b). The data in the table are
hospital beds per 1,000 people and outpatient visits
is total health expenditure divided by population in
a subset of the first four indicators. Monitoring
per capita, reflect both demand- and supply-side fac-
U.S. dollars and in international dollars converted
health systems allows the effectiveness, efficiency,
tors. In the absence of a consistent definition these
using 2005 purchasing power parity (PPP) rates.
and equity of different health system models to be
are crude indicators of the extent of physical, finan-
• Physicians include generalist and specialist medi-
compared. Health system data also help identify
cial, and other barriers to health care.
cal practitioners.• Nurses and midwives include pro-
weaknesses and strengths and areas that need
fessional nurses and midwives, auxiliary nurses and
investment, such as additional health facilities,
midwives, enrolled nurses and midwives, and other
better health information systems, or better trained
personnel, such as dental nurses and primary care
human resources.
nurses. • Hospital beds are inpatient beds for both
Health expenditure data are broken down into
acute and chronic care available in public, private,
public and private expenditures, with private expen-
general, and specialized hospitals and rehabilitation
diture further broken down into out-of-pocket expen-
centers. • Outpatient visits per capita are the num-
diture (direct payments by households to providers),
ber of visits to health care facilities per capita, includ-
which make up the largest proportion of private
ing repeat visits.
expenditures. In general, low-income economies have a higher share of private health expenditure than do middle- and high-income countries. High out-of-pocket expenditures may discourage people from accessing preventive or curative care and can impoverish households that cannot afford needed care. Health financing data are collected through national health accounts, which systematically, comprehensively, and consistently monitoring health system resource flows. To establish a national health account, countries must define the boundaries of the health system and classify health expenditure infor-
Data sources
mation along several dimensions, including sources
Data on health expenditures are from the WHO’s
of financing, providers of health services, functional
National Health Account database (www.who.int/
use of health expenditures, and benefi ciaries of
nha/en), supplemented by country data. Data on
expenditures. The accounting system can then pro-
physicians, nurses and midwives, hospital beds,
vide an accurate picture of resource envelopes and
and outpatient visits are from the WHO, Organi-
financial flows and allow analysis of the equity and
sation for Economic Co-operation and Develop-
efficiency of financing to inform policy.
ment, and TransMONEE, supplemented by country
Many low-income countries use Demographic and
data.
Health Surveys or Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys
2010 World Development Indicators
123
PEOPLE
Health services
2.17
Health information Year last national health account completed
Number of national health accounts completed
Year of last health survey
Year of last census
Completeness
%
1995–2008
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
124
2005 2001 1999 2008 2007 2007 2007 2007 2006 2007 2006 2003 2006 2006 2006 2007 1995 2008
2007 2006 2003 2005 2003
2007 2007 2002 2005 2002 2008 2007 2005 2007 2007 2004 2008 2007 2002 2007
2006 2005
2010 World Development Indicators
0 3 2 0 5 5 13 13 0 12 0 5 3 13 3 3 7 5 4 1 0 1 14 0 0 13 12 0 9 0 1 2 0 0 0 13 13 2 5 2 13 0 5 3 13 13 0 3 8 13 1 0 13 0 0 1 3
2000–10
2003 2005 2006 2001 2005
2006 2007 2005 2006 2008 2006 2000 1996 2006 2005 2005 2006 2006 2004
2005 2007 2005 1993 2006 2006 1993 2007 2004 2008 2008 2002 2005
2000 2005/06 2005 2008 2002 2005 2006 2005/06 2005/06
2001 2008 2001 2001 2006 2001 2009 2001 2009 2001 2002 2001 2001 2000 2001 2006 2008 2008 2005 2006 2003 2002 2000 2006 2005 2007 2000 2001 2002 2001 2001 2002 2001 2006 2007 2000 2007 2000 2006 2003 2003 2002 2001 2000 2001 2002 2009 2009 2003 2001
Birth registration 2000–08a
Infant death reporting 2003–08a
Total death reporting 2003–08 a
6 98 99 29 91 96 .. .. 94 10 .. .. 60 74 100 58 89 .. 64 60 66 70 .. 49 9 96 .. .. 90 31 81 .. 55 .. 100 .. .. 78 85 99 .. .. .. 7 .. .. 89 55 92 .. 51 .. .. 43 39 81 94
.. 28 .. .. 100 38 95 89 24 .. 55 100 .. .. 54 .. 47 79 29 .. 0 .. 100 .. .. 100 .. 66 57 .. .. 91 .. 75 97 84 97 1 59 49 36 .. 68 .. 84 95 .. .. 54 96 .. 78 62 .. .. .. 100
.. 76 89 .. 100 100 97 97 100 .. 94 97 .. 30 92 .. 86 100 61 .. 100 0 98 .. .. 100 99 97 76 .. .. 97 .. 100 100 94 97 54 85 96 75 0 96 .. 98 100 .. .. 83 99 .. 95 93 .. .. 9 99
Year last national health account completed
Number of national health accounts completed
Year of last health survey
Year of last census
2.17
Completeness
%
1995–2008
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
2007 2004 2008 2001 2007
2007 2006 2007 2007 2006 2008
2008 2005 2005 2008 2006 2007 2006 2006 2004 2004 2007 2003 2006 2006 2001 2006 2005 2007 2006 2004 2006 2005 2008 1998 2006 2003 2000 2007 2005 2007 2007 2007
13 2 8 3 0 13 0 0 10 12 4 1 2 0 14 0 0 4 0 3 4 0 1 0 5 0 2 5 10 6 0 2 13 0 5 3 4 4 9 5 13 12 9 4 8 12 1 1 1 3 2 11 13 13 8 0 0
2000–10
2005/06 2007 2000 2006
2005 2007 2006 2004 2000
1996 2005/06 2006 2000 2004 2007 2000 2005 2003/04 2006 2006 2007 1995 2005 2005 2006 2003 2000 2006/07 2006
2006/07 2006 2008 1995 2006/07 2003 1996 2004 2008 2007/08
1996
2001 2001 2000 2006 2006 2008 2001 2001 2005 2004
2008 2005 2005 2009 2005 2000 2006 2008 2006 2001 2002 2008 2000 2009 2000 2000 2005 2004 2000 2004 2007 2001 2001 2001 2006 2005 2001 2006 2001 2003 2000 2000 2002 2007 2007 2002 2001 2000 2004
Birth registration 2000–08a
Infant death reporting 2003–08a
Total death reporting 2003–08 a
.. 41 55 .. 95 .. .. .. 89 .. .. 99 48 99 .. .. .. 94 72 .. .. 26 4 .. .. 94 75 .. .. 53 56 .. .. 98 98 85 31 65 67 35 .. .. 81 32 30 .. .. .. .. .. .. 93 83 .. .. .. ..
84 .. .. .. 100 75 90 99 76 88 .. 95 37 .. 85 .. 97 86 .. 79 .. .. .. .. 64 94 .. .. 62 .. .. 99 87 43 48 .. .. 49 .. .. 84 100 64 .. .. 82 49 84 77 19 11 80 39 95 79 100 95
97 .. .. 99 100 99 100 98 85 98 83 88 39 .. 94 .. 100 97 .. 99 72 .. .. .. 100 100 .. 100 100 .. .. 94 100 88 88 .. .. 50 100 .. 97 97 65 .. .. 100 88 .. 88 14 58 54 100 100 96 95 77
2010 World Development Indicators
125
PEOPLE
Health information
2.17
Health information Year last national health account completed
Number of national health accounts completed
Year of last health survey
Year of last census
Completeness
%
1995–2008
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe
2006 2007 2006 2005 2008
2007 2006 1998 2007 2006
2007 2007
2006 2007 2002 2000 2005 2005 2006 2004 2007 2007 2008
2007 2006 2006 2001
a. Data are for the most recent year available.
126
2010 World Development Indicators
9 13 5 0 2 6 0 0 11 5 0 3 13 12 0 0 7 13 0 0 3 13 0 1 1 5 8 0 6 2 0 11 13 13 0 0 10 0 3 11 3
2000–10
1999 1996 2007/08 2007 2005 2005/06 2008 2005
2006 1998 1987 2006 2006/07
2006 2005 2004/05 2005/06 2003 2006 2006 2006 2003 2006 2006 2007
2009 2006 2000 2006 2006 2006 2007 2005/06
2002 2002 2002 2004 2002 2002 2004 2000 2001 2002 2001 2001 2001 2008 2007 2000 2004 2000 2002 2000 2004 2000 2004 2000 2002 2001 2005 2001 2000 2004 2001 2009 2007 2004 2000 2002
Birth registration 2000–08a
Infant death reporting 2003–08a
Total death reporting 2003–08 a
.. .. 82 .. 55 99 48 .. .. .. 3 78 .. .. 33 30 .. .. 95 88 8 99 53 78 96 .. 84 96 21 100 .. .. .. .. 100 92 88 96 22 10 74
79 79 .. 94 .. 35 .. 84 90 72 .. 81 99 .. .. .. 83 100 .. 19 .. 84 .. .. 50 .. 56 .. .. 90 75 100 100 86 .. 62 72 .. .. .. ..
96 96 .. 100 .. 89 .. 75 99 95 .. 87 100 92 .. .. 99 98 100 69 .. 66 .. .. 94 93 .. .. .. 100 100 94 100 100 .. 84 83 .. 15 .. ..
About the data
2.17
Definitions
According to the World Health Organization (WHO),
• Year last national health account completed is the
health information systems are crucial for moni-
latest year for which the health expenditure data are
toring and evaluating health systems, which are
available using the national health account approach.
increasingly recognized as important for combating
• Number of national health accounts completed is
disease and improving health status. Health informa-
the number of national health accounts completed
tion systems underpin decisionmaking through four
between 1995 and 2008. • Year of last health survey
data functions: generation, compilation, analysis and
is the latest year the national survey that collects
synthesis, and communication and use. The health
health information was conducted. • Year of last cen-
information system collects data from the health sec-
sus is the latest year a census was conducted in the
tor and other relevant sectors; analyzes the data and
last 10 years. • Completeness of birth registration is
ensures their overall quality, relevance, and timeli-
the percentage of children under age 5 whose births
ness; and converts data into information for health-
were registered at the time of the survey. The numer-
related decisionmaking (WHO 2008b).
ator of completeness of birth registration includes
Numerous indicators have been proposed to
children whose birth certificate was seen by the inter-
assess a country’s health information system.
viewer or whose mother or caretaker says the birth
They can be grouped into two broad types: indica-
has been registered. • Completeness of infant death
tors related to data generation using core sources
reporting is the number of infant deaths reported by
and methods (health surveys, civil registration, cen-
national statistical authorities to the United Nations
suses, facility reporting, health system resource
Statistics Division’s Demographic Yearbook divided
tracking) and indicators related to capacity for data
by the number of infant deaths estimated by the
synthesis, analysis, and validation. Indicators related
United Nations Population Division. • Complete-
to data generation reflect a country’s capacity to col-
ness of total death reporting is the number of total
lect relevant data at suitable intervals using the most
deaths reported by national statistical authorities to
appropriate data sources. Benchmarks include peri-
the United Nations Statistics Division’s Demographic
odicity, timeliness, contents, and availability. Indi-
Yearbook divided by the number of total deaths esti-
cators related to capacity for synthesis, analysis,
mated by the United Nations Population Division.
and validation measure the dimensions of the institutional frameworks needed to ensure data quality,
Data sources
including independence, transparency, and access.
Data on year last national health account com-
Benchmarks include the availability of independent
pleted and number of national health accounts
coordination mechanisms and micro- and meta-data
completed were compiled by staff in the World
(WHO 2008a).
Bank’s Health, Nutrition, and Population Unit using
The indicators in the table are all related to data
data on the health expenditures reported by the
generation, including the years the last national
WHO and OECD and consultation with colleagues
health account, last health survey, and latest popu-
from countries and other international organiza-
lation census were completed. Frequency of data col-
tions. Data on year of last health survey are from
lection, a benchmark of data generation, is shown
Macro International and the United Nations Chil-
as the number of years for which a national health
dren’s Fund (UNICEF). Data on year of last cen-
account was completed between 1995 and 2008.
sus are from United Nations Statistics Division’s
National health account data may be collected
2010 World Population and Housing Census Pro-
using different approaches such as Organisation for
gram (http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
sources/census/2010_PHC/default.htm). Data
System of Health Accounts, WHO National Health
on completeness of birth registration are compiled
Account producers guide approach, local national
by UNICEF in State of the World’s Children 2010
health accounting methods, or Pan American
based mostly on household surveys and ministry
Health Organization/WHO satellite health accounts
of health data. Data used to calculate complete-
approach.
ness of infant death reporting and total death
Indicators related to data generation include com-
reporting are from the United Nations Statistics
pleteness of birth registration, infant death report-
Division’s Population and Vital Statistics Report
ing, and total death reporting.
and the United Nations Population Division’s World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision.
2010 World Development Indicators
127
PEOPLE
Health information
2.18
Disease prevention coverage and quality Access to an improved water source
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
128
Access to improved sanitation facilities
% of population 1990 2006
% of population 1990 2006
.. .. 94 39 94 .. 100 100 68 78 100 .. 63 72 97 93 83 99 34 70 19 49 100 58 .. 91 67 .. 89 43 .. .. 67 99 .. 100 100 84 73 94 69 43 100 13 100 .. .. .. 76 100 56 96 79 45 .. 52 72
.. .. 88 26 81 .. 100 100 .. 26 .. .. 12 33 .. 38 71 99 5 44 8 39 100 11 5 84 48 .. 68 15 .. 94 20 99 98 100 100 68 71 50 73 3 95 4 100 .. .. .. 94 100 6 97 70 13 .. 29 45
22 97 85 51 96 98 100 100 78 80 100 .. 65 86 99 96 91 99 72 71 65 70 100 66 48 95 88 .. 93 46 71 98 81 99 91 100 100 95 95 98 84 60 100 42 100 100 87 86 99 100 80 100 96 70 57 58 84
2010 World Development Indicators
30 97 94 50 91 91 100 100 80 36 93 .. 30 43 95 47 77 99 13 41 28 51 100 31 9 94 65 .. 78 31 20 96 24 99 98 99 100 79 84 66 86 5 95 11 100 .. 36 52 93 100 10 98 84 19 33 19 66
Child immunization rate
% of children ages 12–23 monthsb Measles DTP3 2008 2008
75 98 88 79 99 94 94 83 66 89 99 93 61 86 84 94 99 96 75 84 89 80 94 62 23 92 94 .. 92 67 79 91 63 96 99 97 89 79 66 92 95 95 95 74 97 87 55 91 96 95 86 99 96 64 76 58 95
85 99 93 81 96 89 92 83 70 95 97 99 67 83 91 96 97 95 79 92 91 84 94 54 20 96 97 .. 92 69 89 90 74 96 99 99 75 77 75 97 94 97 95 81 99 98 38 96 92 90 87 99 85 66 63 53 93
Children with acute respiratory infection taken to health provider
Children with diarrhea who received oral rehydration and continuous feeding
Children sleeping under treated netsa
Children with fever receiving antimalarial drugs
% of children under age 5 with ARI 2003–08c
% of children under age 5 with diarrhea 2003–08c
% of children under age 5 2003–08 c
28 45 53 .. .. 36 .. .. 33 28 90 .. 36 51 91 .. 50 .. 39 38 48 35 .. 32 12 .. .. .. 62 42 48 .. 35 .. .. .. .. 70 .. 73 62 .. .. 19 .. .. .. 69 74 .. 51 .. .. 42 57 31 56
48 50 24 .. .. 59 .. .. 45 68 54 .. 42 54 53 .. .. .. 42 23 50 22 .. 47 27 .. .. .. 39 42 39 .. 45 .. .. .. .. 55 .. 19 .. .. .. 15 .. .. .. 38 37 .. 29 .. .. 38 25 43 49
.. .. .. 17.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 20.1 .. .. .. .. .. 9.6 8.3 4.2 13.1 .. 15.1 .. .. .. .. .. 5.8 6.1 .. 3.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 33.1 .. .. .. 49.0 .. .. 28.2 .. .. 1.4 39.0 .. ..
Tuberculosis
Treatment success rate
Case detection rate
% of children under age 5 with fever 2003–08 c
% of new registered cases
% of new estimated cases
2007
2008
.. .. .. 29.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 54.0 .. .. .. .. .. 48.0 30.0 0.2 57.8 .. 57.0 44.0 .. .. .. .. 29.8 48.0 .. 36.0 .. .. .. .. 0.6 .. .. .. .. .. 9.5 .. .. .. 62.6 .. .. 43.0 .. .. 43.5 45.7 5.1 0.5
87 85 90 74 62 70 85 71 58 92 74 73 87 85 97 73 73 80 72 86 94 74 64 67 54 85 94 66 77 87 53 88 73 30 90 69 77 78 75 89 91 88 68 84 .. .. 36 84 75 40 84 .. 47 79 71 82 85
55 87 103 85 78 74 87 87 67 42 82 87 49 65 90 63 82 91 13 24 55 69 87 47 22 126 75 87 70 43 63 104 28 87 123 87 87 59 50 57 88 62 88 47 87 87 69 48 96 87 30 87 38 34 68 60 60
Access to an improved water source
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Access to improved sanitation facilities
% of population 1990 2006
% of population 1990 2006
96 71 72 92 83 .. 100 .. 92 100 97 96 41 .. .. .. .. .. .. 99 100 .. 57 71 .. .. 39 41 98 33 37 100 88 .. 64 75 36 57 57 72 100 97 70 41 50 100 81 86 .. 39 52 75 83 .. 96 .. 100
100 14 51 83 .. .. .. .. 83 100 .. 97 39 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 40 97 .. .. 8 46 .. 35 20 94 56 .. .. 52 20 23 26 9 100 .. 42 3 26 .. 85 33 .. 44 60 55 58 .. 92 .. 100
100 89 80 .. 77 .. 100 .. 93 100 98 96 57 100 .. .. .. 89 60 99 100 78 64 .. .. 100 47 76 99 60 60 100 95 90 72 83 42 80 93 89 100 .. 79 42 47 100 .. 90 92 40 77 84 93 .. 99 .. 100
100 28 52 .. 76 .. .. .. 83 100 85 97 42 .. .. .. .. 93 48 78 .. 36 32 97 .. 89 12 60 94 45 24 94 81 79 50 72 31 82 35 27 100 .. 48 7 30 .. .. 58 74 45 70 72 78 .. 99 .. 100
Child immunization rate
% of children ages 12–23 monthsb Measles DTP3 2008 2008
99 70 83 98 69 89 84 91 88 97 95 99 90 98 92 .. 99 99 52 97 53 85 64 98 97 98 81 88 95 68 65 98 96 94 97 96 77 82 73 79 96 86 99 80 62 93 99 85 85 54 77 90 92 98 97 .. 92
99 66 77 99 62 93 93 96 87 98 97 99 85 92 94 .. 99 95 61 97 74 83 64 98 96 95 82 91 90 68 74 99 98 95 96 99 72 85 83 82 97 89 96 66 54 94 92 73 82 52 76 99 91 99 97 .. 94
Children with acute respiratory infection taken to health provider
Children with diarrhea who received oral rehydration and continuous feeding
Children sleeping under treated netsa
Children with fever receiving antimalarial drugs
% of children under age 5 with ARI 2003–08c
% of children under age 5 with diarrhea 2003–08c
% of children under age 5 2003–08 c
.. 33 54 .. 64 .. .. .. 39 .. 32 48 33 .. .. .. .. 22 49 .. .. 53 47 .. .. 45 47 27 .. 38 32 .. .. 48 47 46 47 65 48 37 .. .. .. 34 28 .. .. 37 .. .. .. 60 76 .. .. .. ..
.. .. 3.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4.6 .. .. .. .. .. 40.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 45.8d 24.7 .. 27.1 2.1 .. .. .. .. .. 22.8 .. 10.5 .. .. .. .. 7.4 5.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. 69 66 .. 82 .. .. .. 75 .. 75 71 49 93 .. .. .. 62 32 .. .. 59 62 .. .. 93 42 d 52 .. 38 45 .. .. 60 63 38 65 66 72 43 .. .. .. 47 32 .. .. 69 .. .. .. 67 50 .. .. .. ..
2.18 Tuberculosis
Treatment success rate
Case detection rate
% of children under age 5 with fever 2003–08 c
% of new registered cases
% of new estimated cases
2007
2008
.. 8.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 26.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 58.8 .. .. .. 19.7d 24.9 .. 31.7 20.7 .. .. .. .. .. 14.9 .. 9.8 0.1 .. .. .. 33.0 33.9 .. .. 3.3 .. .. .. .. 0.2 .. .. .. ..
46 87 91 83 86 66 74 0 56 46 71 69 85 87 81 .. 79 85 92 73 90 67 71 67 74 87 80 85 72 78 66 85 84 62 89 86 79 85 82 88 84 86 86 79 82 93 91 91 79 39 82 92 89 75 87 80 69
87 67 69 65 47 87 87 87 59 87 91 85 79 88 87 .. 87 77 44 93 91 92 46 192 89 91 45 50 62 15 26 38 93 70 83 73 42 62 84 70 87 87 89 35 19 87 87 60 95 85 75 94 54 79 87 87 81
2010 World Development Indicators
129
PEOPLE
Disease prevention coverage and quality
2.18
Disease prevention coverage and quality Access to an improved water source
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Access to improved sanitation facilities
% of population 1990 2006
% of population 1990 2006
76 94 65 94 67 .. .. 100 100 .. .. 81 100 67 64 .. 100 100 83 .. 49 95 .. 49 88 82 85 .. 43 .. 100 100 99 100 90 89 52 .. .. 50 78 76 w 54 74 71 88 72 68 90 84 89 73 49 99 ..
72 87 29 91 26 .. .. 100 100 .. .. 55 100 71 33 .. 100 100 81 .. 35 78 .. 13 93 74 85 .. 29 96 97 .. 100 100 93 83 29 .. 28 42 44 51 w 25 47 39 76 43 48 88 68 67 18 26 99 ..
88 97 65 96 77 99e 53 100 100 .. 29 93 100 82 70 60 100 100 89 67 55 98 62 59 94 94 97 .. 64 97 100 100 99 100 88 .. 92 89 66 58 81 86 w 67 88 86 94 84 87 95 91 88 87 58 100 100
72 87 23 99 28 92e 11 100 100 .. 23 59 100 86 35 50 100 100 92 92 33 96 41 12 92 85 88 .. 33 93 97 .. 100 100 96 .. 65 80 46 52 46 60 w 38 58 52 82 55 66 89 78 74 33 31 100 ..
Child immunization rate
% of children ages 12–23 monthsb Measles DTP3 2008 2008
.. 99 92 97 77 92 60 95 99 96 24 62 98 98 79 95 96 87 81 86 88 98 .. 77 91 98 97 99 68 94 92 86 92 95 98 82 92 .. 62 85 66 83 w 78 w 83 81 93 82 91 96 93 86 75 72 93 93
.. 98 97 98 88 95 60 97 99 97 31 67 97 98 86 95 98 95 82 86 84 99 .. 89 90 99 96 96 64 90 92 92 96 94 98 47 93 .. 69 80 62 82 w 80 81 79 92 81 92 96 91 89 71 72 95 95
Children with acute respiratory infection taken to health provider
Children with diarrhea who received oral rehydration and continuous feeding
Children sleeping under treated netsa
Children with fever receiving antimalarial drugs
% of children under age 5 with ARI 2003–08c
% of children under age 5 with diarrhea 2003–08c
% of children under age 5 2003–08 c
% of children under age 5 with fever 2003–08 c
.. .. 28 .. 47 93 46 .. .. .. 13 65 .. 58 90 73 .. .. 77 64 59 84 24 23 74 59 41 83 73 .. .. .. .. .. 68 .. 83 .. 47 68 25 .. w 45 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 62 .. 44 .. ..
.. .. 24 .. 43 71 31 .. .. .. 7 .. .. .. 56 22 .. .. 34 22 53 46 .. 22 32 62 .. 25 39 .. .. .. .. .. 28 .. 65 .. 48 56 47 .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. 55.7 .. 29.2d .. 25.9 .. .. .. 11.4 .. .. 2.9 27.6 0.6 .. .. .. 1.3 25.7 .. .. 38.4 .. .. .. .. 9.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 5.0 .. .. 41.1 2.9 .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 15.9 .. ..
.. .. 12.3 .. 22.0 .. 51.9 .. .. .. 7.9 .. .. 0.3 54.2 0.6 .. .. .. 1.2 58.2 .. .. 47.7 .. .. .. .. 61.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.6 .. .. 38.4 4.7 .. w 28.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 7.2 34.4 .. ..
Tuberculosis
Treatment success rate
Case detection rate
% of new registered cases
% of new estimated cases
2007
2008
83 58 86 67 77 84 89 84 81 92 86 74 .. 86 78 58 63 .. 88 83 88 83 84 76 65 89 91 84 75 59 64 72 85 87 79 82 92 93 84 85 78 85 w 85 85 87 73 85 91 70 76 86 87 76 67 ..
76 85 20 86 33 95 32 87 87 87 36 72 87 70 49 61 87 87 79 47 75 60 60 10 87 94 79 110 43 81 37 87 87 93 49 68 56 5 41 74 39 61 w 48 66 64 78 61 69 78 77 70 63 46 87 87
a. For malaria prevention only. b. Refers to children who were immunized before age 12 months or in some cases at any time before the survey (12–23 months). c. Data are for the most recent year available. d. Data are for 2009. e. Includes Kosovo.
130
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
2.18
Definitions
People’s health is influenced by the environment
rehydration salts at home. However, recommenda-
• Access to an improved water source refers to
in which they live. Lack of clean water and basic
tions for the use of oral rehydration therapy have
people with access to at least 20 liters of water
sanitation is the main reason diseases transmitted
changed over time based on scientific progress, so
a person a day from an improved source, such as
by feces are so common in developing countries.
it is difficult to accurately compare use rates across
piped water into a dwelling, public tap, tubewell,
Access to drinking water from an improved source
countries. Until the current recommended method
protected dug well, and rainwater collection, within
and access to improved sanitation do not ensure
for home management of diarrhea is adopted and
1 kilometer of the dwelling. • Access to improved
safety or adequacy, as these characteristics are
applied in all countries, the data should be used
sanitation facilities refers to people with at least
not tested at the time of the surveys. But improved
with caution. Also, the prevalence of diarrhea may
adequate access to excreta disposal facilities that
drinking water technologies and improved sanitation
vary by season. Since country surveys are adminis-
can effectively prevent human, animal, and insect
facilities are more likely than those characterized
tered at different times, data comparability is further
contact with excreta. Improved facilities range from
as unimproved to provide safe drinking water and to
affected.
protected pit latrines to flush toilets. • Child immu-
prevent contact with human excreta. The data are
Malaria is endemic to the poorest countries in the
nization rate refers to children ages 12–23 months
derived by the Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP)
world, mainly in tropical and subtropical regions of
who, before 12 months or at any time before the
of the World Health Organization (WHO) and United
Africa, Asia, and the Americas. Insecticide-treated
survey, had received one dose of measles vaccine
Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) based on national
nets, properly used and maintained, are one of the
and three doses of diphtheria, pertussis (whooping
censuses and nationally representative household
most important malaria-preventive strategies to limit
cough), and tetanus (DTP3) vaccine. • Children with
surveys. The coverage rates for water and sanita-
human-mosquito contact. Studies have emphasized
acute respiratory infection (ARI) taken to health
tion are based on information from service users
that mortality rates could be reduced by about
provider are children under age 5 with ARI in the
on the facilities their households actually use rather
25–30 percent if every child under age 5 in malaria-
two weeks before the survey who were taken to an
than on information from service providers, which
risk areas such as Africa slept under a treated net
appropriate health provider. • Children with diarrhea
may include nonfunctioning systems. While the esti-
every night.
who received oral rehydration and continuous feed-
mates are based on use, the JMP reports use as
Prompt and effective treatment of malaria is a criti-
ing are children under age 5 with diarrhea in the two
access, because access is the term used in the Mil-
cal element of malaria control. It is vital that suffer-
weeks before the survey who received either oral
lennium Development Goal target for drinking water
ers, especially children under age 5, start treatment
rehydration therapy or increased fluids, with con-
and sanitation.
within 24 hours of the onset of symptoms, to pre-
tinuous feeding. • Children sleeping under treated
vent progression—often rapid—to severe malaria
nets are children under age 5 who slept under an
and death.
insecticide-treated net to prevent malaria the night
Governments in developing countries usually finance immunization against measles and diphtheria, pertussis (whooping cough), and tetanus (DTP)
Data on the success rate of tuberculosis treatment
before the survey. • Children with fever receiving
as part of the basic public health package. In many
are provided for countries that have submitted data
antimalarial drugs are children under age 5 who were
developing countries lack of precise information on
to the WHO. The treatment success rate for tuber-
ill with fever in the two weeks before the survey and
the size of the cohort of one-year-old children makes
culosis provides a useful indicator of the quality of
received any appropriate (locally defined) antimalarial
immunization coverage diffi cult to estimate from
health services. A low rate suggests that infectious
drugs. • Tuberculosis treatment success rate is new
program statistics. The data shown here are based
patients may not be receiving adequate treatment.
registered infectious tuberculosis cases that were
on an assessment of national immunization cover-
An important complement to the tuberculosis treat-
cured or that completed a full course of treatment as
age rates by the WHO and UNICEF. The assessment
ment success rate is the case detection rate, which
a percentage of smear-positive cases registered for
considered both administrative data from service
indicates whether there is adequate coverage by
treatment outcome evaluation. • Tuberculosis case
providers and household survey data on children’s
the recommended case detection and treatment
detection rate is newly identified tuberculosis cases
immunization histories. Based on the data available,
strategy.
(including relapses) as a percentage of estimated
consideration of potential biases, and contributions
Previous editions included the tuberculosis detec-
of local experts, the most likely true level of immuni-
tion rates by DOTS, the internationally recommended
zation coverage was determined for each year.
strategy for tuberculosis control. This year’s edition
Acute respiratory infection continues to be a lead-
shows the tuberculosis detection rate for all detec-
ing cause of death among young children, killing
tion methods, so data on the case detection rate
about 2 million children under age 5 in developing
cannot be compared with data in previous editions.
countries each year. Data are drawn mostly from
For indicators that are from household surveys, the
household health surveys in which mothers report
year in the table refers to the survey year. For more
on number of episodes and treatment for acute respi-
information, consult the original sources.
ratory infection. Since 1990 diarrhea-related deaths among children have declined tremendously. Most diarrhearelated deaths are due to dehydration, and many of
incident cases (case detection, all forms). Data sources Data on access to water and sanitation are from the WHO and UNICEF’s Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation (2008). Data on immunization are from WHO and UNICEF estimates (www.who.int/ immunization_monitoring). Data on children with ARI, with diarrhea, sleeping under treated nets, and receiving antimalarial drugs are from UNICEF’s State of the World’s Children 2009, Childinfo, and Demographic and Health Surveys by Macro International. Data on tuberculosis are from the WHO’s Global Tuberculosis Control: A Short Update to the 2009 Report.
these deaths can be prevented with the use of oral
2010 World Development Indicators
131
PEOPLE
Disease prevention coverage and quality
2.19
Reproductive health Total fertility Wanted Adolescent rate fertility rate fertility rate
births per woman 1990 2008
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
132
8.0 2.9 4.7 7.2 3.0 2.5 1.9 1.5 2.7 4.4 1.9 1.6 6.7 4.9 1.7 4.7 2.8 1.8 6.8 6.6 5.8 5.9 1.8 5.8 6.7 2.6 2.3 b 1.3 3.1 7.1 5.4 3.2 6.3 1.6 1.8 1.9 1.7 3.5 3.7 4.6 4.0 6.2 2.0 7.1 1.8 1.8 5.2 6.1 2.2 1.5 5.6 1.4 5.6 6.7 5.9 5.4 5.1
6.6 1.9 2.4 5.8 2.2 1.7 2.0 1.4 2.3 2.3 1.4 1.8 5.4 3.5 1.2 2.9 1.9 1.5 5.9 4.6 2.9 4.6 1.6 4.8 6.2 1.9 1.8b 1.0 2.4 6.0 4.4 2.0 4.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.9 2.6 2.6 2.9 2.3 4.6 1.7 5.3 1.8 2.0 3.3 5.1 1.6 1.4 4.0 1.5 4.1 5.4 5.7 3.5 3.3
2010 World Development Indicators
Unmet Contraceptive need for prevalence contraception rate
births per woman 2003–08a
births per 1,000 women ages 15–19 2008
% of married women ages 15–49 2003–08a
% of married women ages 15–49 2003–08a
.. .. .. .. .. 1.6 .. .. 1.8 1.9 .. .. 4.8 2.1 .. .. .. .. 5.1 .. 2.8 4.5 .. .. 6.1 .. .. .. 1.7 5.6 4.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1.9 .. 2.3 .. .. .. 4.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 3.7 .. .. 5.1 .. 2.4 2.3
120 14 7 123 57 36 15 13 34 70 21 8 111 78 16 51 75 42 129 19 39 126 13 104 162 59 10 b 6 74 198 111 67 128 14 45 11 6 108 83 38 82 66 21 102 11 7 89 88 44 8 63 9 106 151 128 46 92
.. .. .. .. .. 13 .. .. 23 17 .. .. 30 23 23 .. .. .. 29 .. 25 20 .. .. 21 .. .. .. 6 24 16 .. 29 .. 8 .. .. 11 .. 10 .. .. .. 34 .. .. .. .. .. .. 34 .. .. 21 .. 38 17
15 60 61 .. .. 53 .. .. 51 56 73 .. 17 61 36 .. 81 .. 17 9 40 29 .. 19 3 58 85 .. 78 21 44 96 13 .. 77 .. .. 73 73 60 73 .. .. 15 .. .. .. .. 47 .. 24 .. .. 9 10 32 65
Pregnant women receiving prenatal care
Births attended by skilled health staff
Maternal mortality ratio
per 100,000 live births % 2003–08 a
36 97 89 80 99 93 .. .. 77 51 99 .. 84 77 99 .. 98 .. 85 92 69 82 .. 69 39 .. 91 .. 94 85 86 90 85 100 100 .. .. 99 84 74 94 .. .. 28 .. .. .. 98 94 .. 95 .. .. 88 78 85 92
% of total 1990 2003–08a
.. .. 77 .. 96 .. 100 .. .. .. .. .. .. 43 97 77 72 .. .. .. .. 58 .. .. .. .. 50 .. 82 .. .. 98 .. 100 .. .. .. 93 .. 37 52 .. .. .. .. .. .. 44 .. .. 40 .. .. 31 .. 23 45
24 100 95 47 99 100 100 .. 88 18 100 .. 74 66 100 .. 97 99 54 34 44 63 100 53 14 100 98 100 96 74 83 99 57 100 100 100 .. 98 75 79 92 .. 100 6 100 .. .. 57 98 100 59 .. .. 46 39 26 67
National estimates 2000–08a
1,600 20 .. .. 44 15 .. .. 26 351 12 .. 397 229 3 .. 53 7 .. 615 472 669 .. 543 1,099 20 37 .. 75 549 781 33 543 10 29 8 .. 159 60 84 59 .. 7 673 .. .. 519 730 23 .. 451 .. 133 980 405 630 ..
Modeled estimates 2005
1,800 92 180 1,400 77 76 4 4 82 570 18 8 840 290 3 380 110 11 700 1,100 540 1,000 7 980 1,500 16 45 .. 130 1,100 740 30 810 7 45 4 3 150 210 130 170 450 25 720 7 8 520 690 66 4 560 3 290 910 1,100 670 280
Total fertility Wanted Adolescent rate fertility rate fertility rate
births per woman 1990 2008
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
1.8 4.0 3.1 4.8 6.0 2.1 2.8 1.3 2.9 1.5 5.5 2.7 6.0 2.4 1.6 3.9 3.5 3.7 6.0 2.0 3.1 4.9 6.5 4.8 2.0 2.1 6.3 7.0 3.7 6.7 5.9 2.3 3.4 2.4 4.2 4.0 6.2 3.4 5.2 5.2 1.6 2.2 4.8 7.9 6.6 1.9 6.6 6.1 3.0 4.8 4.5 3.8 4.3 2.0 1.4 2.2 4.4
1.4 2.7 2.2 1.8 4.1 2.1 3.0 1.4 2.4 1.3 3.5 2.6 4.9 1.9 1.2 2.4 2.2 2.7 3.5 1.5 1.8 3.3 5.9 2.7 1.5 1.4 4.7 5.5 2.6 6.5 4.5 1.6 2.1 1.5 2.0 2.4 5.1 2.3 3.4 2.9 1.8 2.2 2.7 7.1 5.7 2.0 3.0 4.0 2.5 4.1 3.0 2.6 3.1 1.4 1.4 1.8 2.4
Unmet Contraceptive need for prevalence contraception rate
Pregnant women receiving prenatal care
Births attended by skilled health staff
2.19 Maternal mortality ratio
per 100,000 live births
births per woman 2003–08a
births per 1,000 women ages 15–19 2008
% of married women ages 15–49 2003–08a
% of married women ages 15–49 2003–08a
% 2003–08 a
.. 1.9 2.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.8 .. 3.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.5 4.6 .. .. .. 4.6 4.9 .. 6.0 .. .. .. .. .. 1.8 4.9 .. 2.7 2.0 .. .. .. 6.8 5.3 .. .. 3.1 .. .. .. .. 2.5 .. .. .. ..
20 67 39 18 84 16 14 5 77 5 24 30 103 0 6 .. 13 32 37 15 16 72 140 3 21 21 131 133 13 161 88 40 64 33 16 19 146 18 72 99 4 22 112 156 124 8 10 45 82 54 72 54 44 14 16 53 16
.. 13 9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 12 .. 25 .. .. .. .. 1 .. .. .. 31 36 .. .. 34 24 28 .. 31 .. .. .. 7 14 10 18 .. 7 25 .. .. 8 16 17 .. .. 25 .. .. .. 8 22 .. .. .. ..
.. 56 61 79 50 .. .. .. .. .. 57 51 39 .. .. .. .. 48 38 .. 58 37 11 .. .. 14 40 c 41 .. 8 9 .. 71 68 66 63 16 34 55 48 .. .. 72 11 15 .. .. 30 .. 32 79 71 51 .. .. .. ..
.. 74 93 98 84 .. .. .. 91 .. 99 100 88 .. .. .. .. 97 35 .. 96 90 79 .. .. 94 86 c 92 79 70 75 .. 94 98 89 68 89 .. 95 44 .. .. 90 46 58 .. .. 61 .. 79 96 91 91 .. .. .. ..
% of total 1990 2003–08a
.. .. 32 .. 54 .. .. .. 79 100 87 .. 50 .. 98 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 57 55 .. .. 40 91 .. .. .. 31 .. .. 68 7 .. .. .. 15 33 100 .. 19 .. .. 66 80 .. .. 98 .. ..
100 47 79 97 80 100 .. 99 95 100 99 100 42 97 100 .. .. 98 20 100 98 55 46 .. 100 99 44 c 54 98 49 61 99 93 100 100 63 55 68 81 19 100 .. 74 33 39 .. 99 39 92 53 82 71 62 100 .. 100 ..
National estimates 2000–08a
Modeled estimates 2005
8 301 228 25 84 .. .. .. 95 .. .. 31 414 .. .. .. .. 104 405 9 .. 762 994 .. 13 4 469 807 30 464 686 22 56 16 49 227 408 316 449 281 .. .. 87 648 .. .. 23 276 60 .. 121 185 162 3 .. .. ..
6 450 420 140 300 1 4 3 170 6 62 140 560 370 14 .. 4 150 660 10 150 960 1,200 97 11 10 510 1,100 62 970 820 15 60 22 46 240 520 380 210 830 6 9 170 1,800 1,100 7 64 320 130 470 150 240 230 8 11 18 12
2010 World Development Indicators
133
PEOPLE
Reproductive health
2.19
Reproductive health Total fertility Wanted Adolescent rate fertility rate fertility rate
births per woman 1990 2008
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
1.8 1.9 6.8 5.8 6.7 1.8 5.5 1.9 2.1 1.5 6.6 3.7 1.3 2.5 6.0 5.7 2.1 1.6 5.5 5.2 6.2 2.1 5.3 6.3 2.4 3.5 3.1 4.3 7.1 1.8 4.4 1.8 2.1 2.5 4.1 3.4 3.7 6.4 8.1 6.5 5.2 3.3 w 5.4 3.3 3.4 2.8 3.6 2.6 2.3 3.2 4.9 4.3 6.3 1.8 1.5
1.4 1.5 5.4 3.1 4.8 1.4 5.2 1.3 1.3 1.5 6.4 2.5 1.5 2.3 4.2 3.5 1.9 1.5 3.2 3.4 5.6 1.8 6.5 4.3 1.6 2.1 2.1 2.5 6.3 1.4 1.9 1.9 2.1 2.0 2.6 2.5 2.1 5.0 5.2 5.8 3.4 2.5 w 4.0 2.4 2.5 2.0 2.7 1.9 1.8 2.2 2.7 2.9 5.1 1.8 1.6
births per woman 2003–08a
.. .. 4.6 .. 4.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.1 .. .. .. .. 4.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 5.1 1.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 5.2 3.3 .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1.9 .. .. ..
births per 1,000 women ages 15–19 2008
31 25 36 26 102 22 125 4 20 5 70 58 12 29 56 82 8 5 59 28 130 37 53 64 34 7 38 19 148 28 16 24 35 61 13 90 17 77 67 139 64 51 w 90 47 46 51 55 17 27 72 35 66 116 19 8
Unmet Contraceptive need for prevalence contraception rate
% of married women ages 15–49 2003–08a
.. .. 38 .. 32 29 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6 24 .. .. .. .. 22 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 41 10 .. .. .. .. 8 .. .. .. .. 27 13 .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 13 .. .. ..
% of married women ages 15–49 2003–08a
70 .. 36 .. 12 41 8 .. .. .. 15 60 .. 68 8 51 .. .. 58 37 26 77 20 17 43 60 73 48 24 67 .. .. .. .. 65 .. 76 50 28 41 60 61 w 38 66 65 72 61 77 .. 75 62 53 23 .. ..
a. Data are for most recent year available. b. Includes Taiwan, China. c. Data are for 2009. d. Includes Montenegro.
134
2010 World Development Indicators
Pregnant women receiving prenatal care
Births attended by skilled health staff
Maternal mortality ratio
per 100,000 live births % 2003–08 a
94 .. 96 .. 87 98 81 .. .. .. 26 92 .. 99 64 85 .. .. 84 80 76 98 61 84 96 96 54 99 94 99 .. .. .. 97 99 .. 91 99 47 94 94 82 w 69 84 83 90 82 91 .. 95 83 69 72 .. ..
% of total 1990 2003–08a
.. .. 26 .. .. .. .. .. .. 100 .. .. .. .. 69 .. .. .. .. .. 53 .. .. 31 .. 69 .. .. 38 .. .. .. 99 .. .. .. .. .. 16 51 70 50 w .. 46 41 .. 46 48 .. 72 47 32 .. .. ..
98 100 52 96 52 99 43 100 100 100 33 91 .. 99 49 69 .. 100 93 88 43 97 18 62 98 95 91 100 42 99 100 .. 99 99 100 95 88 99 36 47 69 66 w 44 70 65 95 63 89 97 90 80 42 46 99 ..
National estimates 2000–08a
15 22 750 10 401 13 857 .. 4 17 1,044 166 .. 44 1,107 589 .. .. 65 97 578 12 .. .. .. .. 29 14 435 24 .. .. .. 18 28 61 162 .. 365 591 555
Modeled estimates 2005
24 28 1,300 18 980 14 d 2,100 14 6 6 1,400 400 4 58 450 390 3 5 130 170 950 110 380 510 45 100 44 130 550 18 37 8 11 20 24 57 150 .. 430 830 880 400 w 790 320 370 110 440 150 45 130 200 500 900 10 5
About the data
2.19
Definitions
Reproductive health is a state of physical and men-
Good prenatal and postnatal care improve mater-
• Total fertility rate is the number of children that would
tal well-being in relation to the reproductive system
nal health and reduce maternal and infant mortality.
be born to a woman if she were to live to the end of her
and its functions and processes. Means of achieving
But data may not reflect such improvements because
childbearing years and bear children in accordance with
reproductive health include education and services
health information systems are often weak, mater-
current age-specific fertility rates. • Wanted fertility
during pregnancy and childbirth, safe and effec-
nal deaths are underreported, and rates of maternal
rate is the estimated total fertility rate if all unwanted
tive contraception, and prevention and treatment
mortality are difficult to measure.
births were avoided. • Adolescent fertility rate is
of sexually transmitted diseases. Complications of
The share of births attended by skilled health staff
the number of births per 1,000 women ages 15–19.
pregnancy and childbirth are the leading cause of
is an indicator of a health system’s ability to provide
• Unmet need for contraception is the percentage of
death and disability among women of reproductive
adequate care for pregnant women. Maternal mor-
fertile, married women of reproductive age who do not
age in developing countries.
tality ratios are generally of unknown reliability, as
want to become pregnant and are not using contracep-
are many other cause-specific mortality indicators.
tion. • Contraceptive prevalence rate is the percent-
data on registered live births from vital registration
Household surveys such as Demographic and Health
age of women married or in union ages 15–49 who are
systems or, in the absence of such systems, from
Surveys attempt to measure maternal mortality by
practicing, or whose sexual partners are practicing, any
censuses or sample surveys. The estimated rates
asking respondents about survivorship of sisters.
form of contraception. • Pregnant women receiving
are generally considered reliable measures of fertility
The main disadvantage of this method is that the
prenatal care are the percentage of women attended at
in the recent past. Where no empirical information
estimates of maternal mortality that it produces
least once during pregnancy by skilled health personnel
on age- specific fertility rates is available, a model is
pertain to 12 years or so before the survey, making
for reasons related to pregnancy. • Births attended
used to estimate the share of births to adolescents.
them unsuitable for monitoring recent changes or
by skilled health staff are the percentage of deliveries
For countries without vital registration systems fertil-
observing the impact of interventions. In addition,
attended by personnel trained to give the necessary
ity rates are generally based on extrapolations from
measurement of maternal mortality is subject to
care to women during pregnancy, labor, and post-
trends observed in censuses or surveys from earlier
many types of errors. Even in high-income countries
partum; to conduct deliveries on their own; and to care
years.
with vital registration systems, misclassification of
for newborns. • Maternal mortality ratio is the number
maternal deaths has been found to lead to serious
of women who die from pregnancy-related causes dur-
underestimation.
ing pregnancy and childbirth per 100,000 live births.
Total and adolescent fertility rates are based on
Unwanted fertility—actual fertility minus desired fertility—can been avoided when couples use effective contraception. One approach to measur-
The national estimates of maternal mortality
ing unwanted fertility is to calculate what the total
ratios in the table are based on national surveys,
fertility rate would be if all unwanted births were
vital registration records, and surveillance data or
Data on total fertility are compiled from the United
avoided—the wanted fertility rate. It is calculated
are derived from community and hospital records.
Nations Population Division’s World Population Pros-
in the same manner as the total fertility rate (from a
The modeled estimates are based on an exercise by
pects: The 2008 Revision, census reports and other
household survey), but unwanted births are excluded
the World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations
statistical publications from national statistical
from the numerator. Unwanted births are defined as
Children’s Fund (UNICEF), United Nations Population
offices, household surveys conducted by national
those that exceed the number considered ideal by
Fund (UNFPA), and World Bank. For countries with
agencies, Macro International, and the U.S. Cen-
the same respondent in the survey.
Data sources
complete vital registration systems with good attribu-
ters for Disease Control and Prevention, Eurostat’s
More couples in developing countries want to limit
tion of cause of death, the data are used as reported.
Demographic Statistics, and the U.S. Bureau of the
or postpone childbearing but are not using effec-
For countries with national data either from complete
Census International Data Base. Data on wanted
tive contraception. These couples have an unmet
vital registration systems with uncertain or poor attri-
fertility are from Demographic and Health Surveys by
need for contraception. Common reasons are lack
bution of cause of death or from household surveys
Macro International. Data on adolescent fertility are
of knowledge about contraceptive methods and
reported maternal mortality was adjusted, usually by
from World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision,
concerns about possible side effects. This indica-
a factor of underenumeration and misclassification.
with annual data linearly interpolated by the Develop-
tor excludes women not exposed to the risk of unin-
For countries with no empirical national data (about
ment Data Group. Data on women with unmet need
tended pregnancy because of menopause, infertility,
35 percent of countries), maternal mortality was esti-
for contraception and contraceptive prevalence are
or postpartum anovulation.
mated with a regression model using socioeconomic
Contraceptive prevalence reflects all methods—
information, including fertility, birth attendants, and
ineffective traditional methods as well as highly
GDP. Neither set of ratios can be assumed to provide
effective modern methods. Contraceptive prevalence
an exact estimate of maternal mortality for any of the
rates are obtained mainly from household surveys,
countries in the table.
including Demographic and Health Surveys, Multiple
For the indicators that are from household surveys,
Indicator Cluster Surveys, and contraceptive preva-
the year in the table refers to the survey year. For
lence surveys (see Primary data documentation for
more information, consult the original sources.
the most recent survey year). Unmarried women are often excluded from such surveys, which may bias the estimates.
from household surveys, including Demographic and Health Surveys by Macro International and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys by UNICEF. Data on pregnant women receiving prenatal care, births attended by skilled health staff, and national estimates of maternal mortality ratios are from UNICEF’s State of the World’s Children 2010 and Childinfo and Demographic and Health Surveys by Macro International. Modeled estimates of maternal mortality ratios are from WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA and the World Bank’s Maternal Mortality in 2005 (2007).
2010 World Development Indicators
135
PEOPLE
Reproductive health
2.20
Nutrition Prevalence of undernourishment
Prevalence of child Prevalence Lowmalnutrition of overweight birthweight children babies
Exclusive breastfeeding
Consumption Vitamin A of iodized supplemensalt tation
Prevalence of anemia
% % of population 1990–92 2004–06
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
136
.. <5 <5 66 <5 46 <5 <5 27 36 <5 <5 28 24 <5 20 10 <5 14 44 38 34 <5 47 59 7 15c .. 15 29 40 <5 15 <5 5 <5 <5 27 24 <5 9 67 <5 71 <5 <5 5 20 47 <5 34 <5 14 19 20 63 19
.. <5 <5 44 <5 23 <5 <5 11 26 <5 <5 19 23 <5 26 6 <5 9 63 25 23 <5 41 38 <5 10 c .. 10 75 21 <5 14 <5 <5 <5 <5 21 13 <5 10 66 <5 44 <5 <5 <5 29 12 <5 8 <5 16 16 31 58 12
2010 World Development Indicators
% of children under age 5 Underweight Stunting 2000–08a 2000–08a
32.9 6.6 11.1 27.5 2.3 4.2 .. .. 8.4 41.3 1.3 .. 20.2 5.9 1.6 10.7 2.2 1.6 37.4 38.9 28.8 16.6 .. 21.8 33.9 0.5 6.8 .. 5.1 28.2 11.8 .. 16.7 .. .. 2.1 .. 3.4 6.2 6.8 6.1 34.5 .. 34.6 .. .. 8.8 15.8 2.3 1.1 13.9 .. 17.7 22.5 17.4 18.9 8.6
59.3 27.0 23.3 50.8 8.2 18.2 .. .. 26.8 43.2 4.5 .. 44.7 32.5 11.8 29.1 7.1 8.8 44.5 63.1 39.5 36.4 .. 44.6 44.8 2.0 21.8 .. 16.2 45.8 31.2 .. 40.1 .. .. 2.6 .. 10.1 29.0 30.7 24.6 43.7 .. 50.7 .. .. 26.3 27.6 14.7 1.3 28.1 .. 54.3 39.3 47.7 29.7 29.9
% of children under age 5 2000–08a
4.6 25.2 14.7 5.3 6.5 11.7 .. .. 13.9 1.1 9.7 .. 11.4 9.2 25.6 10.4 7.3 13.6 7.7 1.4 2.0 9.6 .. 10.8 4.4 9.5 9.2 .. 4.2 6.8 8.5 .. 9.0 .. .. 4.4 .. 8.3 5.1 20.5 5.8 1.6 .. 5.1 .. .. 5.6 2.7 21.0 3.5 2.6 .. 5.6 5.1 17.0 3.9 5.8
% of births 2003–08a
% of children under 6 months 2003–08a
% of households 2003–08a
.. 7 6 .. 7 7 .. .. 10 22 4 .. 15 7 5 .. 8 9 16 11 14 11 .. 13 22 6 2 .. 6 8 13 7 17 5 5 .. .. 11 10 13 7 .. .. 20 .. .. .. 20 5 .. 9 .. .. 12 24 25 10
83 40 7 .. .. 33 .. .. 12 43 9 .. 43 60 18 .. 40 .. 7 45 60 21 .. 23 2 85 51 .. 47 36 19 15 4 .. 26 .. .. 9 40 53 31 .. .. 49 .. .. .. 41 11 .. 63 .. .. 48 16 41 30
28 60 61 45 .. 97 .. .. 54 84 55 .. 55 88 62 .. 96 100 34 98 73 49 .. 62 56 .. 95 .. .. 79 82 .. 84 .. 88 .. .. 19 .. 79 .. .. .. 20 .. .. .. 7 87 .. 32 .. 76 41 1 3 ..
% of children Children Pregnant 6–59 months under age 5 women a 2008 2000–06 2000–06a
96 .. .. 82 .. .. .. .. 90 b 97 .. .. 52 45 .. .. .. .. 100 80 88 .. .. 68 0 .. .. .. .. 85 10 .. 90 .. .. .. .. .. .. 68b 20 49 .. 88 .. .. 0 28 .. .. 24 .. 20 94 66 42 40
38 31 43 .. 18 37 8 11 32 47 27 9 78 52 27 .. 55 27 92 56 62 68 8 .. 71 24 20 .. 28 71 66 .. 69 23 27 18 9 35 38 49 18 70 23 75 11 8 44 .. 41 8 76 12 38 76 75 65 30
61 34 43 57 25 12 12 15 38 47 26 13 75 37 35 21 29 30 68 47 66 51 12 .. 60 28 29 .. 31 67 55 .. 55 28 39 22 12 40 38 34 .. 55 23 63 15 11 46 .. 42 12 65 19 22 63 58 50 21
Prevalence of undernourishment
Prevalence of child Prevalence Lowmalnutrition of overweight birthweight children babies
Exclusive breastfeeding
2.20
Consumption Vitamin A of iodized supplemensalt tation
PEOPLE
Nutrition
Prevalence of anemia
% % of population 1990–92 2004–06
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
<5 24 19 <5 .. <5 <5 <5 11 <5 <5 <5 33 21 <5 .. 20 17 27 <5 <5 15 30 <5 <5 <5 32 45 <5 14 10 7 <5 <5 30 5 59 44 29 21 <5 <5 52 38 15 <5 .. 22 18 .. 16 28 21 <5 <5 .. ..
<5 22 16 <5 .. <5 <5 <5 5 <5 <5 <5 30 32 <5 .. <5 <5 19 <5 <5 15 38 <5 <5 <5 35 29 <5 10 8 6 <5 <5 29 <5 37 17 19 16 <5 <5 21 28 8 <5 .. 23 17 .. 12 13 15 <5 <5 .. ..
% of children under age 5 Underweight Stunting 2000–08a 2000–08a
.. 43.5 19.6 .. 7.1 .. .. .. 2.2 .. 3.6 4.9 16.5 17.8 .. .. .. 2.7 31.6 .. 4.2 16.6 20.4 5.6 .. 1.8 36.8 15.5 .. 27.9 23.2 .. 3.4 3.2 5.3 9.9 21.2 29.6 17.5 38.8 .. .. 4.3 39.9 27.2 .. .. 31.3 .. 18.1 .. 5.4 26.2 .. .. .. ..
.. 47.9 40.1 .. 27.5 .. .. .. 3.7 .. 12.0 17.5 35.8 44.7 .. .. .. 18.1 47.6 .. 16.5 45.2 39.4 21.0 .. 11.5 52.8 53.2 .. 38.5 28.9 .. 15.5 11.3 27.5 23.1 47.0 40.6 29.6 49.3 .. .. 18.8 54.8 43.0 .. .. 41.5 .. 43.9 .. 29.8 27.9 .. .. .. ..
% of children under age 5 2000–08a
.. 1.9 11.2 .. 15.0 .. .. .. 7.5 .. 4.7 14.8 5.8 0.9 .. .. .. 10.7 1.3 .. 16.7 6.8 4.2 22.4 .. 16.2 6.2 11.3 .. 4.7 2.3 .. 7.6 9.1 14.2 13.3 6.3 2.4 4.6 0.6 .. .. 5.2 3.5 6.2 .. .. 4.8 .. 3.4 .. 9.1 2.0 .. .. .. ..
% of births 2003–08a
% of children under 6 months 2003–08a
% of households 2003–08a
.. 28 9 7 15 .. .. .. 14 .. 13 6 10 .. .. .. .. 5 11 .. .. 13 14 .. .. 6 17 13 .. 19 34 14 8 6 6 15 15 .. 16 21 .. .. 8 27 14 .. 9 32 10 10 9 8 20 .. .. .. ..
.. 46 32 23 25 .. .. .. 15 .. 22 17 13 65 .. .. .. 32 26 .. .. 36 29 .. .. 16 67 57 .. 38 16 .. .. 46 57 31 37 15 24 53 .. .. 31 4 13 .. .. 37 .. 56 22 69 34 .. .. .. ..
.. 51 62 99 28 .. .. .. .. .. .. 92 .. 40 .. .. .. 76 84 .. 92 91 .. .. .. 94 75 50 .. 79 2 .. 91 60 83 21 25 93 .. .. .. .. 97 46 97 .. .. .. .. 92 94 91 81 .. .. .. ..
% of children Children Pregnant 6–59 months under age 5 women a 2008 2000–06 2000–06a
.. 53 86 .. 1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 27 98 .. .. .. 99 83 .. .. 85 85 .. .. .. 97 95 .. 97 87 .. 68 .. 95 .. 83 94 68 93 .. .. 95 92 74 .. .. 97 4 7 .. .. 86 .. .. .. ..
19 74 44 35 56 10 12 11 .. 11 28 .. .. .. .. .. 32 .. 48 27 .. 49 .. 34 24 .. 68 73 32 83 68 .. 24 41 21 32 75 63 41 48 9 11 17 81 .. 6 42 51 .. 60 30 50 36 23 13 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
21 50 44 21 38 15 17 15 .. 15 39 26 .. .. 23 .. 31 34 56 25 32 25 .. 34 24 32 50 47 38 73 53 .. 21 36 37 37 52 50 31 42 13 18 33 61 .. 9 43 39 .. 55 39 43 44 25 17 .. 29
137
2.20
Nutrition Prevalence of undernourishment
Prevalence of child Prevalence Lowmalnutrition of overweight birthweight children babies
Exclusive breastfeeding
Consumption Vitamin A of iodized supplemensalt tation
Prevalence of anemia
% % of population 1990–92 2004–06
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
<5 <5 45 <5 28 <5 d 45 .. <5 <5 .. <5 <5 27 31 12 <5 <5 <5 34 28 29 18 45 11 <5 <5 9 19 <5 <5 <5 <5 5 5 10 28 8 30 40 40 17 w 35 16 19 8 19 18 7 12 7 25 31 5 5
<5 <5 40 <5 25 <5d 46 .. <5 <5 .. <5 <5 21 20 18 <5 <5 <5 26 35 17 23 37 10 <5 <5 6 15 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 13 12 13 15 32 45 39 14 w 30 13 15 6 16 12 6 9 7 22 28 5 5
% of children under age 5 Underweight Stunting 2000–08a 2000–08a
3.5 .. 18.0 5.3 14.5 1.8 28.3 3.3 .. .. 32.8 .. .. 21.1 31.7 6.1 .. .. 10.0 14.9 16.7 7.0 40.6 22.3 4.4 3.3 3.5 .. 16.4 4.1 .. .. 1.3 6.0 4.4 .. 20.2 2.2 43.1 14.9 14.0 22.4 w 27.5 22.2 25.1 3.8 23.5 11.9 .. 4.5 12.2 41.1 25.3 .. ..
12.8 .. 51.7 9.3 20.1 8.1 46.9 4.4 .. .. 42.1 .. .. 17.3 37.9 29.5 .. .. 28.6 33.1 44.4 15.7 55.7 27.8 5.3 9.0 15.6 .. 38.7 22.9 .. .. 3.9 13.9 19.6 .. 35.8 11.8 57.7 45.8 35.8 34.6 w 43.6 33.6 36.8 13.5 36.1 27.4 .. 15.9 30.0 46.6 43.3 .. ..
% of children under age 5 2000–08a
8.3 .. 6.7 6.1 2.4 19.3 5.9 2.6 .. .. 4.7 .. .. 1.6 5.3 11.4 .. .. 18.7 6.7 4.9 8.0 5.7 4.7 4.9 8.8 9.1 .. 4.9 26.5 .. .. 8.0 9.4 12.8 .. 2.5 11.4 5.0 8.4 9.1 6.3 w 4.7 6.7 6.4 8.8 6.2 8.1 .. 7.2 15.3 2.2 6.0 .. ..
% of births 2003–08a
8 6 6 .. 19 8 24 .. .. .. 11 .. .. 18 .. 9 .. .. 9 10 10 9 12 12 19 5 .. 4 14 4 .. .. .. 9 5 9 7 7 .. 11 11 15 w 15 16 17 7 15 6 6 9 11 27 14 .. ..
% of children under 6 months 2003–08a
16 .. 88 .. 34 15 11 .. .. .. 9 8 .. 76 34 32 .. .. 29 25 41 5 31 48 13 6 40 11 60 18 .. .. .. 57 26 .. 17 27 12 61 22 39 w 37 40 40 .. 39 42 .. .. 29 45 31 .. ..
% of households 2003–08a
74 .. 88 .. 41 .. 45 .. .. .. 1 .. .. 94 11 80 .. .. 79 49 43 47 60 25 28 .. 69 87 96 18 .. .. .. .. 53 .. 93 86 30 .. 91 71 w 62 73 72 73 71 86 50 89 67 55 60 .. ..
% of children Children Pregnant 6–59 months under age 5 women a 2008 2000–06 2000–06a
.. .. 89 .. 90 .. 12 .. .. .. 100 39 .. 64 67 44 .. .. .. 87 93 .. 57 64 .. .. .. .. 67 .. .. .. .. .. 38 .. 98 b .. 47b 96 20 .. w 81 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 65 73 .. ..
40 27 56 33 70 .. 83 19 23 14 .. .. 13 30 85 47 9 6 41 38 72 .. 32 52 30 .. 33 36 73 22 28 .. 3 19 38 33 34 .. 68 53 58 .. w .. .. .. 38 .. 20 30 .. 48 74 .. .. 10
30 21 .. 32 58 .. 60 24 25 19 .. 22 18 29 58 24 13 .. 39 45 58 .. 23 50 30 .. 40 30 64 27 28 15 6 27 .. 40 32 .. 58 .. 47 .. w .. .. .. 30 .. 29 30 .. .. 50 .. 13 14
a. Data are for the most recent year available. b. Country’s vitamin A supplementation programs do not target children all the way up to 59 months of age. c. Includes Hong Kong SAR, China; Macau SAR, China; and Taiwan, China. d. Includes Montenegro.
138
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
2.20
Definitions
Data on undernourishment are from the Food and
Low birthweight, which is associated with maternal
• Prevalence of undernourishment is the percent-
Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations
malnutrition, raises the risk of infant mortality and
age of the population whose dietary energy consump-
and measure food deprivation based on average food
stunts growth in infancy and childhood. There is also
tion is continuously below a minimum requirement
available for human consumption per person, the
emerging evidence that low-birthweight babies are
for maintaining a healthy life and carrying out light
level of inequality in access to food, and the mini-
more prone to noncommunicable diseases such as
physical activity with an acceptable minimum weight
mum calories required for an average person.
diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. Estimates of
for height. • Prevalence of child malnutrition is the
From a policy and program standpoint, however,
low-birthweight infants are drawn mostly from hos-
percentage of children under age 5 whose weight for
this measure has its limits. First, food insecurity
pital records and household surveys. Many births
age (underweight) or height for age (stunting) is more
exists even where food availability is not a problem
in developing countries take place at home and are
than two standard deviations below the median for
because of inadequate access of poor households
seldom recorded. A hospital birth may indicate higher
the international reference population ages 0–59
to food. Second, food insecurity is an individual
income and therefore better nutrition, or it could indi-
months. Height is measured by recumbent length
or household phenomenon, and the average food
cate a higher risk birth, possibly skewing the data on
for children up to two years old and by stature while
available to each person, even corrected for possible
birthweights downward. The data should therefore be
standing for older children. Data are for the WHO child
effects of low income, is not a good predictor of food
used with caution.
growth standards released in 2006. • Prevalence
insecurity among the population. And third, nutrition
Improved breastfeeding can save an estimated 1.3
of over weight children is the percentage of children
security is determined not only by food security but
million children a year. Breast milk alone contains
under age 5 whose weight for height is more than two
also by the quality of care of mothers and children
all the nutrients, antibodies, hormones, and antioxi-
standard deviations above the median for the interna-
and the quality of the household’s health environ-
dants an infant needs to thrive. It protects babies
tional reference population of the corresponding age
ment (Smith and Haddad 2000).
from diarrhea and acute respiratory infections, stimu-
as established by the WHO child growth standards
Estimates of child malnutrition, based on weight for
lates their immune systems and response to vaccina-
released in 2006. • Low-birthweight babies are
age (underweight) and height for age (stunting), are
tion, and may confer cognitive benefits. The data on
the percentage of newborns weighing less than 2.5
from national survey data. The proportion of under-
breastfeeding are derived from national surveys.
kilograms within the first hours of life, before signifi -
weight children is the most common malnutrition
Iodine defi ciency is the single most important
cant postnatal weight loss has occurred. • Exclusive
indicator. Being even mildly underweight increases
cause of preventable mental retardation, and it
breastfeeding is the percentage of children less than
the risk of death and inhibits cognitive development
contributes significantly to the risk of stillbirth and
six months old who were fed breast milk alone (no
in children. And it perpetuates the problem across
miscarriage. Widely used and inexpensive, iodized
other liquids) in the past 24 hours. • Consumption of
generations, as malnourished women are more
salt is the best source of iodine, and a global cam-
iodized salt is the percentage of households that use
likely to have low-birthweight babies. Height for age
paign to iodize edible salt is significantly reducing the
edible salt fortified with iodine. • Vitamin A supple-
reflects linear growth achieved pre- and postnatally;
risks (www.childinfo.org). The data on iodized salt are
mentation is the percentage of children ages 6–59
a deficit indicates long-term, cumulative effects of
derived from household surveys.
months old who received at least one dose of vitamin
inadequate health, diet, or care. Stunting is often
Vitamin A is essential for immune system function-
A in the previous six months, as reported by mothers.
used as a proxy for multifaceted deprivation and as
ing. Vitamin A deficiency, a leading cause of blind-
• Prevalence of anemia, children under age 5, is the
an indicator of long-term changes in malnutrition.
ness, also causes a 23 percent greater risk of dying
percentage of children under age 5 whose hemoglo-
Estimates of overweight children are also from
from a range of childhood ailments such as measles,
bin level is less than 110 grams per liter at sea level.
national survey data. Overweight children have
malaria, and diarrhea. Giving vitamin A to new breast-
• Prevalence of anemia, pregnant women, is the per-
become a growing concern in developing countries.
feeding mothers helps protect their children during
centage of pregnant women whose hemoglobin level
Research shows an association between childhood
the first months of life. Food fortification with vitamin
is less than 110 grams per liter at sea level.
obesity and a high prevalence of diabetes, respiratory
A is being introduced in many developing countries.
disease, high blood pressure, and psychosocial and
Data on anemia are compiled by the WHO based
orthopedic disorders (de Onis and Blössner 2000).
mainly on nationally representative surveys between
Data sources
New international growth reference standards for
1993 and 2005, which measured hemoglobin in the
Data on undernourishment are from www.fao.
infants and young children were released in 2006 by
blood. WHO’s hemoglobin thresholds were then used
org/faostat/foodsecurity/index_en.htm. Data
the World Health Organization (WHO) to monitor chil-
to determine anemia status based on age, sex, and
on malnutrition and overweight children are from
dren’s nutritional status. They are also key in moni-
physiological status. Children under age 5 and preg-
the WHO’s Global Database on Child Growth and
toring health targets for the Millennium Development
nant women have the highest risk for anemia. Data
Malnutrition (www.who.int/nutgrowthdb). Data on
Goals. Differences in growth to age 5 are influenced
should be used with caution because surveys dif-
low-birthweight babies, breastfeeding, iodized salt
more by nutrition, feeding practices, environment,
fer in quality, coverage, age group interviewed, and
consumption, and vitamin A supplementation are
and healthcare than by genetics or ethnicity. The
treatment of missing values across countries and
from the United Nations Children’s Fund’s State of
previously reported data were based on the U.S.
over time.
the World’s Children 2010 and Childinfo. Data on
National Center for Health Statistics–WHO growth
For indicators from household surveys, the year in
anemia are from the WHO’s Worldwide Prevalence
reference. Because of the change in standards, the
the table refers to the survey year. For more informa-
of Anemia 1993–2005 (2008) and Integrated WHO
data in this edition should not be compared with data
tion, consult the original sources.
Nutrition Global Databases.
in editions prior to 2008.
2010 World Development Indicators
139
PEOPLE
Nutrition
2.21
Health risk factors and future challenges Prevalence of smoking
% of adults
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
140
Male 2006
Female 2006
.. 43 26 .. 34 61 22 47 .. 43 64 30 13 34 49 .. 19 49 13 .. 46 9 21 .. 12 42 59 .. .. 10 9 26 11 39 36 35 35 15 23 24 .. 15 48 8 33 36 .. 17 57 37 7 63 24 .. .. .. ..
.. 4 0b .. 24 3 19 41 .. 1 22 24 1 26 35 .. 12 38 1 .. 6 1 18 .. 1 31 4 .. .. 1 0b 7 1 29 28 27 30 11 5 1 .. 1 25 1 23 27 .. 1 6 26 1 39 4 .. .. .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
Incidence of Prevalence tuberculosis of diabetes
Prevalence of HIV
Total % of population ages 15–49
Female % of total population with HIV
Condom use
Youth % of population ages 15–24
% of population ages 15–24
per 100,000 people
% of population ages 20–79
2008
2010
1990
2007
2007
Male 2007
Female 2007
Male 2000–08a
Female 2000–08 a
189 16 58 292 30 73 7 0 110 225 43 9 92 144 51 712 46 43 220 357 490 187 5 336 291 11 97 91 36 382 393 11 410 25 6 9 7 73 72 20 32 97 34 368 7 6 452 263 107 5 202 6 63 302 224 246 64
8.6 4.5 8.5 3.5 5.7 7.8 5.7 8.9 7.5 6.6 7.6 5.3 4.6 6.0 7.1 5.4 6.4 6.5 3.8 1.8 5.2 3.9 9.2 4.5 3.7 5.7 4.2 8.5 5.2 3.2 5.1 9.3 4.7 6.9 9.5 6.4 5.6 11.2 5.9 11.4 9.0 2.5 7.6 2.5 5.7 6.7 5.0 4.3 7.5 8.9 4.3 6.0 8.6 4.3 3.9 7.2 9.1
.. .. .. 0.3 0.2 .. 0.1 <0.1 .. .. .. 0.1 0.1 0.1 .. 4.7 0.4 .. 1.9 1.7 0.7 0.8 0.2 1.8 0.7 <0.1 .. .. 0.1 .. 5.1 0.1 2.2 .. .. .. 0.1 0.6 0.1 .. 0.1 0.1 .. 0.7 .. 0.1 0.9 .. .. <0.1 0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.2 1.2 1.3
.. .. .. .. .. .. 0.1 25.0 28.6 2.1 60.9 61.1 0.5 25.0 26.7 0.1 <27.8 <41.7 0.2 <7.1 6.7 0.2 27.3 29.6 0.2 .. 16.7 .. <1.3 16.7 0.2 27.5 30.0 0.2 26.2 27.3 1.2 63.3 62.7 0.2 24.6 27.8 <0.1 .. .. 23.9 59.3 60.7 0.6 34.4 33.8 .. .. .. 1.6 45.4 50.8 2.0 59.2 58.9 0.8 25.8 28.6 5.1 61.2 60.0 0.4 26.5 27.4 6.3 66.7 65.0 3.5 60.7 61.1 0.3 26.0 28.1 25.5c 29.0c 0.1c .. .. .. 0.6 26.9 29.4 .. .. .. 3.5 58.4 58.9 0.4 27.5 28.1 3.9 58.2 59.5 <0.1 .. .. 0.1 <43.5 29.0 .. <38.5 <33.3 0.2 .. 22.9 1.1 54.0 50.8 0.3 25.8 28.4 .. 26.8 28.9 0.8 25.7 28.5 1.3 60.0 60.0 1.3 <28.6 24.2 2.1 59.5 59.6 0.1 <50.0 <41.7 0.4 25.0 27.1 5.9 58.3 58.7 0.9 59.0 60.0 0.1 20.0 37.0 0.1 27.3 28.8 1.9 58.3 60.0 0.2 26.5 27.3 0.8 97.9 98.1 1.6 59.6 59.3 1.8 59.2 58.0 2.2 45.7 52.7 0.7 25.7 28.5
.. .. 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 .. 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 .. 5.1 1.0 .. 0.5 0.4 0.8 1.2 0.4 1.1 2.0 0.3 0.1c .. 0.7 .. 0.8 0.4 0.8 .. 0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 .. 0.9 0.3 1.6 0.5 0.1 0.4 1.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.2 .. 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.7
.. .. 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1 .. 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.1 .. 15.3 0.6 .. 0.9 1.3 0.3 4.3 0.2 5.5 2.8 0.2 0.1c .. 0.3 .. 2.3 0.2 2.4 .. 0.1 .. 0.1 0.6 0.2 .. 0.5 0.9 0.7 1.5 <0.1 0.2 3.9 0.6 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.1 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.4 0.4
.. .. .. .. .. 32 .. .. 25 .. .. .. 39 29 .. .. .. .. 54 .. 31 52 .. .. 18 .. .. .. .. 16 36 .. .. .. .. .. .. 58 .. .. .. .. .. 18 .. .. .. .. .. .. 45 .. .. 35 .. 42 ..
.. .. .. .. .. 7 .. .. 1 .. .. .. 10 10 .. .. .. .. 17 .. 3 24 .. .. 7 .. .. .. 23 26 16 .. .. .. .. .. .. 19 .. .. .. 2 .. 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. 19 .. .. 10 .. 37 7
2001
Prevalence of smoking
% of adults
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Male 2006
Female 2006
45 28 58 24 29 34 31 34 18 42 59 43 23 58 53 .. 36 46 60 53 31 .. 10 .. 50 .. .. 17 49 13 24 34 36 45 46 27 19 40 22 30 33 22 .. .. 8 30 20 30 .. .. 33 .. 50 30 34 .. ..
35 1 4 2 3 28 18 19 8 13 10 9 1 .. 6 .. 4 2 13 24 7 .. .. .. 22 .. .. 2 2 1 1 1 12 5 6 0b 1 13 8 28 28 20 .. .. 0b 30 0b 3 .. .. 14 .. 11 38 15 .. ..
Incidence of Prevalence tuberculosis of diabetes
Prevalence of HIV
Total % of population ages 15–49
Female % of total population with HIV
2.21 Condom use
Youth % of population ages 15–24
% of population ages 15–24
per 100,000 people
% of population ages 20–79
2008
2010
1990
2007
2001
2007
Male 2007
Female 2007
Male 2000–08a
Female 2000–08 a
16 168 189 20 64 9 6 7 7 22 6 175 328 344 88 .. 34 159 150 50 14 635 283 17 71 24 256 324 102 322 324 22 19 175 205 116 420 404 747 163 7 8 46 178 303 6 14 231 47 250 47 119 285 25 30 3 55
6.4 7.8 4.8 8.0 10.2 5.2 6.5 5.9 10.6 5.0 10.1 5.8 3.5 5.3 7.9 .. 14.6 5.2 5.6 7.6 7.8 3.9 4.7 9.0 7.6 6.9 3.2 2.3 11.6 4.2 4.8 16.2 10.8 7.6 1.6 8.3 4.0 3.2 4.4 3.9 5.3 5.2 10.0 3.9 4.7 3.6 13.4 9.1 9.6 3.0 4.9 6.2 7.7 7.6 9.7 10.6 15.4
.. 0.1 .. .. .. .. <0.1 0.4 0.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. <0.1 0.8 0.4 .. .. .. .. 2.1 0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 .. .. .. 1.4 0.4 1.2 <0.1 0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.7 <0.1 .. .. 0.4 .. <0.1 0.1 .. .. 0.2 .. ..
0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 .. 0.2 0.1 0.4 1.6 .. .. 0.1 .. .. <0.1 .. .. 0.1 0.2 0.8 0.1 23.2 1.7 .. 0.1 <0.1 0.1 11.9 0.5 1.5 0.8 1.7 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 12.5 0.7 15.3 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.8 3.1 0.1 .. 0.1 1.0 1.5 0.6 0.5 .. 0.1 0.5 .. ..
<35.7 38.5 10.8 26.7 .. 26.1 60.0 25.7 26.4 22.2 .. <29.4 .. .. 26.5 .. .. <50 <45.5 <23.8 <45.5 58.3 59.1 .. <35.7 .. 23.8 56.4 23.3 60.5 25.8 <27.8 27.1 <50.0 .. 27.5 59.4 33.4 60.7 21.8 25.6 <16.7 25.6 29.3 60.0 <41.7 .. 26.0 26.9 34.7 26.4 26.8 <50 26.0 26.6 .. ..
<30.3 38.3 20.0 28.2 .. 27.3 59.2 27.3 29.2 24.0 .. 27.5 .. .. 27.7 .. .. 26.2 24.1 27.0 <33.3 57.7 59.4 .. <45.5 .. 26.2 58.3 26.6 60.2 27.9 29.2 28.5 29.5 <20.0 28.1 57.9 41.7 61.1 25.0 27.2 <35.7 28.0 30.4 58.3 <33.3 .. 28.7 28.9 39.6 29.0 28.4 26.8 28.9 27.6 .. ..
0.1 0.3 0.3 0.2 .. 0.2 <0.1 0.4 1.7 .. .. 0.2 .. .. <0.1 .. .. 0.2 0.2 0.9 0.1 5.9 0.4 .. 0.1 .. 0.2 2.4 0.6 0.4 0.9 1.8 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 2.9 0.7 3.4 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.9 0.8 0.1 .. 0.1 1.1 0.6 0.7 0.5 .. 0.1 0.5 .. ..
<0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 .. 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.9 .. .. 0.1 .. .. <0.1 .. .. 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 14.9 1.3 .. 0.1 .. 0.1 8.4 0.3 1.1 0.5 1.0 0.2 0.2 .. 0.1 8.5 0.6 10.3 0.3 0.1 .. 0.1 0.5 2.3 0.1 .. 0.1 0.6 0.7 0.3 0.3 .. 0.1 0.3 .. ..
.. 37 .. .. .. .. .. .. 74 .. .. .. 39 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 44 19 .. .. .. 8 32 .. 29 .. .. .. 55 .. .. 27 .. 81 24 .. .. .. .. 38 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 13 .. .. .. ..
.. 18 1 .. .. .. .. .. 66 .. 4 .. 9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 26 9 .. .. .. 2 9 .. 4 .. .. .. 22 .. .. 12 .. 64 8 .. .. 7 .. 8 .. .. .. .. .. .. 9 3 .. .. .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
141
PEOPLE
Health risk factors and future challenges
2.21
Health risk factors and future challenges Prevalence of smoking
% of adults Male 2006
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
46 70 .. 22 13 40 .. 34 41 32 .. 27 37 27 25 21 17 32 40 .. 20 40 .. .. .. 53 51 .. 17 65 24 26 25 39 23 32 41 .. 28 17 28 39 w 29 42 43 39 40 56 55 27 28 30 14 33 37
Female 2006
24 28 .. 3 1 27 .. 5 20 21 .. 8 27 0b 2 2 23 23 .. .. 2 2 .. .. .. 6 20 .. 2 24 2 24 19 29 3 27 2 .. 6 2 2 8w 3 6 3 18 6 4 24 15 2 2 2 20 25
Incidence of Prevalence tuberculosis of diabetes
Prevalence of HIV
Total % of population ages 15–49
per 100,000 people
% of population ages 20–79
2008
2010
1990
2007
6.9 7.6 1.6 16.8 4.7 6.9d 4.4 10.2 6.4 7.7 3.0 4.5 6.6 10.9 4.2 4.2 5.2 8.9 10.8 5.0 3.2 7.1 3.5 4.3 11.7 9.3 8.0 5.3 2.2 7.6 18.7 3.6 10.3 5.7 5.2 6.5 3.5 8.6 3.0 4.0 4.1 6.4 w 4.3 6.4 6.2 7.5 6.1 4.6 7.3 7.4 9.1 7.8 3.8 7.9 7.1
.. .. 9.2 .. 0.1 <0.1 0.2 .. .. .. <0.1 0.8 0.4 .. 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.4 .. .. 4.8 1.0 .. 0.7 0.2 .. .. .. 13.7 .. .. <0.1 0.5 0.1 .. .. 0.1 .. .. 8.9 14.2 0.3 w 2.1 0.1 0.1 .. 0.4 0.1 .. 0.3 .. 0.1 2.1 0.3 0.2
0.1 1.1 2.8 .. 1.0 0.1 1.7 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 0.5 18.1 0.5 .. 1.4 26.1 0.1 0.6 .. 0.3 6.2 1.4 .. 3.3 1.5 0.1 .. <0.1 5.4 1.6 .. 0.2 0.6 0.6 0.1 .. 0.5 .. .. 15.2 15.3 0.8 w 2.3 0.6 0.4 1.5 0.9 0.2 0.6 0.5 0.1 0.3 5.0 0.3 0.3
134 107 387 19 277 18 608 39 12 12 388 960 17 66 119 1,227 6 5 22 199 190 137 498 438 24 24 30 68 311 102 6 12 5 22 128 33 200 19 88 468 762 139 w 282 137 145 106 162 138 87 47 44 180 352 14 8
a. Data are for the most recent year available. b. Less than 0.5. c. Includes Hong Kong SAR, China.
142
2010 World Development Indicators
Female % of total population with HIV 2001
2007
50.7 50.0 22.1 25.5 60.6 60.0 .. .. 60.9 59.4 25.5 28.1 59.4 58.8 <34.5 29.3 .. .. .. .. 26.5 27.9 58.7 59.3 20.8 20.0 <33.3 37.8 56.0 58.6 60.7 58.8 43.4 46.8 33.2 36.8 .. .. <20.8 21.0 61.7 58.5 36.9 41.7 .. .. 61.0 57.5 57.5 59.2 <45.5 27.8 .. .. .. .. 58.9 59.3 35.7 44.2 .. .. .. .. 18.0 20.9 25.4 28.0 <35.7 28.8 .. .. 24.7 27.1 .. .. .. .. 54.7 57.1 58.8 56.7 30.8 w 32.9 w 35.0 39.2 31.6 33.4 31.8 33.7 30.8 32.0 32.1 34.2 25.5 28.5 28.6 30.5 32.1 32.8 27.9 28.6 32.8 34.6 57.1 56.9 23.3 24.9 25.8 26.9
Condom use
Youth % of population ages 15–24 Male 2007
Female 2007
0.2 1.3 0.5 .. 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.2 .. .. 0.6 4.0 0.6 <0.1 0.3 5.8 0.1 0.4 .. 0.4 0.5 1.2 .. 0.8 0.3 0.1 .. .. 1.3 1.5 .. .. 0.7 0.6 0.1 .. 0.6 .. .. 3.6 2.9 0.5 w .. 0.4 0.3 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.8 0.7 .. 0.3 1.1 0.5 0.3
0.2 0.6 1.4 .. 0.8 0.1 1.3 0.1 .. .. 0.3 12.7 0.2 .. 1.0 22.6 0.1 0.5 .. 0.1 0.9 1.2 .. 2.4 1.0 <0.1 .. .. 3.9 1.5 .. .. 0.3 0.3 0.1 .. 0.3 .. .. 11.3 7.7 0.7 w .. 0.6 0.4 1.3 0.7 0.2 0.5 0.4 .. 0.3 3.3 0.2 0.2
% of population ages 15–24 Male 2000–08a
Female 2000–08 a
.. .. 19 .. 48 .. .. .. .. .. .. 57 .. .. .. 66 .. .. .. .. 36 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 56 69 .. .. .. .. 18 .. 16 .. .. 47 52 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 36 36 .. ..
.. .. 5 .. 5 .. .. .. .. .. .. 46 .. .. .. 44 .. .. .. .. 13 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 39 73 .. .. .. .. 2 .. 8 .. .. 39 9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 17 15 .. ..
About the data
2.21
Definitions
The limited availability of data on health status is a
The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS
• Prevalence of smoking is the adjusted and age-
major constraint in assessing the health situation in
(UNAIDS) and the WHO estimate HIV prevalence from
standardized prevalence estimate of smoking among
developing countries. Surveillance data are lacking
sentinel surveillance, population-based surveys,
adults. The age range varies but in most countries is
for many major public health concerns. Estimates
and special studies. Since the 2009 edition the
18 and older or 15 and older. • Incidence of tuber-
of prevalence and incidence are available for some
estimates in the table have been more reliable than
culosis is the estimated number of new tuberculosis
diseases but are often unreliable and incomplete.
previous estimates because of expanded sentinel
cases (pulmonary, smear positive, extrapulmonary).
National health authorities differ widely in capacity
surveillance and improved data quality. Findings from
• Prevalence of diabetes refers to the percentage of
and willingness to collect or report information. To
population-based HIV surveys, which are geographi-
people ages 20–79 who have type 1 or type 2 diabe-
compensate for this and improve reliability and inter-
cally more representative than sentinel surveillance
tes. • Prevalence of HIV is the percentage of people
national comparability, the World Health Organization
and include both men and women, influenced a down-
who are infected with HIV. Total and youth rates are
(WHO) prepares estimates in accordance with epide-
ward adjustment to prevalence rates based on senti-
percentages of the relevant age group. Female rate
miological models and statistical standards.
nel surveillance. And assumptions about the average
is as a percentage of the total population with HIV.
Smoking is the most common form of tobacco use
time people living with HIV survive without antiret-
• Condom use is the percentage of the population
and the prevalence of smoking is therefore a good
roviral treatment were improved in the most recent
ages 15–24 who used a condom at last intercourse
measure of the tobacco epidemic (Corrao and others
model. Thus, estimates in this edition should not be
in the last 12 months.
2000). Tobacco use causes heart and other vascular
compared with estimates in previous editions.
diseases and cancers of the lung and other organs.
Estimates from recent Demographic and Health
Given the long delay between starting to smoke and
Surveys that have collected data on HIV/AIDS dif-
the onset of disease, the health impact of smoking
fer somewhat from those of UNAIDS and the WHO,
in developing countries will increase rapidly only in
which are based on surveillance systems that focus
the next few decades. Because the data present a
on pregnant women who attend sentinel antenatal
one-time estimate, with no information on intensity
clinics. Caution should be used in comparing the
or duration of smoking, and because the definition of
two sets of estimates. Demographic and Health
adult varies, the data should be used with caution.
Surveys are household surveys that use a represen-
Tuberculosis is one of the main causes of adult
tative sample from the whole population, whereas
deaths from a single infectious agent in develop-
surveillance data from antenatal clinics are limited
ing countries. In developed countries tuberculosis
to pregnant women. Household surveys also fre-
has reemerged largely as a result of cases among
quently provide better coverage of rural populations.
immigrants. Since tuberculosis incidence cannot be
However, respondents who refuse to participate or
directly measured, estimates are obtained by elicit-
are absent from the household add considerable
ing expert opinion or are derived from measurements
uncertainty to survey-based HIV estimates, because
of prevalence or mortality. These estimates include
the possible association of absence or refusal with
uncertainty intervals, which are not shown in the table.
higher HIV prevalence is unknown. UNAIDS and the
Diabetes, an important cause of ill health and a
WHO estimate HIV prevalence for the adult popu-
risk factor for other diseases in developed countries,
lation (ages 15–49) by assuming that prevalence
is spreading rapidly in developing countries. Highest
among pregnant women is a good approximation of
among the elderly, prevalence rates are rising among
prevalence among men and women. However, this
younger and productive populations in developing
assumption might not apply to all countries or over
countries. Economic development has led to the
time. Other potential biases are associated with the
spread of Western lifestyles and diet to develop-
use of antenatal clinic data, such as differences
ing countries, resulting in a substantial increase in
among women who attend antenatal clinics and
Data on smoking are from the WHO’s Report on
diabetes. Without effective prevention and control
those who do not.
the Global Tobacco Epidemic 2009: Implementing
Data sources
Data on condom use are from household surveys
Smoke-Free Environments. Data on tuberculosis
and refer to condom use at last intercourse. How-
are from the WHO’s Global Tuberculosis Control
Adult HIV prevalence rates reflect the rate of HIV
ever, condoms are not as effective at preventing the
Report 2009. Data on diabetes are from the
infection in each country’s population. Low national
transmission of HIV unless used consistently. Some
International Diabetes Federation’s Diabetes
prevalence rates can be misleading, however. They
surveys have asked directly about consistent use,
Atlas, 3rd edition. Data on prevalence of HIV are
often disguise epidemics that are initially concentrated
but the question is subject to recall and other biases.
from UNAIDS and the WHO’s 2008 Report on the
in certain localities or population groups and threaten
Caution should be used in interpreting the data.
Global AIDS Epidemic. Data on condom use are
programs, diabetes will likely continue to increase. Data are estimated based on sample surveys.
to spill over into the wider population. In many devel-
For indicators from household surveys, the year in
oping countries most new infections occur in young
the table refers to the survey year. For more informa-
adults, with young women especially vulnerable.
tion, consult the original sources.
from Demographic and Health Surveys by Macro International.
2010 World Development Indicators
143
PEOPLE
Health risk factors and future challenges
2.22 Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France d Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
144
Mortality Life expectancy at birth
Infant mortality rate
Under-five mortality rate
Child mortality rate
Adult mortality rate
Survival to age 65
years
per 1,000 live births 1990 2008
per 1,000 1990 2008
per 1,000 Male Female 2003–08a,b 2003–08a,b
per 1,000 Male Female 2005–08a 2005–08a
% of cohort Male Female 2008 2008
1990
2008
41 72 67 42 72 68 77 76 65 54 71 76 54 59 67 64 66 72 47 46 55 55 77 49 51 74 68 c 77 68 48 59 76 58 72 75 71 75 68 69 63 66 48 69 47 75 77 61 51 70 75 57 77 62 48 44 55 66
44 77 72 47 75 74 81 80 70 66 71 80 61 66 75 54 72 73 53 50 61 51 81 47 49 79 73c 82 73 48 54 79 57 76 79 77 79 73 75 70 71 59 74 55 80 82 60 56 72 80 57 80 70 58 48 61 72
2010 World Development Indicators
168 37 52 154 25 48 8 8 78 103 20 9 111 88 21 39 46 15 110 113 85 92 7 116 120 18 37 .. 28 126 67 19 104 11 11 10 7 48 41 66 48 92 14 124 6 7 67 104 41 7 75 9 58 137 142 105 43
165 13 36 130 15 21 5 3 32 43 11 4 76 46 13 26 18 9 92 102 69 82 6 115 124 7 18 .. 16 126 80 10 81 5 5 3 4 27 21 20 16 41 4 69 3 3 57 80 26 4 51 3 29 90 117 54 26
260 46 64 260 29 56 9 9 98 149 24 10 184 122 23 50 56 18 201 189 117 149 8 178 201 22 46 .. 35 199 104 22 150 13 14 12 9 62 53 90 62 150 18 210 7 9 92 153 47 9 118 11 77 231 240 151 55
257 14 41 220 16 23 6 4 36 54 13 5 121 54 15 31 22 11 169 168 90 131 6 173 209 9 21 .. 20 199 127 11 114 6 6 4 4 33 25 23 18 58 6 109 3 4 77 106 30 4 76 4 35 146 195 72 31
.. 3 .. .. .. 8 .. .. 9 16 .. .. 64 18 .. .. .. .. 110 65 20 73 .. 74 96 .. .. .. 4 70 49 .. .. .. .. .. .. 6 5 5 .. .. .. 56 .. .. .. 46 5 .. 38 .. .. 89 110 33 8
.. 1 .. .. .. 3 .. .. 5 20 .. .. 65 20 .. .. .. .. 113 65 20 72 .. 82 101 .. .. .. 3 64 43 .. .. .. .. .. .. 4 5 5 .. .. .. 56 .. .. .. 39 4 .. 28 .. .. 86 88 36 9
439 100 120 409 165 165 82 111 181 209 330 111 211 235 135 487 230 213 335 387 294 406 92 456 361 129 149c 76 200 400 377 113 313 147 109 143 116 206 166 163 288 381 283 339 133 121 323 329 198 107 327 93 234 256 403 287 172
412 52 101 353 77 80 47 55 110 176 115 61 174 175 62 497 120 91 280 353 223 402 56 428 319 64 89 c 33 93 350 354 59 278 58 68 65 69 136 87 107 123 286 92 297 57 55 278 269 78 56 289 38 128 198 350 225 120
34 82 78 37 74 72 88 85 69 65 53 85 61 63 78 42 67 71 45 41 55 42 86 35 41 80 76c 87 71 38 45 82 52 77 83 79 83 70 76 72 63 46 64 48 83 85 55 47 69 85 51 85 67 54 38 56 73
36 90 82 44 87 85 93 93 79 70 83 92 67 71 89 44 80 87 51 46 63 45 92 40 47 90 83c 94 84 44 49 90 58 90 89 90 89 79 85 80 80 57 87 54 93 93 61 55 84 92 55 93 79 63 44 64 80
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
2.22
Life expectancy at birth
Infant mortality rate
Under-five mortality rate
Child mortality rate
Adult mortality rate
Survival to age 65
years
per 1,000 live births 1990 2008
per 1,000 1990 2008
per 1,000 Male Female 2003–08a,b 2003–08a,b
per 1,000 Male Female 2005–08a 2005–08a
% of cohort Male Female 2008 2008
1990
2008
69 58 62 65 65 75 77 77 71 79 67 68 60 70 71 68 75 68 54 69 69 59 49 68 71 71 51 49 70 43 56 69 71 67 61 64 43 59 62 54 77 75 64 42 45 77 70 61 72 55 68 66 65 71 74 75 70
74 64 71 71 68 80 81 82 72 83 73 66 54 67 80 69 78 67 65 72 72 45 58 74 72 74 60 53 74 48 57 73 75 68 67 71 48 62 61 67 80 80 73 51 48 81 76 67 76 61 72 73 72 76 79 79 76
15 83 56 55 42 8 10 9 28 5 31 51 68 42 8 .. 13 63 108 13 33 80 146 33 12 32 101 133 16 139 81 21 36 30 71 68 166 85 49 99 7 9 51 144 120 7 23 101 24 67 34 64 42 15 11 .. 17
5 52 31 27 36 3 4 3 26 3 17 27 81 42 5 .. 9 33 48 8 12 63 100 15 6 10 68 65 6 103 75 15 15 15 34 32 90 71 31 41 4 5 23 79 96 3 10 72 19 53 24 22 26 6 3 .. 9
17 116 86 73 53 9 11 10 33 6 38 60 105 55 9 .. 15 75 157 17 40 101 219 38 16 36 167 225 18 250 129 24 45 37 98 88 249 120 72 142 8 11 68 305 230 9 31 130 31 91 42 81 61 17 15 .. 20
7 69 41 32 44 4 5 4 31 4 20 30 128 55 5 .. 11 38 61 9 13 79 145 17 7 11 106 100 6 194 118 17 17 17 41 36 130 98 42 51 5 6 27 167 186 4 12 89 23 69 28 24 32 7 4 .. 10
.. 9 13 .. 6 .. .. .. 5 .. 2 5 42 .. .. .. .. 8 .. .. .. 22 62 .. .. 2 45 52 .. 117 53 .. .. 7 11 9 61 .. 24 21 .. .. .. 138 91 .. .. 14 .. .. .. 13 10 .. .. .. ..
.. 12 12 .. 7 .. .. .. 6 .. 3 4 39 .. .. .. .. 4 .. .. .. 19 64 .. .. 1 45 54 .. 114 44 .. .. 4 10 11 64 .. 19 18 .. .. .. 135 93 .. .. 22 .. .. .. 4 9 .. .. .. ..
250 261 166 144 226 88 86 82 225 87 162 405 402 172 106 .. 85 262 226 311 152 674 255 147 346 134 270 448 150 389 308 228 139 283 291 147 489 257 346 199 81 92 205 351 406 81 98 165 137 348 172 164 156 209 128 133 111
104 174 116 99 107 56 48 43 117 43 112 153 412 120 42 .. 52 125 184 114 100 630 209 91 116 80 220 403 86 358 241 113 77 127 184 97 462 195 327 175 59 59 116 302 382 53 73 133 73 255 125 101 102 80 53 53 102
67 58 72 75 64 87 87 86 69 87 73 46 46 66 83 .. 85 61 63 63 74 24 56 75 59 77 57 42 76 38 49 67 78 59 57 74 36 57 54 67 87 87 71 43 39 87 82 68 79 49 73 73 73 72 82 80 81
2010 World Development Indicators
86 68 80 81 81 92 93 94 81 94 81 75 47 76 93 .. 90 77 69 85 82 30 62 84 86 85 63 48 85 42 58 81 86 78 71 82 40 65 59 71 92 91 81 48 42 92 87 71 87 60 79 83 82 89 92 91 83
145
PEOPLE
Mortality
2.22
Mortality Life expectancy at birth
Infant mortality rate
Under-five mortality rate
Child mortality rate
Adult mortality rate
Survival to age 65
years
per 1,000 live births 1990 2008
per 1,000 1990 2008
per 1,000 Male Female 2003–08a,b 2003–08a,b
per 1,000 Male Female 2005–08a 2005–08a
% of cohort Male Female 2008 2008
1990
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
70 69 33 68 52 71 40 74 71 73 45 61 77 70 53 60 78 77 68 63 51 69 46 58 69 70 65 63 48 70 73 76 75 73 67 71 65 68 54 51 61 65 w 54 64 63 68 63 67 69 68 64 58 50 76 76
2008
73 68 50 73 56 74 48 81 75 79 50 51 81 74 58 46 81 82 74 67 56 69 61 63 69 74 72 65 53 68 78 80 78 76 68 74 74 73 63 45 44 69 w 59 69 68 71 67 72 70 73 71 64 52 80 81
25 23 106 35 72 25 163 6 13 9 119 44 8 23 78 62 6 7 30 91 97 26 138 89 30 40 69 81 114 18 15 8 9 21 61 27 39 33 90 105 51 64 w 102 60 65 38 69 42 41 42 58 89 109 10 8
12 12 72 18 57 6 123 2 7 3 119 48 4 13 70 59 2 4 14 54 67 13 75 64 31 18 20 43 85 14 7 5 7 12 34 16 12 24 53 92 62 46 w 76 41 45 19 50 23 19 20 29 58 86 6 3
32 27 174 43 149 29 278 7 15 10 200 56 9 29 124 84 7 8 37 117 157 32 184 150 34 50 84 99 186 21 17 9 11 24 74 32 56 38 127 172 79 92 w 160 85 93 47 101 55 50 53 76 125 185 12 9
14 13 112 21 108 7 194 3 8 4 200 67 4 15 109 83 3 5 16 64 104 14 93 98 35 21 22 48 135 16 8 6 8 14 38 18 14 27 69 148 96 67 w 118 57 64 23 73 29 22 23 34 76 144 7 4
.. .. 69 3 43 4 134 .. .. .. 53 13 .. .. 38 32 .. .. 5 18 56 .. .. 55 5 .. 9 .. 75 4 .. .. .. .. 11 .. 5 3 10 66 21
.. .. 55 4 39 3 124 .. .. .. 54 9 .. .. 30 30 .. .. 3 13 52 .. .. 43 8 .. 9 .. 62 1 .. .. .. .. 7 .. 4 3 11 55 21
196 429 403 139 329 155 e 503 81 196 149 371 577 106 196 306 615 78 78 122 210 377 297 264 242 239 123 151 303 412 385 77 100 141 141 240 177 136 128 251 542 718 216f w 295 205 204 210 219 161 305 g 192 158 246 395 116 g 107g
83 158 357 89 271 83 e 470 41 76 57 318 511 44 77 261 639 48 46 83 139 362 172 229 199 141 72 84 154 411 142 64 61 81 64 137 93 90 92 202 530 681 153f w 254 136 138 127 156 101 126g 104 106 173 362 62g 52g
70 46 40 76 47 74 e 29 86 72 81 41 31 85 71 53 29 88 88 78 63 48 62 57 61 63 78 74 54 43 53 86 85 83 77 62 74 78 78 59 31 21 68 w 55 67 67 66 65 74 59 72 73 60 43 84 85
85 78 46 84 54 85e 33 93 88 92 47 41 94 86 59 29 93 93 85 73 51 77 62 68 77 86 84 73 45 80 88 91 89 89 75 84 85 84 66 34 26 77 w 61 76 75 81 74 81 81 83 81 68 48 91 93
a. Data are for the most recent year available. b. Refers to a survey year. Values were estimated directly from surveys and cover the 5 or 10 years preceding the survey. c. Includes Taiwan, China. d. Excludes the French overseas departments of French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, and Réunion. e. Includes Kosovo. f. These world aggregates for 2008 do not include data for many lower mortality countries because recent estimates are unavailable. The world aggregates for 2006 are 213 for men and 143 for women. g. Data are for 2006.
146
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
2.22
Definitions
Mortality rates for different age groups (infants, chil-
weighted least squares method to fit a regression
• Life expectancy at birth is the number of years
dren, and adults) and overall mortality indicators (life
line to the relationship between mortality rates and
a newborn infant would live if prevailing patterns of
expectancy at birth or survival to a given age) are
their reference dates and then extrapolate the trend
mortality at the time of its birth were to stay the
important indicators of health status in a country.
to the present. (For further discussion of childhood
same throughout its life. • Infant mortality rate is
Because data on the incidence and prevalence of
mortality estimates, see UNICEF, WHO, World Bank,
the number of infants dying before reaching one year
diseases are frequently unavailable, mortality rates
and United Nations Population Division 2007; for a
of age, per 1,000 live births in a given year. • Under-
are often used to identify vulnerable populations.
graphic presentation and detailed background data,
five mortality rate is the probability per 1,000 that a
And they are among the indicators most frequently
see www.childmortality.org).
newborn baby will die before reaching age 5, if sub-
Infant and child mortality rates are higher for boys
ject to current age-specific mortality rates. • Child
than for girls in countries in which parental gender
mortality rate is the probability per 1,000 of dying
The main sources of mortality data are vital reg-
preferences are insignificant. Child mortality cap-
between ages 1 and 5—that is, the probability of a
istration systems and direct or indirect estimates
tures the effect of gender discrimination better than
1-year-old dying before reaching age 5—if subject to
based on sample surveys or censuses. A “complete”
infant mortality does, as malnutrition and medical
current age-specific mortality rates. • Adult mortal-
vital registration system—covering at least 90 per-
interventions are more important in this age group.
ity rate is the probability per 1,000 of dying between
cent of vital events in the population—is the best
Where female child mortality is higher, as in some
the ages of 15 and 60—that is, the probability of a
source of age-specific mortality data. Where reliable
countries in South Asia, girls probably have unequal
15-year-old dying before reaching age 60—if subject
age-specific mortality data are available, life expec-
access to resources. Child mortality rates in the
to current age-specific mortality rates between those
tancy at birth is directly estimated from the life table
table are not compatible with infant mortality and
ages. • Survival to age 65 refers to the percent-
constructed from age- specific mortality data.
under-five mortality rates because of differences in
age of a hypothetical cohort of newborn infants that
But complete vital registration systems are fairly
methodology and reference year. Child mortality data
would survive to age 65, if subject to current age-
uncommon in developing countries. Thus estimates
were estimated directly from surveys and cover the
specific mortality rates.
must be obtained from sample surveys or derived
10 years preceding the survey. In addition to esti-
by applying indirect estimation techniques to reg-
mates from Demographic Health Surveys, estimates
istration, census, or survey data (see table 2.17
derived from Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys have
and Primary data documentation). Survey data are
been added to the table; they cover the 5 years pre-
Data on infant and under-five mortality are esti-
subject to recall error, and surveys estimating infant
ceding the survey.
mates by the Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality
used to compare socioeconomic development across countries.
Data sources
deaths require large samples because households
Rates for adult mortality and survival to age 65
Estimation based mainly on household surveys,
in which a birth has occurred during a given year
come from life tables. Adult mortality rates increased
censuses, and vital registration data, supple-
cannot ordinarily be preselected for sampling. Indi-
notably in a dozen countries in Sub-Saharan Africa
mented by the World Bank’s Human Development
rect estimates rely on model life tables that may be
between 1995–2000 and 2000–05 and in several
Network estimates based on vital registration and
inappropriate for the population concerned. Because
countries in Europe and Central Asia during the first
sample registration data. Data on child mortal-
life expectancy at birth is estimated using infant mor-
half of the 1990s. In Sub-Saharan Africa the increase
ity are from Demographic and Health Surveys by
tality data and model life tables for many develop-
stems from AIDS-related mortality and affects both
Macro International (Measure DHS) and World
ing countries, similar reliability issues arise for this
sexes, though women are more affected. In Europe
Bank calculations based on infant and under-five
indicator. Extrapolations based on outdated surveys
and Central Asia the causes are more diverse (high
mortality from Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys
may not be reliable for monitoring changes in health
prevalence of smoking, high-fat diet, excessive alco-
by UNICEF. Data on survival to age 65 and most
status or for comparative analytical work.
hol use, stressful conditions related to the economic
data on adult mortality are linear interpolations
transition) and affect men more.
of five-year data from World Population Prospects:
Estimates of infant and under-five mortality tend to vary by source and method for a given time and
The percentage of a hypothetical cohort surviv-
The 2008 Revision. Remaining data on adult mor-
place. Years for available estimates also vary by
ing to age 65 reflects both child and adult mortality
tality are from the Human Mortality Database by
country, making comparison across countries and
rates. Like life expectancy, it is a synthetic mea-
the University of California, Berkeley, and the Max
over time diffi cult. To make infant and under-fi ve
sure based on current age-specific mortality rates.
Planck Institute for Demographic Research (www.
mortality estimates comparable and to ensure
It shows that even in countries where mortality is
mortality.org). Data on life expectancy at birth are
consistency across estimates by different agen-
high, a certain share of the current birth cohort will
World Bank calculations based on male and female
cies, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
live well beyond the life expectancy at birth, while in
data from World Population Prospects: The 2008
and the World Bank (now working together with
low-mortality countries close to 90 percent will reach
Revision (for more than half of countries, most of
the World Health Organization (WHO), the United
at least age 65.
them developing countries), census reports and
Nations Population Division, and other universities
Annual data series from the United Nations are
other statistical publications from national sta-
and research institutes as the Inter-agency Group for
interpolated based on five-year estimates and thus
tistical offices, Eurostat’s Demographic Statistics,
Child Mortality Estimation) developed and adopted
may not reflect actual events.
and the U.S. Bureau of the Census International
a statistical method that uses all available informa-
PEOPLE
Mortality
Data Base.
tion to reconcile differences. The method uses the
2010 World Development Indicators
147 Text figures, tables, and boxes
ENVIRONMENT
Introduction
G
lobal climate change presents a significant challenge to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The expected extreme changes in weather—such as shifts in the intensity and pattern of rainfall and variations in temperature— may lower agricultural productivity and damage infrastructure, leading to slower economic growth, threatening food security, and increasing poverty. Projected floods and droughts could cause many people to lose their livelihoods, be displaced, or migrate, while rising temperatures could increase the incidence of vector-borne diseases and lead to heat-related deaths and water scarcity.
The poorest countries and regions face the greatest danger. Africa—with the most rainfed agricultural land of any continent, half its population without access to improved water sources, and about 70 percent without access to improved sanitation facilities— is particularly vulnerable to climate change. International action on greenhouse gas emissions and developing countries
Greenhouse gas emissions have been rising at increasing rates
Economic growth—necessary for reducing poverty, improving people’s lives, and achieving the MDGs— entails significant energy use. Generating this energy will affect greenhouse gas emissions. There is now consensus that greenhouse gas emissions need to peak by 2015 to curb emissions to about 50 percent of their 1990 levels by 2050, to keep global warming below 2°C, and to avoid more dangerous and catastrophic climate change (United Nations 2009b; World Bank 2009k). To meet this target and achieve the MDGs, sustainable energy systems need to be part of long-term economic planning for developed and developing countries. The 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen did not reach a binding agreement on targets and timetables for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The Copenhagen Accord recognized the critical importance of keeping global warming below 2°C and affirmed that the first priority of developing countries is to eradicate poverty and promote socioeconomic development—but that a low-emission development strategy is indispensable to sustainable development. On the principle of “differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities,” the accord urged developed countries to help developing countries in their mitigation efforts and their adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change (United Nations 2009c).
Carbon dioxide is the most common of the Kyoto Protocol greenhouse gases, which also include methane, nitrous oxide, and other artificial gases. It constitutes more than 75 percent of greenhouse gas emissions (figure 3a). About 80 percent of carbon dioxide is generated by the energy sector. Carbon dioxide emissions, on the rise since the beginning of the industrial revolution 150 years ago, began to surge in the second half of the 20th century (figure 3b), reaching more than 30 petagrams (billion metric tons) a year in 2006 (see table 3.8). Carbon dioxide is the most common greenhouse gas
3
3a
Global greenhouse gas emissions (share of total carbon dioxide equivalent), 2005 Other gases 2% Nitrous oxide 7% Methane 16%
Carbon dioxide 76%
Source: International Energy Agency.
2010 World Development Indicators
149
High-income Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, which have produced more than 55 percent of total cumulative emissions since the beginning of industrialization, stabilized their emissions growth at about 0.9 percent a year between 1990 and 2006. Carbon dioxide emissions per capita from developing economies were less than a fourth those of developed economies in 2006, but their total emissions rate grew about twice as fast during 1990–2006 (table 3c). Over the same period carbon dioxide emissions grew 5.1 percent a year in China and 4.8 percent a year in India. China became the largest emitter of carbon dioxide in 2006 (see tables 3.8 and 3.9). During 1990–2006 developing economies’ carbon energy intensity—the ratio of carbon dioxide emissions per unit of energy used— remained unchanged. But their carbon income intensity—the carbon dioxide emitted for each
3b
Carbon dioxide emissions have surged since the 1950s Industrial carbon dioxide emissions (petagrams of carbon dioxide equivalent) 30
20
10
0 1751
1800
1850
1900
1950
2006
Source: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center and World Development Indicators data files.
3c
Carbon dioxide emissions are growing, 1990–2006 (percent) Carbon intensity (average annual growth)
Carbon dioxide Average annual growth
Per capita growth
China
5.1
United States
1.2 –2.4
Country or group
Russian Federation
Energy
Income
4.1
0.8
–4.3
0.1
–0.1
–1.9
–2.2
–0.9
–2.8
India
4.8
3.1
1.3
–1.2
Japan
0.6
0.3
–0.5
–0.5
Developing economiesa
2.1
0.6
0.0
–2.0
High-income OECD
0.9
0.2
–0.4
–1.7
a. Emissions from oil-producing economies constitute 8 percent (excluding the Russian Federation). Source: World Development Indicators data files; International Energy Agency; Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center.
150
2010 World Development Indicators
unit of gross domestic product—decreased 2 percent a year, indicating greater economic productivity and energy efficiency. The world’s top five carbon dioxide emitters —China, the United States, the Russian Federation, India, and Japan (figure 3d)—all decreased their carbon income intensity in 1990–2006. Only China and India increased their carbon energy intensity, because of a higher share of fossil fuel in their energy consumption. Energy use has been increasing in China and India, both as a share of the global total and per capita. Among the five economies with the highest energy consumption, India uses fossil fuels the least—but its dependence on fossil fuels is growing the most, at about 1.3 percent annually during 1990–2007 (table 3e). World energy consumption has increased about 2 percent a year since 1970 but decreased in 2009 because of the economic crisis. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), energy demand could increase 40 percent by 2030 under business as usual conditions. Fossil fuels would remain the main energy source, accounting for 77 percent of increased demand during 2007–30 (IEA 2009). The IEA estimates that using fossil fuels at this rate will increase carbon dioxide emissions to about 40 petagrams a year by 2030, resulting in a long-term atmospheric concentration of 1,000 parts per million. This increase will be environmentally, socially, and economically unsustainable. In Copenhagen the IEA proposed an emission reduction scenario to limit the concentration A few rapidly developing and high-income countries produce 70 percent of carbon dioxide emissions
3d
Carbon dioxide emissions, 2006
Other countries 30%
High income OECD 40%
India 5% China 20% Russian Federation 5%
Source: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center and World Bank.
ENVIRONMENT
of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to 450 parts per million of carbon dioxide equivalent, which would reduce energy-related carbon dioxide emissions from 28.8 petagrams in 2007 to 26.4 petagrams in 2030. Under this scenario carbon dioxide emissions from the power sector are projected to be reduced the most (figure 3f). High-income OECD countries are projected
to reduce their power generation emissions from 484 grams of carbon dioxide per kilowatt hour of energy produced to 145, a 70 percent reduction. According to this scenario, highincome OECD economies should also reduce their carbon energy intensity by about 38 percent, and other economies by less than half that (table 3g). 3e
Trends in fossil fuel use and energy intensity (percent)
Energy use
Country or group
Fossil fuel
Energy intensity of GDP
Net importsa
Average annual growth, 1990–2007
Share of energy use, 2007
Share of Average Average world energy annual growth, Share of total, annual growth, use, 2007 1990–2007 2007 1990–2007
China
16.8
United States
4.5
86.9
0.8
–4.9
7.2
20.1
1.2
85.6
0.0
–1.8
28.8
Russian Federation
5.8
–1.3
89.3
–0.3
–2.1
–83.1
India
5.1
3.5
70.0
1.3
–2.6
24.2
Japan
4.4
0.9
83.2
–0.1
–0.2
82.4
Developing economies
52.1
2.2
79.8
0.2
–2.1
–20.1
High-income OECD
43.9
1.3
81.6
–0.1
–1.3
31.9
a. A negative value indicates that the economy is a net energy exporter. Source: World Development Indicators data files and International Energy Agency.
3f
Emission reductions by 2030 Power generation Buildings
Share of global energy-related carbon dioxide emissions (percent)
Transport Other
Industry
2007
2030 (450 scenario)
0
25
50
75
100
Note: Based on International Energy Agency 450 scenario. Source: IEA 2009.
3g
Future energy use under the IEA-450 scenario (percentage change, 2007–30) Energy use Group
Total
Per capita
Carbon dioxide emissions Total
Per capita
Carbon dioxide intensity Income
Energy
Power intensity
World
17.6
–5.6
–8.3
–26.4
–55.0
–22.1
–53.1
European Union
–3.8
–5.7
–41.0
–42.2
–58.2
–38.7
–72.9
OECDa
–5.2
–13.3
–41.2
–46.3
–60.7
–38.0
–70.0
Other major economiesb
36.3
21.1
14.4
1.7
–62.1
–16.0
–48.3
Other economies
55.9
14.3
28.0
–6.2
–51.5
–17.9
–49.9
a. OECD economies and European Union. b. Other major economies are those in the Middle East and North Africa and Brazil, China, and South Africa. Source: IEA 2009.
2010 World Development Indicators
151
People affected by natural disasters and projected changes in rainfall and agricultural production (percent)
Country
Bangladesh
Average share of population affected by droughts, fl oods, and storms, 1971–2008
Projected change in precipitation outcome, 2000–50
9.1
Projected change in agricultural outcome, 2000–50
Total
Intensity
Output
1.4
5.4
–21.7
8.9
Yield
8.4
China
5.2
4.5
5.4
–7.2
Ethiopia
6.6
2.4
5.0
–31.3
0.5
India
7.2
1.9
2.7
–38.1
–12.2
Malawi
12.3
–0.1
2.4
–31.3
–3.0
Mozambique
13.8
–2.7
1.4
–21.7
–10.7
Niger
13.2
5.6
2.5
–34.1
–1.7
Senegal
11.3
–1.9
3.1
–51.9
–19.3
Swaziland
18.3
..
Zimbabwe
10.7
–3.7
.. 4.8
3h
.. –37.9
.. –10.6
Source: World Bank 2009k.
Climate change will affect food and water security During the last century rising atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide led to a 0.74°C increase in average global temperature. Even if greenhouse gas emissions stop growing, global warming is expected to continue because changes in temperature lag behind changes in concentrations, which lag behind changes in emissions (World Bank 2009k). According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, during the coming decades global warming will cause droughts, floods, changes in rainfall patterns, severe freshwater shortages, and shifts in crop growing seasons—especially in developing countries (FAO 2008a). The agriculture and water sectors will be affected most by climate change, and adaptive measures are needed to mitigate expected adverse outcomes; otherwise, areas such as Southern Africa will suffer severe drops in agricultural yields by 2030 (World Bank 2009a) (table 3h). Developing countries already suffering from hunger and water supply problems, especially those in Southeast Asia and SubSaharan Africa, will be hardest hit without aid for adaptation.
Demand for water will increase, making better water management crucial Properly using and managing water resources are important components of sustainable development—and essential for achieving the MDGs (World Bank and IMF 2008b; FAO 2010;
152
2010 World Development Indicators
Bates and others 2008) (table 3i). Some 1 billion people lack access to safe water, and more than 2.5 billion need access to improved sanitation facilities. The world’s population is growing by about 80 million people a year, demanding an additional 64 billion cubic meters of freshwater a year (UNESCO 2009). And about 90 percent of population growth by 2050 is projected to occur in developing countries, where many people still lack access to safe water and improved sanitation. By 2025, 1.8 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity, and two-thirds of the world’s population could be living under conditions of water stress (FAO 2007, 2010). The effects of climate change on freshwater availability will depend on temperature increases, droughts, floods, regional variation in precipitation, and rising sea levels (UNESCO 2009; Bates and others 2008; Kundzewicz and Mata 2007; FAO 2008b). Precipitation is the most important source of freshwater; 80 percent of the world’s cultivated land and about 60 percent of crops depend on rainwater (UNESCO 2009). Climate change models predict more precipitation in high latitudes and the tropics but less precipitation in subtropical regions such as the northern Sahara (UNESCO 2009; Kundzewicz and Mata 2007; IPCC 2007). In addition, non-climate-related water stresses— such as industrial water pollution, extensive irrigation, construction of dams, and draining of wetlands—have already raised concerns about future freshwater shortages (Bates and others 2008).
ENVIRONMENT
Potential contributions of the water sector to attaining the Millennium Development Goals
3i
Goal
Relation to water
1
Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
Water is a factor in many production activities (agriculture, animal husbandry, cottage industries).
3
Promote gender equity and empower women
More gender-sensitive water management programs can reduce time wasted and health burdens through improved water service, leading to more time for income earning and more-balanced gender roles.
4
Reduce child mortality
Improved access to more and better quality drinking water and improved sanitation can reduce the main factors contributing to illness and death among young children.
6
Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases
Improved access to water and sanitation supports HIV/AIDS-affected households and may improve the impact of health care programs. Better water management reduces mosquito habitats and the risk of malaria transmission.
7
Ensure environmental sustainability
Improved water management reduces water consumption and allows recycling of nutrients and organics. Action could ensure improved water supply and sanitation services for poor communities, and reduced wastewater discharge and improved environmental health in slum areas.
Source: Bates and others 2008.
In response to higher freshwater demand and geographic changes in water supply caused by climate change and other factors, countries must improve water storage, use water more efficiently, reuse freshwater (especially in agriculture), and use technology to anticipate regional, local, and seasonal variation in water availability and water use (UNESCO 2009; Bates and others 2008; Faurèsa, Hoogeveena, and Bruinsmab 2004; FAO 2009a).
Sustainable agriculture can help developing countries adapt to climate change Sustainable agriculture is essential for development—and for achieving the MDG to eradicate poverty and hunger (World Bank and IFPRI 2006). Today’s challenges for sustainable agricultural development are to respond to increasing demand for food, adjust to rapid climate changes caused by global warming, and reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions (FAO 2008a). Adaptation strategies for agriculture will require balancing many environmental variables and socioeconomic factors—and their interactions. Countries may integrate climate change
adaptation and MDG efforts into their sustainable development policies. Research and development in sustainable agriculture could signifi cantly affect agricultural resource conservation, promoting synergy among human needs. The agriculture sector also causes greenhouse gas emissions—primarily nitrous oxide and methane. Climate change mitigation in agriculture will require more efficient use of fertilizer, soil conservation, and better production management. Inefficient use of fertilizers has undesirable environmental impacts, such as increased nitrogen loss into the atmosphere. Under current fertilization practices, crop plant uptake of nitrogen as a nutrient is about 50 percent, with losses and emissions to the atmosphere through runoff and leaching from soil erosion (Takle and Hofstrand 2008; FAO 2001). Use of fossil fuels in agricultural production causes 7 percent of agricultural emissions, primarily from combustion of gasoline and diesel fuel (Takle and Hofstrand 2008). Capturing and using methane from livestock production as an energy source can reduce emissions and improve profitability by reducing the need to buy fossil fuel energy (Takle and Hofstrand 2008).
2010 World Development Indicators
153
Tables
3.1
Rural population and land use Rural population
% of total 1990 2008
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
154
.. 64 48 63 13 33 15 34 46 80 34 4 66 44 61 58 25 34 86 94 87 59 23 63 79 17 73 1 32 72 46 49 60 46 27 25 15 45 45 57 51 84 29 87 39 26 31 62 45 27 64 41 59 72 72 72 60
.. 53 35 43 8 36 11 33 48 73 27 3 59 34 53 40 14 29 80 90 78 43 20 61 73 12 57 0 26 66 39 37 51 43 24 27 13 31 34 57 39 79 31 83 37 23 15 44 47 26 50 39 51 66 70 53 52
2010 World Development Indicators
average annual % growth 1990–2008
.. –1.2 –0.1 0.8 –1.6 –0.2 –0.2 0.2 1.3 1.3 –1.7 –1.3 2.7 0.7 –1.5 –0.1 –1.7 –1.6 2.7 1.7 1.7 0.7 0.0 2.0 2.8 –0.7 –0.5 .. 0.5 2.6 1.2 0.5 1.8 –0.8 –0.2 0.4 –0.4 –0.4 0.0 2.0 –0.6 2.1 –0.6 2.6 0.1 –0.2 –1.5 1.5 –1.0 0.1 1.1 0.3 1.6 2.1 2.3 0.2 1.5
Land area
Land use
Arable land 1990 2007
Arable land hectares per 100 people 1990–92 2005–07
12.1 21.1 3.0 2.3 9.6 15.0 6.2 17.3 20.5 70.2 30.0 0.6b 14.6 1.9 16.6 0.7 6.0 34.9 12.9 36.2 20.9 12.6 5.0 3.1 2.6 3.8 13.3 .. 3.0 2.9 1.4 5.1 7.6 21.7 30.9 41.1 60.4 18.6 5.8 2.3 26.5 4.9 26.3 10.0 7.4 32.9 1.1 18.2 11.4 34.3 11.9 22.5 12.1 3.3 10.7 28.3 13.1
.. 18.8 24.5 20.6 75.1 14.4 a 248.9 17.3 22.6a 5.6 58.6a 8.2 35.7 35.7 26.8 a 15.2 33.2 43.4 36.5 14.7 28.5 36.7 147.4 50.6 41.0 11.0 10.4 .. 6.2 12.8 15.8 5.1 15.8 25.2 a 32.5 30.1 42.6 9.1 12.0 4.0 11.2 14.8 52.1a 15.2 42.2 31.1 25.8 22.4 17.0 a 14.3 20.3 24.9 12.2 16.8 22.5 10.2 16.8
% of land area thousand sq. km 2008
Forest area 1990 2007
652.2 27.4 2,381.7 1,246.7 2,736.7 28.2 7,682.3 82.5 82.6 130.2 202.9 30.3 110.6 1,083.3 51.2 566.7 8,459.4 108.6 273.6 25.7 176.5 472.7 9,093.5 623.0 1,259.2 743.8 9,327.5 1.0 1,109.5 2,267.1 341.5 51.1 318.0 53.9 109.8 77.3 42.4 48.3 276.8 995.5 20.7 101.0 42.4 1,000.0 304.1 547.7 257.7 10.0 69.5 348.8 227.5 128.9 107.2 245.7 28.1 27.6 111.9
2.0 28.8 0.8 48.9 12.9 12.0 21.9 45.8 11.2 6.8 36.8 22.3b 30.0 58.0 43.1 24.2 61.5 30.1 26.1 11.3 73.3 51.9 34.1 37.2 10.4 20.5 16.8 .. 55.4 62.0 66.5 50.2 32.1 37.9 18.7 34.1 10.5 28.5 49.9 0.0 18.1 15.9 51.4 14.7 72.9 26.5 85.1 44.2 39.7 30.8 32.7 25.6 44.3 30.1 78.8 4.2 66.0
1.2 29.3 1.0 47.2 12.0 9.7 21.3 47.0 11.3 6.7 39.0 22.0 20.1 53.7 42.7 20.7 55.7 34.3 24.7 5.2 56.7 44.0 34.1 36.4 9.3 21.8 22.0 .. 54.6 58.7 65.7 46.9 32.8 39.6 25.7 34.3 11.9 28.5 37.8 0.1 13.9 15.3 54.3 12.7 74.0 28.5 84.4 47.5 39.7 31.8 23.2 29.6 35.7 27.1 73.0 3.8 38.7
Permanent cropland 1990 2007
0.2 4.6 0.2 0.4 0.4 2.1 0.0 1.0 3.7 2.3 0.9 0.5 b 0.9 0.1 2.9 0.0 0.8 2.7 0.2 14.0 0.6 2.6 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.8 .. 1.5 0.5 0.1 4.9 11.0 2.0 4.1 3.1 0.2 9.3 4.8 0.4 12.5 0.0 0.3 0.5 0.0 2.2 0.6 0.5 4.8 1.3 6.6 8.3 4.5 2.0 4.2 11.6 3.2
0.2 4.4 0.4 0.2 0.4 1.9 0.0 0.8 2.7 3.7 0.6 0.8 2.4 0.2 1.9 0.0 0.8 1.8 0.2 13.6 0.9 2.5 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.6 1.3 .. 1.4 0.4 0.1 5.9 13.2 1.5 3.8 3.1 0.2 10.3 4.4 0.5 11.4 0.0 0.2 1.0 0.0 2.0 0.7 0.6 1.6 0.6 10.5 8.8 8.8 2.7 8.9 10.9 3.2
13.1 21.1 3.1 2.6 11.9 14.4 5.8 16.8 22.4 61.2 27.3 27.7 24.4 3.3 20.0 0.4 7.0 28.4 19.0 38.7 21.5 12.6 5.0 3.1 3.4 1.7 15.1 .. 1.8 3.0 1.4 3.9 8.8 15.8 32.5 39.2 54.3 17.0 4.3 3.0 32.9 6.3 14.1 14.0 7.4 33.7 1.3 34.8 6.7 34.1 18.0 19.8 14.7 9.0 10.7 32.7 9.5
.. 18.2 22.4 19.3 80.5 13.4 227.5 16.7 21.8 5.1 56.9 8.0 33.4 38.9 27.1 13.0 31.6 40.5 35.3 13.0 26.7 32.7 138.3 46.0 41.3 8.3 10.5 .. 4.5 11.0 14.2 4.6 14.2 19.4 32.4 29.6 42.8 8.5 9.4 3.8 11.6 13.8 43.3 17.5 42.7 30.1 23.3 21.7 10.5 14.4 18.2 23.1 11.5 21.9 19.9 9.4 15.2
Rural population
% of total 1990 2008
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
34 75 69 44 30 43 10 33 51 37 28 44 82 42 26 .. 2 62 85 31 17 86 55 24 32 42 76 88 50 77 60 56 29 53 43 52 79 75 72 91 31 15 48 85 65 28 34 69 46 85 51 31 51 39 52 28 8
33 71 49 32 .. 39 8 32 47 34 22 42 78 37 19 .. 2 64 69 32 13 75 40 23 33 33 71 81 30 68 59 58 23 58 43 44 63 67 63 83 18 13 43 84 52 23 28 64 27 88 40 29 35 39 41 2 4
average annual % growth 1990–2008
–0.5 1.3 –0.6 –0.3 .. 0.7 1.7 0.1 0.2 –0.3 2.0 –0.4 2.6 0.3 –1.2 .. 0.3 1.1 1.0 –0.7 0.5 0.6 1.4 1.6 –0.4 –1.0 2.5 2.0 –0.7 1.4 2.5 1.2 0.1 –0.5 1.0 0.5 1.6 0.5 1.5 1.7 –2.5 0.5 1.2 3.4 1.2 –0.6 1.3 1.9 –1.1 2.7 0.7 1.1 0.0 0.0 –1.0 –15.0 2.4
Land area
3.1
ENVIRONMENT
Rural population and land use Land use
Arable land 1990 2007
Arable land hectares per 100 people 1990–92 2005–07
56.2 54.8 11.2 9.3 13.3 15.1 15.9 30.6 11.0 13.1 2.0 13.0 8.8 19.0 19.8 .. 0.2 6.9 3.5 27.2 17.9 10.4 3.6 1.0 46.0 23.8 4.7 23.9 5.2 1.7 0.4 49.3 12.5 52.8 0.9 19.5 4.4 14.6 0.8 16.0 26.0 9.9 10.8 8.7 32.4 2.8 0.1 26.6 6.7 0.4 5.3 2.7 18.4 47.3 25.6 7.3 0.9
45.2 15.6 9.7 24.0 20.3 29.7 5.3 14.7 6.7 3.5 3.9 148.7a 15.6 11.4 3.6 .. 0.6 27.2a 16.4 41.0 a 3.3 16.7 12.9 33.3 58.8a 26.8 a 18.7 23.1 7.6 43.1 16.7 8.2 25.4 45.7a 42.4 29.7 21.9 21.1 43.8 9.4 5.7 33.2 37.6 122.6 24.0 19.5 1.6 15.2 18.2 3.8 56.9 13.9 6.3 35.3 15.4 1.7 2.8
% of land area thousand sq. km 2008
Forest area 1990 2007
89.6 2,973.2 1,811.6 1,628.6 437.4 68.9 21.6 294.1 10.8 364.5 88.2 2,699.7 569.1 120.4 96.9 10.9c 17.8 191.8 230.8 62.3 10.2 30.4 96.3 1,759.5 62.7 25.4 581.5 94.1 328.6 1,220.2 1,030.7 2.0 1,944.0 32.9 1,553.6 446.3 786.4 653.5 823.3 143.4 33.8 267.7 120.0 1,266.7 910.8 304.3 309.5 770.9 74.3 452.9 397.3 1,280.0 298.2 304.3 91.5 8.9 11.6
20.0 21.5 64.3 6.8 1.8 6.4 7.1 28.5 31.9 68.4 0.9 1.3 6.5 68.1 64.5 .. 0.2 4.4 75.0 45.1 11.8 0.2 42.1 0.1 31.3 35.6 23.5 41.4 68.1 11.5 0.4 19.2 35.5 9.7 7.4 9.6 25.4 60.0 10.6 33.7 10.2 28.8 54.5 1.5 18.9 30.0 0.0 3.3 58.9 69.6 53.3 54.8 35.5 29.2 33.9 45.5 ..
22.4 22.8 46.8 6.8 1.9 10.1 8.0 34.6 31.2 68.2 0.9 1.2 6.1 49.3 64.5 41.3c 0.3 4.6 69.3 47.6 13.6 0.3 31.5 0.1 34.0 35.6 21.9 35.5 62.7 10.1 0.2 18.0 32.8 10.0 6.5 9.8 24.4 47.9 9.1 24.6 10.9 31.2 41.5 1.0 11.3 31.0 0.0 2.4 57.7 64.4 45.6 53.6 23.0 30.4 42.2 46.0 ..
Permanent cropland 1990 2007
2.6 2.2 6.5 0.8 0.7 0.0 4.1 10.1 9.2 1.3 0.8 0.1 0.8 1.5 1.6 .. 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.4 11.9 0.1 1.6 0.2 0.7 2.2 1.0 1.4 16.0 0.1 0.0 3.0 1.0 14.2 0.0 1.6 0.3 0.8 0.0 0.5 0.9 0.2 1.6 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.1 0.6 2.1 1.2 0.2 0.3 14.8 1.1 8.5 5.6 0.1
2.2 3.6 8.6 1.0 0.6 0.0 3.2 8.6 10.2 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.9 1.7 1.9 .. 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.2 14.0 0.1 2.2 0.2 0.5 1.4 1.0 1.3 17.6 0.1 0.0 2.0 1.2 9.2 0.0 2.0 0.4 1.7 0.0 0.8 1.0 0.2 2.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.1 1.0 2.0 1.3 0.3 0.7 16.4 1.3 6.4 4.2 0.3
51.2 53.4 12.1 10.4 11.9 15.4 14.2 24.4 16.1 11.9 1.6 8.4 9.1 23.3 16.5 27.6c 0.8 6.7 5.1 19.1 14.1 9.9 4.0 1.0 29.3 16.9 5.1 31.9 5.5 4.0 0.4 44.3 12.6 55.3 0.5 18.1 5.7 16.2 1.0 16.4 31.4 3.2 16.3 11.6 40.1 2.8 0.2 27.9 7.4 0.6 10.8 2.9 17.1 41.1 11.8 7.0 1.6
2010 World Development Indicators
45.6 14.3 9.9 23.8 .. 26.6 4.4 12.6 6.5 3.4 3.1 148.1 14.3 11.8 3.4 16.8 c 0.6 24.7 18.5 50.8 3.5 15.4 11.0 29.0 55.2 21.8 16.3 21.4 6.9 39.1 15.5 7.3 23.7 49.3 32.5 26.5 21.2 21.2 39.6 8.5 6.2 22.1 36.0 106.2 24.8 18.4 2.3 13.4 16.7 3.9 68.7 13.0 5.8 32.3 11.0 1.6 1.8
155
3.1
Rural population and land use Rural population
% of total 1990 2008
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
47 27 95 23 61 50 67 0 44 50 70 48 25 83 73 77 17 27 51 68 81 71 79 70 92 42 41 55 89 33 21 11 25 11 60 16 80 32 79 61 71 57 w 77 61 69 32 64 71 37 29 48 75 72 27 29
46 27 82 18 58 48 62 0 43 51 64 39 23 85 57 75 16 27 46 74 75 67 73 58 87 34 31 51 87 32 22 10 18 8 63 7 72 28 69 65 63 50 w 71 52 59 25 55 56 36 21 43 71 64 22 27
average annual % growth 1990–2008
Land area
Land use
% of land area thousand sq. km 2008
–0.5 229.9 –0.1 16,377.7 0.9 24.7 0.7 2,000.0 d 2.4 192.5 –0.4 88.4 1.3 71.6 .. 0.7 0.1 48.1 0.3 20.1 1.1 627.3 0.7 1,214.5 0.5 499.0 1.0 64.6 0.9 2,376.0 1.5 17.2 –0.1 410.3 0.7 40.0 2.1 183.6 1.8 140.0 2.4 885.8 0.6 510.9 1.7 14.9 1.7 54.4 0.2 5.1 0.0 155.4 0.1 769.6 1.4 469.9 3.1 197.1 –0.8 579.3 5.2 83.6 –0.3 241.9 –0.6 9,161.9 –1.6 175.0 1.9 425.4 –2.8 882.1 0.9 310.1 3.1 6.0 2.7 528.0 2.9 743.4 0.3 386.9 0.6 w 129,611.3 s 1.8 18,731.9 0.4 77,325.4 0.5 31,182.2 –0.3 46,143.3 0.7 96,057.3 –0.3 15,853.6 0.0 23,054.0 –0.3 20,147.6 1.3 8,643.6 1.4 4,773.1 1.9 23,585.4 –0.3 33,554.0 –0.1 2,509.8
Forest area 1990 2007
27.8 49.3 12.9 1.4 48.6 .. 42.5 3.4 40.0 59.5 13.2 7.6 27.0 36.4 32.1 27.4 66.7 28.9 2.0 2.9 46.8 31.2 65.0 12.6 45.8 4.1 12.6 8.8 25.0 16.1 2.9 10.8 32.6 5.2 7.2 59.0 28.8 .. 1.0 66.1 57.5 31.4 w 27.9 33.5 25.7 38.7 32.4 28.9 38.2 48.8 2.3 16.5 29.2 28.6 33.6
27.7 49.4 21.7 1.4 44.6 23.6 37.9 3.3 40.2 63.3 11.1 7.6 37.1 29.0 27.9 32.0 67.1 30.7 2.6 2.9 38.9 28.2 52.2 6.4 43.9 7.0 13.3 8.8 17.5 16.6 3.7 11.8 33.1 8.8 7.8 53.4 43.3 1.5 1.0 55.9 43.7 30.3 w 24.7 32.3 24.8 37.3 30.8 28.5 38.4 44.9 2.5 16.7 26.1 28.9 37.7
Permanent cropland 1990 2007
2.6 0.1 12.4 0.0 0.2 .. 0.8 1.5 0.5 1.8 0.0 0.7 9.7 15.5 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.5 4.0 0.9 1.1 6.1 3.9 1.7 6.8 12.5 3.9 0.1 9.4 1.9 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.9 0.9 3.2 .. 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.9 w 0.7 1.1 1.7 0.6 1.0 2.2 0.4 0.9 0.8 1.8 0.8 0.7 4.6
a. Data are not available for all three years. b. Includes Luxembourg. c. Data are from national sources. d. Provisional estimate.
156
2010 World Development Indicators
2.0 0.1 11.1 0.1 0.3 3.4 1.1 0.3 0.5 1.3 0.0 0.8 9.7 14.7 0.1 0.8 0.0 0.6 5.2 0.7 1.4 7.3 4.6 3.1 4.3 14.0 3.8 0.1 11.2 1.6 2.6 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.8 0.8 9.9 18.9 0.5 0.0 0.3 1.1 w 1.0 1.3 2.3 0.7 1.2 3.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 2.8 1.0 0.7 4.2
Arable land 1990 2007
41.2 0.0 35.7 1.7 16.1 .. 6.8 1.5 32.5 9.9 1.6 11.1 30.7 13.9 5.4 10.5 6.9 9.8 26.6 6.1 10.2 34.2 7.4 38.6 7.0 18.7 32.0 2.9 25.4 57.6 0.4 27.4 20.3 7.2 10.5 3.2 16.4 .. 2.9 7.1 7.5 9.1 w 6.8 8.6 14.8 4.3 8.2 12.1 2.7 6.6 5.9 42.6 6.3 11.5 26.7
37.2 7.4 48.6 1.7 15.5 37.3 12.6 0.9 28.6 8.8 1.6 11.9 25.5 15.0 8.1 10.3 6.4 10.2 25.8 5.1 10.2 29.8 11.4 45.2 4.9 17.7 28.5 3.9 27.9 56.0 0.8 25.2 18.6 7.7 10.1 3.0 20.5 18.1 2.6 7.1 8.3 10.9 w 8.7 11.6 17.0 7.9 11.0 13.3 10.8 7.4 6.0 41.9 8.3 10.7 24.8
Arable land hectares per 100 people 1990–92 2005–07
42.4 84.9 a 12.1 17.0 30.4 .. 11.6 0.0 27.1 8.6a 14.4 33.0 32.2 4.9 45.9 16.3 30.2 5.7 27.1 12.5a 25.5 24.7 16.3 46.5 2.4 29.0 35.4 37.8 a 20.2 66.9a 2.0 9.8 61.6 40.8 18.0 a 10.4 8.2 3.4 7.9 49.1 25.9 22.8 w 18.1 20.4 15.0 40.9 20.0 11.0 58.5 27.5 17.9 14.5 25.9 37.2 20.6
40.9 85.3 12.7 14.6 26.3 44.7 16.4 0.0 25.6 8.9 13.7 30.7 29.0 5.0 48.9 15.6 29.3 5.4 24.0 11.2 23.3 22.9 16.5 40.2 1.9 27.2 31.8 37.9 18.3 69.3 1.6 9.8 57.4 40.1 16.4 9.8 7.6 2.9 6.2 43.8 25.9 21.7 w 17.3 19.6 14.5 39.0 19.2 10.9 57.1 26.7 16.4 13.3 25.0 35.0 19.4
About the data
3.1
ENVIRONMENT
Rural population and land use Definitions
With more than 3 billion people, including 70 percent
Satellite images show land use that differs from
• Rural population is calculated as the difference
of the world’s poor people, living in rural areas, ade-
that of ground-based measures in area under cultiva-
between the total population and the urban popula-
quate indicators to monitor progress in rural areas
tion and type of land use. Moreover, land use data
tion (see Definitions for tables 2.1 and 3.11). • Land
are essential. However, few indicators are disaggre-
in some countries (India is an example) are based
area is a country’s total area, excluding area under
gated between rural and urban areas (for some that
on reporting systems designed for collecting tax rev-
inland water bodies and national claims to the con-
are, see tables 2.7, 3.5, and 3.11). The table shows
enue. With land taxes no longer a major source of
tinental shelf and to exclusive economic zones. In
indicators of rural population and land use. Rural
government revenue, the quality and coverage of land
most cases the definition of inland water bodies
population is approximated as the midyear nonurban
use data have declined. Data on forest area may be
includes major rivers and lakes. (See table 1.1 for
population. While a practical means of identifying the
particularly unreliable because of irregular surveys
the total surface area of countries.) Variations from
rural population, it is not precise (see box 3.1a for
and differences in definitions (see About the data
year to year may be due to updated or revised data
further discussion).
for table 3.4). FAO’s Global Forest Resources Assess-
rather than to change in area. • Land use can be
The data in the table show that land use patterns
ment 2005 is an important background document for
broken into several categories, three of which are
are changing. They also indicate major differences
the data. Conducted during 2003–05, it covers 229
presented in the table (not shown are land used as
in resource endowments and uses among countries.
countries and is the most comprehensive assess-
permanent pasture and land under urban develop-
True comparability of the data is limited, however,
ment of forests, forestry, and the benefits of forest
ments). • Forest area is land under natural or planted
by variations in definitions, statistical methods, and
resources in both scope and number of countries and
stands of trees of at least 5 meters in height in situ,
quality of data. Countries use different definitions of
people involved. It examines status and trends for
whether productive or not, and excludes tree stands
rural and urban population and land use. The Food
about 40 variables on the extent, condition, uses,
in agricultural production systems (for example, in
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
and values of forests and other wooded land.
fruit plantations and agroforestry systems) and trees
(FAO), the primary compiler of the data, occasion-
in urban parks and gardens. • Permanent cropland
ally adjusts its definitions of land use categories
is land cultivated with crops that occupy the land for
and revises earlier data. Because the data reflect
long periods and need not be replanted after each
changes in reporting procedures as well as actual
harvest, such as cocoa, coffee, and rubber. Land
changes in land use, apparent trends should be inter-
under flowering shrubs, fruit trees, nut trees, and
preted cautiously.
vines is included, but land under trees grown for wood or timber is not. • Arable land is land defined by the
What is rural? Urban?
3.1a
FAO as under temporary crops (double-cropped areas
The rural population identified in table 3.1 is approximated as the difference between total population and
are counted once), temporary meadows for mowing
urban population, calculated using the urban share reported by the United Nations Population Division.
or pasture, land under market or kitchen gardens,
There is no universal standard for distinguishing rural from urban areas, and any urban-rural dichotomy is
and land temporarily fallow. Land abandoned as a
an oversimplification (see About the data for table 3.11). The two distinct images—isolated farm, thriving
result of shifting cultivation is excluded.
metropolis—represent poles on a continuum. Life changes along a variety of dimensions, moving from the most remote forest outpost through fields and pastures, past tiny hamlets, through small towns with weekly farm markets, into intensively cultivated areas near large towns and small cities, eventually reaching the center of a megacity. Along the way access to infrastructure, social services, and nonfarm employment increase, and with them population density and income. Because rurality has many dimensions, for policy purposes the rural-urban dichotomy presented in tables 3.1, 3.5, and 3.11 is inadequate. A 2005 World Bank Policy Research Paper proposes an operational definition of rurality based on population density and distance to large cities (Chomitz, Buys, and Thomas 2005). The report argues that these criteria are important gradients along which economic behavior and appropriate development interventions vary substantially. Where population densities are low, markets of all kinds are thin, and the unit cost of delivering most social services and many types of infrastructure is high. Where large urban
Data sources
areas are distant, farm-gate or factory-gate prices of outputs will be low and input prices will be high, and
Data on urban population shares used to estimate
it will be difficult to recruit skilled people to public service or private enterprises. Thus, low population
rural population are from the United Nations Popu-
density and remoteness together define a set of rural areas that face special development challenges.
lation Division’s World Urbanization Prospects: The
Using these criteria and the Gridded Population of the World (CIESIN 2005), the authors’ estimates of
2007 Revision, and data on total population are
the rural population for Latin America and the Caribbean differ substantially from those in table 3.1. Their
World Bank estimates. Data on land area and land
estimates range from 13 percent of the population, based on a population density of less than 20 people
use are from the FAO’s electronic files. The FAO
per square kilometer, to 64 percent, based on a population density of more than 500 people per square
gathers these data from national agencies through
kilometer. Taking remoteness into account, the estimated rural population would be 13–52 percent. The
annual questionnaires and by analyzing the results
estimate for Latin America and the Caribbean in table 3.1 is 21 percent.
of national agricultural censuses.
2010 World Development Indicators
157
3.2
Agricultural inputs Agricultural landa
% of land area 1990–92 2005–07
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
158
58 41 16 46 47 41b 60 42 53b 73 46 b 44 c 21 33 43b 46 29 56 35 83 25 19 7 8 38 21 57 .. 41 10 31 54 60 43b 62 .. 65 53 29 3 69 .. 32b .. 8 56 20 63 46b 50 56 71 40 49 53 58 30
59 40 17 46 48 56 57 39 58 70 44 46 32 34 42 46 31 48 40 89 31 19 7 8 39 21 59 .. 38 10 31 54 63 22 60 55 63 52 27 4 76 75 19 34 8 54 20 81 36 49 65 64 41 55 58 61 28
2010 World Development Indicators
Average annual precipitation
Land under cereal production
Fertilizer consumption
Agricultural employment
Agricultural machinery
kilograms per hectare % of of arable fertilizer land production 2005–07 2005–07
% of total employment 1990–92 2005–07
Tractors per 100 sq. km of arable land 1990–92 2005–07
% irrigated 2005–07
millimeters 2008
thousand hectares 1990–92 2006–08
5.8 .. 2.0 .. 1.1 .. 0.6 1.1 30.0 55.7 1.3 1.6 .. .. .. 0.0 .. 1.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.6 .. 1.5 8.5 .. 9.7 .. 1.9 .. .. 0.4 2.8 5.8 .. .. 4.0 .. .. 15.8 .. .. .. .. ..
327 1,485 89 1,010 591 562 534 1,110 447 2,666 618 847 1,039 1,146 1,028 416 1,782 608 748 1,274 1,904 1,604 537 1,343 322 1,522 .. .. 2,612 1,543 1,646 2,926 1,348 1,113 1,335 677 703 1,410 2,087 51 1,724 384 626 848 536 867 1,831 836 1,026 700 1,187 652 1,996 1,651 1,577 1,440 1,976
2,283.3 2,913.0 242.6 136.4 3,104.9 2,831.5 892.6 1,487.5 8,509.6 9,584.1 162.8b 178.4 12,813.8 19,153.0 903.2 813.6 627.0b 795.1 10,985.4 11,616.4 2,603.0b 2,368.2 354.3c 333.2 659.9 902.6 642.4 926.6 304.1b 308.0 140.1 81.7 19,632.5 19,592.8 2,179.3 1,598.5 2,724.5 3,529.1 218.8 221.7 1,800.8 2,702.1 816.1 1,106.6 20,864.4 16,235.7 104.0 204.7 1,241.9 2,541.1 741.6 542.3 93,430.3 86,057.9 .. .. 1,598.1 997.6 1,867.6 1,976.1 9.1 27.4 83.1 62.8 1,434.0 808.6 592.7b 559.7 235.0 277.4 .. 1,561.9 1,581.3 1,484.3 134.2 170.5 861.0 810.0 2,410.2 2,956.4 452.6 361.9 345.6 419.2 453.6b 293.9 .. 8,589.5 1,050.5 1,158.6 9,211.6 9,260.9 14.4 20.2 89.5 212.7 248.5b 195.1 6,673.0 6,770.8 1,077.6 1,409.4 1,455.2 1,196.0 768.2 854.2 774.2 1,822.9 112.4 142.6 406.5 445.5 502.3 409.3
171.2 .. 86.1 .. 231.8 523.6 231.5 80.3 .. 149.1 17.8 .. .. .. .. .. 293.6 71.4 .. .. .. .. 24.3 .. .. 101.6 103.4 .. 827.6 .. .. .. .. 58.9 449.4 137.6 228.7 .. .. 86.2 .. .. 227.5 .. 88.0 219.8 .. .. 19.5 54.2 .. 236.4 .. .. .. .. ..
3.7 81.9 12.7 2.9 43.0 27.5 46.3 173.0 11.2 185.6 172.2 .. 2.9 4.8 44.9 .. 156.8 97.0 8.5 1.8 2.5 8.1 69.7 .. .. 428.2 327.9 .. 344.1 0.2 0.5 799.9 25.7 238.9 26.6 146.4 129.9 .. 579.5 570.5 84.9 2.3 118.1 8.3 138.2 205.2 5.9 4.9 37.1 212.8 9.5 141.1 119.6 1.6 .. .. 117.8
.. .. .. 5.1 0.4 .. 5.5 7.5 32.5b 66.4 .. 2.8 .. 1.7 .. .. 25.6 19.7 .. .. .. .. 4.2 .. .. 18.8 53.5 0.8 1.4 .. .. 25.2 .. .. 25.1 .. 5.4 19.5 7.0 36.2 23.1 .. 19.5b .. 8.8 5.6 .. .. .. 3.9 62.0 22.7 13.3 .. .. 65.6 42.1
.. 58.3 .. .. 1.0 46.2 3.5 5.6 39.0 48.1 .. 1.9 .. .. .. 29.9 19.9 8.2 .. .. .. .. 2.6 .. .. 12.8 .. 0.2 20.1 .. .. 14.1 .. 14.8 19.6 3.8 3.0 14.7 8.3 31.1 19.5 .. 5.0 44.4 4.6 3.6 .. .. 54.3 2.2 .. 12.0 33.2 .. .. .. 39.2
0.1 177.3 128.5 30.5 98.8 345.5b 67.4 2,367.1 194.8 b 2.4 206.9 b .. 1.0 24.9 235.3b 142.9 144.0 127.8 2.9 1.8 3.2 0.8 162.0 0.2 0.5 143.7 64.4 .. 97.8 3.6 14.7 259.4 19.7 35.2b 221.1 .. 624.9 25.5 54.1 250.7 60.3 .. 455.3 b .. 899.9 784.1 28.5 1.9 295.6b 1,253.3 14.7 773.6 32.6 43.4 0.6 2.4 31.1
0.6 143.0 136.9 27.3 80.1 353.1 67.0 2,392.0 83.7 3.2 94.3 1,128.0 0.7 16.5 283.0 117.4 131.9 132.2 16.9 1.7 11.0 0.8 162.4 0.2 0.4 396.6 124.3 .. 106.3 3.6 14.1 350.0 33.4 2,203.3 205.4 281.0 481.0 22.8 118.6 333.1 48.6 7.3 573.2 2.2 779.8 624.7 29.0 2.6 468.4 673.0 8.9 1,008.1 28.9 27.0 0.7 1.7 49.6
Average annual precipitation
Agricultural landa
% of land area 1990–92 2005–07
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
71 61 24 39 23 70 27 55 44 16 12 82b 47 21 22 .. 8 53b 7 41b 59 77 26 9 54b 51b 63 45 23 26 38 56 54 78b 81 68 61 16 47 29 59 60 34 27 79 3 3 34 29 2 43 17 37 62 43 48 64
65 61 27 29 22 62 23 49 47 13 11 77 47 25 19 52 9 56 9 29 66 76 27 9 44 46 70 53 24 32 39 51 55 76 75 67 62 18 47 29 57 46 44 34 85 3 6 35 30 2 51 17 38 53 39 22 61
% irrigated 2005–07
millimeters 2008
2.2 30.4 15.4 15.1 .. .. 31.2 18.0 .. 35.7 7.6 .. 0.1 .. 52.7 .. .. 9.4 .. .. 19.9 .. .. .. .. 2.7 2.2 .. .. .. .. 20.4 3.5 9.7 .. 5.2 .. 23.8 .. 27.7 .. 3.0 .. .. .. 4.2 .. 64.9 .. .. .. .. .. 0.5 12.2 8.0 ..
589 1,083 2,702 228 216 1,118 435 832 2,051 1,668 111 250 630 1,054 1,274 .. 121 533 1,834 641 661 788 2,391 56 656 619 1,513 1,181 2,875 282 92 2,041 752 450 241 346 1,032 2,091 285 1,500 778 1,732 2,391 151 1,150 1,414 125 494 2,692 3,142 1,130 1,738 2,348 600 854 2,054 74
3.2
ENVIRONMENT
Agricultural inputs Land under cereal production
Fertilizer consumption
Agricultural employment
Agricultural machinery
thousand hectares 1990–92 2006–08
kilograms per hectare % of of arable fertilizer land production 2005–07 2005–07
% of total employment 1990–92 2005–07
Tractors per 100 sq. km of arable land 1990–92 2005–07
2,803.5 2,899.4 215.4 100,759.8 99,791.3 133.0 13,861.2 15,740.9 117.3 9,611.9 7,534.3 179.5 3,506.1 3,334.8 132.7 298.0 291.0 285.3 107.8 90.4 18.9 4,346.9 3,933.6 365.3 2.6 1.5 .. 2,438.6 2,002.4 145.4 111.9 56.4 10.7 22,152.4b 14,857.6 119.0 1,765.9 2,149.1 .. 1,569.0 1,268.7 .. 1,367.8 1,030.5 150.8 .. .. 0.4 1.4 4.4 578.0b 586.3 .. 625.3 951.8 .. 696.7b 526.4 .. 41.5 70.4 31.8 177.6 222.9 .. 135.0 160.0 .. 355.0 342.9 25.0 1,134.0b 996.1 26.6 235.2b 179.2 .. 1,321.0 1,580.1 .. 1,442.6 1,701.1 .. 699.3 683.2 229.6 2,392.7 3,424.1 .. 132.9 235.0 .. 0.5 0.1 507.5 10,075.0 10,233.1 702.5 675.6b 923.1 .. 620.0 134.0 .. 5,373.9 5,253.5 29.0 1,508.6 2,037.6 .. 5,282.9 8,860.7 1,444.8 206.4 289.1 .. 2,957.2 3,360.7 .. 185.0 222.2 49.4 153.5 122.4 309.1 299.3 458.9 .. 7,010.6 9,313.6 .. 16,416.7 19,152.0 974.8 361.4 336.8 28.0 2.4 4.8 3.6 11,776.8 13,145.5 132.6 182.4 149.0 .. 1.9 3.2 .. 454.7 969.4 .. 682.5 1,170.9 75,752.0 6,957.4 6,924.3 265.1 8,522.7 8,444.3 102.8 780.1 348.2 175.1 0.5 0.3 .. 5,842.3 5,006.4
118.0 121.3 158.8 92.7 22.0 525.2 1,443.9 173.2 54.3 347.2 911.4 5.9 35.0 .. 453.6 1,022.2 20.5 .. 59.5 273.5 .. .. 53.5 172.2 50.2 2.9 36.4 821.3 0.0 .. 278.7 64.0 12.9 6.0 49.1 4.3 6.4 2.6 23.4 892.4 1,054.7 29.9 0.4 5.0 237.0 285.7 160.8 39.9 139.3 63.2 91.2 150.6 170.8 199.3 ..
15.2 .. 54.9 .. .. 14.1 3.7 8.4 27.3 6.8 .. .. .. .. 16.7 .. .. 35.5b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 24.4 .. .. 15.5 24.7 38.5b .. 3.8 .. 69.4 48.2 81.2 4.2 10.7 38.7 .. .. 5.9 .. 48.9 26.2 .. .. 1.0 45.3 25.2 15.6 3.5 30.6
4.9 .. 42.4 23.9 .. 5.6 1.8 4.2 18.2 4.3 .. .. .. .. 7.7 .. .. 37.4 .. 11.0 .. .. .. .. 12.3 19.3 82.0 .. 14.7 .. .. 9.6 14.2 35.7 38.8 44.4 .. .. .. .. 3.1 7.1 29.0 .. .. 3.2 .. 43.3 15.4 .. 29.5 10.8 36.6 16.0 11.7 1.5 30.7
157.8 65.4 2.7 135.9 64.9 1,666.7 763.0 1,619.3 158.0 .. 351.9 62.0 b 20.0 297.1 274.6 .. 215.0 189.4b 11.4 363.7b 187.6 57.1 9.4 187.2 256.0b 730.2b 4.6 6.1 .. 10.5 8.2 36.2 126.7 310.1b 73.2 46.0 14.3 11.5 30.3 26.4 2,056.1 323.1 20.3 0.1 4.9 1,731.8 42.0 133.3 103.3 59.4 72.4 35.9 72.1 820.7 569.5 478.2 146.1
2010 World Development Indicators
264.2 186.9 2.3 178.4 139.3 1,548.4 796.4 2,539.4 128.4 .. 323.9 18.8 26.2 229.3 1,458.2 .. 70.0 178.6 9.8 498.3 576.6 64.6 8.5 227.1 650.6 1,208.9 1.9 4.8 .. 2.3 8.2 60.0 98.8 208.5 46.1 53.5 14.5 6.8 24.7 123.0 1,433.6 829.8 20.1 0.1 6.7 1,544.2 35.2 207.8 147.8 50.0 40.0 36.0 124.4 1,211.8 1,522.1 504.1 197.1
159
3.2
Agricultural inputs Agricultural landa
% of land area 1990–92 2005–07
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
14 76b 5 .. 46 .. 38 2 .. 28b 70 80 61 36 52 76 8 47 74 32b 38 42 22 59 16 58 52 69b 61 72b 4 75 47 85 65b 25 21 .. 45 31 34 38 w 36 38 49 30 37 48 28 34 24 55 43 38 50
13 77 6 .. 45 57 44 1 40 25 70 82 58 37 58 78 8 39 76 33 39 39 26 67 11 63 52 69 65 71 7 72 45 84 63 24 32 62 45 34 40 38 w 38 38 50 30 38 50 28 36 23 55 44 38 47
Average annual precipitation
% irrigated 2005–07
2.1 2.1 .. .. 0.7 0.5 .. .. 2.7 0.5 .. .. 12.1 .. 1.1 .. .. .. 10.1 .. .. .. .. .. 12.7 3.6 12.8 .. .. 5.3 .. .. .. 1.2 .. .. .. 4.3 2.8 .. .. 1.8 w 1.5 2.3 3.6 1.0 2.2 0.9 2.0 0.5 5.9 16.1 0.2 0.8 4.2
millimeters 2008
637 460 1,212 59 686 .. 2,526 2,497 824 1,162 282 495 636 1,712 416 788 624 1,537 252 691 1,071 1,622 .. 1,168 2,200 207 593 161 1,180 565 78 1,220 715 1,265 206 1,875 1,821 402 167 1,020 657
Land under cereal production
Fertilizer consumption
Agricultural employment
Agricultural machinery
thousand hectares 1990–92 2006–08
kilograms per hectare % of of arable fertilizer land production 2005–07 2005–07
% of total employment 1990–92 2005–07
Tractors per 100 sq. km of arable land 1990–92 2005–07
59,541.3 258.2b 1.2 1,061.8 1,153.8 .. 451.7 .. .. 112.5b 531.4 5,735.9 7,588.5 834.3 6,266.9 69.1 1,184.3 207.3 3,811.9 266.5b 3,003.3 10,593.6 83.7 610.2 6.4 1,524.7 13,759.9 331.3b 1,097.6 12,542.3b 1.4 3,548.5 64,547.3 509.4 1,225.3b 798.7 6,726.1 .. 738.2 813.4 1,430.8 707,271.9 s 73,977.3 483,693.9 310,393.3 173,300.6 557,671.3 142,265.1 136,657.9 47,722.2 30,590.3 129,690.1 70,745.7 149,600.7 33,854.7
41,825.3 42.6 42.2 328.0 12.1 12.4 2.0 .. 2.6 596.7 22.5 99.0 1,230.8 78.3 9.0 1,886.8 332.9 38.8 1,037.2 .. .. .. .. 13,528.1 772.2 50.9 84.3 101.5 38,791.4 354.9 536.0 .. .. 3,408.5 170.2 48.7 6,381.8 117.0 155.5 955.1 2,497.4 289.5 11,122.4 .. 3.4 48.5 .. .. 1,009.4 316.9 100.3 159.8 .. 214.0 3,108.4 149.0 77.9 403.3 369.3 22.0 5,013.0 .. 6.0 11,520.2 1,148.7 123.3 101.7 .. .. 797.5 .. .. 2.0 3.5 406.8 1,311.0 9.1 39.3 12,183.5 218.9 102.5 1,000.5 .. .. 1,724.7 .. 1.5 14,012.9 28.3 21.8 0.0 14.4 615.8 3,006.3 126.3 289.3 58,581.6 134.1 149.9 711.4 1,040.8 133.4 1,562.9 .. .. 1,138.7 61.7 167.1 8,390.6 441.2 374.3 32.8 .. .. 879.7 .. 10.0 896.0 .. 16.3 2,139.5 161.6 35.5 697,843.7 s 99.5 w 117.7 w 100,232.3 256.2 35.0 456,809.5 101.5 120.2 314,214.7 109.1 155.1 142,594.7 83.1 70.5 557,041.8 104.2 108.5 143,348.3 114.0 271.0 109,979.2 35.2 37.7 50,046.2 298.3 111.9 27,701.1 58.0 89.9 131,869.1 135.4 122.8 94,098.0 343.8 10.8 140,801.9 90.8 143.8 31,664.6 107.3 200.8
14.5 ..b .. .. .. .. .. 0.3 .. .. .. .. 10.5 44.3 .. .. 3.3 4.2 28.2 45.8b .. 61.1 .. .. 11.8 .. 46.5 .. .. 20.0 b .. 2.2 2.9 1.5 .. 12.6 .. .. 52.6 49.8 .. .. w .. .. .. 20.9 .. 53.5 23.4 18.7 .. .. .. 5.6 6.9
a. Includes permanent pastures, arable land, and land under permanent crops. b. Data are not available for all three years. c. Includes Luxembourg.
160
2010 World Development Indicators
9.7 97.8 36.3 .. 1.0b 0.5 3.0 75.9 41.3 4.4 20.3 28.8 33.7 1.7 3.0 .. .. 19.8 .. 3.3 1.1 1.2 636.7 1,083.3 4.4 .. 158.6 9.5 .. .. .. 15.5 12.0 8.3 101.1 43.3 4.9 494.2 782.0 31.3 175.0 213.2 .. 7.8 31.3 .. 251.4 86.0 2.1 604.4 596.7 3.8 2,870.2 2,624.7 .. 136.7 229.0 .. 415.4b 299.0 74.6 8.2 23.1 42.1 38.8 529.6 .. 8.0 5.2 .. 0.5 0.3 4.3 .. .. .. 88.3 142.5 27.7 286.7 447.0 .. 464.7b 268.8 .. 9.2 8.7 17.9 153.3b 106.2 4.9 49.8 56.0 1.3 761.2 744.2 1.5 235.8 258.9 8.9 259.5 274.4 .. 402.3b 390.8 8.9 176.1 184.9 .. 60.4 256.6 15.4 .. 694.2 .. 40.4 48.4 .. 11.3 11.4 .. 61.4 74.3 .. w 189.6 w 198.7 w .. 33.5 33.7 .. 131.7 152.1 .. 72.3 140.7 15.7 252.6 175.2 .. 117.0 133.1 .. 55.1 137.7 17.6 187.1 175.3 16.4 121.7 109.0 .. 114.2 161.4 .. 67.1 173.2 .. 17.7 14.9 3.2 360.2 380.7 4.2 989.0 1,013.0
About the data
3.2
ENVIRONMENT
Agricultural inputs Definitions
Agriculture is still a major sector in many economies,
appropriate levels and application rates vary by coun-
• Agricultural land is the share of land area that
and agricultural activities provide developing coun-
try and over time and depend on the type of crops, the
is permanent pastures, arable, or under permanent
tries with food and revenue. But agricultural activi-
climate and soils, and the production process used.
crops. Permanent pasture is land used for fi ve or
ties also can degrade natural resources. Poor farming
The agriculture sector is the most water-intensive
more years for forage, including natural and culti-
practices can cause soil erosion and loss of soil fertil-
sector, and water delivery in agriculture is increas-
vated crops. Arable land includes land defined by the
ity. Efforts to increase productivity by using chemical
ingly important. The table shows irrigated agricultural
FAO as land under temporary crops (double-cropped
fertilizers, pesticides, and intensive irrigation have
land as share of total agricultural land area and data
areas are counted once), temporary meadows for
environmental costs and health impacts. Excessive
on average precipitation to illustrate how countries
mowing or for pasture, land under market or kitchen
use of chemical fertilizers can alter the chemistry of
obtain water for agricultural use.
gardens, and land temporarily fallow. Land aban-
soil. Pesticide poisoning is common in developing
The data shown here and in table 3.3 are collected
doned as a result of shifting cultivation is excluded.
countries. And salinization of irrigated land dimin-
by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Land under permanent crops is land cultivated with
ishes soil fertility. Thus, inappropriate use of inputs
Nations (FAO) through annual questionnaires. The FAO
crops that occupy the land for long periods and need
for agricultural production has far-reaching effects.
tries to impose standard definitions and reporting
not be replanted after each harvest, such as cocoa,
The table provides indicators of major inputs to
methods, but complete consistency across countries
coffee, and rubber. Land under flowering shrubs, fruit
agricultural production: land, fertilizer, labor, and
and over time is not possible. Thus, data on agricul-
trees, nut trees, and vines is included, but land under
machinery. There is no single correct mix of inputs:
tural land in different climates may not be comparable.
trees grown for wood or timber is not. • Irrigated
For example, permanent pastures are quite different
land refers to areas purposely provided with water,
in nature and intensity in African countries and dry
including land irrigated by controlled flooding. • Aver-
Middle Eastern countries. Data on agricultural employ-
age annual precipitation is the long-term average in
ment, in particular, should be used with caution. In
depth (over space and time) of annual precipitation
many countries much agricultural employment is
in the country. Precipitation is defined as any kind
informal and unrecorded, including substantial work
of water that falls from clouds as a liquid or a solid.
performed by women and children. To address some
• Land under cereal production refers to harvested
of these concerns, this indicator is heavily footnoted
areas, although some countries report only sown or
in the database in sources, definition, and coverage.
cultivated area. • Fertilizer consumption is the quan-
Fertilizer consumption measures the quantity of
tity of plant nutrients used per unit of arable land.
plant nutrients. Consumption is calculated as pro-
Fertilizer products cover nitrogen, potash, and phos-
duction plus imports minus exports. Because some
phate fertilizers (including ground rock phosphate).
chemical compounds used for fertilizers have other
Traditional nutrients—animal and plant manures—
industrial applications, the consumption data may
are not included. • Fertilizer production is fertilizer
overstate the quantity available for crops. Fertil-
consumption, exports, and nonfertilizer use of fertil-
izer consumption as a share of production shows
izer products minus fertilizer imports. • Agricultural
the agriculture sector’s vulnerability to import and
employment is employment in agriculture, forestry,
energy price fluctuation. The FAO recently revised
hunting, and fishing (see table 2.3). • Agricultural
the time series for fertilizer consumption and irriga-
machinery refers to wheel and crawler tractors
tion for 2002 onward, but recent data are not avail-
(excluding garden tractors) in use in agriculture at
able for all countries. FAO collects fertilizer statistics
the end of the calendar year specified or during the
for production, imports, exports, and consumption
first quarter of the following year.
Nearly 40 percent of land globally is devoted to agriculture
3.2a
Total land area in 2007: 130 million sq. km
Others 31.8%
Permanent pastures 26.0%
Arable land 10.8% Forests 30.3% Permanent crops 1.1% Note: Agricultural land includes permanent pastures, arable land, and land under permanent crops. Source: Tables 3.1 and 3.2.
Developing regions lag in agricultural machinery, which reduces their 3.2b agricultural productivity Tractors per 100 square kilometers of arable land 400
1990–92
2005–07
through the new FAO fertilizer resources questionnaire. In the previous release, the data were based on total consumption of fertilizers, but the data in
300
the recent release are based on the nutrients in fertilizers. Some countries compile fertilizer data on a
200
calendar year basis, while others do so on a crop year basis (July–June). Previous editions of World 100
Development Indicators reported data on a crop year basis, but this edition uses the calendar year, as adopted by the FAO. Caution should thus be used
0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe Latin & America Central & Asia Caribbean
Source: Table 3.2.
Middle East & North Africa
South Asia
SubHigh Saharan income Africa
when comparing data over time. To smooth annual fluctuations in agricultural activity, all the indicators in the table (except average annual
Data sources Data on agricultural inputs are from electronic files that the FAO makes available to the World Bank.
precipitation) have been averaged over three years.
2010 World Development Indicators
161
3.3
Agricultural output and productivity Crop production index
1999–2001 = 100 1990–92 2005–07
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
162
148.0 81.0 99.7 76.7 74.3 95.0a 66.7 96.3 147.0a 90.7 107.0 a 77.6b 76.7 78.0 101.0a 117.7 87.3 137.7 95.7 128.7 82.7 89.0 95.3 92.7 92.0 89.3 75.7 .. 106.3 160.3 102.0 89.7 92.7 78.0a 117.0 .. 106.0 137.3 92.3 81.3 120.7 .. 108.0a .. 100.0 97.0 108.7 77.3 108.0a 86.0 72.3 91.3 95.7 98.7 92.3 127.7 113.7
2010 World Development Indicators
124.0 112.3 144.3 147.3 120.0 180.3 73.3 99.3 137.7 103.0 146.3 103.0 88.3 107.7 113.3 103.0 122.0 89.3 115.3 86.7 145.3 98.3 101.0 89.7 92.3 111.7 116.0 .. 92.7 82.7 98.3 98.3 95.3 84.0 83.7 94.3 94.7 108.3 96.0 104.7 88.7 83.7 113.3 115.7 107.0 90.0 91.0 68.3 87.3 90.3 111.3 85.7 109.3 107.3 95.0 88.0 128.0
Food production index
1999–2001 = 100 1990–92 2005–07
119.7 69.7 95.7 82.3 81.7 101.0 a 104.0 93.3 112.0 a 88.7 132.0a 87.8b 83.3 86.3 113.0 a 137.3 79.7 125.3 94.7 128.3 82.7 93.0 91.0 86.7 97.0 84.0 66.3 .. 93.3 156.3 100.7 90.3 95.3 98.0a 116.0 .. 100.3 120.3 83.3 79.3 106.3 .. 162.0 a .. 106.7 100.7 111.0 83.0 93.0a 101.0 75.0 99.7 93.0 99.0 95.0 117.7 107.0
94.3 112.0 126.3 126.0 113.3 164.3 77.3 91.7 132.0 104.3 138.0 62.3 94.0 101.7 119.0 103.7 118.0 82.0 103.7 86.0 139.0 98.7 103.0 98.3 95.0 110.0 117.7 .. 95.3 82.7 103.7 103.7 101.0 92.3 84.3 96.0 100.0 122.3 103.3 105.3 100.0 81.3 122.7 116.0 101.7 91.7 91.0 69.3 95.0 94.0 110.3 89.3 112.0 107.7 95.0 92.7 125.3
Livestock production index
1999–2001 = 100 1990–92 2005–07
100.0 62.0 94.7 96.3 99.0 106.0a 155.0 95.7 103.0 a 87.3 142.0a 93.8 b 118.3 93.3 114.0a 141.3 74.3 133.7 88.0 153.0 82.3 106.0 83.7 84.3 113.3 77.3 54.7 .. 94.0 130.0 96.7 99.0 117.3 124.0a 135.0 .. 91.7 92.7 75.0 77.0 92.3 .. 173.0a .. 109.7 100.7 108.0 136.0 71.0a 110.0 114.3 111.7 94.3 78.3 105.3 82.0 84.7
71.0 110.3 107.0 83.3 102.0 131.7 84.3 91.0 128.0 114.3 129.0 50.7 98.7 101.7 139.3 103.7 113.3 68.0 103.3 74.7 104.0 90.0 104.7 101.3 90.3 109.0 116.3 .. 101.3 80.3 128.3 101.3 100.0 113.0 83.7 89.7 102.0 133.3 105.7 104.7 113.7 78.7 108.7 113.3 100.0 92.7 91.0 87.3 96.0 99.7 93.7 95.7 91.3 121.0 95.0 102.0 117.0
Cereal yield
Agricultural productivity
kilograms per hectare 1990–92 2006–08
Agriculture value added per worker 2000 $ 1990–92 2005–07
1,153 2,372 915 378 2,652 1,843a 1,739 5,400 2,113a 2,567 2,741a 6,122.0b 880 1,373 3,553 a 312 1,916 3,633 783 1,370 1,356 1,166 2,559 883 636 3,949 4,307 .. 2,492 794 688 3,188 863 3,975a 2,092 .. 5,448 4,078 1,724 5,738 1,871 .. 1,304a .. 3,246 6,370 1,712 1,114 1,998a 5,578 1,084 3,589 1,882 1,423 1,529 997 1,371
1,603 3,717 1,384 490 3,991 1,992 1,292 6,128 2,669 3,896 3,000 8,223 1,247 1,933 3,977 487 3,531 3,252 1,118 1,307 2,672 1,343 3,133 1,115 775 5,960 5,388 .. 4,046 772 776 3,433 1,713 5,535 2,787 4,679 5,825 4,292 2,995 7,537 2,957 456 2,679 1,489 3,497 6,880 1,656 935 1,954 6,596 1,330 4,069 1,582 1,501 1,464 885 1,662
.. 837 1,823 176 6,919 1,607a 20,676 12,060 1,067a 255 2,042a .. 429 703 .. 766 1,611 2,686 126 117 .. 409 28,541 322 209 3,618 269 .. 3,342 209 .. 3,158 652 5,553a .. .. 15,190 2,055 1,801 1,826 1,774 .. .. .. 19,011 22,254 1,246 262 2,359a 13,863 352 7,669 2,304 156 236 .. 1,227
.. 1,663 2,239 222 11,191 4,508 30,830 21,440 1,222 387 4,266 38,337 661 732 10,352 452 3,315 8,015 182 70 376 703 46,138 409 246 6,103 459 .. 3,001 162 .. 5,132 875 14,823 .. 5,871 43,201 3,829 1,872 2,758 2,404 118 4,550 187 35,653 47,418 1,741 269 1,871 26,745 378 8,656 2,719 208 315 .. 1,858
Crop production index
1999–2001 = 100 1990–92 2005–07
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
111.7 95.0 93.7 85.7 120.3 99.3 127.0 98.7 91.0 115.0 139.0 149.0 a 108.3 140.7 94.7 .. 35.7 76.0a 77.0 117.0 a 136.3 77.3 90.0 94.3 75.0a 112.0a 122.3 66.3 92.7 93.0 80.3 122.0 94.0 127.0a 270.0 115.0 81.0 68.7 90.3 92.3 98.3 87.3 91.7 96.7 86.7 125.0 78.0 99.7 130.7 99.0 105.0 57.0 103.7 109.3 109.0 176.7 83.3
108.3 100.3 120.3 117.3 96.7 80.0 100.7 94.3 88.0 93.3 127.3 121.7 101.0 106.0 90.7 .. 96.0 93.7 117.7 139.3 88.0 68.0 90.3 91.0 99.3 101.0 103.7 98.3 116.7 101.3 85.3 90.0 105.7 102.7 115.0 129.7 105.7 133.3 117.0 104.3 93.7 100.0 112.3 116.3 108.0 99.0 87.7 102.7 100.3 91.0 126.0 120.3 109.7 88.0 89.7 98.7 73.0
Food production index
1999–2001 = 100 1990–92 2005–07
115.3 91.0 95.3 83.3 117.7 102.0 108.0 98.0 82.0 110.7 122.7 149.0 a 111.3 129.0 85.7 .. 27.7 81.0 a 73.0 203.0 a 124.3 91.3 116.3 93.0 149.0a 116.0 121.0 56.3 88.0 103.3 111.3 111.3 89.0 146.0a 110.0 107.3 87.0 71.0 133.3 93.7 110.3 86.7 76.0 90.0 86.7 108.7 74.7 87.3 107.0 100.7 96.3 63.3 95.3 110.0 103.0 136.3 98.0
101.7 101.7 121.3 118.7 92.7 84.7 93.3 94.0 92.7 96.7 118.3 121.0 108.7 109.7 92.3 .. 101.3 96.7 115.7 128.7 96.7 78.3 95.7 90.3 125.3 105.7 100.7 99.3 114.7 113.0 95.3 98.3 110.0 116.3 72.7 121.7 92.3 139.7 93.0 103.0 89.7 110.3 119.3 112.3 106.3 94.3 104.0 106.0 97.0 95.7 116.0 121.3 108.0 104.0 94.3 89.0 51.7
Livestock production index
1999–2001 = 100 1990–92 2005–07
124.7 83.3 99.3 77.7 117.0 101.0 94.7 96.3 70.7 109.0 97.3 163.0a 114.3 131.7 73.3 .. 29.0 118.0a 74.3 249.0a 80.3 110.3 132.0 92.7 175.0a 119.0 130.7 97.3 100.3 114.7 116.3 77.0 83.3 183.0a 104.3 93.3 112.3 66.0 141.7 99.3 110.3 89.7 68.7 81.3 90.3 103.0 81.7 83.3 82.7 102.0 113.7 77.7 74.7 115.0 87.3 127.0 109.7
86.7 112.3 132.3 119.7 93.0 85.7 93.7 95.0 104.0 98.7 98.7 124.7 117.0 128.7 98.0 .. 99.3 97.3 109.3 114.3 115.0 87.0 99.0 89.0 125.0 118.0 89.7 107.0 114.3 109.0 96.3 129.7 110.0 116.7 70.7 101.3 104.3 180.3 86.3 102.0 89.0 109.7 125.0 106.0 99.0 91.7 139.3 108.7 95.0 100.3 91.7 121.0 105.3 106.0 96.7 86.7 34.3
3.3
ENVIRONMENT
Agricultural output and productivity Cereal yield
Agricultural productivity
kilograms per hectare 1990–92 2006–08
Agriculture value added per worker 2000 $ 1990–92 2005–07
4,551 1,947 3,826 1,523 872 6,653 3,132 4,340 1,298 5,713 1,167 1,338a 1,645 5,073 5,885 .. 3,112 2,772a 2,355 1,641a 2,001 703 951 706 1,938 a 2,652 1,935 871 2,827 840 802 4,117 2,520 2,928 a 967 1,094 330 2,739 388 1,831 7,142 5,257 1,543 323 1,135 3,744 2,206 1,818 1,862 2,504 1,905 2,463 2,070 2,958 1,939 1,100 2,941
5,226 2,574 4,508 2,574 1,377 7,417 2,741 5,282 1,227 5,977 891 1,169 1,621 3,607 6,525 .. 2,623 2,481 3,612 2,767 2,351 569 1,421 619 2,762 3,135 2,418 1,837 3,422 1,133 760 8,381 3,341 2,236 1,141 1,057 787 3,670 434 2,286 7,813 7,439 1,866 460 1,502 3,690 3,265 2,656 2,195 3,700 3,092 3,657 3,278 3,022 3,418 1,882 3,585
4,289 359 519 2,042 .. .. .. 11,714 2,366 20,350 2,348 1,776a 379 .. 5,804 .. .. 684 a 382 1,896a .. 259 .. .. .. 2,413 210 86 398 405 671 3,747 2,274 1,349a 1,150 1,788 117 .. 1,307 245 24,752 19,150 .. 242 .. 19,077 1,012 765 2,341 555 1,648 879 905 1,605 4,642 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
8,136 460 657 2,931 .. 14,217 .. 26,784 2,400 39,368 2,232 1,730 367 .. 14,501 .. .. 1,017 495 3,260 30,573 193 .. .. 4,636 4,395 182 126 583 515 414 5,222 3,022 1,278 1,511 2,306 173 .. 1,917 241 39,910 26,105 2,334 .. .. 39,206 .. 888 4,011 639 2,136 1,390 1,148 2,901 6,387 .. ..
163
3.3
Agricultural output and productivity Crop production index
1999–2001 = 100 1990–92 2005–07
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
87.3 125.0a 129.0 149.7 90.0 101.0a,c 136.7 204.3 .. 84.0a 110.3 95.3 90.7 93.0 83.3 126.3 104.7 117.3 92.0 138.0a 118.0 89.7 103.7 93.7 122.7 119.7 102.3 114.0 a 103.3 124.0 a 35.0 105.7 97.0 73.7 124.0a 95.7 69.7 .. 102.7 95.3 81.0 82.0 w 77.3 79.5 76.0 89.8 79.3 71.6 114.2 77.2 79.1 80.0 74.9 90.3 91.8
97.3 134.7 102.3 112.0 67.3 123.0 a,c 148.7 343.7 99.0 102.7 87.0 92.7 90.7 104.0 100.3 101.0 91.7 92.3 103.0 141.7 122.3 110.0 81.0 85.7 65.0 118.3 100.0 119.0 85.0 133.3 38.7 91.7 99.7 137.7 124.7 96.0 116.0 91.0 97.7 116.3 56.3 114.7 w 122.8 119.3 119.3 119.5 119.7 122.6 115.8 124.0 123.7 112.1 118.0 99.9 95.1
Food production index
1999–2001 = 100 1990–92 2005–07
94.7 130.0a 125.0 130.7 92.3 113.0a,c 131.0 467.3 .. 78.0a 90.7 101.3 89.3 96.0 78.0 128.7 100.0 110.0 94.0 151.0a 111.0 92.0 113.3 95.3 93.0 103.7 104.0 69.0a 105.3 139.0a 39.7 109.3 92.7 80.3 107.0a 89.7 71.3 .. 99.0 105.3 90.7 78.8 w 76.0 73.2 69.6 82.7 73.4 65.0 116.7 73.5 76.6 75.8 76.4 91.4 96.0
104.3 122.3 103.3 99.3 72.7 109.0a,c 146.0 122.0 93.7 100.7 87.0 104.0 90.3 106.0 107.3 106.7 96.7 98.0 107.3 147.7 109.7 109.0 86.7 98.0 106.3 109.3 99.3 122.3 87.3 119.0 41.7 93.0 99.7 124.0 121.7 95.7 114.3 92.7 102.7 103.7 81.0 114.3 w 123.2 119.7 120.3 118.4 120.1 124.0 113.9 121.7 123.1 114.0 119.5 100.4 94.8
a. Data are not available for all three years. b. Includes Luxembourg. c. Includes Montenegro.
164
2010 World Development Indicators
Livestock production index
1999–2001 = 100 1990–92 2005–07
116.3 149.0a 93.3 84.0 110.3 107.0a,c 117.0 526.0 .. 78.0a 88.0 114.3 81.3 101.7 77.0 152.3 97.3 110.0 95.0 214.0 a 100.3 94.7 109.0 112.7 77.0 68.7 107.0 75.0a 109.3 161.0a 94.7 108.3 91.3 88.0 113.0a 89.7 60.0 .. 93.3 106.3 105.0 83.7 w 82.5 77.5 64.9 99.8 77.9 53.9 150.7 73.0 71.3 69.9 82.6 93.1 97.8
112.7 111.0 105.3 95.0 96.7 97.0a,c 107.7 100.7 79.3 100.0 87.0 116.3 95.0 114.7 113.7 110.7 93.3 99.3 116.7 168.0 92.3 103.0 102.0 98.7 140.3 95.0 94.3 118.3 93.3 108.3 90.3 95.0 98.0 116.7 112.3 93.7 113.3 91.3 110.7 96.0 94.7 112.2 w 122.9 119.0 121.2 114.9 119.2 122.2 109.0 117.9 120.6 122.8 120.1 101.0 96.0
Cereal yield
Agricultural productivity
kilograms per hectare 1990–92 2006–08
Agriculture value added per worker 2000 $ 1990–92 2005–07
2,777 1,743a 1,088 4,212 803 2,926a,c 1,223 .. .. 3,279a 622 1,602 2,310 2,950 596 1,299 4,272 6,102 947 1,020a 1,276 2,186 1,694 791 3,159 1,401 2,192 2,210a 1,487 2,834 a 2,042 6,321 4,875 2,445 1,777a 2,561 3,097 .. 906 1,251 1,125 2,847 w 1,710 2,537 2,672 1,961 2,419 3,816 1,935 2,234 1,544 1,977 987 4,260 4,631
2,664 2,092 1,110 5,099 892 4,087 1,016 .. 4,244 5,310 408 3,244 3,493 3,700 600 845 4,781 6,361 1,749 2,246 1,209 3,007 1,184 1,130 2,656 1,278 2,548 3,079 1,528 2,707 2,200 7,110 6,578 4,185 4,287 3,533 4,883 1,863 963 1,803 592 3,397 w 2,190 3,122 3,324 2,676 2,954 4,767 2,335 3,487 2,308 2,678 1,205 5,147 5,597
2,129 1,917a 193 8,476 251 .. .. 22,695 .. 13,217a .. 2,149 9,583 697 526 993 22,319 19,369 2,778 370 a 261 480 .. 345 1,818 2,975 2,204 1,321a 175 1,232a 10,414 21,817 20,353 6,278 1,427a 4,584 229 .. 412 189 271 801 w 249 501 383 2,154 465 307 2,009 2,213 1,846 372 305 14,601 12,696
6,179 2,914 226 17,365 224 1,890a,c .. 50,828 4,995 50,960 .. 3,077 17,894 823 844 1,108 39,578 22,653 4,479 517 324 653 .. 394 1,317 3,424 3,229 .. 191 2,010 29,465 28,065 45,015 9,370 2,231 7,386 335 .. .. 232 239 959 w 307 741 570 3,286 663 491 2,842 3,273 2,823 480 318 27,557 22,921
About the data
3.3
ENVIRONMENT
Agricultural output and productivity Definitions
The agricultural production indexes in the table are
single enterprise, estimates of the amounts retained
• Crop production index is agricultural production
prepared by the Food and Agriculture Organization of
for seed and feed are subtracted from the produc-
for each period relative to the base period 1999–
the United Nations (FAO). The FAO obtains data from
tion data to avoid double counting. The resulting
2001. It includes all crops except fodder crops. The
official and semiofficial reports of crop yields, area
aggregate represents production available for any
regional and income group aggregates for the FAO’s
under production, and livestock numbers. If data are
use except as seed and feed. The FAO’s indexes
production indexes are calculated from the under-
unavailable, the FAO makes estimates. The indexes
may differ from those from other sources because
lying values in international dollars, normalized to the
are calculated using the Laspeyres formula: produc-
of differences in coverage, weights, concepts, time
base period 1999–2001. • Food production index
tion quantities of each commodity are weighted by
periods, calculation methods, and use of interna-
covers food crops that are considered edible and
average international commodity prices in the base
tional prices.
that contain nutrients. Coffee and tea are excluded
period and summed for each year. Because the FAO’s
To facilitate cross-country comparisons, the FAO
because, although edible, they have no nutritive
indexes are based on the concept of agriculture as a
uses international commodity prices to value produc-
value. • Livestock production index includes meat
tion. These prices, expressed in international dollars
and milk from all sources, dairy products such as
(equivalent in purchasing power to the U.S. dollar),
cheese, and eggs, honey, raw silk, wool, and hides
are derived using a Geary-Khamis formula applied to
and skins. • Cereal yield, measured in kilograms
agricultural outputs (see United Nations System of
per hectare of harvested land, includes wheat, rice,
National Accounts 1993, sections 16.93–96). This
maize, barley, oats, rye, millet, sorghum, buckwheat,
method assigns a single price to each commodity so
and mixed grains. Production data on cereals refer
that, for example, one metric ton of wheat has the
to crops harvested for dry grain only. Cereal crops
same price regardless of where it was produced. The
harvested for hay or harvested green for food, feed,
use of international prices eliminates fluctuations in
or silage, and those used for grazing, are excluded.
the value of output due to transitory movements of
The FAO allocates production data to the calendar
nominal exchange rates unrelated to the purchasing
year in which the bulk of the harvest took place. But
power of the domestic currency.
most of a crop harvested near the end of a year will
Cereal yield in low-income economies is less than 40 percent of the yield 3.3a in high-income countries Kilograms per hectare (thousands) 6
1990–92
2006–08
5 4 3 2 1 0 World
Low Lower Upper High income middle middle income income income
Euro area
Source: Table 3.3.
Sub-Saharan Africa has the lowest yield, while East Asia and Pacific is closing the gap with high-income economies Kilograms per hectare (thousands)
1990–92
Data on cereal yield may be affected by a variety of
be used in the following year. • Agricultural produc-
reporting and timing differences. Millet and sorghum,
tivity is the ratio of agricultural value added, mea-
which are grown as feed for livestock and poultry in
sured in 2000 U.S. dollars, to the number of workers
Europe and North America, are used as food in Africa,
in agriculture. Agricultural productivity is measured
Asia, and countries of the former Soviet Union. So
by value added per unit of input. (For further discus-
some cereal crops are excluded from the data for
sion of the calculation of value added in national
some countries and included elsewhere, depending
accounts, see About the data for tables 4.1 and 4.2.)
on their use. To smooth annual fluctuations in agri-
Agricultural value added includes that from forestry
cultural activity, the indicators in the table have been
and fishing. Thus interpretations of land productivity
averaged over three years.
should be made with caution.
3.3b
2006–08
6 5 4 3
Data sources 2
Data on agricultural production indexes, cereal yield, and agricultural employment are from elec-
1
tronic files that the FAO makes available to the World Bank. The files may contain more recent
0 East Europe Latin Middle South Sub- High Asia & & America East & Asia Saharan income Pacific Central & North Africa Asia Caribbean Africa Source: Table 3.3.
information than published versions. Data on agricultural value added are from the World Bank’s national accounts files.
2010 World Development Indicators
165
3.4
Deforestation and biodiversity Forest area
Average annual deforestationa
thousand sq. km
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
166
1990
2007
13 8 18 610 353 3 1,679 38 9 9 75 .. 33 628 22 137 5,200 33 72 3 129 245 3,101 232 131 153 1,571 .. 614 1,405 227 26 102 21 21 26 4 14 138 0c 4 16 22 147 222 145 219 4 28 107 74 33 47 74 22 1 74
8 8 23 589 327 3 1,633 39 9 9 79 7 22 582 22 117 4,715 37 67 1 100 208 3,101 227 118 162 2,054 .. 606 1,330 224 24 104 21 28 27 5 14 105 1 3 15 23 127 225 156 218 5 28 111 53 38 38 67 21 1 43
2010 World Development Indicators
% 1990–2000 2000–07
2.5 0.3 –1.8 0.2 0.4 1.0 0.2 –0.2 0.0 0.0 –0.5 .. 2.1 0.4 0.1 0.9 0.5 –0.1 0.3 3.7 1.1 0.9 0.0 0.1 0.6 –0.4 –1.2 .. 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.8 –0.1 –0.1 –1.7 0.0 –0.9 0.0 1.5 –3.0 1.5 0.2 –0.3 0.7 –0.1 –0.5 0.0 –0.4 0.0 –0.3 2.0 –0.9 1.2 0.7 0.4 0.6 3.0
3.2 –0.6 –1.2 0.2 0.4 1.5 0.1 –0.1 0.0 0.3 –0.1 0.0 2.6 0.5 0.0 1.0 0.6 –1.4 0.4 5.5 2.0 1.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 –0.4 –2.1 .. 0.1 0.2 0.1 –0.1 –0.1 –0.1 –2.1 –0.1 –0.6 0.0 1.8 –2.5 1.7 0.2 –0.4 1.1 0.0 –0.3 0.0 –0.4 0.0 0.0 2.0 –0.8 1.3 0.5 0.5 0.8 3.2
Threatened species
GEF benefits index for biodiversity
Nationally protected areas
Terrestrial
Marine
Mammals
Birds
Fish
Higher plantsb
0–100 (no biodiversity to maximum biodiversity)
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
11 3 14 14 35 9 57 4 7 34 4 3 10 19 4 6 82 7 8 9 37 41 12 7 12 21 74 2 52 29 11 8 24 7 14 2 2 6 43 17 5 9 1 31 1 9 13 9 10 6 17 10 16 22 11 5 6
13 6 11 18 49 12 49 9 15 28 4 2 4 29 6 7 122 12 5 8 25 15 16 5 7 32 85 16 86 31 3 17 14 11 17 6 2 14 69 10 3 9 3 22 4 6 5 5 10 6 8 11 11 12 2 13 7
3 33 23 22 31 4 84 9 9 12 1 9 15 0 27 2 64 17 0 18 18 43 26 0 0 18 70 13 31 25 15 19 19 46 28 5 13 15 15 24 7 14 4 2 5 31 21 16 12 20 17 62 16 19 18 15 19
2 0 3 26 44 1 55 4 0 12 0 1 14 71 1 0 382 0 2 2 31 355 2 15 2 40 446 6 223 65 35 111 105 1 163 4 3 30 1,839 2 26 3 0 22 1 8 108 4 0 12 117 11 83 22 4 29 110
.. 0.2 2.9 8.3 17.7 0.2 87.7 0.3 0.8 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 12.5 0.4 1.4 100.0 0.8 0.3 0.3 3.5 12.5 21.5 1.5 2.2 15.3 66.6 .. 51.5 19.9 3.6 9.7 3.4 0.6 12.5 0.1 0.2 6.0 29.3 2.9 0.9 0.8 0.1 8.4 0.2 5.3 3.0 0.1 0.6 0.6 1.9 2.8 8.0 2.3 0.6 5.2 7.2
0.2 8.0 5.0 8.3 6.5 8.2 0.1 28.0 7.3 2.2 6.5 3.2 23.2 21.2 0.8 30.1 29.6 10.1 14.4 5.6 24.0 10.1 8.2 18.2 9.0 18.8 15.1 44.1 26.2 12.2 10.3 31.0 21.1 7.5 18.8 15.8 5.7 28.5 25.4 7.7 1.3 4.3 46.8 17.5 9.3 15.4 16.5 2.0 3.9 56.2 16.6 3.4 32.7 6.6 18.2 0.3 21.0
7 80 23 15 307 10 5,485 1,087 42 20 440 502 49 53 32 60 1,444 905 72 15 30 39 5,122 32 9 102 1,981 98 263 66 14 165 240 177 71 1,765 3,847 59 104 26 77 3 9,617 42 6,046 1,541 22 6 33 14,388 302 111 163 102 9 8 77
0.0 1.1 0.3 0.2 0.6 0.0 70.6 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 84.2 1.8 0.0 9.8 0.0 4.4 12.6 0.0 2.7 0.0 12.4 9.9 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 3.4 3.2 4.9 1.5 0.0 26.7 0.0 2.4 4.7 0.0 54.4 0.0 2.8
0 7 6 4 36 0 384 0 0 7 0 2 0 0 0 0 58 1 0 0 2 2 563 0 0 9 36 22 15 1 0 35 3 19 42 0 52 15 3 8 1 0 3 0 15 64 5 6 2 21 0 12 7 0 4 0 22
% of surface area
Number of areas
% of surface area
Number of areas
Forest area
Average annual deforestationa
thousand sq. km 1990
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
18 639 1,166 111 8 4 2 84 3 250 1 34 37 82 64 .. 0c 8 173 28 1 0c 41 2 20 9 137 39 224 141 4 0c 690 3 115 43 200 392 88 48 3 77 65 19 172 91 0c 25 44 315 212 702 106 89 31 4 ..
2007
20 678 848 111 8 7 2 102 3 249 1 33 35 59 63 5d 0c 9 160 30 1 0c 30 2 21 9 128 33 206 124 2 0c 637 3 101 44 192 313 75 35 4 83 50 12 103 94 0c 18 43 292 181 686 68 92 39 4 ..
% 1990–2000 2000–07
–0.6 –0.6 1.7 0.0 –0.2 –3.3 –0.6 –1.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 1.8 0.1 .. –3.4 –0.2 0.5 –0.3 –0.8 –3.4 1.6 0.0 –0.3 0.0 0.5 0.9 0.4 0.7 2.7 0.3 0.5 –0.2 0.7 –0.1 0.3 1.3 0.9 2.1 –0.4 –0.6 1.6 3.7 2.7 –0.2 0.0 1.8 0.2 0.5 0.9 0.1 2.8 –0.2 –1.5 –0.1
–0.7 0.0 2.0 0.0 –0.1 –1.9 –0.8 –1.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 2.0 0.1 .. –2.4 –0.3 0.5 –0.4 –0.8 –2.6 1.8 0.0 –0.8 0.0 0.3 1.0 0.7 0.8 3.5 0.5 0.4 –0.2 0.8 –0.2 0.3 1.4 1.0 1.4 –0.3 –0.2 1.5 1.0 3.5 –0.2 0.0 2.2 0.1 0.5 0.9 0.1 2.1 –0.3 –1.1 0.0
Threatened species
GEF benefits index for biodiversity
ENVIRONMENT
3.4
Deforestation and biodiversity
Nationally protected areas
Terrestrial
Mammals
Birds
Fish
Higher plantsb
0–100 (no biodiversity to maximum biodiversity)
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2 96 183 16 13 5 15 7 5 27 13 16 27 9 9 0 6 6 46 1 10 2 20 12 3 5 62 6 70 11 14 6 100 4 11 18 11 45 11 32 4 8 5 11 27 7 9 23 14 41 8 53 39 5 11 3 2
9 76 115 20 18 1 13 8 10 40 8 21 27 20 30 0 8 12 23 4 6 5 11 4 4 10 35 12 42 6 8 11 54 9 21 10 21 41 21 32 2 69 9 5 12 2 9 27 17 36 27 93 67 6 8 8 4
9 40 111 21 6 16 31 33 15 40 14 13 71 8 14 .. 10 3 6 6 15 1 19 14 6 14 75 101 49 1 23 11 114 9 1 31 45 17 21 0 11 14 21 2 21 14 20 22 19 38 0 10 60 6 38 13 7
1 246 386 1 0 1 0 19 209 12 0 16 103 3 0 0 0 14 21 0 0 1 46 1 0 0 281 14 686 6 0 88 261 0 0 2 46 38 24 7 0 21 39 2 171 2 6 2 194 142 10 275 216 4 16 53 0
0.2 39.9 81.0 7.3 1.6 0.6 0.8 3.8 4.4 36.0 0.4 5.1 8.8 0.7 1.7 .. 0.1 1.1 5.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 2.6 1.6 0.0 0.2 29.2 3.5 13.9 1.5 1.3 3.3 68.7 0.0 4.2 3.5 7.2 10.0 5.2 2.1 0.2 20.2 3.3 0.9 6.0 1.3 3.7 4.9 10.9 25.4 2.8 33.4 32.3 0.5 5.5 4.0 0.1
5.6 4.8 15.7 7.0 0.0 1.1 34.5 7.1 20.9 14.1 10.5 2.8 12.3 2.6 4.3 .. 0.8 3.1 15.9 16.4 0.4 0.2 15.0 0.1 6.0 0.0 3.1 15.5 20.3 2.1 0.9 5.5 8.0 1.4 13.9 1.2 15.7 6.7 15.0 16.6 19.8 29.5 16.9 6.6 16.0 5.2 9.4 9.0 28.1 9.7 6.0 13.8 17.2 24.3 6.6 6.8 0.0
% of surface area
Marine
Number of areas
% of surface area
Number of areas
2008
2008
2008
136 556 469 145 8 85 222 456 71 216 12 77 284 31 32
0.0 1.5 1.8 3.5 0.0 0.1 0.5 3.1 3.6 5.2 21.6 0.0 5.8 0.0 3.2
0 117 139 12 0 12 13 58 12 135 1 0 11 0 6
5 29 25 540 11 1 16 8 250 61 53 96 684 10 3 23 182 63 51 31 46 49 31 19 1,948 3,878 74 6 972 1,795 6 151 53 67 33 61 204 1,605 59 50 0
1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 7.9 0.0 0.1 0.0 4.6 0.0 31.3 0.3 14.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 4.0 0.5 0.2 0.0 3.1 7.1 10.3 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.2 1.1 8.6 0.5 0.0 2.9 0.7 2.5 1.1 11.5 ..
5 0 0 1 1 0 1 4 3 0 8 0 147 0 3 18 38 0 0 11 3 6 4 0 6 87 5 0 0 17 3 5 21 24 0 2 212 3 27 19 ..
2010 World Development Indicators
167
3.4
Deforestation and biodiversity Forest area
Average annual deforestationa
thousand sq. km
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
1990
2007
64 8,090 3 27 93 .. 30 0c 19 12 83 92 135 24 764 5 274 12 4 4 414 160 10 7 2 6 97 41 49 93 2 26 2,986 9 31 520 94 .. 5 491 222 40,678 s 5,221 25,888 8,016 17,872 31,109 4,580 8,812 9,834 200 789 6,894 9,569 843
64 8,086 5 27 86 21 27 0c 19 13 70 92 185 19 664 6 275 12 5 4 344 144 8 3 2 11 102 41 35 96 3 29 3,034 15 33 471 134 0c 5 416 169 39,280 s 4,635 24,955 7,725 17,230 29,591 4,525 8,837 9,052 212 799 6,165 9,689 947
% 1990–2000 2000–07
0.0 0.0 –0.8 0.0 0.5 .. 0.7 0.0 0.0 –0.4 1.0 0.0 –2.0 1.2 0.8 –0.9 0.0 –0.4 –1.5 0.0 1.0 0.7 1.2 3.4 0.3 –4.1 –0.4 0.0 1.9 –0.2 –2.4 –0.7 –0.1 –4.5 –0.4 0.6 –2.3 .. 0.0 0.9 1.5 0.2 w 0.7 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.5 –0.4 –0.2 0.7 –0.1 –0.7
0.0 0.0 –6.5 0.0 0.5 .. 0.7 0.0 –0.1 –0.4 1.1 0.0 –1.7 1.5 0.9 –0.9 0.0 –0.4 –1.3 0.0 1.1 0.4 1.4 4.7 0.2 –1.9 –0.2 0.0 2.3 –0.1 –0.1 –0.4 –0.1 –1.3 –0.5 0.6 –1.9 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.7 0.2 w 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.3 –0.2 0.0 0.5 –0.3 0.1 0.6 –0.1 –0.6
Threatened species
GEF benefits index for biodiversity
Mammals
Birds
Fish
Higher plantsb
0–100 (no biodiversity to maximum biodiversity)
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
7 12 33 51 19 10 9 14 15 8 6 11 16 10 12 14 3 7 4 4 14 12 23 35 16 15 30 13 14 13 4 7 1 3 2 2 16 13 8 9 34 40 57 44 4 5 10 2 2 2 14 8 17 15 9 15 21 18 11 12 7 8 5 2 37 74 10 24 11 15 32 26 54 39 3 7 9 13 8 12 8 11 1,141 1,222
16 32 9 16 28 8 16 22 7 24 26 65 52 31 13 3 12 11 27 8 138 50 5 16 19 20 60 12 54 20 9 34 164 28 8 29 33 1 18 10 3 1,275
1 7 3 3 7 1 47 54 2 0 17 74 49 280 17 11 3 3 0 14 240 86 0 10 1 0 3 3 38 1 0 14 244 1 15 69 147 0 159 8 17 8,457
0.7 34.1 0.9 3.2 1.0 0.2 1.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 6.1 20.7 6.8 7.9 5.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.9 0.7 14.8 8.0 0.6 0.3 2.2 0.5 6.2 1.8 2.8 0.5 0.2 3.5 94.2 1.2 1.1 25.3 12.1 .. 3.2 3.8 1.9
a. Negative values indicate an increase in forest area. b. Flowering plants only. c. Less than 0.5. d. Data are from national sources.
168
2010 World Development Indicators
Nationally protected areas
Terrestrial % of surface area 2008
Marine
Number of areas
% of surface area
Number of areas
2008
2008
2008
10.7 923 9.0 11,181 7.6 5 38.4 30 25.0 109 2.7 68 4.1 39 5.2 7 19.6 1,126 6.6 30 0.6 7 6.0 931 9.5 468 20.6 234 4.6 20 3.1 7 10.4 4,622 28.6 2,146 0.7 9 13.7 15 38.8 537 20.4 206 14.6 6 11.1 90 35.0 64 1.5 36 1.9 236 2.6 18 26.1 732 3.4 5,197 0.3 10 22.3 778 27.1 6,770 0.4 20 1.9 13 71.3 231 5.6 116 0.0 0 0.3 3 41.1 625 15.8 240 14.4 w 112,355 s 11.9 3,970 12.9 33,010 11.2 11,729 14.0 21,281 12.7 36,980 14.7 4,044 7.8 21,825 22.8 3,801 3.8 313 5.5 996 12.4 6,001 19.1 75,375 17.1 28,025
37.9 6.3 0.0 1.1 13.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.4 0.2 6.2 5.3 1.0 0.0 0.0 4.9 0.0 1.3 0.0 12.5 3.9 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.2 2.8 0.0 0.0 4.3 0.1 4.6 67.6 0.1 0.0 10.9 1.4 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 1.7 w 0.2 0.9 1.3 0.6 0.8 1.8 0.4 1.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 4.3 1.0
10 27 0 3 11 0 0 3 0 3 2 30 47 14 1 0 477 0 4 0 17 19 0 1 13 4 13 0 0 15 3 149 787 4 0 19 36 0 1 0 0 4,949 s 121 1,484 791 693 1,605 754 84 422 53 143 149 3,344 277
About the data
3.4
ENVIRONMENT
Deforestation and biodiversity Definitions
Biological diversity is defined in terms of variability in
information on individual species range maps avail-
• Forest area is land under natural or planted stands
genes, species, and ecosystems. A 2008 comprehen-
able from the IUCN for virtually all mammals (5,487),
of trees, whether productive or not. • Average annual
sive assessment of world species shows that at least
amphibians (5,915), and endangered birds (1,098);
deforestation is the permanent conversion of natu-
1,141 of 5,487 known mammals are threatened with
country data from the World Resources Institute
ral forest area to other uses, including agriculture,
extinction. As threats to biodiversity mount, the inter-
for reptiles and vascular plants; country data from
ranching, settlements, and infrastructure. It does not
national community is increasingly focusing on con-
FishBase for 31,190 fish species; and the ecological
include areas logged but intended for regeneration or
serving diversity. Deforestation is a major cause of
characteristics of 867 world terrestrial ecoregions
areas degraded by fuelwood gathering, acid precipita-
loss of biodiversity, and habitat conservation is vital
from WWF International. For each country the bio-
tion, or forest fires. • Threatened species are species
for stemming this loss. Conservation efforts have
diversity indicator incorporates the best available
classified by the IUCN as endangered, vulnerable, rare,
focused on protecting areas of high biodiversity.
and comparable information in four relevant dimen-
indeterminate, out of danger, or insufficiently known.
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
sions: represented species, threatened species,
Mammals exclude whales and porpoises. Birds are
Nations (FAO) Global Forest Resources Assessment
represented ecoregions, and threatened ecoregions.
listed for the country where their breeding or winter-
2005 provides detailed information on forest cover in
To combine these dimensions into one measure, the
ing ranges are located. Fish are cold-blooded aquatic
2005 and adjusted estimates of forest cover in 1990
indicator uses dimensional weights that reflect the
vertebrates of the superclass Pisces. Higher plants are
and 2000. The current survey uses a uniform defini-
consensus of conservation scientists at the GEF,
native vascular plant species. • GEF benefits index for
tion of forest. Because of space limitations, the table
IUCN, WWF International, and other nongovernmen-
biodiversity is a composite index of relative biodivers-
does not break down forest cover between natural for-
tal organizations.
ity potential based on the species in each country and
est and plantation, a breakdown the FAO provides for
The World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC)
their threat status and diversity of habitat types. The
developing countries. Thus the deforestation data in
compiles data on protected areas, numbers of cer-
index is normalized from 0 (no biodiversity potential)
the table may underestimate the rate at which natural
tain species, and numbers of those species under
to 100 (maximum biodiversity potential). • Nationally
forest is disappearing in some countries.
threat from various sources. Because of differences
protected areas are totally or partially protected areas
in definitions, reporting practices, and reporting peri-
of at least 1,000 hectares that are designated as sci-
ods, cross-country comparability is limited.
entific reserves with limited public access, national
The number of threatened species is also an important measure of the immediate need for conservation in an area. Global analyses of the status
Nationally protected areas are defined using the
parks, natural monuments, nature reserves or wildlife
of threatened species have been carried out for few
six IUCN management categories for areas of at
sanctuaries, and protected landscapes. Terrestrial
groups of organisms. Only for mammals, birds, and
least 1,000 hectares: scientific reserves and strict
protected areas exclude marine areas, unclassified
amphibians has the status of virtually all known spe-
nature reserves with limited public access; national
areas, littoral (intertidal) areas, and sites protected
cies been assessed. Threatened species are defined
parks of national or international significance and not
under local or provincial law. Marine protected areas
using the World Conservation Union’s (IUCN) clas-
materially affected by human activity; natural monu-
are areas of intertidal or subtidal terrain—and over-
sification: endangered (in danger of extinction and
ments and natural landscapes with unique aspects;
lying water and associated flora and fauna and histori-
unlikely to survive if causal factors continue operat-
managed nature reserves and wildlife sanctuaries;
cal and cultural features—that have been reserved to
ing) and vulnerable (likely to move into the endan-
protected landscapes (which may include cultural
protect part of or the entire enclosed environment.
gered category in the near future if causal factors
landscapes); and areas managed mainly for the sus-
continue operating).
tainable use of natural systems to ensure long-term
Data sources
Unlike mammals, birds, and fish, it is difficult to
protection and maintenance of biological diversity.
Data on forest area are from the FAO’s electronic
accurately count plants. The number of plant species
The data in the table cover these six categories
files. The FAO gathers these data from national
is highly debated. The 2008 IUCN Red List of Threat-
as well as terrestrial protected areas that are not
agencies through annual questionnaires and
ened Species, the result of more than 20 years’ work
assigned to a category by the IUCN. Designating an
country official publications and websites and by
by botanists worldwide, is the most comprehensive
area as protected does not mean that protection
analyzing national agricultural censuses. Data
list of threatened species on a global scale. Only 5
is in force. And for small countries that have only
on species are from the electronic files of the
percent of plant species have been evaluated, and
protected areas smaller than 1,000 hectares, the
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
70 percent of these are threatened with extinction.
size limit in the definition leads to an underestimate
and WCMC, the 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened
Plant species data may not be comparable across
of protected areas.
Species, and Froese and Pauly’s (2008) FishBase
countries because of differences in taxonomic con-
Due to variations in consistency and methods of
database. The GEF benefits index for biodiversity
cepts and coverage and so should be used with cau-
collection, data quality is highly variable across coun-
is from Pandey and others’ “Biodiversity Conser-
tion. However, the data identify countries that are
tries. Some countries update their information more
vation Indicators: New Tools for Priority Setting at
major sources of global biodiversity and that show
frequently than others, some have more accurate
the Global Environment Facility” (2006a). Data on
national commitments to habitat protection.
data on extent of coverage, and many underreport
protected areas are from the UNEP and WCMC, as
the number or extent of protected areas.
compiled by the World Resources Institute, based
The Global Environment Facility’s (GEF) benefits index for biodiversity is a comprehensive indicator
on data from national authorities and national leg-
of national biodiversity status and is used to guide
islation and international agreements.
its biodiversity priorities. The indicator incorporates
2010 World Development Indicators
169
3.5
Freshwater Internal renewable freshwater resourcesa
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
170
Annual freshwater withdrawals
Water productivity
Access to an improved water source
Flows billion cu. m
Per capita cu. m
billion cu. m
% of internal resources
% for agriculture
% for industry
% for domestic
GDP/water use 2000 $ per cu. m
% of urban population
% of rural population
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2006
2006
55 27 11 148 276 9 492 55 8 105 37 12 10 304 36 2 5,418 21 13 10 121 273 2,850 141 15 884 2,812 .. 2,112 900 222 112b 77 38 38 13 6 21 432 2 18 3b 13 122b 107 179 164 3 58 107 30 58 109 226 16 13 96
.. 8,588 332 8,431 6,989 2,952 23,348 6,626 946 666 3,834 1,129 1,227 31,868 9,395 1,268 28,498 2,742 849 1,283 8,417 14,630 86,426 33,119 1,412 53,137 2,134 .. 47,611 14,395 62,516 25,209b 3,819 8,493 3,402 1,272 1,099 2,139 32,379 22 2,907 586b 9,475 1,551b 20,232 2,882 115,340 1,857 13,339 1,301 1,325 5,182 8,177 23,505 10,383 1,338 13,372
23.3 1.7 6.1 0.4 29.2 3.0 23.9 2.1 12.2 79.4 2.8 .. 0.1 1.4 .. 0.2 59.3 10.5 0.8 0.3 4.1 1.0 46.0 0.0 0.2 12.6 630.3 .. 10.7 0.4 0.0 2.7 0.9 .. 8.2 2.6 1.3 3.4 17.0 68.3 1.3 0.6 0.2 5.6 2.5 40.0 0.1 0.0 1.6 47.1 1.0 7.8 2.0 1.5 0.2 1.0 0.9
98 62 65 60 74 66 75 1 76 96 30 .. 45 81 .. 41 62 19 86 77 98 74 12 4 83 64 68 .. 46 31 9 53 65 .. 69 2 43 66 82 86 59 95 5 94 3 10 42 65 65 20 66 80 80 90 82 94 80
0 11 13 17 9 4 10 64 19 1 47 .. 23 7 .. 18 18 78 1 6 0 8 69 16 0 25 26 .. 4 17 22 17 12 .. 12 57 25 2 5 6 16 0 38 0 84 74 8 12 13 68 10 3 13 2 5 1 12
2 27 22 23 17 30 15 35 4 3 23 .. 32 13 .. 41 20 3 13 17 1 18 20 80 17 11 7 .. 50 53 70 29 24 .. 19 41 32 32 12 8 25 5 57 6 14 16 50 23 22 12 24 16 6 8 13 5 8
.. 36.2 9.0 26.1 9.7 0.6 16.9 91.9 0.8 0.6 4.6 .. 18.2 5.8 .. 31.8 10.9 1.2 3.3 2.5 0.9 10.2 15.8 38.4 6.0 6.0 1.9 .. 8.8 12.0 76.0 6.0 11.2 .. .. 22.0 126.0 7.1 0.9 1.5 10.3 1.2 35.6 1.6 49.2 33.2 42.2 13.8 2.7 40.4 5.1 16.2 9.6 2.1 1.2 3.7 8.3
.. 97 87 62 98 99 100 100 95 85 100 100 78 96 100 100 97 100 97 84 80 88 100 90 71 98 98 .. 99 82 95 99 98 100 95 100 100 97 98 99 94 74 100 96 100 100 95 91 100 100 90 100 99 91 82 70 95
.. 97 81 39 80 96 100 100 59 78 99 .. 57 69 98 90 58 97 66 70 61 47 99 51 40 72 81 .. 77 29 35 96 66 98 78 100 100 91 91 98 68 57 99 31 100 100 47 81 97 100 71 99 94 59 47 51 74
2010 World Development Indicators
42.3 6.4 54.0 0.2 10.6 32.5 4.9 3.8 150.5 75.6 7.5 .. 1.3 0.5 .. 8.1 1.1 50.0 6.4 2.9 3.4 0.4 1.6 0.0 1.5 1.4 22.4 .. 0.5 0.0 0.0 2.4 1.2 .. 21.5 19.6 21.2 16.1 3.9 3,794.4 7.2 20.8 1.2 4.6 2.3 22.4 0.1 1.0 2.8 44.0 3.2 13.4 1.8 0.7 1.1 7.6 0.9
Internal renewable freshwater resourcesa
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Annual freshwater withdrawals
Water productivity
3.5
ENVIRONMENT
Freshwater
Access to an improved water source
Flows billion cu. m
Per capita cu. m
billion cu. m
% of internal resources
% for agriculture
% for industry
% for domestic
GDP/water use 2000 $ per cu. m
% of urban population
% of rural population
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2006
2006
6 1,261 2,838 129 35 49 1 183 9 430 1 75 21 67 65 .. .. 46 190 17 5 5 200b 1 16 5 337 16b 580 60 0c 3 409 1 35 29 100 881 6 198 11 327 190 4 221 382 1 55b 147 801 94 1,616 479 54 38 7 0.1
597 1,121 12,578 1,809 .. 11,246 104 3,074 3,514 3,365 119 4,871 548 2,824 1,338 .. .. 8,873 31,256 7,355 1,153 2,574 55,138 b 97 4,610 2,647 18,114 1,118 b 21,841 4,835 127 2,182 3,885 273 13,326 940 4,586 17,924 2,949 7,007 671 77,336 33,912 248 1,496 81,119 514 338b 44,094 124,716 15,343 56,685 5,399 1,406 3,582 1,802 45
7.6 645.8 82.8 93.3 66.0 1.1 2.0 44.4 0.4 88.4 0.9 35.0 2.7 9.0 18.6 .. 0.9 10.1 3.0 0.3 1.3 0.1 0.1 4.3 0.3 .. 15.0 1.0 9.0 6.5 1.7 0.7 78.2 2.3 0.4 12.6 0.6 33.2 0.3 10.2 7.9 2.1 1.3 2.2 8.0 2.2 1.3 169.4 0.8 0.1 0.5 20.1 28.5 16.2 11.3 .. 0.4
127.3 51.2 2.9 72.6 187.5 2.3 260.5 24.3 4.4 20.6 138.0 46.4 13.2 13.5 28.7 .. .. 21.7 1.6 1.8 27.3 1.0 0.1 721.0 1.7 .. 4.4 6.3 1.6 10.9 425.0 26.4 19.1 231.0 1.3 43.4 0.6 3.8 4.9 5.1 72.2 0.6 0.7 62.3 3.6 0.6 94.4 308.0 0.6 0.0 0.5 1.2 6.0 30.2 29.6 .. 870.6
32 86 91 92 79 0 58 45 49 62 65 82 79 55 48 .. 54 94 90 13 60 20 55 83 7 .. 96 80 62 90 88 68 77 33 52 87 87 98 71 96 34 42 83 95 69 11 88 96 28 1 71 82 74 8 78 .. 59
59 5 1 1 15 77 6 37 17 18 4 17 4 25 16 .. 2 3 6 33 11 40 18 3 15 .. 2 5 21 1 3 3 5 58 27 3 2 1 5 1 60 9 2 0 10 67 1 2 5 42 8 10 9 79 12 .. 2
9 8 8 7 7 23 36 18 34 20 31 2 17 20 36 .. 44 3 4 53 29 40 27 14 78 .. 3 15 17 9 9 30 17 10 20 10 11 1 24 3 6 48 15 4 21 23 10 2 67 56 20 8 17 13 10 .. 39
100 96 89 99 .. 100 100 100 97 100 99 99 85 100 97 .. .. 99 86 100 100 93 72 72 .. 100 76 96 100 86 70 100 98 96 90 100 71 80 99 94 100 100 90 91 65 100 85 95 96 88 94 92 96 100 99 .. 100
100 86 71 84 .. .. 100 .. 88 100 91 91 49 100 71 .. .. 83 53 96 100 74 52 68 .. 99 36 72 96 48 54 100 85 85 48 58 26 80 90 88 100 .. 63 32 30 100 73 87 81 32 52 63 88 .. 100 .. 100
6.3 0.7 2.0 1.4 0.4 85.3 67.6 24.7 22.0 52.8 12.2 0.5 5.0 .. 28.7 .. 42.9 0.1 0.6 26.1 15.9 15.7 5.1 7.8 42.3 .. 0.3 1.7 10.4 0.4 0.6 6.9 7.4 0.6 2.5 2.9 6.7 .. 13.0 0.5 48.5 24.1 3.0 0.8 5.7 76.8 16.6 0.4 14.2 49.6 14.4 2.6 2.7 10.6 10.0 .. 58.7
2010 World Development Indicators
171
3.5
Freshwater Internal renewable freshwater resourcesa
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Annual freshwater withdrawals
Water productivity
Access to an improved water source
Flows billion cu. m
Per capita cu. m
billion cu. m
% of internal resources
% for agriculture
% for industry
% for domestic
GDP/water use 2000 $ per cu. m
% of urban population
% of rural population
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2006
2006
54.8 1.8 1.6 986.1 8.6 .. 0.2 .. .. .. 55.0 27.9 32.0 25.2 124.4 39.5 1.7 6.4 238.4 18.0 6.2 41.5 1.5 8.1 62.9 17.7 1,812.5 .. 70.7 2,665.3 6.6 17.1 5.3 357.0 1.2 19.5 .. 161.9 2.2 34.3 9.0 w 7.9 8.8 18.1 2.7 8.7 10.2 7.2 2.0 122.3 51.7 3.2 10.4 22.3
57 18 68 88 93 .. 92 .. .. .. 99 63 68 95 97 97 9 2 88 92 89 95 45 6 82 74 98 .. 52 83 3 41 96 93 47 68 .. 90 76 79 70 w 88 77 81 58 78 74 60 71 86 90 87 43 38
34 63 8 3 3 .. 3 .. .. .. 0 6 19 2 1 1 54 74 4 5 0 2 2 26 4 11 1 .. 35 2 75 46 1 2 7 24 .. 2 7 7 20 w 6 14 12 25 13 20 30 10 6 4 3 42 48
9 19 24 9 4 .. 5 .. .. .. 0 31 13 2 3 2 37 24 9 4 10 2 53 68 14 15 2 .. 12 15 22 13 3 5 46 8 .. 8 17 14 10 w 5 9 7 17 8 7 10 19 8 6 10 15 15
1.6 3.4 11.6 9.9 2.2 .. 1.7 .. .. .. .. 10.6 16.3 1.3 0.3 1.4 83.0 97.2 1.3 0.1 2.0 1.4 8.2 26.3 7.4 7.0 0.1 .. 0.8 24.5 152.1 20.4 7.2 0.2 14.0 0.4 .. 2.8 1.9 1.6 8.3 w 1.2 2.9 1.7 15.9 2.9 1.9 1.0 7.8 14.4 0.7 1.2 27.9 29.8
99 100 82 97 93 99e 83 100 100 .. 63 100 100 98 78 87 100 100 95 93 81 99 86 97 99 98 .. 90 97 100 100 100 100 98 .. 98 90 68 90 98 96 w 86 95 94 98 94 96 99 97 95 94 81 100 100
76 88 61 .. 65 .. 32 .. 100 .. 10 82 100 79 64 51 100 100 83 58 46 97 40 93 84 95 .. 60 97 100 100 94 100 82 .. 90 88 65 41 72 77 w 60 81 81 82 76 81 88 73 81 84 46 98 100
42 4,313 10b 2 26b 44 d 160 b 1 13 19 6 45 111 50 30 3 171 40 7 66 84 210 12 4 4 227 1 39 53 0 145 2,800 59 16 722 367 .. 2 80 12 43,464 s 4,784 29,126 11,525 17,601 33,910 9,454 5,129 13,425 225 1,819 3,858 9,554 942
1,963 23.2 30,350 76.7 1,005b 0.2 99 23.7 2,169b 2.2 5,419d .. 29,518 b 0.4 131 .. 2,334 .. 9,251 .. 687 3.3 936 12.5 2,478 35.6 2,499 12.6 742 37.3 2,293 1.0 18,692 3.0 5,350 2.6 349 16.7 9,855 12.0 2,035 5.2 3,135 87.1 1,825 0.2 2,891 0.3 410 2.6 3,109 40.1 273 24.7 1,273 .. 1,142 37.5 34 4.0 2,377 9.5 9,293 479.3 17,750 3.2 608 58.3 26,287 8.4 4,304 71.4 .. .. 94 3.4 6,513 1.7 985 4.2 6,616 w 3,765.3 s 5,004 357.3 6,350 2,518.2 3,154 2,039.5 18,876 478.7 6,118 2,875.5 4,938 959.0 11,867 356.5 24,004 264.9 715 253.2 1,194 941.1 4,829 100.8 9,305 .. 2,905 200.0
a. Excludes river flows from other countries because of data unreliability. b. Food and Agriculture Organization estimates. c. Less than 0.5. d. Includes Montenegro. e. Includes Kosovo and Metohija.
172
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
3.5
ENVIRONMENT
Freshwater Definitions
The data on freshwater resources are based on
to variations in collection and estimation methods.
• Internal renewable freshwater resources are
estimates of runoff into rivers and recharge of
In addition, inflows and outflows are estimated at
the average annual flows of rivers and groundwater
groundwater. These estimates are based on differ-
different times and at different levels of quality and
from rainfall) in the country. Natural incoming flows
ent sources and refer to different years, so cross-
precision, requiring caution in interpreting the data,
originating outside a country’s borders are excluded.
country comparisons should be made with caution.
particularly for water-short countries, notably in the
Overlapping water resources between surface run-
Because the data are collected intermittently, they
Middle East and North Africa.
off and groundwater recharge are also deducted.
may hide signifi cant variations in total renewable
Water productivity is an indication only of the
• Renewable internal freshwater resources per
water resources from year to year. The data also
effi ciency by which each country uses its water
capita are calculated using the World Bank’s popu-
fail to distinguish between seasonal and geographic
resources. Given the different economic structure
lation estimates (see table 2.1). • Annual freshwater
variations in water availability within countries. Data
of each country, these indicators should be used
withdrawals are total water withdrawals, not count-
for small countries and countries in arid and semiarid
carefully, taking into account the countries’ sectoral
ing evaporation losses from storage basins. With-
zones are less reliable than those for larger countries
activities and natural resource endowments.
drawals also include water from desalination plants
The data on access to an improved water source
in countries where they are a significant source. With-
Caution should also be used in comparing data
measure the percentage of the population with ready
drawals can exceed 100 percent of total renewable
on annual freshwater withdrawals, which are subject
access to water for domestic purposes. The data
resources where extraction from nonrenewable aqui-
are based on surveys and estimates provided by
fers or desalination plants is considerable or where
governments to the Joint Monitoring Programme of
water reuse is significant. Withdrawals for agriculture
the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United
and industry are total withdrawals for irrigation and
Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). The coverage
livestock production and for direct industrial use
rates are based on information from service users
(including for cooling thermoelectric plants). With-
on actual household use rather than on information
drawals for domestic uses include drinking water,
from service providers, which may include nonfunc-
municipal use or supply, and use for public services,
tioning systems. Access to drinking water from an
commercial establishments, and homes. • Water
improved source does not ensure that the water
productivity is calculated as GDP in constant prices
is safe or adequate, as these characteristics are
divided by annual total water withdrawal. • Access
not tested at the time of survey. While information
to an improved water source is the percentage of the
on access to an improved water source is widely
population with reasonable access to an adequate
used, it is extremely subjective, and such terms as
amount of water from an improved source, such as
safe, improved, adequate, and reasonable may have
piped water into a dwelling, plot, or yard; public tap
different meaning in different countries despite offi -
or standpipe; tubewell or borehole; protected dug
cial WHO definitions (see Definitions). Even in high-
well or spring; and rainwater collection. Unimproved
income countries treated water may not always be
sources include unprotected dug wells or springs,
safe to drink. Access to an improved water source is
carts with small tank or drum, bottled water, and
equated with connection to a supply system; it does
tanker trucks. Reasonable access is defined as the
not take into account variations in the quality and
availability of at least 20 liters a person a day from
cost (broadly defined) of the service.
a source within 1 kilometer of the dwelling.
and countries with greater rainfall.
Agriculture is still the largest user of water, accounting for some 70 percent 3.5a of global withdrawals in 2007 . . . Percent 100
Industry
Domestic
Agriculture
80
60
40
20
0 Low income
Lower middle income
Upper middle income
High income
World
Source: Table 3.5.
. . . and approaching 90 percent in some developing regions in 2007 Percent 100
Industry
Domestic
3.5b
Agriculture
80
60
Data sources Data on freshwater resources and withdrawals
40
are from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations AQUASTAT data. The GDP
20
estimates used to calculate water productivity are from the World Bank national accounts data-
0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe Latin & America Central & Asia Caribbean
Source: Table 3.5.
Middle East & North Africa
South SubAsia Saharan Africa
base. Data on access to water are from WHO and UNICEF’s Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation (2008).
2010 World Development Indicators
173
3.6
Water pollution Emissions of organic water pollutants
thousand kilograms per day 1990 2006a
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
174
5.9 2.4 107.0 4.5 181.4 37.9 186.1 90.5 41.3 250.8 .. 107.8 .. 11.3 50.7 2.5 780.4 124.3 .. 1.6 3.6 14.0 300.9 1.0 .. .. 7,038.1 86.1 .. .. 2.5 27.2 7.9 48.5 173.0 176.8 84.5 88.6 28.6 206.5 5.5 2.4 21.7 18.5 72.5 326.5 2.0 0.8 .. 1,020.9 .. 50.9 21.6 .. .. 0.1 17.8
0.2 3.6 .. .. 155.5 7.1 111.7 84.8 18.8 303.0 .. 97.9 .. 11.5 .. 5.0 .. 101.2 .. .. .. 10.0 310.3 .. .. 92.5 6,088.7 34.3 87.0 .. .. 31.2 .. 41.8 .. 146.5 60.5 88.6 44.7 206.5 .. 2.8 16.4 26.8 61.6 578.2 .. .. .. 954.2 15.4 58.6 .. .. .. 0.0 ..
2010 World Development Indicators
Industry shares of emissions of organic water pollutants
kilograms per day per worker
Primary metals
Paper and pulp
Chemicals
% of total Stone, Food and ceramics, beverages and glass
Textiles
Wood
Other
1990
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
0.16 0.25 0.25 0.19 0.21 0.11 0.18 0.15 0.15 0.15 .. 0.17 .. 0.24 0.14 0.30 0.19 0.17 .. 0.24 0.21 0.28 0.17 0.18 .. .. 0.14 0.12 .. .. 0.32 0.20 0.22 0.17 0.25 0.15 0.18 0.18 0.24 0.19 0.22 0.19 0.15 0.23 0.19 0.11 0.25 0.34 .. 0.14 .. 0.19 0.23 .. .. 0.01 0.23
0.21 0.25 .. .. 0.23 0.28 0.18 0.14 0.18 0.14 .. 0.17 .. 0.25 .. 0.28 .. 0.17 .. .. .. 0.19 0.16 .. .. 0.25 0.14 0.20 0.20 .. .. 0.22 .. 0.17 .. 0.13 0.16 0.18 0.28 0.19 .. 0.20 0.15 0.23 0.16 0.16 .. .. .. 0.14 0.17 0.20 .. .. .. 0.01 ..
.. 0.0 .. .. 3.8 .. 12.4 5.7 9.7 0.7 .. 6.4 .. 0.9 .. 0.0 .. 3.8 .. .. .. 0.4 4.4 .. .. 7.6 20.4 1.2 2.3 .. .. 1.6 .. 3.2 .. 5.4 1.4 0.1 1.8 5.8 .. 0.2 0.4 1.8 4.8 3.3 .. .. .. 3.8 3.1 4.4 .. .. .. 0.0 ..
19.7 0.0 .. .. 8.4 .. 22.8 7.1 2.5 2.3 .. 7.8 .. 9.8 .. 2.4 .. 4.3 .. .. .. 5.2 9.1 .. .. 6.3 10.9 43.5 8.9 .. .. 10.0 .. 7.2 .. 4.8 11.3 1.3 7.8 4.0 .. 4.1 7.3 6.8 15.6 7.4 .. .. .. 7.2 2.8 9.0 .. .. .. 2.0 ..
27.9 0.0 .. .. 15.8 .. 6.7 9.2 18.7 3.0 .. 17.3 .. 13.1 .. 0.0 .. 7.6 .. .. .. 36.1 10.6 .. .. 13.7 14.8 3.9 17.3 .. .. 8.2 .. 9.5 .. 10.9 12.4 2.3 12.8 13.9 .. 9.5 8.4 10.6 8.6 15.0 .. .. .. 12.0 15.0 10.3 .. .. .. 0.0 ..
14.1 39.8 .. .. 30.5 77.6 43.5 12.5 19.0 7.6 .. 15.7 .. 35.4 .. 56.7 .. 18.0 .. .. .. 48.8 13.9 .. .. 35.1 28.1 30.5 21.3 .. .. 65.7 .. 18.0 .. 10.9 16.2 18.6 46.4 20.0 .. 30.0 15.1 30.7 8.8 16.2 .. .. .. 11.8 19.2 23.1 .. .. .. 0.0 ..
11.7 0.0 .. .. 3.5 .. 0.2 5.9 6.5 2.6 .. 5.5 .. 7.7 .. 0.6 .. 4.6 .. .. .. 0.0 2.8 .. .. 3.6 0.5 0.1 5.3 .. .. 0.1 .. 5.9 .. 6.4 4.4 1.4 4.4 8.2 .. 13.2 5.1 8.5 4.0 3.8 .. .. .. 3.4 4.2 6.7 .. .. .. 0.0 ..
23.3 60.2 .. .. 14.3 22.4 5.3 4.5 13.6 79.3 .. 6.9 .. 18.4 .. 3.4 .. 28.0 .. .. .. 3.8 7.9 .. .. 9.1 15.5 16.2 24.1 .. .. 10.2 .. 15.3 .. 7.4 2.2 73.1 12.3 31.1 .. 25.1 8.8 28.8 2.8 5.1 .. .. .. 2.5 10.0 15.3 .. .. .. 0.0 ..
.. 0.0 .. .. 2.1 .. 2.8 5.9 1.4 0.5 .. 2.2 .. 5.3 .. 0.0 .. 3.0 .. .. .. 5.0 6.7 .. .. 6.9 0.9 0.2 0.9 .. .. 1.3 .. 4.8 .. 4.4 4.0 0.1 2.2 0.6 .. 0.0 17.0 1.5 6.7 2.3 .. .. .. 2.0 34.3 2.7 .. .. .. 0.0 ..
3.1 0.0 .. .. 21.6 .. 6.3 49.0 28.5 4.2 .. 38.3 .. 9.5 .. 36.9 .. 30.6 .. .. .. 0.8 44.6 .. .. 17.7 8.8 4.6 19.9 .. .. 2.9 .. 36.0 .. 49.8 48.1 3.1 12.3 16.4 .. 17.8 37.9 11.3 48.7 46.9 .. .. .. 57.4 11.4 28.6 .. .. .. 98.0 ..
Emissions of organic water pollutants
thousand kilograms per day 1990 2006a
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
122.1 1,410.6 721.8 131.6 7.7 36.1 43.9 378.3 18.7 1,451.4 15.0 1.3 42.6 .. 366.9 .. 9.1 28.9 0.5 39.8 14.7 .. 0.6 .. 54.0 32.4 .. 37.2 .. .. .. 0.3 370.8 29.2 10.2 .. 20.4 7.7 7.4 26.4 142.3 46.7 10.5 .. 70.8 51.8 3.8 104.1 10.3 5.7 15.3 56.1 118.4 446.7 140.6 19.0 ..
115.1 1,519.8 764.0 160.8 7.7 34.1 42.8 475.8 .. 1,122.7 27.2 1.7 56.1 .. 319.6 .. 11.9 11.8 0.5 29.3 14.7 15.3 .. .. 42.6 .. 92.8 32.7 208.4 .. .. 0.4 .. 21.1 .. 80.4 10.2 6.2 .. 26.8 122.1 62.5 .. 0.4 .. 50.5 6.6 .. 13.7 .. 10.8 .. 97.9 364.5 105.0 9.2 3.7
3.6
ENVIRONMENT
Water pollution Industry shares of emissions of organic water pollutants
kilograms per day per worker
Primary metals
Paper and pulp
Chemicals
% of total Stone, Food and ceramics, beverages and glass
Textiles
Wood
Other
1990
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
0.18 0.20 0.18 0.16 0.27 0.19 0.18 0.13 0.29 0.14 0.18 0.40 0.23 .. 0.12 .. 0.16 0.14 0.44 0.12 0.19 .. 0.30 .. 0.15 0.18 .. 0.40 .. .. .. 0.05 0.19 0.44 0.18 .. 0.27 0.17 0.35 0.14 0.20 0.24 0.27 .. 0.22 0.20 0.15 0.18 0.30 0.25 0.20 0.20 0.26 0.16 0.14 0.15 ..
0.15 0.20 0.18 0.15 0.27 0.18 0.18 0.12 .. 0.15 0.18 0.41 0.24 .. 0.11 .. 0.17 0.20 0.44 0.18 0.19 0.13 .. .. 0.17 .. 0.14 0.39 0.13 .. .. 0.06 .. 0.45 .. 0.16 0.31 0.18 .. 0.16 0.18 0.23 .. 0.32 .. 0.20 0.17 .. 0.32 .. 0.28 .. 0.23 0.16 0.15 0.18 0.12
2.7 12.2 1.3 7.1 13.1 1.3 2.2 3.5 .. 3.2 2.5 0.0 .. .. 4.2 .. 2.1 8.6 0.0 2.6 0.5 0.9 .. .. 0.8 .. 0.3 .. 2.9 .. .. 0.0 .. 0.0 .. 1.0 1.1 56.5 .. 1.6 1.2 2.1 .. .. .. 5.1 4.3 .. 0.9 .. 3.1 .. 5.8 3.1 1.7 1.9 5.6
6.4 7.6 4.0 2.8 25.6 10.1 8.5 5.2 .. 7.1 6.1 50.0 11.5 .. 5.4 .. 16.6 6.0 26.3 6.8 7.5 0.5 .. .. 5.2 .. 1.6 1.4 5.2 .. .. 13.7 .. 3.3 .. 2.8 7.1 4.6 .. 3.9 13.8 12.7 .. 17.0 .. 14.3 5.1 .. 11.7 .. 9.3 .. 6.3 5.2 7.2 14.9 1.3
10.5 9.2 13.0 12.8 29.9 17.2 15.0 10.5 .. 11.2 14.7 0.0 5.4 .. 12.1 .. 11.1 8.4 0.0 5.6 6.0 1.2 .. .. 7.6 .. 12.4 3.7 16.2 .. .. 0.0 .. 0.0 .. 8.7 2.7 13.2 .. 7.2 14.8 8.6 .. 4.4 .. 7.5 16.3 .. 7.0 .. 16.7 .. 13.2 11.1 6.6 21.9 17.2
15.8 53.7 21.5 16.1 16.9 21.6 19.7 9.0 .. 15.1 21.6 47.6 66.8 .. 6.3 .. 50.2 24.8 73.7 21.9 25.5 3.6 .. .. 20.0 .. 7.6 82.1 9.5 .. .. 0.0 .. 95.7 .. 17.6 81.2 14.9 .. 19.2 18.4 30.6 .. 76.9 .. 20.9 21.6 .. 55.7 .. 42.6 .. 33.1 18.8 15.1 34.4 10.7
3.8 0.3 3.9 13.8 5.4 5.8 0.0 5.5 .. 3.6 11.6 0.0 0.1 .. 3.0 .. 0.4 14.9 0.0 3.7 12.9 1.2 .. .. 4.4 .. 2.8 0.6 3.9 .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. 9.4 0.1 0.4 .. 29.9 4.1 3.2 .. 0.3 .. 4.0 23.7 .. 4.0 .. 5.9 .. 6.2 5.4 5.0 0.2 29.7
10.5 12.7 29.0 11.2 9.1 1.9 9.1 14.2 .. 5.3 16.8 0.0 12.8 .. 9.3 .. 11.6 11.8 0.0 12.6 16.7 90.7 .. .. 19.3 .. 58.9 7.5 6.8 .. .. 0.0 .. 0.0 .. 42.0 5.8 2.9 .. 29.4 2.6 6.1 .. .. .. 2.1 5.2 .. 4.8 .. 11.0 .. 3.1 11.0 19.1 15.5 2.2
3.4 0.3 7.4 0.7 .. 3.5 1.5 2.9 .. 2.0 2.6 0.0 1.7 .. 0.9 .. 2.8 1.8 0.0 19.7 4.5 .. .. .. 11.5 .. 6.3 1.1 7.9 .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. 1.9 1.4 1.7 .. 2.0 2.5 7.8 .. 0.8 .. 5.6 2.1 .. 1.7 .. 4.5 .. 0.0 4.8 6.8 1.4 20.4
46.9 3.9 19.8 35.5 .. 38.6 43.9 49.2 .. 52.6 24.2 2.4 1.8 .. 58.9 .. 5.2 23.7 0.0 27.2 26.3 1.9 .. .. 31.2 .. 10.0 3.6 47.5 .. .. 86.3 .. 1.0 .. 16.6 0.7 5.8 .. 6.8 42.5 28.9 .. 0.6 .. 40.5 21.6 .. 14.2 .. 6.9 .. 32.4 40.6 38.5 9.7 12.8
2010 World Development Indicators
175
3.6
Water pollution Emissions of organic water pollutants
thousand kilograms per day 1990 2006a
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe
411.2 1,521.4 7.1 .. 6.1 .. 4.2 32.3 72.8 28.1 6.2 260.5 348.0 .. .. 146.0 116.8 .. 6.6 29.1 31.1 369.4 .. .. 7.0 44.6 174.9 .. 3.3 .. 5.6 599.9 2,307.0 38.7 .. 96.5 141.0 .. 1.5 15.9 29.3
228.1 1,388.1 7.1 6.8 6.6 .. .. 35.3 51.4 28.2 .. 191.6 379.7 266.1 38.6 .. 97.6 .. 4.5 16.1 35.2 333.8 .. .. 7.6 55.8 177.7 .. 17.5 537.4 .. 521.7 1,889.4 15.8 .. .. 500.5 .. 1.6 .. 29.3
Industry shares of emissions of organic water pollutants
kilograms per day per worker
Primary metals
Paper and pulp
Chemicals
% of total Stone, Food and ceramics, beverages and glass
Textiles
Wood
Other
1990
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
2006a
0.12 0.16 0.44 .. 0.30 .. 0.32 0.09 0.13 0.13 0.38 0.17 0.16 .. .. 0.16 0.15 .. 0.45 0.17 0.24 0.15 .. .. 0.23 0.18 0.18 .. 0.29 .. 0.14 0.16 0.14 0.23 .. 0.21 0.16 .. 0.43 0.23 0.20
0.15 0.17 0.44 0.39 0.29 .. .. 0.09 0.14 0.13 .. 0.16 0.15 0.19 0.29 .. 0.14 .. 0.45 0.23 0.25 0.16 .. .. 0.29 0.14 0.16 .. 0.26 0.20 .. 0.17 0.14 0.28 .. .. 0.15 .. 0.41 .. 0.20
4.6 9.0 .. 0.0 4.9 .. .. 0.0 7.6 4.5 .. 5.8 3.1 2.6 0.6 .. 5.4 .. 0.0 21.9 1.5 1.8 .. .. 0.0 2.5 5.2 .. .. 14.5 .. 2.7 3.4 1.2 .. .. 1.4 .. .. .. 8.0
3.4 5.0 .. 96.9 6.3 .. .. 5.8 4.8 6.4 .. 7.0 7.9 4.3 1.9 .. 12.2 .. 6.2 1.4 9.4 4.1 .. .. 18.1 6.1 3.0 .. 4.6 4.1 .. 12.5 8.3 3.7 .. .. 3.5 .. 67.4 .. 4.7
6.7 11.9 0.0 0.0 23.8 .. .. 11.4 8.8 11.9 .. 11.4 10.8 9.0 7.0 .. 9.9 .. 0.0 5.1 2.7 13.2 .. .. 21.4 5.5 9.8 .. 7.9 10.3 .. 13.5 13.1 6.6 .. .. 6.8 .. 0.0 .. 11.0
13.4 17.8 97.0 0.5 44.6 .. .. 5.3 10.7 8.1 .. 14.7 15.2 22.4 57.5 .. 8.7 .. 93.8 20.2 69.3 16.5 .. .. 39.1 35.8 15.2 .. 44.5 20.7 .. 14.9 12.0 79.2 .. .. 13.3 .. 32.6 .. 21.5
3.9 8.0 0.0 0.0 3.9 .. .. 1.4 5.9 3.5 .. 5.2 7.9 6.3 14.2 .. 2.5 .. 0.0 7.6 0.1 3.4 .. .. 0.4 0.4 6.2 .. 0.0 6.5 .. 3.6 3.7 0.1 .. .. 6.7 .. 0.0 .. 6.3
27.4 6.6 0.0 0.0 10.5 .. .. 2.4 11.5 11.4 .. 11.9 9.0 43.6 8.0 .. 1.4 .. 0.0 37.5 14.0 22.5 .. .. 7.6 43.3 35.7 .. 14.4 6.1 .. 4.3 4.7 7.4 .. .. 40.3 .. 0.0 .. 25.2
5.1 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.8 .. .. 0.4 3.9 4.9 .. 4.3 3.7 2.5 1.7 .. 5.4 .. 0.0 0.4 1.5 2.4 .. .. 8.5 1.9 1.0 .. 16.8 2.1 .. 2.5 4.1 0.6 .. .. 3.3 .. 0.0 .. 1.7
35.4 37.7 3.0 2.6 5.3 .. .. 73.3 46.8 49.3 .. 39.6 42.4 9.3 9.1 .. 54.4 .. 0.0 5.9 1.4 36.1 .. .. 4.9 4.6 24.0 .. 11.7 35.8 .. 46.1 50.6 1.2 .. .. 24.7 .. 0.0 .. 21.5
a. Data are derived using the United Nations Industrial Development Organization’s (UNIDO) industry database four-digit International Standard Industrial Classification (ISIC). Data in italics are for the most recent year available and are derived using UNIDO’s industry database at the three-digit ISIC.
176
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
3.6
ENVIRONMENT
Water pollution Definitions
Emissions of organic pollutants from industrial
emissions of organic water pollutants. Such data
• Emissions of organic water pollutants are mea-
activities are a major cause of degradation of water
are fairly reliable because sampling techniques for
sured as biochemical oxygen demand, or the amount
quality. Water quality and pollution levels are gener-
measuring water pollution are more widely under-
of oxygen that bacteria in water will consume in
ally measured as concentration or load—the rate of
stood and much less expensive than those for air
breaking down waste, a standard water treatment
occurrence of a substance in an aqueous solution.
pollution.
test for the presence of organic pollutants. Emis-
Polluting substances include organic matter, metals,
Hettige, Mani, and Wheeler (1998) used plant- and
sions per worker are total emissions divided by the
minerals, sediment, bacteria, and toxic chemicals.
sector-level information on emissions and employ-
number of industrial workers. • Industry shares of
The table focuses on organic water pollution result-
ment from 13 national environmental protection
emissions of organic water pollutants are emissions
ing from industrial activities. Because water pollu-
agencies and sector-level information on output
from manufacturing activities as defined by two-digit
tion tends to be sensitive to local conditions, the
and employment from the United Nations Industrial
divisions of the International Standard Industrial
national-level data in the table may not reflect the
Development Organization (UNIDO). Their economet-
Classification revision 3.
quality of water in specific locations.
ric analysis found that the ratio of BOD to employ-
The data in the table come from an international
ment in each industrial sector is about the same
study of industrial emissions that may have been
across countries. This finding allowed the authors to
the first to include data from developing countries
estimate BOD loads across countries and over time.
(Hettige, Mani, and Wheeler 1998). These data were
The estimated BOD intensities per unit of employ-
updated through 2006 by the World Bank’s Develop-
ment were multiplied by sectoral employment num-
ment Research Group. Unlike estimates from earlier
bers from UNIDO’s industry database for 1980–98.
studies based on engineering or economic models,
These estimates of sectoral emissions were then
these estimates are based on actual measurements
used to calculate kilograms of emissions of organic
of plant-level water pollution. The focus is on organic
water pollutants per day for each country and year.
water pollution caused by organic waste, measured in
The data in the table were derived by updating these
terms of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), because
estimates through 2006.
the data for this indicator are the most plentiful and reliable for cross-country comparisons of emissions. BOD measures the strength of an organic waste by the amount of oxygen consumed in breaking it down. A sewage overload in natural waters exhausts the water’s dissolved oxygen content. Wastewater treatment, by contrast, reduces BOD. Data on water pollution are more readily available than are other emissions data because most industrial pollution control programs start by regulating
Emissions of organic water pollutants declined in most economies from 1990 to 2006, even in some of the top emitters Kilograms per day (millions)
1990–98
3.6a
2000–06
8
6
Data sources 4
Data on water pollutants are from Hettige, Mani, and Wheeler, “Industrial Pollution in Economic 2
Development: Kuznets Revisited” (1998). The data were updated through 2006 by the World Bank’s Development Research Group using the
0 China
United States
India
Russian Federation
Japan
Note: Data are for the most recent year available during the period specified. Source: Table 3.6.
Germany
Indonesia
same methodology as the initial study. Data on industrial sectoral employment are from UNIDO’s industry database.
2010 World Development Indicators
177
3.7
Energy production and use Energy production
Total million metric tons of oil equivalent 1990
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
178
.. 2.4 100.1 28.7 48.4 0.1 157.5 8.1 21.3 10.8 3.3 13.1 1.8 4.9 4.6 0.9 103.7 9.6 .. .. .. 11.0 273.8 .. .. 7.4 886.3 0.0 48.2 12.0 8.7 1.0 3.4 5.1 6.6 40.1 10.1 1.0 16.5 54.9 1.7 0.7 5.1 14.1 12.1 112.5 14.6 .. 1.8 186.2 4.4 9.2 3.4 .. .. 1.3 1.7
Energy use
Total million metric tons of oil equivalent
2007
1990
2007
.. 1.1 164.3 95.0 81.9 0.8 289.2 10.9 52.1 21.3 4.0 14.4 1.8 15.1 3.9 1.1 215.6 10.0 .. .. 3.6 10.2 413.2 .. .. 8.5 1,814.0 0.0 87.6 18.4 12.5 2.5 11.2 4.1 5.2 33.7 27.0 1.5 28.9 82.3 2.8 0.5 4.4 20.9 15.9 135.5 12.0 .. 1.1 137.0 6.5 12.1 5.3 .. .. 2.0 2.1
.. 2.7 22.2 5.9 46.1 7.7 86.2 24.8 25.8 12.7 42.3 48.2 1.7 2.8 7.0 1.3 139.5 28.6 .. .. .. 5.0 208.7 .. .. 13.8 863.1 8.8 24.2 11.8 0.8 2.0 4.3 9.0 16.5 48.8 17.3 4.1 6.0 31.8 2.5 0.9 9.6 14.9 28.4 224.5 1.2 .. 12.1 351.4 5.3 21.4 4.4 .. .. 1.6 2.4
.. 2.2 36.9 10.6 73.1 2.8 124.1 33.2 11.9 25.8 28.0 57.0 2.9 5.4 5.6 2.0 235.6 20.2 .. .. 5.1 7.3 269.4 .. .. 30.8 1,955.8 13.7 29.5 18.1 1.3 4.8 10.0 9.3 9.9 45.8 19.6 7.9 11.8 67.2 4.9 0.7 5.6 22.8 36.5 263.7 1.8 .. 3.3 331.3 9.5 32.2 8.3 .. .. 2.8 4.7
2010 World Development Indicators
Alternative and nuclear energy production
% of total average annual % growth 1990–2007
.. 2.0 2.7 3.4 2.1 –3.7 2.3 2.0 –3.2 4.5 –1.9 1.1 3.1 3.4 2.2 2.6 3.1 –1.3 .. .. 3.5 2.3 1.6 .. .. 5.0 4.5 2.4 0.5 2.5 2.8 5.1 5.0 1.4 –1.7 0.2 0.2 4.0 3.9 4.7 3.8 –2.2 –2.2 2.6 1.8 1.1 2.3 .. –7.3 –0.1 3.4 2.6 4.0 .. .. 3.6 3.6
Per capita kilograms of oil equivalent
Fossil fuel
Combustible renewables and waste
% of total energy use
1990
2007
1990
2007
1990
2007
1990
2007
.. 809 878 552 1,418 2,171 5,053 3,214 3,609 110 4,155 4,840 346 416 1,627 933 933 3,277 .. .. .. 407 7,509 .. .. 1,048 760 1,539 730 319 326 643 343 1,884 1,558 4,705 3,374 556 583 551 463 276 6,099 308 5,692 3,957 1,275 .. 2,217 4,424 353 2,110 498 .. .. 219 486
.. 694 1,089 606 1,850 926 5,888 3,997 1,388 163 2,891 5,366 343 571 1,483 1,068 1,239 2,641 .. .. 358 391 8,169 .. .. 1,851 1,484 1,985 655 289 357 1,070 496 2,099 884 4,428 3,598 804 885 840 800 151 4,198 290 6,895 4,258 1,300 .. 767 4,027 415 2,875 620 .. .. 286 661
.. 76.5 99.9 25.5 88.7 97.2 93.9 79.2 .. 45.5 95.4 76.0 4.8 69.1 93.9 66.1 51.1 84.3 .. .. .. 18.7 74.5 .. .. 75.1 75.5 99.4 67.4 11.2 35.0 47.2 23.3 86.5 64.3 93.2 89.6 74.8 79.1 94.0 31.4 19.3 99.8 5.5 55.5 58.0 32.0 .. 88.6 86.8 18.2 94.6 28.1 .. .. 19.7 30.0
.. 67.8 99.7 34.0 89.5 70.7 94.4 72.6 98.4 66.2 91.5 73.1 36.8 81.8 91.5 69.4 52.6 77.8 .. .. 29.1 27.4 75.6 .. .. 77.7 86.9 95.3 71.5 4.2 38.7 47.1 22.7 86.7 86.8 83.0 82.3 80.5 86.6 95.8 41.9 26.5 91.3 8.5 50.0 51.2 39.6 .. 70.7 80.8 31.8 93.4 46.0 .. .. 27.8 55.3
.. 13.6 0.1 73.5 3.7 0.1 4.6 10.0 0.0 53.9 0.5 1.6 94.2 27.2 2.3 33.4 34.1 0.6 .. .. .. 76.7 4.0 .. .. 19.4 23.2 0.6 22.8 84.7 59.5 37.4 73.5 3.5 35.6 0.0 6.6 24.4 13.8 3.3 48.2 80.7 2.0 93.9 16.1 5.2 62.9 .. 3.8 1.4 73.7 4.2 68.5 .. .. 77.8 62.9
.. 9.9 0.2 63.4 3.5 0.0 4.3 15.4 0.0 33.3 5.2 3.6 61.5 14.5 3.3 23.1 30.7 3.7 .. .. 70.5 68.1 4.3 .. .. 15.4 9.9 0.4 15.5 92.7 55.9 17.7 76.4 3.5 13.1 4.6 14.8 18.0 6.2 2.2 30.7 73.5 10.5 90.2 20.1 5.1 56.6 .. 11.8 6.8 64.7 3.7 50.4 .. .. 71.7 40.7
.. 9.2 0.1 1.1 7.5 1.7 1.5 11.0 0.2 0.6 0.0 23.1 0.0 3.6 3.8 0.1 13.2 13.9 .. .. .. 4.6 21.5 .. .. 5.5 1.3 0.0 9.8 4.1 5.3 14.7 2.6 3.6 0.1 6.9 0.3 0.7 7.2 2.7 20.3 0.0 0.0 0.6 20.9 38.6 5.2 .. 5.4 11.8 9.3 1.0 3.4 .. .. 2.5 8.2
.. 11.1 0.1 2.6 6.2 29.0 1.3 10.3 1.7 0.5 0.0 22.2 0.0 3.7 6.1 0.0 15.1 20.4 .. .. 0.1 4.5 20.9 .. .. 6.5 3.2 0.0 13.2 3.9 2.3 35.0 1.6 4.0 0.1 15.4 3.3 1.5 6.6 2.1 27.4 0.0 0.2 1.3 20.1 45.6 3.7 .. 18.0 12.8 3.4 1.7 3.8 .. .. 0.5 4.0
Energy production
Total million metric tons of oil equivalent
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Energy use
Total million metric tons of oil equivalent
1990
2007
1990
2007
14.6 291.1 170.0 179.8 104.9 3.5 0.4 25.3 0.5 75.1 0.2 90.5 9.0 28.9 22.6 .. 50.4 2.5 .. 1.1 0.1 .. .. 73.2 4.9 1.3 .. .. 50.3 .. .. .. 193.4 0.1 2.7 0.8 5.6 10.7 0.2 5.5 60.5 12.0 1.5 .. 150.5 119.1 38.3 34.2 0.6 .. 4.6 10.6 15.7 103.9 3.4 .. 26.6
10.2 450.9 331.1 323.1 104.8 1.4 2.7 26.4 0.5 90.5 0.3 136.0 14.7 19.7 42.5 .. 146.6 1.4 .. 1.8 0.2 .. .. 101.6 3.8 1.5 .. .. 94.4 .. .. .. 251.1 0.1 3.6 0.7 11.0 23.9 0.3 8.5 61.5 14.0 2.1 .. 231.7 213.9 59.3 63.6 0.7 .. 7.1 12.2 22.4 72.6 4.6 .. 103.0
28.7 318.2 102.5 68.3 18.1 10.0 11.6 146.7 2.8 438.1 3.3 72.7 11.2 33.2 93.1 .. 7.8 7.6 .. 7.8 2.2 .. .. 11.3 16.1 2.5 .. .. 22.7 .. .. .. 121.2 9.9 3.4 6.9 5.9 10.7 0.7 5.8 65.7 13.3 2.1 .. 70.6 21.0 4.2 42.9 1.5 .. 3.1 9.7 27.5 103.1 16.7 .. 6.9
26.7 594.9 190.6 184.9 33.1 15.1 22.0 178.2 5.0 513.5 7.2 66.5 18.3 18.4 222.2 .. 25.2 2.9 .. 4.7 4.0 .. .. 17.8 9.3 3.0 .. .. 72.6 .. .. .. 184.3 3.3 3.1 14.4 9.2 15.6 1.6 9.6 80.4 16.8 3.5 .. 106.7 26.9 15.5 83.3 2.8 .. 4.2 14.1 40.0 97.1 25.1 .. 22.2
ENVIRONMENT
3.7
Energy production and use
Alternative and nuclear energy production
% of total average annual % growth 1990–2007
0.0 3.5 3.5 5.7 3.9 2.9 3.6 1.4 2.8 0.9 4.4 –1.5 3.0 –2.3 5.0 .. 7.5 –4.3 .. –2.6 3.8 .. .. 2.3 –2.4 0.8 .. .. 6.2 .. .. .. 2.3 –5.6 –1.3 4.0 2.8 2.4 5.1 3.1 1.0 1.3 3.2 .. 2.4 1.7 7.0 3.7 3.5 .. 1.5 2.2 2.3 –0.6 2.9 .. 6.4
Per capita kilograms of oil equivalent
Fossil fuel
Combustible renewables and waste
% of total energy use
1990
2007
1990
2007
1990
2007
1990
2007
2,762 375 575 1,256 1,000 2,843 2,486 2,586 1,167 3,546 1,028 4,450 479 1,649 2,171 .. 3,681 1,713 .. 2,913 755 .. .. 2,596 4,357 1,298 .. .. 1,252 .. .. .. 1,456 2,261 1,541 287 437 261 446 303 4,392 3,859 506 .. 725 4,951 2,304 397 618 .. 723 447 440 2,705 1,691 .. 14,732
2,658 529 845 2,604 .. 3,457 3,059 3,001 1,852 4,019 1,259 4,292 485 774 4,586 .. 9,463 556 .. 2,052 959 .. .. 2,889 2,740 1,482 .. .. 2,733 .. .. .. 1,750 910 1,182 465 418 319 745 338 4,909 3,966 621 .. 722 5,704 5,678 512 845 .. 686 494 451 2,547 2,363 .. 19,504
81.5 55.6 54.6 98.2 98.6 84.8 97.2 93.4 82.6 84.5 98.2 96.9 19.5 93.1 83.8 .. 99.9 93.6 .. 81.6 93.5 .. .. 98.9 75.8 98.0 .. .. 89.1 .. .. .. 88.1 99.6 97.0 93.8 5.5 14.4 62.0 5.1 96.0 64.2 28.3 .. 19.3 51.9 100.0 52.7 58.4 .. 21.3 63.3 45.8 97.8 80.4 .. 99.9
79.0 70.0 68.8 98.7 99.4 90.9 97.4 90.5 89.9 83.2 98.4 98.9 19.6 88.1 81.9 .. 100.0 65.7 .. 64.2 92.7 .. .. 99.1 61.9 85.0 .. .. 95.5 .. .. .. 89.3 90.0 96.1 93.8 8.0 31.7 68.0 10.7 92.9 67.4 40.6 .. 19.3 54.8 100.0 62.1 75.7 .. 29.4 69.8 57.0 94.8 79.1 .. 100.0
2.3 41.9 43.9 1.0 0.1 1.1 0.0 0.6 17.1 1.1 0.1 0.2 75.9 2.9 0.8 .. 0.1 0.1 .. 8.5 4.6 .. .. 1.1 1.8 0.0 .. .. 9.4 .. .. .. 6.1 0.4 2.5 4.6 93.9 84.7 16.0 93.7 1.4 4.1 53.9 .. 80.2 4.9 0.0 43.8 28.3 .. 72.5 27.5 35.2 2.2 14.8 .. 0.1
5.0 27.2 27.5 0.5 0.1 1.6 0.0 2.6 9.8 1.4 0.1 0.1 74.0 5.7 1.2 .. 0.0 0.1 .. 25.1 3.5 .. .. 0.9 8.3 4.8 .. .. 4.0 .. .. .. 4.5 2.3 3.3 3.1 80.3 66.3 12.3 86.7 3.5 6.6 52.4 .. 80.2 5.1 0.0 33.9 13.5 .. 53.0 18.2 19.2 5.4 12.6 .. 0.0
12.8 2.4 1.5 0.8 1.2 0.6 3.1 3.9 0.3 14.4 1.8 0.9 4.4 4.0 15.4 .. 0.0 11.3 .. 5.0 1.9 .. .. 0.0 28.2 1.7 .. .. 1.5 .. .. .. 5.9 0.2 0.0 1.5 0.4 1.0 17.5 1.3 1.4 31.7 17.5 .. 0.5 49.6 0.0 3.6 12.7 .. 76.0 9.2 19.0 0.1 4.8 .. 0.0
14.8 2.7 3.7 0.8 0.1 1.5 3.4 4.6 0.4 15.3 1.5 1.1 6.4 6.2 16.9 .. 0.0 41.2 .. 5.1 1.7 .. .. 0.0 28.7 3.2 .. .. 0.8 .. .. .. 6.3 0.1 0.0 1.0 15.1 1.9 8.7 2.5 1.8 25.9 6.8 .. 0.5 43.2 0.0 3.9 11.2 .. 109.9 12.0 23.8 0.3 5.7 .. 0.0
2010 World Development Indicators
179
3.7
Energy production and use Energy production
Total million metric tons of oil equivalent 1990
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
180
2007
40.8 27.6 1,280.3 1,230.6 .. .. 370.8 551.3 1.0 1.3 13.4 9.8 25.2 .. .. .. 0.0 0.0 5.3 6.0 3.1 3.5 .. .. 114.5 159.6 34.6 30.3 4.2 5.1 8.8 34.6 .. .. 29.7 33.6 9.7 12.6 22.3 24.4 2.0 1.6 9.1 16.9 26.5 59.4 .. .. 1.1 2.1 12.6 37.0 5.7 7.9 25.8 27.3 74.9 66.1 .. .. 135.8 81.6 110.2 178.4 208.0 176.2 1,649.4 1,665.2 1.1 1.2 38.6 60.1 148.9 183.8 24.7 73.9 .. .. 9.4 16.5 4.9 6.8 8.6 8.7 8,823.2 t 11,926.4 t 407.6 249.0 4,811.7 6,906.3 2,296.4 3,981.5 2,515.6 2,926.8 5,055.3 7,298.0 1,225.4 2,460.3 1,861.3 1,796.8 608.4 919.8 558.6 836.8 348.7 554.1 475.6 779.9 3,785.4 4,654.1 477.1 459.9
2010 World Development Indicators
Energy use
Total million metric tons of oil equivalent 1990
2007
62.3 38.9 870.0 672.1 .. .. 59.3 150.3 1.7 2.7 19.3 15.8 43.8 .. .. .. 11.5 26.8 21.3 17.8 5.7 7.3 .. .. 90.9 134.3 90.1 144.0 5.5 9.3 10.6 14.7 .. .. 47.2 50.4 23.8 25.7 11.4 19.6 5.6 3.9 9.7 18.3 42.0 104.0 .. .. 1.3 2.5 6.0 15.3 4.9 8.8 52.8 100.0 19.6 18.1 .. .. 251.8 137.3 19.9 51.6 207.2 211.3 1,913.2 2,339.9 2.3 3.2 46.4 48.7 43.6 63.7 24.3 55.8 .. .. 2.5 7.2 5.4 7.4 9.3 9.4 8,555.5 t 11,664.3 t 277.3 378.3 3,884.6 5,715.4 2,013.2 3,713.4 1,871.9 2,004.7 4,145.7 6,074.4 1,138.8 2,475.5 1,675.5 1,297.3 453.0 711.2 185.5 406.5 388.3 728.9 310.8 474.1 4,433.0 5,625.0 1,060.4 1,229.2
Alternative and nuclear energy production
% of total average annual % growth 1990–2007
Per capita kilograms of oil equivalent 1990
2007
–2.1 2,683 1,806 –1.3 5,867 4,730 .. .. .. 4.8 3,618 6,223 3.5 224 225 .. 2,550 2,141 .. 4,182 .. .. .. .. 3.8 3,760 5,831 –0.2 4,037 3,307 2.0 2,835 3,632 .. .. .. 2.2 2,581 2,807 3.2 2,320 3,208 3.5 322 464 2.6 392 363 .. .. .. 0.5 5,514 5,512 0.6 3,545 3,406 2.9 895 958 –1.9 1,051 580 4.1 382 443 5.2 742 1,553 .. .. .. 4.5 322 390 6.1 4,899 11,506 3.7 607 864 3.6 941 1,370 1.2 5,352 3,631 .. .. .. –3.2 4,851 2,953 5.2 10,645 11,833 0.2 3,619 3,464 1.2 7,664 7,766 1.3 725 953 0.6 2,261 1,812 1.6 2,206 2,319 5.1 367 655 .. .. .. 6.2 204 324 1.8 683 604 –0.2 889 759 1.8 w 1,666 w 1,819 w 2.1 449 423 2.2 1,054 1,242 3.5 696 1,013 0.5 2,354 2,130 2.2 980 1,127 4.4 715 1,295 –1.3 3,885 2,948 2.5 1,042 1,273 4.5 819 1,276 3.6 347 484 2.5 676 662 1.5 4,733 5,321 1.1 3,516 3,789
Fossil fuel 1990
2007
96.1 93.3 .. 100.0 43.2 90.6 90.6 .. 100.0 81.6 71.1 .. 86.1 77.4 24.1 17.5 .. 37.3 59.9 97.9 72.7 6.9 63.9 .. 15.0 99.2 87.0 81.8 100.0 .. 91.8 100.0 90.7 86.4 58.7 99.2 91.5 20.4 .. 97.0 15.6 44.8 81.0 w 50.6 79.5 71.4 88.1 77.9 71.5 93.2 71.2 97.2 53.7 41.3 83.9 79.8
82.8 89.3 .. 100.0 53.1 89.2 .. .. 100.0 70.8 69.2 .. 87.7 83.2 45.5 26.3 .. 32.9 51.6 98.4 62.0 10.3 81.2 .. 12.8 99.9 86.3 90.5 100.0 .. 81.7 100.0 89.6 85.6 62.3 98.9 87.8 51.4 .. 98.9 10.7 27.9 81.3 w 46.7 81.6 80.0 84.7 79.8 83.8 89.2 72.8 97.9 67.9 41.8 82.9 75.7
Combustible renewables and waste
% of total energy use
1990
2007
1990
2007
1.0 1.4 .. 0.0 56.8 6.0 2.1 .. 0.0 0.8 4.7 .. 11.5 4.5 71.0 81.8 .. 11.7 3.8 0.0 0.0 91.7 34.9 .. 82.8 0.8 12.9 13.7 0.0 .. 0.1 0.0 0.3 3.3 24.3 0.0 1.2 77.7 .. 3.1 74.3 50.9 10.2 w 46.2 16.4 25.9 6.2 18.1 26.6 1.6 19.7 1.7 43.7 56.5 2.8 3.2
8.9 1.0 .. 0.0 45.9 5.1 .. .. 0.0 3.5 6.5 .. 10.2 3.7 50.8 72.8 .. 19.6 8.2 0.0 0.0 88.6 17.8 .. 85.1 0.1 13.6 5.1 0.0 .. 0.6 0.0 1.9 3.5 16.4 0.0 0.8 44.0 .. 1.1 78.3 65.0 9.6 w 49.3 13.2 16.3 7.3 15.1 12.8 2.1 16.3 1.1 29.3 55.8 3.7 5.6
1.6 5.2 .. 0.0 0.0 4.2 7.4 .. 0.0 15.5 25.8 .. 2.5 18.1 4.9 0.8 .. 50.9 37.0 2.1 25.5 1.4 1.0 .. 0.6 0.0 0.1 4.6 0.3 .. 8.2 0.0 8.5 10.3 26.8 1.2 7.3 1.9 .. 0.0 12.7 4.0 8.8 w 3.4 4.1 2.8 5.4 4.0 1.8 5.1 9.2 1.1 2.5 2.2 13.1 16.7
8.7 8.6 .. 0.0 0.7 5.7 .. .. 0.0 24.9 24.1 .. 2.3 13.3 3.7 0.9 .. 46.2 40.9 1.5 37.7 1.2 0.7 .. 0.3 0.0 0.1 4.6 0.0 .. 18.2 0.0 8.2 10.8 21.9 1.1 11.2 4.6 .. 0.0 11.3 4.7 9.0 w 4.1 5.1 3.8 7.4 5.0 3.4 8.1 10.8 0.9 2.8 2.5 13.3 18.2
About the data
3.7
ENVIRONMENT
Energy production and use Definitions
In developing economies growth in energy use is
assumed for converting nuclear electricity into oil
• Energy production refers to forms of primary
closely related to growth in the modern sectors—
equivalents and 100 percent efficiency for converting
energy—petroleum (crude oil, natural gas liquids,
industry, motorized transport, and urban areas—
hydroelectric power.
and oil from nonconventional sources), natural gas,
but energy use also reflects climatic, geographic,
The IEA makes these estimates in consultation
solid fuels (coal, lignite, and other derived fuels),
and economic factors (such as the relative price
with national statistical offices, oil companies, elec-
and combustible renewables and waste—and pri-
of energy). Energy use has been growing rapidly in
tric utilities, and national energy experts. The IEA
mary electricity, all converted into oil equivalents
low- and middle-income economies, but high-income
occasionally revises its time series to reflect politi-
(see About the data). • Energy use refers to the use
economies still use almost five times as much energy
cal changes, and energy statistics undergo contin-
of primary energy before transformation to other
on a per capita basis.
ual changes in coverage or methodology as more
end-use fuels, which is equal to indigenous produc-
detailed energy accounts become available. Breaks
tion plus imports and stock changes, minus exports
in series are therefore unavoidable.
and fuels supplied to ships and aircraft engaged in
Energy data are compiled by the International Energy Agency (IEA). IEA data for economies that are not members of the Organisation for Economic
international transport (see About the data). • Fos-
Co-operation and Development (OECD) are based
sil fuel comprises coal, oil, petroleum, and natural
on national energy data adjusted to conform to
gas products. • Combustible renewables and waste
annual questionnaires completed by OECD member
comprise solid biomass, liquid biomass, biogas,
governments.
industrial waste, and municipal waste. • Alternative
Total energy use refers to the use of primary energy
and nuclear energy production is noncarbohydrate
before transformation to other end-use fuels (such
energy that does not produce carbon dioxide when
as electricity and refined petroleum products). It
generated. It includes hydropower and nuclear, geo-
includes energy from combustible renewables and
thermal, and solar power, among others.
waste—solid biomass and animal products, gas and liquid from biomass, and industrial and municipal waste. Biomass is any plant matter used directly as fuel or converted into fuel, heat, or electricity. Data for combustible renewables and waste are often based on small surveys or other incomplete information and thus give only a broad impression of developments and are not strictly comparable across countries. The IEA reports include country notes that explain some of these differences (see Data sources). All forms of energy—primary energy and primary electricity—are converted into oil equivalents. A notional thermal efficiency of 33 percent is
A person in a high-income economy uses more than 12 times as much energy on average as a person in a low-income economy
3.7a 1990
Energy use per capita (thousands of kilograms of oil equivalent) 6
2007
4
Data sources 2
Data on energy production and use are from IEA electronic files and are published in IEA’s annual publications, Energy Statistics and Bal-
0
ances of Non-OECD Countries, Energy Statistics Low income
Source: Table 3.7.
Lower middle income
Upper middle income
High income
World
of OECD Countries, and Energy Balances of OECD Countries.
2010 World Development Indicators
181
3.8 Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
182
Energy dependency and efficiency and carbon dioxide emissions Net energy importsa
GDP per unit of energy use
% of energy use 1990 2007
2005 PPP $ per kilogram of oil equivalent 1990 2007
.. 8 –351 –387 –5 98 –83 67 17 16 92 73 –7 –77 34 28 26 66 .. .. .. –120 –31 .. .. 46 –3 100 –99 –2 –997 48 22 43 60 18 42 75 –175 –72 31 19 47 5 57 50 –1,139 .. 85 47 17 57 24 .. .. 20 29
.. 51 –346 –793 –12 71 –133 67 –337 17 86 75 39 –177 30 45 8 51 .. .. 29 –39 –53 .. .. 73 7 100 –202 –2 –891 47 –13 57 48 26 –38 80 –145 –22 42 26 22 9 56 49 –549 .. 68 59 32 62 36 .. .. 28 55
2010 World Development Indicators
.. 4.5 7.1 5.8 5.3 1.4 4.8 8.0 1.3 6.2 1.5 5.2 3.2 7.0 .. 7.5 7.7 2.2 .. .. .. 5.1 3.6 .. .. 6.3 1.4 15.4 8.2 1.9 10.7 9.7 5.5 6.6 .. 3.5 7.5 6.7 9.4 5.8 8.0 1.9 1.7 1.8 4.1 6.3 11.8 .. 2.4 5.8 2.5 8.3 6.7 .. .. 6.4 5.5
.. 9.2 6.7 8.1 6.8 5.7 6.0 8.9 5.3 7.2 3.6 6.2 3.9 6.6 4.5 11.6 7.4 3.8 .. .. 4.8 5.1 4.4 .. .. 7.1 3.4 20.1 12.3 1.0 9.9 9.6 3.1 7.5 .. 5.2 9.6 9.0 7.9 5.7 7.7 4.0 4.7 2.6 4.8 7.4 10.3 .. 5.8 8.2 3.1 9.4 7.0 .. .. 3.6 5.4
Carbon dioxide emissions
Total million metric tons 1990 2006
2.7 7.5 78.8 4.4 112.5 3.7 292.9 60.7 44.1 15.5 98.5 107.5 0.7 5.5 4.7 2.2 208.7 76.6 0.6 0.3 0.5 1.7 449.7 0.2 0.1 35.5 2,412.9 27.6 57.3 4.1 1.2 3.0 5.8 16.9 33.3 131.0 50.4 9.6 16.8 75.9 2.6 .. 25.0 3.0 51.0 397.8 6.1 0.2 15.3 962.7 3.9 72.7 5.1 1.1 0.3 1.0 2.6
0.7 4.3 132.6 10.6 173.4 4.4 371.7 71.8 35.0 41.6 68.8 107.1 3.1 11.4 27.4 4.8 352.3 48.0 0.8 0.2 4.1 3.6 544.3 0.2 0.4 60.1 6,099.1 39.0 63.4 2.2 1.5 7.8 6.9 23.7 29.6 114.8 53.9 20.3 31.3 166.7 6.5 0.6 17.5 6.0 66.6 382.9 2.1 0.3 5.5 804.5 9.2 96.3 11.8 1.4 0.3 1.8 7.2
Carbon intensity kilograms per kilogram of oil equivalent energy use 1990 2006
.. 2.8 3.6 0.8 2.4 0.9 3.4 2.4 2.7 1.2 2.6 2.2 0.4 2.0 1.1 1.7 1.5 2.7 .. .. .. 0.3 2.2 .. .. 2.6 2.8 3.1 2.4 0.3 1.5 1.5 1.3 2.5 2.0 3.0 2.9 2.3 2.8 2.4 1.1 .. 4.0 0.2 1.8 1.8 5.2 .. 1.8 2.8 0.7 3.4 1.1 .. .. 0.6 1.1
.. 2.0 3.8 1.1 2.5 1.7 3.0 2.1 2.6 1.7 2.4 1.8 1.1 2.4 5.1 2.4 1.6 2.4 .. .. 0.8 0.5 2.0 .. .. 2.0 3.3 2.9 2.1 0.1 1.2 1.8 0.7 2.6 3.0 2.5 2.7 2.6 2.9 2.6 1.4 0.8 3.5 0.3 1.8 1.4 1.2 .. 1.8 2.4 1.0 3.2 1.4 .. .. 0.7 1.8
Per capita metric tons 1990 2006
0.2 2.3 3.1 0.4 3.5 1.1 17.2 7.9 6.0 0.1 9.6 10.8 0.1 0.8 1.2 1.6 1.4 8.8 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 16.2 0.1 0.0 2.7 2.1 4.8 1.7 0.1 0.5 1.0 0.5 3.8 3.1 12.7 9.8 1.3 1.6 1.3 0.5 .. 16.3 0.1 10.2 7.0 6.6 0.2 2.9 12.0 0.3 7.2 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.5
0.0 1.4 4.0 0.6 4.4 1.4 18.0 8.7 4.1 0.3 7.1 10.2 0.4 1.2 7.3 2.6 1.9 6.2 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.2 16.7 0.1 0.0 3.6 4.7 5.7 1.5 0.0 0.4 1.8 0.3 5.3 2.6 11.2 9.9 2.1 2.4 2.1 1.1 0.1 13.0 0.1 12.7 6.2 1.5 0.2 1.3 9.8 0.4 8.6 0.9 0.1 0.2 0.2 1.0
kilograms per 2005 PPP $ of GDP 1990 2006
.. 0.6 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.3 1.7 0.2 1.7 0.4 0.1 0.3 .. 0.2 0.2 1.2 0.1 0.1 .. 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.4 1.9 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4 .. 0.9 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.1 .. 2.2 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.2 1.2 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.2
0.0 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.7 0.2 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.3 1.2 0.2 0.2 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.3 1.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4 .. 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.7 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.3
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Net energy importsa
GDP per unit of energy use
% of energy use 1990 2007
2005 PPP $ per kilogram of oil equivalent 1990 2007
49 9 –66 –163 –480 65 96 83 83 83 95 –24 20 13 76 .. –544 67 .. 86 94 .. .. –546 69 49 .. .. –122 .. .. .. –60 99 20 89 5 0 67 5 8 10 29 .. –113 –467 –802 20 59 .. –49 –9 43 –1 80 .. –286
62 24 –74 –75 –217 91 88 85 90 82 96 –105 20 –7 81 .. –482 51 .. 61 95 .. .. –470 59 50 .. .. –30 .. .. .. –36 97 –15 95 –20 –53 79 11 24 16 41 .. –117 –696 –283 24 75 .. –70 13 44 25 82 .. –364
4.5 3.2 3.6 5.0 .. 6.2 7.2 9.2 5.1 7.3 3.2 1.6 3.0 .. 5.2 .. 2.8 1.5 .. 3.2 7.5 .. .. .. 2.7 6.0 .. .. 5.3 .. .. .. 6.9 1.7 1.4 9.7 0.9 .. 9.4 2.3 6.0 4.8 3.7 .. 2.0 6.5 6.4 4.2 9.8 .. 5.5 10.0 5.4 3.0 9.4 .. ..
6.7 4.9 4.1 4.0 .. 11.9 8.2 9.6 3.9 7.9 3.8 2.4 3.0 .. 5.5 .. 4.8 3.4 .. 7.4 10.5 .. .. 5.1 5.8 5.3 .. .. 4.7 .. .. .. 7.6 2.7 2.6 8.3 1.8 .. 7.9 2.9 7.6 6.4 3.9 .. 2.6 8.6 3.8 4.6 12.7 .. 6.1 14.7 7.1 6.1 9.0 .. 3.4
3.8
ENVIRONMENT
Energy dependency and efficiency and carbon dioxide emissions Carbon dioxide emissions
Total million metric tons 1990 2006
61.9 690.1 150.3 227.0 52.5 30.9 33.5 424.7 8.0 1,171.4 10.4 261.1 5.8 244.6 241.5 .. 40.7 11.0 0.2 13.3 9.1 .. 0.5 40.3 22.1 10.8 1.0 0.6 56.5 0.4 2.7 1.5 384.4 21.0 10.0 23.5 1.0 4.3 0.0 0.6 167.3 22.7 2.6 1.1 45.3 31.3 10.3 68.5 3.1 2.1 2.3 21.1 44.5 347.6 44.3 .. 11.8
57.6 1,509.3 333.2 466.6 92.5 43.8 70.4 473.8 12.1 1,292.5 20.7 193.4 12.1 84.7 474.9 .. 86.5 5.6 1.4 7.5 15.3 .. 0.8 55.5 14.2 10.9 2.8 1.0 187.7 0.6 1.7 3.8 435.8 7.8 9.4 45.3 2.0 10.0 2.8 3.2 168.4 30.5 4.3 0.9 97.2 40.2 41.3 142.6 6.4 4.6 4.0 38.6 68.3 318.0 60.0 .. 46.2
Carbon intensity kilograms per kilogram of oil equivalent energy use 1990 2006
2.2 2.2 1.5 3.3 2.9 3.1 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.7 3.2 3.3 0.5 7.4 2.6 .. 5.2 2.2 .. 2.2 4.0 .. .. 3.6 2.0 4.0 .. .. 2.5 .. .. .. 3.2 3.1 2.9 3.4 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.1 2.5 1.7 1.3 .. 0.6 1.5 2.4 1.6 2.1 .. 0.7 2.2 1.6 3.4 2.6 .. 1.7
2.1 2.7 1.8 2.7 2.7 3.0 3.3 2.6 2.8 2.5 3.0 3.0 0.7 3.9 2.2 .. 3.5 2.0 .. 1.6 3.3 .. .. 3.1 1.7 3.7 .. .. 2.8 .. .. .. 2.5 2.3 3.3 3.4 0.2 0.6 1.9 0.3 2.2 1.8 1.3 .. 0.9 1.4 2.8 1.8 2.2 .. 1.0 2.9 1.7 3.3 2.4 .. 2.5
Per capita metric tons 1990 2006
6.0 0.8 0.8 4.2 2.8 8.8 7.2 7.5 3.3 9.5 3.3 15.9 0.2 12.1 5.6 .. 19.2 2.4 0.1 5.1 3.1 .. 0.2 9.2 6.0 5.6 0.1 0.1 3.1 0.0 1.3 1.4 4.6 4.8 4.5 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 11.2 6.6 0.6 0.1 0.5 7.4 5.6 0.6 1.3 0.5 0.5 1.0 0.7 9.1 4.5 .. 25.2
5.7 1.4 1.5 6.7 3.2 10.3 10.0 8.0 4.6 10.1 3.7 12.6 0.3 3.6 9.8 .. 33.3 1.1 0.2 3.3 3.7 .. 0.2 9.2 4.2 5.3 0.2 0.1 7.2 0.0 0.5 3.1 4.2 2.1 3.7 1.5 0.1 0.2 1.4 0.1 10.3 7.3 0.8 0.1 0.7 8.6 15.5 0.9 2.0 0.7 0.7 1.4 0.8 8.3 5.7 .. 46.1
kilograms per 2005 PPP $ of GDP 1990 2006
0.5 0.7 0.4 0.7 .. 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.6 0.4 1.0 2.7 0.2 .. 0.5 .. 0.6 1.3 0.1 0.9 0.5 .. 0.5 .. 0.7 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.9 0.2 0.5 2.1 2.0 0.4 0.2 .. 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.3 1.1 0.3 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
0.3 0.6 0.4 0.7 .. 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.6 0.3 0.8 1.3 0.2 .. 0.4 .. 0.7 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.4 .. 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9 1.3 0.4 0.1 .. 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.3 .. 0.7
183
3.8 Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Energy dependency and efficiency and carbon dioxide emissions Net energy importsa
GDP per unit of energy use
% of energy use 1990 2007
2005 PPP $ per kilogram of oil equivalent 1990 2007
34 –47 .. –526 43 31 .. 100 75 46 .. –26 62 24 17 .. 37 59 –96 64 7 37 .. 17 –111 –16 51 –281 .. 46 –454 0 14 49 17 –242 –2 .. –273 9 8 –3b w 10 –24 –14 –34 –22 –8 –11 –34 –201 10 –54 15 55
29 –83 .. –267 53 38 .. 100 67 53 .. –19 79 45 –136 .. 33 51 –24 59 8 43 .. 15 –142 11 73 –266 .. 41 –245 17 29 62 –23 –188 –33 .. –129 8 8 –2b w –8 –21 –7 –46 –20 1 –39 –29 –106 24 –64 18 63
2.7 2.2 .. 5.3 6.3 4.8 .. 6.3 3.1 5.8 .. 3.0 8.5 6.3 2.5 .. 4.5 9.4 3.3 2.9 2.3 5.3 .. 2.7 2.1 6.6 8.3 0.7 .. 1.7 4.8 6.6 4.2 10.1 0.9 4.3 2.5 .. 8.7 1.8 0.3 4.2 w 2.2 3.0 2.5 3.6 3.0 2.0 2.3 6.9 5.6 3.5 2.6 5.3 6.7
5.6 2.9 .. 3.5 7.3 4.4 .. 8.1 5.9 7.2 .. 3.3 8.9 8.6 5.2 .. 6.2 11.0 4.2 2.9 2.5 4.7 .. 2.0 2.0 8.2 8.7 1.6 .. 2.2 4.5 9.9 5.5 11.4 1.3 4.9 3.7 .. 6.8 2.0 0.2 5.4 w 3.2 4.4 3.9 5.2 4.3 3.6 3.7 7.5 5.0 5.0 3.2 6.5 8.2
Carbon dioxide emissions
Total million metric tons 1990 2006
158.7 2,073.5 0.7 214.9 3.2 .. 0.4 46.9 44.3 12.3 0.0 333.3 229.0 3.8 5.6 0.4 51.2 42.9 37.4 21.3 2.4 95.8 .. 0.8 16.9 13.3 146.5 28.0 0.8 611.0 54.8 573.3 4,861.1 4.0 113.9 122.1 21.4 .. .. 2.4 16.6 22,511.6c t 508.5 9,936.6 4,849.7 5,086.1 10,445.0 3,046.8 4,566.0 1,044.8 565.9 781.5 466.4 11,332.7 2,602.0
98.4 1,563.5 0.8 381.3 4.3 .. 1.0 56.2 37.4 15.2 0.2 414.3 352.0 11.9 10.8 1.0 50.8 41.8 68.4 6.4 5.4 272.3 0.2 1.2 33.6 23.1 269.3 44.1 2.7 318.9 139.5 568.1 5,748.1 6.9 115.6 171.5 106.1 3.0 21.2 2.5 11.1 30,154.7c t 478.2 14,821.4 9,976.8 4,837.2 15,299.3 7,188.2 3,195.3 1,462.3 1,111.4 1,710.4 640.8 13,377.9 2,701.4
Carbon intensity kilograms per kilogram of oil equivalent energy use 1990 2006
2.5 2.7 .. 3.6 1.9 .. .. 4.1 2.4 2.4 .. 3.7 2.5 0.7 0.5 .. 1.1 1.8 3.3 4.4 0.2 2.3 .. 0.6 2.8 2.7 2.8 2.5 .. 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.5 1.8 2.5 2.8 0.9 .. .. 0.5 1.8 2.5c w 1.9 2.6 2.4 2.8 2.5 2.7 3.2 2.3 3.1 2.0 1.7 2.5 2.5
2.5 2.3 .. 2.6 1.5 .. .. 2.1 2.0 2.1 .. 3.2 2.5 1.3 0.7 .. 1.0 1.5 3.7 1.7 0.3 2.7 .. 0.5 2.4 2.7 2.9 2.7 .. 2.3 3.1 2.6 2.5 2.2 2.4 2.8 2.0 .. 3.1 0.3 1.2 2.5c w 1.5 2.7 2.8 2.5 2.7 3.1 2.5 2.2 2.9 2.5 1.5 2.4 2.2
Per capita metric tons 1990 2006
6.8 13.9 0.1 13.2 0.4 .. 0.1 15.4 8.4 6.2 0.0 9.5 5.9 0.2 0.2 0.5 6.0 6.4 2.9 3.9 0.1 1.7 .. 0.2 13.9 1.6 2.6 7.2 0.0 11.7 29.3 10.0 19.5 1.3 5.3 6.2 0.3 .. .. 0.3 1.6 4.3c w 0.6 1.8 1.4 3.8 1.6 1.9 9.4 2.4 2.5 0.7 0.9 12.1 7.5
4.6 11.0 0.1 16.1 0.4 .. 0.2 12.8 6.9 7.6 0.0 8.7 8.0 0.6 0.3 0.9 5.6 5.6 3.5 1.0 0.1 4.1 0.2 0.2 25.4 2.3 3.7 9.0 0.1 6.8 32.9 9.4 19.3 2.1 4.4 6.3 1.3 0.8 1.0 0.2 0.9 4.4c w 0.5 3.3 2.8 5.2 2.8 3.8 7.3 2.6 3.5 1.1 0.8 12.7 8.4
kilograms per 2005 PPP $ of GDP 1990 2006
0.9 1.4 0.1 0.7 0.3 .. 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.4 .. 1.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 1.0 2.0 0.1 0.4 .. 0.2 1.4 0.4 0.3 2.3 0.1 1.8 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.2 3.1 0.6 0.4 .. .. 0.2 6.0 0.6c w 0.2 0.7 0.9 0.5 0.7 1.3 1.3 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.3
0.5 0.9 0.1 0.8 0.2 .. 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 .. 1.0 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.9 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.3 1.2 0.3 0.3 1.7 0.1 1.1 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.2 2.1 0.6 0.6 .. 0.4 0.2 5.0 0.5c w 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.9 0.7 0.3 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3
a. Negative values indicate that a country is a net exporter. b. Deviation from zero is due to statistical errors and changes in stock. c. Includes emissions not allocated to specific countries.
184
2010 World Development Indicators
3.8
ENVIRONMENT
Energy dependency and efficiency and carbon dioxide emissions About the data
Because commercial energy is widely traded, its pro-
combustion different fossil fuels release different
estimated from a consistent time series tend to be
duction and use need to be distinguished. Net energy
amounts of carbon dioxide for the same level of
more accurate than individual values. Each year
imports show the extent to which an economy’s use
energy use: oil releases about 50 percent more car-
the CDIAC recalculates the entire time series since
exceeds its production. High-income economies are
bon dioxide than natural gas, and coal releases about
1949, incorporating recent findings and corrections.
net energy importers; middle-income economies are
twice as much. Cement manufacturing releases
Estimates exclude fuels supplied to ships and aircraft
their main suppliers.
about half a metric ton of carbon dioxide for each
in international transport because of the difficulty of
metric ton of cement produced.
apportioning the fuels among benefiting countries.
The ratio of gross domestic product (GDP) to energy use indicates energy efficiency. To produce compa-
The U.S. Department of Energy’s Carbon Diox-
The ratio of carbon dioxide per unit of energy shows
rable and consistent estimates of real GDP across
ide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) calculates
carbon intensity, which is the amount of carbon diox-
economies relative to physical inputs to GDP—that
annual anthropogenic emissions from data on fossil
ide emitted as a result of using one unit of energy in
is, units of energy use—GDP is converted to 2005
fuel consumption (from the United Nations Statistics
the process of production. The proportion of carbon
international dollars using purchasing power parity
Division’s World Energy Data Set) and world cement
dioxide per unit of GDP indicates how clean produc-
(PPP) rates. Differences in this ratio over time and
manufacturing (from the U.S. Bureau of Mines’s
tion processes are.
across economies reflect structural changes in an
Cement Manufacturing Data Set). Carbon dioxide
economy, changes in sectoral energy efficiency, and
emissions, often calculated and reported as elemen-
Definitions
tal carbon, were converted to actual carbon dioxide
• Net energy imports are estimated as energy use
Carbon dioxide emissions, largely by-products of
mass by multiplying them by 3.664 (the ratio of the
less production, both measured in oil equivalents.
energy production and use (see table 3.7), account
mass of carbon to that of carbon dioxide). Although
• GDP per unit of energy use is the ratio of gross
for the largest share of greenhouse gases, which
estimates of global carbon dioxide emissions are
domestic product (GDP) per kilogram of oil equiv-
are associated with global warming. Anthropogenic
probably accurate within 10 percent (as calculated
alent of energy use, with GDP converted to 2005
carbon dioxide emissions result primarily from fos-
from global average fuel chemistry and use), coun-
international dollars using purchasing power parity
sil fuel combustion and cement manufacturing. In
try estimates may have larger error bounds. Trends
(PPP) rates. An international dollar has the same
differences in fuel mixes.
purchasing power over GDP that a U.S. dollar has
3.8a
High-income economies depend on imported energy . . .
in the United States. Energy use refers to the use of primary energy before transformation to other
Net energy imports (% of energy use)
1990
2007
end-use fuel, which is equal to indigenous production plus imports and stock changes minus exports
Low income
and fuel supplied to ships and aircraft engaged in Lower middle income
international transport (see About the data for table 3.7). • Carbon dioxide emissions are emissions from
Upper middle income
the burning of fossil fuels and the manufacture of High income
cement and include carbon dioxide produced during consumption of solid, liquid, and gas fuels and
Euro area
gas flaring. –60
–40
–20
0
20
40
60
80
Note: Negative values indicate that the income group is a net energy exporter. Source: Table 3.8.
. . . mostly from middle-income economies in the Middle East and North Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean
3.8b
Net energy imports (% of energy use)
1990
2007
East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Caribbean
Data sources
Middle East & North Africa
Data on energy use are from the electronic files
South Asia
of the International Energy Agency. Data on car-
Sub-Saharan Africa –250
–200
–150
–100
–50
0
50
100
bon dioxide emissions are from the CDIAC, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National
Note: Negative values indicate that the region is a net energy exporter. Source: Table 3.8.
Laboratory, Tennessee, United States.
2010 World Development Indicators
185
3.9
Trends in greenhouse gas emissions Carbon dioxide emissions
average annual % growtha % changeb 1990– 1990– 2006 2006
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
186
–8.6 2.3 3.7 5.8 2.2 0.6 1.3 1.1 –2.4 6.6 –3 –0.1 8.3 2.8 14.7 4.1 3.5 –2.5 1.9 –4.6 16.7 3.4 1.5 1 10.3 3.7 5.1 2.3 –0.4 –4.7 –1.4 5.4 1.9 1.7 –1.3 –1.5 –1.1 5.1 3.3 5.4 5 8.9 –2.6 4.5 1.3 –0.3 –7 4 –7.4 –1.1 4.8 2.3 6 1.6 0.1 6.6 7.4
–74.0 –42.6 68.2 138.9 54.1 5.2 26.9 18.3 –29.7 168.0 –38.1 –0.4 334.9 107.2 292.5 119.8 68.8 –37.3 34.4 –34.9 803.2 109.7 21.0 25.9 169.9 69.4 152.8 41.1 10.6 –45.9 23.1 165.8 18.7 –5.4 –11.1 –29.4 7.0 112.7 86.1 119.6 146.8 .. –37.9 99.0 30.8 –3.8 –66.2 75.0 –68.1 –16.4 135.1 32.5 131.4 28.8 10.2 82.3 177.5
2010 World Development Indicators
Methane emissions Total thousand metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 2005
.. 2,300 53,720 44,680 101,180 2,960 119,560 8,210 36,600 93,200 11,110 11,760 3,940 30,400 2,550 4,460 482,860 7,160 .. .. 20,350 18,460 72,860 .. .. 17,800 1,287,860 2,610 57,720 56,230 5,460 2,570 10,420 3,750 9,470 9,250 11,990 5,940 17,120 46,160 3,150 2,390 1,990 52,320 8,660 79,540 8,210 .. 4,130 57,030 8,520 5,770 8,280 .. .. 3,860 5,180
Nitrous oxide emissions
% of total % changeb From energy processes Agricultural 1990– 2005 2005 2005
.. 0.0 33.0 –9.6 –8.7 10.9 8.3 –14.2 111.3 6.6 –33.2 –18.0 –17.4 30.9 –53.6 –22.8 57.4 –33.5 .. .. 35.1 38.0 27.5 .. .. 49.7 32.6 97.7 13.1 –41.5 –11.8 –31.3 –6.0 –61.0 –23.1 –39.8 –7.5 2.4 31.8 69.9 18.4 26.5 –37.8 32.9 –2.3 6.3 1.4 .. –14.0 –46.0 22.6 –2.0 75.1 .. .. 39.4 31.5
.. 16.1 83.0 14.3 18.4 50.7 28.6 18.9 82.0 10.8 4.4 8.6 12.7 25.7 42.7 7.8 6.1 14.9 .. .. 5.6 38.9 39.0 .. .. 23.8 44.1 28.7 19.3 9.9 30.6 9.3 12.4 55.7 11.4 37.2 9.9 5.6 31.3 49.8 12.7 7.9 38.7 14.5 6.5 41.3 90.4 .. 31.7 26.8 19.1 31.5 12.2 .. .. 8.8 6.9
.. 73.9 8.3 28.4 71.0 36.8 58.3 50.4 13.6 69.9 73.4 48.5 49.5 34.1 45.5 84.8 62.2 28.8 .. .. 75.6 42.5 35.9 .. .. 40.2 40.2 0.0 68.5 23.2 32.6 67.3 18.3 34.4 62.3 41.7 43.1 65.3 57.8 32.2 52.7 75.3 32.2 72.4 23.3 46.4 1.1 .. 54.2 51.9 41.7 63.1 48.9 .. .. 58.3 78.6
Total thousand metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 2005
.. 970 4,640 68,590 35,890 570 57,910 3,640 2,460 21,260 11,370 5,940 4,320 25,400 1,100 2,930 255,970 3,770 .. .. 6,010 11,470 33,380 .. .. 7,650 414,800 200 22,710 108,260 5,890 1,250 14,010 2,550 6,010 8,370 5,780 1,980 4,280 17,650 1,230 1,160 810 29,160 5,050 45,560 660 .. 1,970 52,590 5,060 4,810 7,000 .. .. 1,380 2,620
Other greenhouse gas emissions
% of total % changeb From energy processes Agricultural 1990– 2005 2005 2005
.. –21.1 28.5 4.9 5.8 –21.9 –0.7 –19.8 –1.6 40.4 –26.4 –28.0 –15.6 17.1 –42.7 –43.0 36.3 –56.7 .. .. 63.3 –10.4 –12.5 .. .. 61.1 43.3 25.0 2.8 –20.9 –8.7 –28.2 6.9 –26.5 –30.6 –4.1 –21.3 3.7 44.6 59.0 1.7 16.0 –51.8 19.0 –16.9 –30.7 40.4 .. –25.7 –23.1 –6.1 –21.7 182.3 .. .. 62.4 21.3
.. 5.2 10.1 0.2 1.8 1.8 5.3 14.3 6.5 6.5 3.3 10.3 2.8 0.5 27.3 1.4 1.5 6.9 .. .. 3.3 2.1 16.3 .. .. 6.4 8.7 95.0 2.2 1.1 0.7 3.2 1.5 5.1 3.0 41.0 5.9 8.1 4.0 5.0 8.9 4.3 19.8 5.5 12.7 4.8 7.6 .. 2.5 7.5 7.9 10.6 3.9 .. .. 6.5 4.2
.. 82.5 61.4 21.7 89.8 82.5 84.5 63.2 82.5 83.0 74.4 49.0 40.0 19.5 61.8 96.6 54.7 53.8 .. .. 62.4 59.5 64.4 .. .. 77.8 82.0 0.0 80.4 15.7 31.2 90.4 15.3 56.9 82.5 38.8 79.8 86.9 89.7 85.0 82.9 92.2 69.1 91.5 58.8 71.0 16.7 .. 57.9 56.0 68.2 71.9 42.7 .. .. 86.2 92.4
Total thousand metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 2005
.. 60 490 20 790 340 6,510 2,330 90 0 460 2,110 0 0 570 0 11,810 380 .. .. 0 420 21,940 .. .. 10 137,120 120 80 0 0 60 0 60 130 1,130 1,420 0 60 3,180 80 0 30 10 830 15,540 10 .. 10 30,930 20 1,840 480 .. .. 0 0
% changeb 1990– 2005
.. .. 48.5 .. –65.7 .. 33.4 45.6 –50.0 .. .. 603.3 .. .. –8.1 .. 40.4 .. .. .. .. –54.8 69.7 .. .. –50.0 1,085.1 –68.4 100.0 .. .. .. .. –93.3 .. .. 468.0 .. .. 54.4 .. .. .. .. 730.0 57.1 .. .. .. 6.8 –96.7 –21.0 .. .. .. .. ..
Carbon dioxide emissions
average annual % growtha % changeb 1990– 1990– 2006 2006
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
–0.4 4.8 3.9 4.5 3.2 2.6 4.4 0.7 2.1 0.6 4.3 –3.1 4.8 –9.6 4.2 .. 9.6 –4.8 14.5 –5 3.7 .. 5.2 2 –3.7 –0.4 7.7 4 6.7 2 –5.5 6.3 0.6 –7.3 –1.2 3.9 5 5.6 47.2 8.5 0 2.1 4.7 –1.2 6.1 3.3 8.5 4.5 4.3 5.9 3.2 3.6 3.4 –1 2.4 .. 4.7
–6.9 118.7 121.7 105.6 76.2 41.7 110.1 11.5 52.6 10.3 99.2 –34.4 108.7 –65.4 96.7 .. 112.5 –55.3 507.8 –50.4 68.5 .. 62.1 37.7 –43.2 –31.8 187.4 71.3 232.0 34.8 –37.5 163.2 13.4 –66.9 –6.0 92.5 103.7 134.5 38,647.9 411.0 0.7 34.1 63.9 –11.2 114.4 28.4 299.8 108.1 105.0 115.7 76.2 82.6 53.5 –8.5 35.2 .. 292.3
Methane emissions Total thousand metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 2005
7,510 589,630 208,910 114,180 15,910 13,540 3,510 40,190 1,230 39,300 1,770 46,120 20,100 17,090 146,330 .. 14,350 3,590 .. 2,760 990 .. .. 14,630 5,330 1,350 .. .. 46,130 .. .. .. 127,490 3,330 5,990 10,490 12,570 77,410 5,070 22,370 21,070 27,570 6,010 .. 129,790 16,580 17,850 138,400 3,230 .. 15,320 17,010 51,340 60,660 7,720 .. 15,700
Nitrous oxide emissions
% of total % changeb From energy processes Agricultural 1990– 2005 2005 2005
–20.0 10.5 18.7 32.3 –45.8 12.8 84.7 –13.9 12.8 –32.9 110.7 –28.5 19.5 –14.8 296.3 .. 119.1 –37.9 .. –45.8 45.6 .. .. –34.8 –34.3 –36.9 .. .. 65.0 .. .. .. 25.8 –14.4 –25.0 15.4 17.5 –7.0 47.4 9.8 –30.5 3.6 26.5 .. 11.7 55.4 195.0 50.5 16.6 .. 2.1 22.8 28.8 –41.6 22.3 .. 387.6
26.6 16.8 25.5 70.6 58.3 12.0 18.2 13.4 6.5 4.5 23.7 65.4 8.6 55.9 3.8 .. 93.4 6.7 .. 49.3 9.1 .. .. 86.5 29.6 29.6 .. .. 69.1 .. .. .. 40.0 44.4 1.3 7.3 21.0 12.9 0.4 6.8 22.9 3.4 6.3 .. 68.8 75.3 94.1 24.2 4.3 .. 3.5 13.2 8.4 56.8 19.8 .. 96.4
34.8 63.8 46.4 18.3 18.6 86.9 31.3 40.4 53.7 77.5 22.0 25.8 72.1 25.0 8.5 .. 1.0 72.4 .. 31.2 26.3 .. .. 5.7 34.9 48.1 .. .. 12.5 .. .. .. 42.5 29.7 93.2 52.1 45.2 68.8 94.7 82.0 43.8 90.4 74.9 .. 19.9 12.8 3.0 63.0 78.9 .. 84.5 62.0 64.4 25.3 55.8 .. 0.4
Total thousand metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 2005
6,640 196,110 165,370 23,230 2,540 7,150 1,410 25,810 440 22,790 530 15,950 10,200 2,730 10,960 .. 390 1,460 .. 1,180 550 .. .. 920 2,360 530 .. .. 18,570 .. .. .. 41,030 780 3,410 5,460 10,020 64,000 3,620 4,310 13,840 12,700 3,150 .. 20,550 4,370 540 25,710 1,100 .. 9,210 8,000 11,660 27,770 5,160 .. 200
Other greenhouse gas emissions
% of total % changeb From energy processes Agricultural 1990– 2005 2005 2005
–29.8 30.1 48.6 41.9 –23.7 –9.3 43.9 –1.5 10.0 –24.0 43.2 –45.4 15.4 –63.8 41.8 .. 129.4 –57.3 .. –57.2 77.4 .. .. –6.1 –44.1 –32.9 .. .. 8.3 .. .. .. 12.8 –51.6 –28.4 10.8 –5.1 –15.9 48.4 24.9 –10.3 24.0 7.1 .. 11.4 –0.5 92.9 46.5 12.2 .. –6.9 27.6 37.8 5.5 24.6 .. 122.2
3.9
ENVIRONMENT
Trends in greenhouse gas emissions
4.4 12.3 1.8 6.5 13.0 2.7 20.6 9.1 11.4 28.8 13.2 10.9 5.5 16.5 24.5 .. 59.0 11.6 .. 11.9 14.5 .. .. 17.4 5.1 17.0 .. .. 4.2 .. .. .. 6.8 5.1 2.1 3.1 3.2 1.3 0.6 12.8 4.8 3.0 3.2 .. 9.9 5.0 27.8 12.6 4.5 .. 1.6 2.8 9.0 10.6 8.3 .. 75.0
62.5 77.1 53.1 85.3 84.6 94.7 66.7 47.5 79.5 36.0 69.8 68.8 90.2 69.2 43.8 .. 28.2 74.0 .. 82.2 70.9 .. .. 71.7 88.6 71.7 .. .. 52.8 .. .. .. 76.5 74.4 95.3 86.4 66.9 19.6 98.9 78.2 41.6 95.8 94.6 .. 78.0 42.3 70.4 76.5 90.9 .. 68.9 76.6 81.0 62.5 50.4 .. 25.0
Total thousand metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 2005
1,550 8,430 1,030 2,570 90 1,150 1,980 13,580 50 52,740 110 340 0 2,790 10,220 .. 940 20 .. 890 0 .. .. 280 660 120 .. .. 1,000 .. .. .. 4,560 10 0 0 290 0 0 0 3,740 970 0 .. 670 5,200 180 820 0 .. 0 330 370 2,450 780 .. 0
2010 World Development Indicators
% changeb 1990– 2005
121.4 –11.8 –40.5 –2.7 –64.0 3,733.3 90.4 213.6 .. 105.6 .. .. .. .. 66.2 .. 261.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. .. 66.7 .. .. .. 53.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. –41.1 3.2 .. .. 179.2 –39.4 .. –18.8 .. .. .. .. 131.3 362.3 609.1 .. ..
187
3.9
Trends in greenhouse gas emissions Carbon dioxide emissions
average annual % growtha % changeb 1990– 1990– 2006 2006
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbiac Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
–3.1 –2.4 1.2 2.3 2.8 0.3 5.4 0.4 –1.8 0.7 31 1.2 3 7.9 6.2 10.9 –0.3 –0.2 3.6 –8.2 4.4 5.9 .. 3.9 3.6 3.3 3.5 2.7 7.8 –4.8 6.6 –0.3 1.2 2 0.1 2.4 11.8 24.1 4.5 –0.7 –3.2 1.7 w –1.4 2.2 4.1 –0.3 2.1 4.5 –2.2 2 4.2 4.8 2 1.1 0.2
–38.0 –33.2 16.7 77.4 33.9 –20.6 155.6 19.8 –32.0 –16.9 841.0 24.3 53.7 214.8 94.5 138.8 –0.7 –2.7 82.8 –73.4 126.4 184.4 .. 57.8 98.1 74.3 83.8 39.3 230.9 –53.7 154.6 –0.9 18.2 71.9 –10.1 40.5 395.8 .. –806.8 1.0 –33.5 34.0 w –6.0 49.2 105.7 –4.9 46.5 135.9 –30.0 40.0 96.4 118.9 37.4 18.0 3.8
Methane emissions Total thousand metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 2005
Nitrous oxide emissions
% of total % changeb From energy processes Agricultural 1990– 2005 2005 2005
23,270 –36.9 557,200 –17.1 .. .. 47,790 66.9 6,900 38.8 6,720 –47.7 .. .. 2,190 138.0 3,800 –39.2 3,380 0.3 .. .. 61,610 23.8 37,510 16.5 10,220 –11.5 65,270 55.2 .. .. 11,150 1.5 4,780 –16.0 12,530 –10.4 3,920 –5.3 30,240 19.1 80,540 6.8 .. .. 2,660 2.3 9,940 30.3 8,000 107.3 49,970 26.9 27,950 –4.7 .. .. 66,990 –42.4 23,250 57.9 42,290 –43.2 610,910 –3.4 19,570 24.0 39,530 25.3 61,170 5.8 83,660 39.9 .. .. 6,650 73.6 18,600 –30.0 9,500 –5.4 7,138,440 s 9.9 w 595,600 2.6 4,962,640 12.9 3,085,730 20.5 1,876,910 2.2 5,558,240 11.7 1,879,280 27.2 966,150 –19.6 996,560 30.3 285,030 19.8 853,820 14.7 577,400 4.7 1,580,200 4.3 300,030 –16.1
40.0 79.1 .. 83.9 6.8 .. .. 58.9 15.8 28.4 .. 43.7 9.1 5.4 4.0 .. 8.6 17.4 54.1 13.3 7.4 14.1 .. 16.9 84.9 54.8 17.5 75.2 .. 60.2 93.1 34.6 32.6 1.5 57.2 47.4 23.3 .. 16.7 3.2 10.9 35.4 w 17.0 38.7 36.1 42.8 36.4 37.7 67.4 16.5 64.4 16.9 29.0 32.1 23.8
37.6 9.2 .. 4.0 70.6 59.2 .. 1.4 40.3 33.1 .. 32.5 55.1 65.2 88.1 .. 28.5 67.2 27.9 68.1 67.0 68.2 .. 43.2 0.7 26.0 43.2 21.6 .. 24.5 2.6 59.4 31.2 94.4 33.8 40.1 63.4 .. 55.0 61.6 73.7 42.5 w 60.0 42.8 45.9 37.7 44.7 44.7 18.5 59.3 20.8 64.8 44.9 35.1 49.3
Total thousand metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 2005
10,860 68,900 .. 4,680 3,870 4,700 .. 960 3,140 1,010 .. 20,530 23,170 1,830 46,880 .. 5,050 2,000 5,010 1,350 23,420 20,210 .. 1,980 210 2,150 29,790 4,280 .. 24,160 1,080 27,750 257,060 6,750 9,630 16,760 21,660 .. 2,710 30,500 5,490 2,827,550 s 369,940 1,786,860 1,151,140 635,720 2,156,800 728,420 225,390 459,810 65,390 249,220 428,570 670,750 197,530
Other greenhouse gas emissions
% of total % changeb From energy processes Agricultural 1990– 2005 2005 2005
–44.3 –48.6 .. 14.7 37.2 –48.2 .. 500.0 –36.2 –17.2 .. 10.6 4.3 10.2 36.4 .. –13.2 –14.2 35.4 –0.7 5.7 13.2 .. –17.2 23.5 16.8 11.7 98.1 .. –51.3 151.2 –44.0 –2.4 13.4 6.9 25.6 96.6 .. 39.0 –22.9 –14.5 4.8 w –7.3 15.7 28.2 –1.8 11.0 33.1 –35.3 24.8 34.9 32.2 –3.2 –11.0 –18.3
5.7 10.4 .. 26.7 3.1 .. .. 15.6 13.4 9.9 .. 10.8 8.4 13.1 1.3 .. 13.5 10.0 4.2 1.5 2.6 17.4 .. 5.1 23.8 5.6 9.0 3.0 .. 4.4 43.5 8.5 24.9 0.6 3.4 4.7 6.3 .. 4.1 0.7 3.6 8.2 w 3.0 6.2 7.0 4.8 5.7 6.5 8.5 2.4 6.3 11.8 2.6 16.2 7.4
Total thousand metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 2005
58.7 740 48.4 58,600 .. .. 63.9 2,190 93.0 0 81.5 840 .. .. 3.1 2,540 39.8 390 80.2 470 .. .. 69.5 2,170 71.3 9,080 72.7 0 97.5 0 .. .. 69.7 2,080 71.5 2,110 84.0 0 88.1 380 72.2 0 71.4 1,100 .. .. 58.1 0 66.7 0 71.6 0 71.6 5,070 78.0 70 .. .. 47.9 690 47.2 1,080 65.1 10,400 59.1 238,510 98.4 60 87.4 610 66.9 2,470 87.3 0 .. .. 86.3 0 58.9 0 93.8 0 63.9 w 715,400 s 49.5 4,120 67.7 256,890 70.1 157,820 63.3 99,070 64.6 261,010 68.9 .. 60.9 77,050 62.4 20,970 82.7 6,720 77.5 9,250 51.1 .. 61.7 454,390 60.7 83,170
% changeb 1990– 2005
–63.2 130.4 .. –10.6 .. 147.1 .. 408.0 457.1 –39.0 .. 45.6 47.6 .. .. .. 136.4 97.2 .. –86.5 .. –23.1 .. .. .. .. 96.5 .. .. 213.6 27.1 96.6 158.7 .. .. –24.0 .. .. .. .. .. 123.7 w 20.8 206.4 393.5 91.0 199.2 .. 117.8 23.4 20.9 –12.5 .. 95.4 36.4
a. Calculated using the least squares method, which accounts for ups and downs of all data points in the period (see Statistical methods). b. Calculated as the change in emission since 1990, which is the baseline for Kyoto Protocol requirements. c. Includes Kosovo and Montenegro.
188
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
3.9
ENVIRONMENT
Trends in greenhouse gas emissions Definitions
Greenhouse gases—which include carbon dioxide,
compared. A kilogram of methane is 21 times as
• Carbon dioxide emissions are emissions from
methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, per-
effective at trapping heat in the earth’s atmosphere
the burning of fossil fuels and the manufacture of
fluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride—contribute
as a kilogram of carbon dioxide within 100 years.
cement and include carbon dioxide produced during
Nitrous oxide emissions are mainly from fossil fuel
consumption of solid, liquid, and gas fuels and gas
Carbon dioxide emissions, largely a byproduct of
combustion, fertilizers, rainforest fires, and animal
flaring. • Methane emissions are emissions from
energy production and use (see table 3.7), account
waste. Nitrous oxide is a powerful greenhouse gas,
human activities such as agriculture and from indus-
for the largest share of greenhouse gases. Anthro-
with an estimated atmospheric lifetime of 114 years,
trial methane production. • Methane emissions from
pogenic carbon dioxide emissions result primarily
compared with 12 years for methane. The per kilo-
energy processes are emissions from the produc-
from fossil fuel combustion and cement manufactur-
gram global warming potential of nitrous oxide is
tion, handling, transmission, and combustion of fos-
ing. Burning oil releases more carbon dioxide than
nearly 310 times that of carbon dioxide within 100
sil fuels and biofuels. • Agricultural methane emis-
burning natural gas, and burning coal releases even
years.
sions are emissions from animals, animal waste, rice
to climate change.
more for the same level of energy use. Cement manu-
Other greenhouse gases covered under the Kyoto
production, agricultural waste burning (nonenergy,
facturing releases about half a metric ton of carbon
Protocol are hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons,
on-site), and savannah burning. • Nitrous oxide
dioxide for each metric ton of cement produced.
and sulfur hexafluoride. Although emissions of these
emissions are emissions from agricultural biomass
Methane emissions result largely from agricultural
artificial gases are small, they are more powerful
burning, industrial activities, and livestock manage-
activities, industrial production landfills and waste-
greenhouse gases than carbon dioxide, with much
ment. • Nitrous oxide emissions from energy pro-
water treatment, and other sources such as tropi-
higher atmospheric lifetimes and high global warm-
cesses are emissions produced by the combustion
cal forest and other vegetation fires. The emissions
ing potential.
of fossil fuels and biofuels. • Agricultural nitrous
are usually expressed in carbon dioxide equivalents
For a discussion of carbon dioxide sources and
oxide emissions are emissions produced through
using the global warming potential, which allows
the methodology behind emissions calculation, see
fertilizer use (synthetic and animal manure), ani-
the effective contributions of different gases to be
About the data for table 3.8.
mal waste management, agricultural waste burning (nonenergy, on-site), and savannah burning. • Other greenhouse gas emissions are byproduct emissions
The 10 largest contributors to methane emissions account for about 62 percent of emissions
3.9a
of hydrofl uorocarbons (byproduct emissions of fluoroform from chlorodifluoromethane manufacture
Methane emissions, 2005 (million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent) 1,000
and use of hydrofluorocarbons), perfluoro carbons (byproduct emissions of tetrafluoromethane and hexafluoroethane from primary aluminum produc-
750
tion and use of perfluoro carbons, in particular for semiconductor manufacturing), and sulfur hexa-
500
fluoride (various sources, the largest being the use 250
and manufacture of gas insulated switchgear used in electricity distribution networks).
0 China
United States
India
Russian Federation
Brazil
Indonesia
Mexico
Australia Pakistan
Canada
Source: Table 3.9.
The 10 largest contributors to nitrous oxide emissions account for about 56 percent of emissions
3.9b
Nitrous oxide emissions, 2005 (million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent) 600
Data sources
400
Data on carbon dioxide emissions are from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Envi-
200
ronmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Tennessee, United States. Data on 0
methane, nitrous oxide, and other greenhouse China
Source: Table 3.9.
United States
India
Brazil
Australia Argentina Pakistan
France
Mexico
Indonesia
gases emissions are compiled by the International Energy Agency.
2010 World Development Indicators
189
3.10
Sources of electricity Electricity production
Sources of electricitya
% of total billion kilowatt hours 1990
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
190
.. 3.2 16.1 0.8 50.7 10.4 154.3 49.3 23.2 7.7 39.5 70.3 0.0 2.1 14.6 0.9 222.8 42.1 .. .. .. 2.7 482.0 .. .. 18.4 621.2 28.9 36.4 5.7 0.5 3.5 2.0 9.2 15.0 62.3 26.0 3.7 6.3 42.3 2.2 0.1 17.4 1.2 54.4 417.2 1.0 .. 13.7 547.7 5.7 34.8 2.3 .. .. 0.6 2.3
2007
.. 2.9 37.2 3.8 115.1 5.9 254.6 60.9 24.2 24.4 31.8 87.5 0.1 5.7 11.8 1.1 445.1 42.9 .. .. 1.3 5.8 639.7 .. .. 58.5 3,279.2 39.0 55.3 8.3 0.4 9.1 5.6 12.1 17.6 87.8 39.2 14.8 17.3 125.1 5.8 0.3 12.2 3.5 81.2 564.4 1.8 .. 8.3 629.5 7.0 62.7 8.8 .. .. 0.5 6.3
2010 World Development Indicators
Coal 1990
.. 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 77.1 14.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.2 0.0 0.0 71.8 88.1 2.1 50.3 .. .. .. 0.0 17.1 .. .. 38.3 71.3 98.3 10.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.8 0.0 76.4 90.7 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 85.8 0.0 18.5 8.5 0.0 .. 0.0 58.7 0.0 72.4 0.0 .. .. 0.0 0.0
Gas 2007
.. 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.0 76.3 12.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.5 0.0 0.0 64.8 99.5 2.3 52.3 .. .. 0.0 0.0 18.1 .. .. 22.7 81.0 73.3 6.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.1 0.0 62.5 50.8 13.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 93.5 0.0 17.9 5.0 0.0 .. 0.0 49.3 0.0 55.3 12.8 .. .. 0.0 0.0
1990
.. 0.0 93.7 0.0 39.2 16.4 10.6 15.7 0.0 84.3 58.1 7.7 0.0 37.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.6 .. .. .. 0.0 2.0 .. .. 2.1 0.4 0.0 12.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.2 0.2 0.6 2.7 0.0 0.0 39.6 0.0 0.0 5.9 0.0 8.6 0.7 16.4 .. 15.6 7.4 0.0 0.3 0.0 .. .. 0.0 0.0
Oil 2007
.. 0.0 97.3 0.0 54.3 25.2 15.4 16.2 74.5 87.6 99.0 29.0 0.0 42.3 0.0 0.0 3.5 5.4 .. .. 0.0 7.6 6.4 .. .. 7.9 0.9 26.5 11.9 0.0 17.7 0.0 65.7 25.4 0.0 3.6 17.7 11.5 6.8 68.4 0.0 0.0 4.8 0.0 13.0 3.9 16.0 .. 17.9 11.6 0.0 22.0 0.0 .. .. 0.0 0.0
1990
.. 10.9 5.4 13.8 9.8 68.6 2.7 3.8 97.0 4.3 41.8 1.9 100.0 5.3 7.3 11.9 2.2 2.9 .. .. .. 1.5 3.4 .. .. 9.2 7.9 1.7 1.0 0.4 0.6 2.5 33.3 31.6 91.4 0.9 3.4 88.6 21.5 36.9 6.9 100.0 8.3 11.6 3.1 2.1 11.2 .. 29.2 1.9 0.0 22.3 9.0 .. .. 20.6 1.7
Hydropower 2007
.. 2.5 2.1 15.5 9.4 0.0 0.9 2.1 15.7 6.7 0.5 0.9 99.2 14.3 1.3 0.5 3.1 1.3 .. .. 95.9 25.5 1.5 .. .. 24.6 1.0 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.0 8.0 0.3 19.2 97.4 0.1 3.3 65.6 41.0 18.6 45.7 99.3 0.3 3.8 0.6 1.1 40.2 .. 0.3 1.8 46.6 15.4 30.1 .. .. 67.2 62.3
1990
.. 89.1 0.8 86.2 35.2 15.0 9.2 63.9 3.0 11.4 0.1 0.4 0.0 55.3 20.9 0.0 92.8 4.5 .. .. .. 98.5 61.6 .. .. 48.5 20.4 0.0 75.6 99.6 99.4 97.5 66.7 41.3 0.8 1.9 0.1 9.4 78.5 23.5 73.5 0.0 0.0 88.4 20.0 12.9 72.1 .. 55.2 3.2 100.0 5.1 76.0 .. .. 76.5 98.3
2007
.. 97.5 0.6 84.5 26.5 31.4 5.7 59.1 9.8 5.7 0.1 0.4 0.8 40.4 33.8 0.0 84.0 6.7 .. .. 3.7 66.9 57.6 .. .. 39.5 14.8 0.0 80.4 99.7 82.3 74.8 31.9 35.1 0.7 2.4 0.1 9.4 52.1 12.4 30.0 0.0 0.2 96.2 17.4 10.3 43.4 .. 81.8 3.3 53.4 4.1 41.5 .. .. 32.8 35.1
Nuclear power 1990
.. 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 34.8 .. .. .. 0.0 15.1 .. .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 35.3 75.3 0.0 .. 0.0 27.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. .. 0.0 0.0
2007
.. 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.3 43.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 55.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 34.1 .. .. 0.0 0.0 14.6 .. .. 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.8 77.9 0.0 .. 0.0 22.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. .. 0.0 0.0
Electricity production
3.10
Sources of electricitya
% of total billion kilowatt hours 1990
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
28.4 289.4 33.3 59.1 24.0 14.2 20.9 213.1 2.5 835.5 3.6 87.4 3.2 27.7 105.4 .. 18.5 15.7 .. 6.6 1.5 .. .. 10.2 28.4 5.8 .. .. 23.0 .. .. .. 124.1 16.2 3.5 9.6 0.5 2.5 1.4 0.9 71.9 32.3 1.4 .. 13.5 121.6 4.5 37.7 2.7 .. 27.2 13.8 27.4 134.4 28.4 .. 4.8
2007
40.0 803.4 142.2 204.0 33.2 27.9 53.8 308.2 7.8 1,123.5 13.0 76.6 6.8 21.5 425.9 .. 48.8 16.2 .. 4.8 9.6 .. .. 25.7 13.5 6.7 .. .. 101.3 .. .. .. 257.5 3.8 3.8 22.9 16.1 6.5 1.7 2.8 103.2 43.8 3.2 .. 23.0 136.4 14.4 95.7 6.5 .. 53.7 29.9 59.6 158.8 46.9 .. 16.1
Coal 1990
30.5 66.2 31.5 0.0 0.0 41.6 50.1 16.8 0.0 14.0 0.0 71.1 0.0 40.1 16.8 .. 0.0 13.1 .. 0.0 0.0 .. .. 0.0 0.0 89.7 .. .. 12.3 .. .. .. 6.3 30.8 92.4 23.0 13.9 1.6 1.5 0.0 38.3 1.9 0.0 .. 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 7.0 97.5 32.1 .. 0.0
Gas 2007
18.7 68.4 44.9 0.0 0.0 19.7 69.5 16.1 0.0 27.7 0.0 70.3 0.0 34.8 40.1 .. 0.0 3.3 .. 0.0 0.0 .. .. 0.0 0.0 77.9 .. .. 29.5 .. .. .. 12.3 0.0 96.1 57.1 0.0 0.0 7.1 0.0 27.6 7.1 0.0 .. 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 .. 0.0 2.8 28.2 93.0 26.4 .. 0.0
1990
15.7 3.4 2.3 52.5 0.0 27.7 0.0 18.6 0.0 20.0 11.9 10.5 0.0 0.0 9.1 .. 45.7 23.5 .. 26.1 0.0 .. .. 0.0 23.8 0.0 .. .. 22.0 .. .. .. 11.6 42.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 39.3 0.0 0.0 50.9 17.6 0.0 .. 53.7 0.0 81.6 33.6 0.0 .. 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.1 0.0 .. 100.0
Oil 2007
38.1 8.3 15.7 78.6 0.0 55.5 19.7 56.0 0.0 25.8 76.4 10.7 0.0 0.0 19.3 .. 27.7 10.8 .. 40.3 0.0 .. .. 44.9 17.9 0.0 .. .. 62.0 .. .. .. 48.8 98.2 0.0 13.6 0.1 41.6 0.0 0.0 57.2 27.3 0.0 .. 67.2 0.5 82.0 34.4 0.0 .. 0.0 24.3 32.6 1.9 28.0 .. 100.0
1990
4.8 3.5 42.7 37.3 89.2 10.0 49.9 48.2 92.4 18.5 87.8 10.0 7.1 3.6 17.9 .. 54.3 0.0 .. 5.4 66.7 .. .. 100.0 14.6 1.8 .. .. 48.4 .. .. .. 56.7 25.4 7.6 64.4 23.6 10.9 3.3 0.1 4.3 0.0 39.8 .. 13.7 0.0 18.4 20.6 14.7 .. 0.0 21.5 45.3 1.2 33.1 .. 0.0
Hydropower 2007
1.3 4.1 26.5 12.5 98.5 7.1 10.8 11.5 95.9 9.8 23.0 8.3 28.8 3.5 5.9 .. 72.3 0.0 .. 0.4 93.9 .. .. 55.1 2.1 7.1 .. .. 2.0 .. .. .. 20.3 0.0 3.9 22.3 0.0 4.5 0.5 0.4 2.1 0.0 71.1 .. 4.9 0.0 18.0 32.2 43.1 .. 0.0 6.0 7.5 1.5 10.4 .. 0.0
1990
0.6 24.8 20.2 10.3 10.8 4.9 0.0 14.8 3.6 10.7 0.3 8.4 76.6 56.3 6.0 .. 0.0 63.5 .. 67.6 33.3 .. .. 0.0 1.5 8.5 .. .. 17.3 .. .. .. 18.9 1.6 0.0 12.7 62.6 48.1 95.2 99.9 0.1 72.3 28.8 .. 32.6 99.6 0.0 44.9 83.2 .. 99.9 75.8 22.1 1.1 32.3 .. 0.0
2007
0.5 15.4 7.9 8.8 1.5 2.4 0.0 10.6 2.1 6.6 0.5 10.7 51.4 61.7 0.9 .. 0.0 85.9 .. 57.3 6.1 .. .. 0.0 3.1 15.0 .. .. 6.4 .. .. .. 10.6 0.9 0.0 5.8 99.9 53.9 92.3 99.6 0.1 53.6 9.5 .. 27.9 98.2 0.0 30.0 56.6 .. 100.0 65.3 14.4 1.5 21.5 .. 0.0
Nuclear power 1990
48.3 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.2 .. 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 .. .. 0.0 60.0 0.0 .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.9 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0
2010 World Development Indicators
2007
36.7 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.6 .. 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 .. .. 0.0 73.0 0.0 .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0
191
ENVIRONMENT
Sources of electricity
3.10
Sources of electricity Electricity production
Sources of electricitya
% of total billion kilowatt hours 1990
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
2007
64.3 61.7 1,082.2 1,013.4 .. .. 69.2 189.1 0.9 2.0 36.5 40.9b .. .. 15.7 41.1 25.5 27.9 12.4 15.0 .. .. 165.4 260.5 151.2 300.2 3.2 9.9 1.5 4.5 .. .. 146.0 148.8 55.0 66.5 11.6 38.6 18.1 17.5 1.6 4.2 44.2 143.4 .. .. 0.2 0.2 3.6 7.7 5.8 14.7 57.5 191.6 14.6 14.9 .. .. 298.6 196.1 17.1 76.1 317.8 392.3 3,202.8 4,322.9 7.4 9.4 56.3 49.0 59.3 114.9 8.7 69.5 .. .. 1.7 6.0 8.0 9.9 9.4 9.2 11,847.9 t19,818.9 t 336.8 210.5 4,066.0 8,665.5 1,672.0 5,425.0 2,393.6 3,244.0 4,271.6 9,008.7 796.3 3,851.0 2,076.4 1,991.2 606.2 1,245.6 187.9 536.9 341.7 944.1 260.2 432.3 7,595.3 10,858.4 1,694.1 2,326.1
Coal
Gas
Oil
Hydropower
Nuclear power
1990
2007
1990
2007
1990
2007
1990
2007
1990
2007
28.8 14.3 .. 0.0 0.0 69.1b .. 0.0 31.9 31.3 .. 94.3 40.1 0.0 0.0 .. 1.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 35.1 0.0 .. 38.2 0.0 65.0 53.1 0.0 7.4 0.0 23.1 .. 0.0 0.5 53.3 37.3 w 11.6 34.9 46.8 26.5 33.8 61.0 27.8 3.9 1.2 56.1 62.2 39.2 33.7
41.0 16.7 .. 0.0 0.0 70.2 .. 0.0 18.7 36.5 .. 94.7 24.8 0.0 0.0 .. 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 21.4 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.9 0.0 .. 34.2 0.0 35.3 49.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 21.4 .. 0.0 0.2 43.0 41.5 w 8.7 49.1 62.7 26.3 47.5 73.3 29.2 5.2 2.4 58.2 58.3 36.2 25.2
35.1 47.3 .. 48.1 2.3 3.2b .. 0.0 7.1 0.0 .. 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.3 0.6 20.5 9.1 0.0 40.2 .. 0.0 99.0 63.7 17.7 95.2 .. 16.7 96.3 1.6 11.9 0.0 76.4 26.2 0.1 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.6 w 26.5 20.8 10.8 27.8 21.1 3.4 34.3 9.2 36.9 8.5 2.8 10.9 8.6
18.7 48.0 .. 44.8 2.0 1.1 .. 78.7 5.8 3.0 .. 0.0 30.8 0.0 0.0 .. 0.6 1.1 31.2 2.2 36.2 67.3 .. 0.0 99.6 83.1 49.6 100.0 .. 13.0 98.1 41.9 21.2 0.0 70.6 16.3 32.1 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.8 w 25.1 18.9 11.8 30.7 19.1 6.7 37.4 19.8 61.6 12.8 5.0 22.2 22.0
18.4 11.9 .. 51.9 93.0 4.6b .. 100.0 6.4 7.9 .. 0.0 5.7 0.2 36.8 .. 0.9 0.7 56.0 0.0 4.9 23.5 .. 39.9 0.1 35.5 6.9 0.0 .. 16.1 3.7 10.9 4.1 5.1 4.4 11.5 15.0 .. 100.0 0.3 0.0 10.3 w 4.2 14.5 16.3 13.2 14.0 12.6 12.9 18.9 48.3 5.3 1.9 8.3 9.6
1.8 1.7 .. 55.2 83.1 1.3 .. 21.3 2.5 0.2 .. 0.4 6.2 59.9 68.0 .. 0.7 0.3 59.7 0.0 0.9 2.7 .. 48.0 0.2 16.2 3.4 0.0 .. 0.4 1.9 1.2 1.8 13.0 11.3 11.4 3.5 .. 100.0 0.4 0.3 5.3 w 7.7 5.8 5.4 6.4 5.9 2.3 2.3 13.3 27.0 7.6 3.7 4.7 4.3
17.7 15.3 .. 0.0 0.0 23.1b .. 0.0 7.4 23.7 .. 0.6 16.8 99.8 63.2 .. 49.7 54.2 23.5 90.9 95.1 11.3 .. 60.1 0.0 0.8 40.2 4.8 .. 3.5 0.0 1.6 8.5 94.2 11.8 62.3 61.8 .. 0.0 99.2 46.7 18.0 w 41.2 22.5 19.9 24.3 23.4 21.4 13.8 63.5 12.4 27.4 15.9 14.9 11.1
25.9 17.5 .. 0.0 10.8 27.5 .. 0.0 16.0 21.7 .. 0.4 9.2 39.9 32.0 .. 44.5 53.0 9.1 97.8 60.1 5.7 .. 46.9 0.0 0.3 18.7 0.0 .. 5.2 0.0 1.3 5.8 85.6 13.1 72.3 43.0 .. 0.0 99.4 56.8 15.5 w 41.9 19.8 15.2 27.5 20.6 14.7 16.2 55.8 7.4 17.0 16.9 11.1 9.1
0.0 10.9 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0b .. 0.0 47.2 37.1 .. 5.1 35.9 0.0 0.0 .. 46.7 43.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 25.5 0.0 20.7 19.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.0 w 0.0 6.2 4.9 7.1 5.9 0.0 10.9 2.1 0.0 1.9 3.2 23.2 35.6
12.5 15.8 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 55.0 37.9 .. 4.3 18.4 0.0 0.0 .. 45.0 42.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 47.2 0.0 16.1 19.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.7 w 0.0 4.7 3.3 7.2 4.6 1.6 14.4 2.4 0.0 2.1 2.6 21.3 31.5
a. Shares may not sum to 100 percent because some sources of generated electricity (such as wind, solar, and geothermal) are not shown. b. Includes Kosovo and Montenegro.
192
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
3.10
Definitions
Use of energy is important in improving people’s
adjustments are made to compensate for differences
• Electricity production is measured at the termi-
standard of living. But electricity generation also
in definitions. The IEA makes these estimates in con-
nals of all alternator sets in a station. In addition to
can damage the environment. Whether such damage
sultation with national statistical offices, oil compa-
hydropower, coal, oil, gas, and nuclear power gen-
occurs depends largely on how electricity is gener-
nies, electric utilities, and national energy experts. It
eration, it covers generation by geothermal, solar,
ated. For example, burning coal releases twice as
occasionally revises its time series to reflect political
wind, and tide and wave energy as well as that from
much carbon dioxide—a major contributor to global
changes. For example, the IEA has constructed his-
combustible renewables and waste. Production
warming—as does burning an equivalent amount
torical energy statistics for countries of the former
includes the output of electric plants designed to
of natural gas (see About the data for table 3.8).
Soviet Union. In addition, energy statistics for other
produce electricity only, as well as that of combined
Nuclear energy does not generate carbon dioxide
countries have undergone continuous changes in
heat and power plants. • Sources of electricity are
emissions, but it produces other dangerous waste
coverage or methodology in recent years as more
the inputs used to generate electricity: coal, gas, oil,
products. The table provides information on electric-
detailed energy accounts have become available.
hydropower, and nuclear power. • Coal is all coal and
ity production by source.
Breaks in series are therefore unavoidable.
brown coal, both primary (including hard coal and
The International Energy Agency (IEA) compiles
lignite-brown coal) and derived fuels (including pat-
data on energy inputs used to generate electricity.
ent fuel, coke oven coke, gas coke, coke oven gas,
IEA data for countries that are not members of the
and blast furnace gas). Peat is also included in this
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Devel-
category. • Gas is natural gas but not natural gas
opment (OECD) are based on national energy data
liquids. • Oil is crude oil and petroleum products.
adjusted to conform to annual questionnaires com-
• Hydropower is electricity produced by hydroelectric
pleted by OECD member governments. In addition,
power plants. • Nuclear power is electricity produced
estimates are sometimes made to complete major
by nuclear power plants.
aggregates from which key data are missing, and
3.10a
Sources of electricity generation have shifted since 1990 . . . World 1990
2007
Other 3%
Other 3% Nuclear power 14%
Nuclear power 17% Coal 37%
Oil 10%
Coal 41%
Hydropower 16%
Hydropower 18%
Oil 5%
Gas 15%
Gas 21%
Source: Table 3.10.
3.10b
. . . with developing economies relying more on coal Developing economies 1990 Nuclear power 6%
2007 Other 2%
Coal 34%
Hydropower 23%
Nuclear power 5%
Other 2%
Hydropower 21%
Gas 21%
Data sources Data on electricity production are from the IEA’s
Oil 6% Oil 14%
Coal 47%
Gas 19%
electronic files and its annual publications Energy Statistics and Balances of Non-OECD Countries, Energy Statistics of OECD Countries, and Energy
Source: Table 3.10.
Balances of OECD Countries.
2010 World Development Indicators
193
ENVIRONMENT
Sources of electricity
3.11
Urbanization Urban population
millions 1990 2008
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
194
.. 1.2 13.2 4.0 28.3 2.4 14.6 5.1 3.8 22.9 6.7 9.6 1.7 3.7 1.7 0.6 111.9 5.8 1.2 0.4 1.2 5.0 21.3 1.1 1.3 11.0 311.0 5.7 22.7 10.3 1.3 1.6 5.0 2.6 7.8 7.8 4.4 4.1 5.7 25.1 2.6 0.5 1.1 6.1 3.1 42.0 0.6 0.3 3.0 58.1 5.4 6.0 3.7 1.7 0.3 2.0 2.0
.. 1.5 22.4 10.2 36.7 2.0 19.0 5.6 4.5 43.4 7.1 10.4 3.6 6.4 1.8 1.1 164.3 5.4 3.0 0.8 3.1 10.8 26.8 1.7 2.9 14.9 570.9 7.0 33.5 21.8 2.2 2.9 10.0 2.5 8.5 7.7 4.8 6.9 8.8 34.8 3.7 1.0 0.9 13.7 3.4 48.2 1.2 0.9 2.3 60.5 11.7 6.9 6.6 3.4 0.5 4.6 3.5
2010 World Development Indicators
% of total population 1990 2008
.. 36 52 37 87 68 85 66 54 20 66 96 35 56 39 42 75 66 14 6 13 41 77 37 21 83 27 100 68 28 54 51 40 54 73 75 85 55 55 44 49 16 71 13 61 74 69 38 55 73 36 59 41 28 28 29 40
.. 47 65 57 92 64 89 67 52 27 73 97 41 66 47 60 86 71 20 10 22 57 80 39 27 88 43 100 75 34 61 63 49 57 76 74 87 69 66 43 61 21 69 17 63 77 85 56 53 74 50 61 49 34 30 47 48
average annual % growth 1990–2008
.. 1.1 3.0 5.3 1.4 –1.1 1.5 0.5 0.9 3.6 0.3 0.5 4.3 3.0 0.3 3.9 2.1 –0.4 5.0 4.7 5.2 4.3 1.3 2.4 4.6 1.7 3.4 1.1 2.2 4.2 2.8 3.4 3.9 –0.1 0.5 –0.1 0.5 2.9 2.5 1.8 1.9 4.0 –1.0 4.5 0.5 0.8 3.6 5.6 –1.6 0.2 4.2 0.8 3.3 3.8 2.7 4.6 3.2
Population in urban agglomerations of more than 1 million
Population in largest city
% of total population 1990 2007
% of urban population 1990 2007
% of urban population 1990 2006
% of rural population 1990 2006
.. .. 8 15 39 33 60 27 24 8 16 10 .. 25 .. .. 34 14 .. .. 6 14 40 .. .. 35 13 100 32 15 29 24 17 .. 20 12 26 21 26 21 18 .. .. 4 17 23 .. .. 22 8 13 30 .. 15 .. 16 ..
.. .. 14 40 37 49 25 41 45 29 24 10 .. 29 .. .. 13 21 49 .. 49 19 18 .. 38 42 3 100 22 35 53 47 42 .. 27 16 31 37 28 36 37 .. .. 29 28 22 .. .. 41 6 22 51 22 52 .. 56 29
.. 97 99 55 86 94 100 100 .. 56 .. .. 32 47 99 60 82 100 23 41 .. 47 100 21 19 91 61 .. 81 53 .. 96 39 99 99 100 100 77 88 68 88 20 96 19 100 .. .. .. 96 100 11 100 87 19 .. 49 68
.. .. 77 9 45 .. 100 100 .. 18 .. .. 2 15 .. 22 37 96 2 44 2 34 99 5 1 48 43 .. 39 1 .. 92 8 98 95 98 100 57 50 37 59 0 94 2 100 .. .. .. 91 100 3 93 58 10 .. 20 29
.. .. 10 23 39 36 61 28 22 12 19 17 .. 32 .. .. 39 16 8 .. 10 19 44 .. .. 34 18 100 35 17 38 29 19 .. 19 11 20 22 32 20 23 .. .. 4 21 22 .. .. 25 9 16 29 8 16 .. 21 ..
.. .. 15 41 35 56 23 41 43 32 26 17 .. 26 .. .. 12 22 41 .. 49 18 20 .. 35 39 3 100 23 37 63 46 39 .. 26 16 23 32 29 35 39 .. .. 22 34 21 .. .. 48 6 19 48 16 46 .. 45 29
Access to improved sanitation facilities
.. 98 98 79 92 96 100 100 90 48 91 .. 59 54 99 60 84 100 41 44 62 58 100 40 23 97 74 .. 85 42 19 96 38 99 99 100 100 81 91 85 90 14 96 27 100 .. 37 50 94 100 15 99 90 33 48 29 78
.. 97 87 16 83 81 100 100 70 32 97 .. 11 22 92 30 37 96 6 41 19 42 99 25 4 74 59 .. 58 25 21 95 12 98 95 98 100 74 72 52 80 3 94 8 100 .. 30 55 92 100 6 97 79 12 26 12 55
Urban population
millions 1990 2008
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
6.8 216.6 54.3 30.6 13.2 2.0 4.2 37.8 1.2 78.0 2.3 9.2 4.3 11.8 31.6 .. 2.1 1.7 0.6 1.9 2.5 0.2 1.0 3.3 2.5 1.1 2.7 1.1 9.0 2.0 0.8 0.5 59.4 2.0 1.3 12.0 2.9 10.2 0.4 1.7 10.3 2.9 2.2 1.2 34.4 3.1 1.2 33.0 1.3 0.6 2.1 15.0 30.5 23.4 4.7 2.6 0.4
6.8 336.7 117.0 49.3 .. 2.7 6.7 40.7 1.4 84.9 4.6 9.1 8.4 14.9 39.6 .. 2.7 1.9 1.9 1.5 3.6 0.5 2.3 4.9 2.2 1.4 5.6 2.8 19.0 4.1 1.3 0.5 82.1 1.5 1.5 17.7 8.2 16.1 0.8 5.0 13.5 3.7 3.2 2.4 73.1 3.7 2.0 60.1 2.5 0.8 3.8 20.6 58.7 23.4 6.3 3.9 1.2
% of total population 1990 2008
66 26 31 56 70 57 90 67 49 63 72 56 18 58 74 .. 98 38 15 69 83 14 45 76 68 58 24 12 50 23 40 44 71 47 57 48 21 25 28 9 69 85 52 15 35 72 66 31 54 15 49 69 49 61 48 72 92
68 30 51 68 .. 61 92 68 53 66 78 58 22 63 81 .. 98 36 31 68 87 25 60 78 67 67 30 19 70 32 41 42 77 42 57 56 37 33 37 17 82 87 57 17 48 77 72 36 73 13 60 71 65 61 59 98 96
average annual % growth 1990–2008
0.0 2.5 4.3 2.6 .. 1.7 2.6 0.4 1.1 0.5 3.9 –0.1 3.7 1.3 1.2 .. 1.4 0.8 6.0 –1.0 2.2 4.7 4.7 2.2 –0.6 1.2 4.2 5.2 4.1 3.9 2.9 0.8 1.8 –1.7 1.0 2.2 5.9 2.6 3.8 6.0 1.5 1.3 2.2 3.8 4.2 1.1 2.7 3.3 3.6 1.6 3.3 1.8 3.6 0.0 1.6 2.3 5.8
Population in urban agglomerations of more than 1 million
Population in largest city
% of total population 1990 2007
% of urban population 1990 2007
19 10 9 23 26 26 43 19 .. 46 27 7 6 15 51 .. 65 .. .. .. 43 .. .. 48 .. .. 8 .. 6 9 .. .. 32 .. .. 16 6 7 .. .. 14 25 18 .. 11 .. .. 16 35 .. 22 27 14 4 37 44 ..
17 11 9 23 .. 25 60 17 .. 48 18 8 8 19 48 .. 72 .. .. .. 44 .. 29 55 .. .. 9 .. 5 12 .. .. 34 .. .. 19 7 8 .. .. 12 30 21 .. 14 .. .. 18 38 .. 30 28 14 4 39 67 ..
29 6 14 21 31 46 48 9 .. 42 37 12 32 21 33 .. 67 38 .. .. 52 .. 54 45 .. .. 36 .. 12 37 .. .. 26 .. 45 22 27 28 .. 23 10 30 34 35 14 22 .. 22 65 .. 45 39 26 7 54 60 ..
25 6 8 16 .. 40 49 8 .. 42 30 14 37 22 25 .. 74 43 .. .. 51 .. 48 46 .. .. 31 .. 8 38 .. .. 23 .. 60 18 18 26 .. 19 8 34 38 40 13 22 .. 21 53 .. 51 39 19 7 45 69 ..
3.11
Access to improved sanitation facilities
% of urban population 1990 2006
% of rural population 1990 2006
100 44 73 86 75 .. 100 .. 82 100 .. 97 18 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 100 .. 59 97 .. .. 15 50 95 53 33 95 74 .. .. 80 .. 47 73 36 100 .. 59 16 33 .. 97 76 .. 67 88 73 71 .. 97 .. 100
100 4 42 78 .. .. .. .. 83 100 .. 96 44 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 30 24 96 .. .. 6 46 .. 30 11 94 8 .. .. 25 12 15 8 6 100 88 23 1 22 .. 61 14 .. 41 34 15 46 .. 88 .. 100
100 52 67 .. .. .. 100 .. 82 100 88 97 19 .. .. .. .. 94 87 82 100 43 49 97 .. 92 18 51 95 59 44 95 91 85 64 85 53 85 66 45 100 .. 57 27 35 .. 97 90 78 67 89 85 81 .. 99 .. 100
2010 World Development Indicators
100 18 37 .. .. .. .. .. 84 100 71 98 48 .. .. .. .. 93 38 71 .. 34 7 96 .. 81 10 62 93 39 10 94 48 73 31 54 19 81 18 24 100 .. 34 3 25 .. .. 40 63 41 42 36 72 .. 98 .. 100
195
ENVIRONMENT
Urbanization
3.11
Urbanization Urban population
millions 1990 2008
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
12.3 108.8 0.4 12.5 2.9 3.8 1.3 3.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 18.3 29.3 2.9 7.2 0.2 7.1 4.9 6.2 1.7 4.8 16.7 0.2 1.2 0.1 4.7 33.2 1.7 2.0 34.7 1.5 50.8 188.0 2.8 8.2 16.6 13.4 1.3 2.6 3.1 3.0 2,257.4 s 148.4 1,435.2 891.8 543.4 1,583.6 461.3 271.1 308.2 117.5 280.7 144.9 673.7 213.0
11.7 103.4 1.8 20.3 5.2 3.8 2.1 4.8 3.1 1.0 3.3 29.6 35.1 3.0 18.0 0.3 7.8 5.6 11.2 1.8 10.8 22.5 0.3 2.7 0.2 6.9 50.8 2.5 4.1 31.4 3.5 55.2 248.4 3.1 10.1 26.1 24.0 2.8 7.0 4.5 4.7 3,330.6 s 280.4 2,238.0 1,528.3 709.7 2,518.4 851.6 281.4 445.0 186.4 455.6 298.4 812.1 238.7
a. Includes Kosovo.
196
2010 World Development Indicators
% of total population 1990 2008
53 73 5 77 39 50 33 100 57 50 30 52 75 17 27 23 83 73 49 32 19 29 21 30 9 58 59 45 11 67 79 89 75 89 40 84 20 68 21 39 29 43 w 23 39 31 68 37 29 63 71 52 25 28 73 71
54 73 18 82 42 52 38 100 57 49 37 61 77 15 43 25 85 73 54 26 26 33 27 42 13 67 69 49 13 68 78 90 82 92 37 93 28 72 31 35 37 50 w 29 48 41 75 45 44 64 79 57 29 36 78 73
average annual % growth 1990–2008
–0.3 –0.3 8.5 2.7 3.1 0.0 2.5 2.6 0.1 –0.1 2.8 2.7 1.0 0.2 5.1 2.1 0.5 0.7 3.2 0.4 4.5 1.7 3.7 4.6 3.0 2.1 2.4 2.2 4.1 –0.5 4.8 0.5 1.5 0.6 1.1 2.5 3.2 4.1 5.6 2.0 2.4 2.2 w 3.5 2.5 3.0 1.5 2.6 3.4 0.2 2.0 2.6 2.7 4.0 1.0 0.6
Population in urban agglomerations of more than 1 million
Population in largest city
% of total population 1990 2007
% of urban population 1990 2007
8 18 .. 30 18 .. .. 99 .. .. 14 25 22 .. 9 .. 17 14 26 .. 5 10 .. 16 .. .. 22 .. 4 12 25 26 41 41 10 34 13 .. 5 10 10 18 w 9 15 .. 24 14 .. 15 32 20 10 .. .. 18
9 18 .. 40 22 11 .. 100 .. .. 13 33 24 .. 12 .. 14 15 31 .. 7 10 .. 23 .. .. 27 .. 5 11 31 26 43 45 8 32 13 .. 9 11 13 20 w 11 18 .. 27 17 .. 16 34 20 12 13 .. 18
14 8 57 19 47 .. 40 99 .. .. 48 10 15 .. 33 .. 21 19 25 .. 27 35 .. 53 .. .. 20 .. 38 7 32 15 9 46 25 17 30 .. 25 24 35 17 w 31 14 11 18 16 9 13 24 27 10 26 20 15
17 10 49 22 52 21 43 100 .. .. 35 12 16 .. 28 .. 16 20 25 .. 28 30 .. 56 .. .. 20 .. 36 9 40 16 8 49 22 12 22 .. 30 31 34 16 w 31 12 10 18 14 7 14 22 24 11 25 19 15
Access to improved sanitation facilities
% of urban population 1990 2006
% of rural population 1990 2006
88 93 31 100 52 .. .. 100 100 .. .. 64 100 85 53 .. 100 100 94 .. 29 92 .. 25 93 95 96 .. 27 98 98 .. 100 100 97 90 62 .. 79 49 65 76 w 48 71 62 86 69 65 95 81 83 49 41 100 ..
52 70 29 .. 9 .. .. .. 99 .. .. 45 100 68 26 .. 100 100 69 .. 36 72 .. 8 93 44 69 .. 29 93 95 .. 99 99 91 47 21 .. 14 38 35 34 w 19 32 30 52 30 42 77 35 50 8 20 99 ..
88 93 34 100 54 96a 20 100 100 .. 51 66 100 89 50 64 100 100 96 95 31 95 64 24 92 96 96 .. 29 97 98 .. 100 100 97 .. 88 84 88 55 63 78 w 52 75 69 89 73 75 94 86 89 57 42 100 ..
54 70 20 .. 9 88 a 5 .. 99 .. 7 49 100 86 24 46 100 100 88 91 34 96 32 3 92 64 72 .. 34 83 95 .. 99 99 95 .. 56 69 30 51 37 44 w 33 43 41 63 41 59 79 51 59 23 24 99 ..
About the data
3.11
ENVIRONMENT
Urbanization Definitions
There is no consistent and universally accepted
populous nations were to change their definition of
• Urban population is the midyear population of
standard for distinguishing urban from rural areas, in
urban centers. According to China’s State Statis-
areas defined as urban in each country and reported
part because of the wide variety of situations across
tical Bureau, by the end of 1996 urban residents
to the United Nations (see About the data). • Popula-
countries (see About the data for table 3.1). Most
accounted for about 43 percent of China’s popula-
tion in urban agglomerations of more than 1 million
countries use an urban classification related to the
tion, more than double the 20 percent considered
is the percentage of a country’s population living in
size or characteristics of settlements. Some define
urban in 1994. In addition to the continuous migra-
metropolitan areas that in 2005 had a population of
urban areas based on the presence of certain infra-
tion of people from rural to urban areas, one of the
more than 1 million. • Population in largest city is
structure and services. And other countries designate
main reasons for this shift was the rapid growth in
the percentage of a country’s urban population living
urban areas based on administrative arrangements.
the hundreds of towns reclassified as cities in recent
in that country’s largest metropolitan area. • Access
years.
to improved sanitation facilities is the percentage
The population of a city or metropolitan area depends on the boundaries chosen. For example, in
Because the estimates in the table are based on
of the urban or rural population with access to at
1990 Beijing, China, contained 2.3 million people in
national definitions of what constitutes a city or met-
least adequate excreta disposal facilities (private or
87 square kilometers of “inner city” and 5.4 million
ropolitan area, cross-country comparisons should be
shared but not public) that can effectively prevent
in 158 square kilometers of “core city.” The popula-
made with caution. To estimate urban populations,
human, animal, and insect contact with excreta.
tion of “inner city and inner suburban districts” was
UN ratios of urban to total population were applied
Improved facilities range from simple but protected
6.3 million and that of “inner city, inner and outer
to the World Bank’s estimates of total population
pit latrines to flush toilets with a sewerage connec-
suburban districts, and inner and outer counties”
(see table 2.1).
tion. To be effective, facilities must be correctly con-
was 10.8 million. (Most countries use the last defini-
The table shows access to improved sanitation
tion.) For further discussion of urban-rural issues see
facilities for both urban and rural populations to
box 3.1a in About the data for table 3.1.
allow comparison of access. Definitions of access
Estimates of the world’s urban population would change significantly if China, India, and a few other
structed and properly maintained.
and urban areas vary, however, so comparisons between countries can be misleading.
Urban population nearly doubled in low- and lower middle-income economies between 1990 and 2008
3.11a
Urban population (millions) 1,600
1990
2008
1,200
800
400
0 Low income
Lower middle income
Upper middle income
High income
Source: Table 3.11.
Latin America and the Caribbean had the same share of urban population as high-income economies in 2008
3.11b
Percent
Urban
Rural
100
Data sources Data on urban population and the population in
75
urban agglomerations and in the largest city are from the United Nations Population Division’s
50
World Urbanization Prospects: The 2007 Revision. Data on total population are World Bank
25
estimates. Data on access to sanitation are from the World Health Organization and United Nations
0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Source: Tables 3.1 and 3.11.
Latin America Middle East & & Caribbean North Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
High income
Children’s Fund’s Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation (2008).
2010 World Development Indicators
197
3.12
Urban housing conditions Census year
Household size
number of people National Urban
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo Dem Rep Congo Rep Costa Rica Côte D’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
198
2001 1998 2001 2001 2001 2001 1999 2001 1999 2001 1992 2001 2001 2000 2001 1996 1990 2005 1987 2001 2003 1993 2002 2000 1993 1984 1984 2000 1998 2001 1981 2001 2001 2002 2001 1996 1992 2000 1994 2000 1999 2003 1993 2002 2001 2000 2001 2002 1996 1982 2001
.. 4.2 4.9 .. 3.6 4.1 3.8 2.4 4.7 4.8 .. 2.6 5.9 4.2 .. 4.2 3.8 2.7 6.2 4.7 5.0 5.2 2.6 5.2 5.1 3.4 3.4 .. 4.8 5.4 10.5 4.0 5.4 3.0 4.2 2.4 2.2 3.9 3.5 4.7 .. .. 2.4 4.8 2.2 2.5 5.2 8.9 3.5 2.3 5.1 3.0 4.4 6.7 .. 4.2 4.4
2010 World Development Indicators
.. 3.9 .. .. .. 4.0 .. .. 4.4 4.8 .. .. .. 4.3 .. 3.9 3.7 2.7 5.8 .. 4.9 5.1 .. 5.8 5.1 3.5 3.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4.2 .. .. .. 3.7 .. .. .. 2.3 4.7 .. .. .. .. 3.5 .. 5.1 .. 4.7 .. .. .. ..
Overcrowding
Households living in overcrowded dwellings a % of total National Urban
.. .. .. .. 19 4 1 2 .. .. .. 0b .. 40 .. 27 .. .. 30 .. 35 67 .. 32 .. .. .. .. 27b 55 .. 22 .. .. .. .. .. .. 30 .. 63 .. 3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 .. 63 .. 26 ..
.. .. .. .. .. 6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 47 .. .. 53 .. 32 77 .. 36b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
Durable dwelling units
Home ownership
Buildings with durable structure % of total National Urban
Privately owned dwellings % of total National Urban
.. .. .. .. 97 93 .. .. .. 21b .. .. 26 43 .. 88 .. 79 .. .. 79 77 .. 78 .. 91 82 .. 83b .. .. 88 .. .. .. .. .. 97 81 .. 67 .. .. .. .. .. .. 18 .. .. 45 .. 67 .. .. .. 69
.. .. .. .. .. 93 .. .. .. 42b .. .. .. 58 .. 90b .. 89 .. .. 88 .. .. 92 .. 92 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 88 .. 83 .. .. 23 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 80 .. .. .. 85
.. 65 b 67 .. .. 95 .. 48 74 88 b .. 67 59 70 .. 61 74 98 .. .. 58 73 64 85 .. 66 88 .. 68b .. 76 72 .. .. .. 52 .. .. 68 b .. 70 .. .. .. 64 55 .. 68 .. 43 57 .. 81 76 .. 92 ..
.. 30 b .. .. .. 90 .. .. 62 61b .. .. .. 59 .. 47 75 98 .. .. 57 48 .. 74 .. 65 74 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 58b .. 68 .. .. 54 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 74 .. .. 68 ..
Multiunit dwellings
Vacancy rate
% of total National Urban
Unoccupied dwellings % of total National Urban
.. .. .. .. 4 1 .. .. 4 .. .. 32b .. 3b .. 1 .. .. .. .. 27 27 32 .. .. 13 .. .. 13 .. .. 2 .. .. 15 49 .. 8 9 75 3 .. 72 .. 44 .. .. .. .. .. 53 .. 2 .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. 1 .. .. 5 .. .. .. .. 5b .. .. .. .. .. .. 32 42 .. .. .. 15 .. .. .. .. .. 3 .. .. 21 .. .. .. 14 .. 6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4 .. .. .. ..
.. 12 19 .. 16 b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6 .. .. .. 23 .. .. .. .. 8 .. .. 11 1 .. 10 b .. .. 9 .. 12 0 12 .. 11 12 .. 11 .. 13 .. .. 7 .. .. .. 7 5 .. 13 .. .. 9 14
.. 13 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4 .. .. .. 17 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 10 .. .. .. .. .. 6 .. .. 0 .. .. .. 7 .. 11 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 11 .. .. 19 ..
Census year
Household size
number of people National Urban
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem Rep Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
2001 2001 2000 1996 1997 2002 1995 2001 2001 2000 2004 1999 2000 1993 1995 1999 1995 2000 2001 1974 2001 2002 1993 1998 2000 1998 1988 2000 2005 2003 2000 1982 1997 2001 2001 2001 1995 2001 1991 1980 2003 1998 2000 1990 2002 1993 2000 1988 2001 1990
2.6 5.3 4.0 4.8 7.7 3.0 3.5 2.8 3.5 2.7 5.3 .. 4.6 3.8 4.4 .. 6.4 4.4 6.1 3.0 .. 5.0 4.8 6.4 2.6 3.6 4.9 4.4 4.5 5.6 .. 3.9 4.0 .. 4.4 5.9 4.4 .. 5.3 5.4 .. 2.8 5.3 6.4 5.0 2.7 7.1 6.8 4.1 4.5b 4.6 .. 4.9 3.2 2.8 3.3 ..
.. 5.3 .. 4.6 7.2 .. .. .. .. .. 5.1 .. 3.4 .. .. .. .. 3.6 6.1 2.6 .. .. .. .. .. 3.6b 4.8 4.4 4.4 .. .. 3.8 3.9 .. 4.5 5.3 4.9 .. .. 4.9 .. .. .. 6.0 4.7 .. .. 6.8 .. 6.5 4.5 .. .. .. .. .. ..
Overcrowding
Households living in overcrowded dwellings a % of total National Urban
2 77 .. 33b .. .. .. .. .. .. 35 .. .. 23 .. .. .. .. .. 4 .. 10b 31 .. 7 8b 64 30 .. .. .. 6 24 .. .. .. 37 .. .. .. .. 1b .. .. .. 1 .. .. 28b .. 38 b .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. 71 .. 26b .. .. .. .. .. .. 34 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 57 .. .. .. .. 7 20 .. .. .. 28 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..b .. .. .. .. .. ..
Durable dwelling units
Home ownership
Buildings with durable structure % of total National Urban
Privately owned dwellings % of total National Urban
.. 83 .. 72 88 .. .. .. 98b .. .. .. 35 .. .. .. .. .. 49 88 .. .. 20 .. .. 95b .. 48 .. .. .. 91 .. .. .. .. 7 .. .. .. .. .. 79 .. .. .. .. 58 88 .. 95b 49 .. .. .. .. ..
.. 81 .. 76 96 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 72 .. .. .. .. .. 77 .. .. .. .. .. .. 95b .. 84 .. .. .. 94 .. .. .. .. 20 .. .. .. .. .. 87 .. .. .. .. 86 98 b .. 98 b 64 .. .. .. .. ..
.. 87 .. 73 70 .. .. .. 58b 61 64 .. 72 50 .. .. .. .. 96 58 .. 84 1 .. .. 48 b 81 86 .. .. .. 87 .. .. .. .. 92 .. .. 88 .. 65 84 77 .. 67 .. 81 80 .. 79 .. 71 .. 76 72 ..
.. 67 .. 67 66 .. .. .. .. .. 60 .. 25 .. .. .. .. .. 86 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 59 47 .. .. .. 81 .. .. .. .. 83 .. .. .. .. .. 86 40 .. .. .. .. 66b 44 75 .. .. .. .. .. ..
Multiunit dwellings
Vacancy rate
% of total National Urban
Unoccupied dwellings % of total National Urban
.. .. .. .. 4 8b .. .. 2b 37 72 .. .. 15 .. .. 9b .. .. 74 .. 0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 10b .. .. .. .. .. 48 .. 1 .. .. .. .. 17 0 .. .. 38 .. .. 10 b .. 1b .. 12 .. 86 .. ..
.. .. .. .. 5 .. .. .. .. .. 80 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 16b .. .. .. .. .. 56 .. 1 .. .. .. .. .. 0 .. .. .. .. .. 10b 8 2b ..
4 6 .. .. 13 .. .. 21 .. .. .. .. 39 .. .. .. 11 .. .. 0 .. .. .. 7 .. 7b .. .. .. .. .. 7 3 .. .. .. 0 .. .. 0 .. 10 8 .. .. .. .. .. 14 .. 6b 7
.. 9 .. .. 15 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 17 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 3b .. .. .. .. .. 6 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6b 3
.. .. .. ..
1 .. 11 ..
.. .. .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
199
ENVIRONMENT
3.12
Urban housing conditions
3.12
Urban housing conditions Census year
Household size
number of people National Urban
Romania Russia Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela. RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe
2002 2002 2002 2004 2001 1985 2000 2002 1975 2007 2001 2001 1993 1997 1990 1990 1981 2000 2002 2000
2000 1994 1990 2002 2003 2001 2005 1996 2001 1999 1997 1994 2000 1992
2.9 2.8 4.4 5.5 .. 2.9 6.8 4.4 .. 2.8 .. 3.0 2.9 3.8 5.8 5.4 2.0 2.4 6.3 .. 4.9 3.8 .. .. 3.7 8.0 5.0 .. 4.7 .. .. .. 2.5 3.3 .. 4.4 4.6 7.1 6.7 5.3 4.8
Overcrowding
Households living in overcrowded dwellings a % of total National Urban
2.8 2.7 3.7 .. .. 2.2 .. .. .. 2.7 .. 2.8 .. .. 6.0 3.7 .. 2.1 6.0 .. 4.5b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 3.9 .. .. 2.4 .. 3.4b .. .. 4.5 .. 6.8 5.9 4.2
a. More than two people per room. b. Data are from a previous census.
200
2010 World Development Indicators
20 7 43 .. .. .. .. .. .. 14 .. 16 1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 33b .. .. .. 9b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0 22b .. .. .. .. 54b .. ..
20 5 36 .. .. .. .. .. .. 17 .. 15 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 7b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6b .. ..
Durable dwelling units
Home ownership
Buildings with durable structure % of total National Urban
Privately owned dwellings % of total National Urban
.. .. 13 92b .. .. 34 .. .. .. .. .. .. 93b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 93 .. .. 98b 99 .. .. 19 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 77 .. .. .. ..
.. .. 31 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 92b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 93 .. .. .. .. .. .. 61 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 89 .. .. .. ..
84 .. 79 43 .. .. 68 .. .. 91 .. 43 82 70 b 86 b .. .. 31 .. .. 82b 81 .. .. 74b 71 70 .. 76 .. .. .. 74 57b .. 78 95 78 88 b 94 94
72 .. 41 .. .. .. .. .. .. 87 .. 40 .. 58b 58b .. .. 24 .. .. 43b 62 .. .. .. 89b .. .. 28 .. .. 69 .. 57b .. .. 86 .. 68b 30 30
Multiunit dwellings
Vacancy rate
% of total National Urban
Unoccupied dwellings % of total National Urban
.. 73 36 .. .. .. .. .. .. 33 .. .. .. 1 0b .. 54 28 .. .. .. 3 .. .. 17b 6 .. .. 37 .. .. .. 26 .. .. 14 .. 45 3b .. 6
.. 86 60 .. .. .. .. .. .. 56 .. .. .. 14b 1b .. .. 32 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 10 b .. .. 71 .. .. 19 .. .. .. .. .. .. 11b .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 13 .. .. 1 11 .. .. .. 3 .. .. .. 15 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 13 b .. 16 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1b .. .. .. 7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 12b .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 13 b .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
About the data
3.12
Definitions
Urbanization can yield important social benefi ts,
There is a strong demand for quantitative indi-
• Census year is the year in which the underlying
improving access to public services and the job mar-
cators that can measure housing conditions on a
data were collected. • Household size is the average
ket. It also leads to significant demands for services.
regular basis to monitor progress. However, data
number of people within a household, calculated by
Inadequate living quarters and demand for housing
deficiencies and lack of rigorous quantitative analy-
dividing total population by the number of households
and shelter are major concerns for policymakers.
sis hamper informed decisionmaking on desirable
in the country and in urban areas. • Overcrowding
The unmet demand for affordable housing, along
policies to improve housing conditions. The data
refers to the number of households living in dwell-
with urban poverty, has led to the emergence of
in the table are from housing and population cen-
ings with two or more people per room as a percent-
slums in many poor countries. Improving the shel-
suses, collected using similar definitions. The table
age of total households in the country and in urban
ter situation requires a better understanding of the
will incorporate household survey data in future edi-
areas. • Durable dwelling units are the number of
mechanisms governing housing markets and the pro-
tions. The table focuses attention on urban areas,
housing units in structures made of durable building
cesses governing housing availability. That requires
where housing conditions are typically most severe.
materials (concrete, stone, cement, brick, asbestos,
good data and adequate policy-oriented analysis so
Not all the compiled indicators are presented in the
zinc, and stucco) expected to maintain their stability
that housing policy can be formulated in a global
table because of space limitations.
for 20 years or longer under local conditions with
comparative perspective and drawn from lessons
normal maintenance and repair, taking into account
learned in other countries. Housing policies and
location and environmental hazards such as floods,
outcomes affect such broad socioeconomic condi-
mudslides, and earthquakes, as a percentage of
tions as the infant mortality rate, performance in
total dwellings. • Home ownership refers to the
school, household saving, productivity levels, capital
number of privately owned dwellings as a percent-
formation, and government budget deficits. A good
age of total dwellings. When the number of private
understanding of housing conditions thus requires
dwellings is not available from the census data, the
an extensive set of indicators within a reasonable
share of households that own their housing unit is
framework.
used. Privately owned and owner-occupied units are included, depending on the definition used in the
3.12a
Selected housing indicators for smaller economies
Census Household Overcrowding Durable Home Multiunit Vacancy year size dwelling ownership dwellings rate units Households
Antigua and Barbuda Bahamas Bahrain Barbados Belize Cape Verde Cayman Islands Equatorial Guinea Fiji Guam Isle of Man Maldives Marshall Islands Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia Northern Mariana Islands Palau Seychelles Solomon Islands St. Vincent & Grenadines Turks and Caicos Virgin Islands (UK) Western Samoa
2001 1990 2001 1990 2000 1990 1999 1993 1996 2000 2001 2000 1999 2001 1989 1995 2000 1997 1999 1991 1990 1991 1991
number of people
living in overcrowded dwellings a % of total
3.0 3.8 5.9 3.5 4.6 5.1 3.1 7.5 5.4 4.0 2.4 6.6 7.8 2.9 4.1 4.9 5.7 4.2 6.3 3.9 3.3 3.0 7.3
.. 12 .. 3 .. 28 .. 14 .. 2b 0 .. .. 24b .. 9b 8 15b 51 .. 4 2 ..
Privately Buildings owned with durable dwellings structure % of total % of total
99b 99 94b 100 93 78 100 56b 60 93 .. 93 95 99 77 99 76 97 23 98 96 99 42
65b 55 51 76 63 72 53 75 65 48 68 .. 72 60 53 33 79 78 85 71 66 40 90
census data. State- and community-owned units and rented, squatted, and rent-free units are excluded. • Multiunit dwellings are the number of multiunit dwellings, such as apartments, flats, condominiums, barracks, boardinghouses, orphanages, retirement
Unoccupied dwellings % of total % of total
3b 13 28 9 4 2 38 14 7 29 16 1 12 16 9 27 11 .. 1 7 11 46 47
22 14 6 9 .. .. 19 .. .. 19 .. 15 8 12 13 17 3 0 .. .. .. .. 30
houses, hostels, hotels, and collective dwellings, as a percentage of total dwellings. • Vacancy rate is the percentage of completed dwelling units that are currently unoccupied. It includes all vacant units, whether on the market or not (such as second homes).
Data sources Data on urban housing conditions are from
a. More than two people per room. b. Data are from a previous census. Source: National population and housing censuses.
national population and housing censuses.
2010 World Development Indicators
201
ENVIRONMENT
Urban housing conditions
3.13
Traffic and congestion Motor vehicles
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
202
Passenger Road cars density
km. of road per 100 sq. km. of % of total land area consumption
per 1,000 people
per kilometer of road
per 1,000 people
2007
2007
2007
2007
23 102 91 40 314 105 653 556 61 2 282 539 21 68 170 113 198 295 11 6 .. .. 597 0 6 164 32 72 66 5 26 152 .. 377 38 470 466 123 63 .. 84 11 444 3 559 600 .. 7 116 623 33 112 117 .. 33 .. 97
9 15 27 .. .. 42 17 43 10 .. .. 37 .. 7 .. 7 18 63 .. .. .. .. 14 .. 2 .. 12 247 16 .. .. 18 .. 58 .. 38 35 .. 19 .. .. .. 10 4 37 39 .. 3 16 80 9 47 .. .. 1 .. ..
15 75 58 8 .. 96 545 511 57 1 240 471 17 18 152 56 158 257 7 2 .. 11 372 0 .. 103 22 54 38 .. 15 118 7 336 21 414 370 62 38 29 41 6 390 1 483 498 .. 5 95 566 21 429 .. .. 27 .. 69
6 63 5 .. 8 25 11 128 68 166 46 499 17 6 43 4 20 37 34 48 22 11 14 .. 3 .. 36 184 15 .. 5 72 25 51 .. 163 168 .. 15 9 .. .. 128 3 23 172 3 33 29 181 25 89 .. 10 12 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
Road sector energy consumption
Fuel price
Particulate matter concentration
Per capita
Diesel fuel
Gasoline fuel
Super grade gasoline
Diesel
Urban-populationweighted PM10 micrograms per cubic meter
2007
2007
2007
2007
2008
2008
1990
2006
.. 29 16 11 19 6 19 23 10 5 5 14 22 26 15 26 23 12 .. .. 8 9 16 .. .. 18 5 11 24 1 23 30 4 21 3 13 22 20 33 16 19 5 13 5 11 16 9 .. 20 15 13 21 24 .. .. 9 22
.. 198 170 68 343 58 1,103 933 134 8 147 762 77 149 230 283 281 315 .. .. 27 37 1,341 .. .. 338 72 209 159 3 80 322 18 445 26 576 799 161 288 138 151 8 559 15 782 691 117 .. 150 623 52 597 150 .. .. 25 149
.. 151 91 41 172 0 315 646 30 5 86 599 27 67 143 96 143 175 .. .. 15 14 328 .. .. 187 29 152 79 0 51 160 11 260 19 344 446 57 134 80 76 8 302 12 417 501 87 .. 48 304 23 198 76 .. .. 0 85
.. 42 61 24 102 55 664 233 92 2 50 131 46 53 80 172 72 78 .. .. 11 20 914 .. .. 134 40 48 65 3 26 145 6 160 5 203 326 96 139 48 67 1 240 2 340 147 25 .. 93 250 27 367 66 .. .. 23 57
1.05 1.36 0.34 0.53 0.78 1.08 0.74 1.37 0.74 1.17 1.33 1.50 1.03 0.68 1.13 0.88 1.26 1.28 1.38 1.39 0.94 1.14 0.76 1.44 1.30 0.95 0.99 1.95 1.04 1.23 0.81 1.24 1.33 1.27 1.67 1.37 1.54 1.04 0.51 0.49 0.78 2.53 1.18 0.92 1.57 1.52 1.14 0.79 1.09 1.56 0.90 1.23 0.86 1.02 0.00 1.16 0.80
0.96 1.31 0.20 0.39 0.58 1.11 0.94 1.43 0.56 0.70 1.06 1.34 1.03 0.53 1.18 1.02 1.03 1.37 1.33 1.23 0.89 1.04 0.90 1.44 1.32 0.95 1.01 1.16 0.73 1.21 0.57 1.10 1.20 1.37 1.51 1.45 1.54 0.94 0.27 0.20 0.81 1.07 1.30 0.89 1.39 1.45 0.90 0.75 1.16 1.56 0.90 1.41 0.82 1.02 0.00 0.89 0.80
78 92 115 142 105 453 23 38 226 231 23 30 75 120 36 95 40 111 151 56 86 116 25 62 217 88 114 .. 39 73 135 45 94 44 44 67 30 44 38 223 46 118 45 112 23 18 10 144 208 27 39 67 63 108 119 70 45
41 44 71 66 73 59 15 33 60 135 6 22 46 94 19 67 23 57 84 29 46 62 17 44 109 48 73 .. 22 47 64 36 36 30 17 21 19 20 25 119 33 56 13 68 18 13 8 86 47 19 34 36 62 70 72 37 43
kilograms of oil equivalent
$ per liter
Motor vehicles
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Passenger Road cars density
Road sector energy consumption
km. of road per 100 sq. km. of % of total land area consumption
per 1,000 people
per kilometer of road
per 1,000 people
2007
2007
2007
2007
384 12 76 16 .. 537 305 677 188 595 137 170 21 .. 338 .. 502 59 21 459 .. .. 3 291 479 136 .. 9 272 9 .. 150 244 120 61 71 10 7 109 5 503 729 48 5 31 572 225 11 188 9 82 52 32 451 507 642 724
20 3 62 .. .. 20 122 81 24 64 101 28 10 .. 161 .. 181 9 10 15 .. .. .. .. 0 20 .. .. 72 .. .. 93 71 36 2 38 .. .. 4 .. 62 33 13 4 .. 29 12 8 .. .. .. 16 14 66 67 .. ..
300 8 42 13 .. 437 251 601 138 325 94 141 15 .. 248 .. 282 44 2 398 .. .. 2 225 470 122 .. 4 225 7 .. 115 167 89 42 53 7 6 52 3 441 615 18 4 31 458 174 9 131 6 39 33 11 383 471 614 335
210 1,001 20 10 .. 132 81 162 201 316 9 3 11 21 103 .. 32 .. 13 108 67 .. .. .. 124 54 .. 16 28 1 1 99 18 38 3 13 .. 4 5 12 372 35 14 1 21 29 16 34 .. .. .. 6 67 83 90 289 68
Fuel price
Particulate matter concentration
Per capita
Diesel fuel
Gasoline fuel
Super grade gasoline
Diesel
Urban-populationweighted PM10 micrograms per cubic meter
2007
2007
2007
2007
2008
2008
1990
2006
16 6 12 19 30 31 16 22 11 14 23 5 6 2 13 .. 13 9 .. 25 26 .. .. 19 18 13 .. .. 18 .. .. .. 26 9 13 23 5 8 37 3 14 27 15 .. 7 14 10 13 16 .. 27 25 20 14 24 .. 9
423 33 99 497 332 1,064 504 659 198 572 295 234 29 17 573 .. 1,232 51 .. 511 252 .. .. 536 485 190 .. .. 505 .. .. .. 455 78 150 105 20 26 278 10 711 1,062 92 .. 50 773 582 66 136 .. 185 124 90 365 578 .. 2
252 21 32 214 186 610 163 415 0 195 125 22 16 9 297 .. 302 0 .. 305 2 .. .. 313 267 106 .. .. 180 .. .. .. 119 50 7 88 14 17 78 7 394 450 53 .. 5 449 53 45 0 .. 147 87 56 197 398 .. 1
152 9 62 242 131 417 314 199 185 340 162 200 11 7 151 .. 860 49 .. 178 234 .. .. 198 123 56 .. .. 306 .. .. .. 299 22 133 13 5 8 173 2 255 558 36 .. 41 293 492 9 127 .. 29 26 29 106 150 .. 1
1.27 1.09 0.60 0.53a 0.03 1.56 1.47 1.57 0.74 1.74 0.61 0.83 1.20 0.76 1.65 .. 0.24 0.80 0.92 1.12 0.76 0.79 0.74 0.14 1.13 1.15 1.55 1.78 0.53 1.30 1.49 0.74 0.74 1.20 1.38 1.29 1.71 0.43 0.78 1.13 1.68 1.09 0.87 0.99 0.59 1.63 0.31 0.84 0.67 0.94 1.17 1.42 0.91 1.43 1.61 0.65 0.22
1.38 0.70 0.46 0.03 0.01 1.64 1.27 1.63 0.84 1.54 0.61 0.72 1.14 0.95 1.33 .. 0.20 0.88 0.76 1.23 0.76 0.93 1.03 0.12 1.22 1.12 1.43 1.67 0.53 1.10 1.06 0.56 0.54 1.04 1.42 0.83 1.37 0.52 0.88 0.82 1.45 0.85 0.82 0.97 1.13 1.63 0.38 0.77 0.68 0.90 0.96 0.99 0.81 1.40 1.47 0.78 0.19
36 112 137 86 146 25 71 42 59 43 110 43 67 165 51 .. 75 75 91 38 43 86 61 106 53 46 78 75 37 274 147 23 69 97 198 34 111 107 74 67 46 16 48 220 175 24 148 224 58 34 106 98 55 59 51 27 57
19 65 83 51 115 16 31 27 43 30 45 19 36 68 35 .. 97 22 49 16 36 41 40 88 19 21 34 33 23 152 86 18 36 36 110 21 28 58 47 34 34 14 28 132 45 15 108 120 35 21 77 54 23 37 23 21 51
kilograms of oil equivalent
$ per liter
2010 World Development Indicators
203
ENVIRONMENT
3.13
Traffic and congestion
3.13
Traffic and congestion Motor vehicles
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Passenger Road cars density
per 1,000 people
per kilometer of road
per 1,000 people
2007
2007
2007
180 245 4 .. 20 244 5 149 282 547 .. 159 601 58 28 89 523 569 52 38 12 .. .. 2 351 103 131 106 7 140 313 527 814c 176 .. 147 13 16 35 18 106 183 w 12 85 18 206 70 36 219 175 .. 12 30 621 588
20 35 .. 20 .. 46 2 207 35 29 .. .. 35 11 .. 25 11 60 26 .. .. .. .. .. .. 49 20 .. .. 39 .. 76 31 .. .. .. 7 18 .. .. .. .. w .. .. 10 .. .. 12 30 .. .. 3 .. 41 66
156 206 2 415 15 204 3 113 272 505 .. 108 485 18 20 46 465 524 22 29 2 54 .. 2 .. 73 88 81 3 128 293 463 461c,d 151 .. 107 13 16 .. 11 91 132 w 8 61 14 155 51 23 182 119 32 8 24 434 418e
Road sector energy consumption
km. of road per 100 sq. km. of % of total land area consumption 2007
.. 5 57 10 7 44 16 472 89 191 .. .. 132 148 .. 21 95 173 21 .. 8 35 .. .. .. 12 55 .. 17 28 5 172 68 102 .. .. 49 .. 14 .. 25 .. w .. 89 240 .. .. 36 9 18 .. 1,001 .. 76 123
2007
10 6 .. 20 19 .. .. 9 11 23 .. 11 23 21 14 .. 15 22 21 39 5 17 .. 9 5 17 14 5 .. 6 16 19 23 26 3 24 13 .. 26 4 4 14 w 7 10 8 14 10 7 8 23 20 7 8 19 18
Fuel price
Particulate matter concentration
Per capita
Diesel fuel
Gasoline fuel
Super grade gasoline
Diesel
Urban-populationweighted PM10 micrograms per cubic meter
2007
2007
2007
2008
2008
1990
2006
1.11 0.89 1.37 0.16 1.35 1.11 0.91 1.07 1.57 1.18 1.12 0.87 1.23 1.43 0.65 0.86 1.38 1.30 0.85 1.03 1.11 0.87 1.22 0.89 0.36 0.96 1.87 0.22 1.30 0.88 0.37 1.44 0.56 1.18 1.35 0.02 0.80 1.34 0.30 1.70 1.30 1.11 m 1.13 0.91 0.87 1.11 1.03 0.92 1.13 0.87 0.61 1.09 1.14 1.28 1.54
1.22 0.86 1.37 0.09 1.26 1.29 0.91 0.90 1.68 1.26 1.15 0.95 1.28 0.75 0.45 0.93 1.52 1.52 0.53 1.00 1.30 0.64 1.35 0.88 0.24 0.84 1.63 0.20 1.22 0.96 0.52 1.65 0.78 1.17 0.75 0.01 0.77 1.25 0.17 1.61 1.05 1.03 m 1.03 0.90 0.82 1.01 0.95 0.85 1.12 0.83 0.53 0.76 1.06 1.37 1.44
36 41 49 161 97 33b 92 106 41 40 78 34 42 94 296 56 15 37 159 103 57 88 .. 57 142 74 68 177 28 72 266 25 30 237 85 22 123 .. .. 96 35 80 w 120 96 121 55 98 112 63 59 125 134 114 37 33
14 18 26 113 95 15b 50 41 15 30 31 21 32 82 165 33 12 26 75 50 25 71 .. 35 101 30 40 55 12 21 127 15 21 175 55 11 55 .. .. 40 27 50 w 65 57 69 32 58 69 27 35 73 78 53 26 23
kilograms of oil equivalent
188 291 .. 1,230 42 .. .. 527 354 838 .. 303 749 96 51 .. 807 746 198 224 24 269 .. 34 546 151 193 179 .. 173 1,867 662 1,785 250 58 553 86 .. 83 25 29 262 w 31 125 81 296 112 87 232 292 250 34 56 1,019 686
111 69 .. 553 35 .. .. 325 214 502 .. 119 573 65 33 .. 354 259 115 0 18 172 .. 15 203 101 125 0 .. 52 958 345 422 164 9 81 48 .. 15 11 17 103 w 15 55 39 118 49 38 88 117 125 22 23 372 432
67 202 .. 615 6 .. .. 179 114 305 .. 172 149 25 16 .. 394 457 74 214 6 78 .. 17 314 41 33 170 .. 112 819 288 1,218 71 43 416 35 .. 59 14 11 138 w 15 59 37 142 52 45 121 133 107 8 31 568 207
$ per liter
a. $1.12 for consumption below 120 liters a month. b. Includes Montenegro. c. Data are from the U.S. Federal Highway Administration. d. Excludes personal passenger vans, passenger minivans, and utility-type vehicles, which are all treated as trucks. e. Data are from the European Commission and the European Road Federation.
204
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
3.13
Definitions
Traffic congestion in urban areas constrains economic
Road sector energy consumption includes energy
• Motor vehicles include cars, buses, and freight
productivity, damages people’s health, and degrades
from petroleum products, natural gas, renewable and
vehicles but not two-wheelers. Population fi gures
the quality of life. In recent years ownership of pas-
combustible waste, and electricity. Biodiesel and bio-
are midyear population in the year for which data
senger cars has increased, and the expansion of eco-
gasoline, forms of renewable energy, are biodegrad-
are available. Roads refer to motorways (a road
nomic activity has led to more goods and services
able and emit less sulfur and carbon monoxide than
designed and built for motor traffic that separates
being transported by road over greater distances
petroleum-derived fuels. They can be produced from
the traffic flowing in opposite directions), highways,
(see table 5.10). These developments have increased
vegetable oils, such as soybean, corn, palm, peanut,
main or national roads, and secondary or regional
demand for roads and vehicles, adding to urban con-
or sunflower oil, and can be used directly only in a
roads. • Passenger cars are road motor vehicles,
gestion, air pollution, health hazards, and traffic acci-
modified internal combustion engine.
other than two-wheelers, intended for the carriage
dents and injuries. Congestion, the most visible cost
Data on fuel prices are compiled by the German
of passengers and designed to seat no more than
of expanding vehicle ownership, is reflected in the
Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ), from its
nine people (including the driver). • Road density
indicators in the table. Other relevant indicators—
global network and other sources, including the
is the ratio of the length of the country’s total road
such as average vehicle speed and the economic cost
Allgemeiner Deutscher Automobile Club (for Europe)
network to the country’s land area. It includes all
of traffic congestion—are not included because data
and the Latin American Energy Organization (for Latin
roads in the country— motorways, highways, main
are incomplete or difficult to compare.
America). Local prices are converted to U.S. dollars
or national roads, secondary or regional roads, and
The data in the table—except those on fuel prices
using the exchange rate in the Financial Times inter-
other urban and rural roads. • Road sector energy
and particulate matter—are compiled by the Interna-
national monetary table on the survey date. When
consumption is the total energy used in the road sec-
tional Road Federation (IRF) through questionnaires
multiple exchange rates exist, the market, parallel,
tor from all sources, including energy from petroleum
sent to national organizations. Primary sources are
or black market rate is used. Prices were compiled
products, natural gas, combustible and renewable
national road associations. If they lack data or do not
in mid-November 2008, when crude oil prices had
waste, and electricity (see table 3.7). • Gasoline
respond, other agencies are contacted, including road
dropped to $48 a barrel Brent (from a high of $148
is light hydrocarbon oil use in internal combustion
directorates, ministries of transport or public works,
in July).
engines such as motor vehicles, excluding aircraft.
and central statistical offices. As a result, data qual-
Considerable uncertainty surrounds estimates
• Diesel is heavy oils used as a fuel for internal com-
ity is uneven. Coverage of each indicator may differ
of particulate matter concentrations, and caution
bustion in diesel engines and heating installations.
across countries because of different definitions. The
should be used in interpreting them. They allow for
• Fuel price is the pump price of super grade gaso-
IRF is taking steps to improve the quality of the data
cross-country comparisons of the relative risk of
line (usually 95 octane) and diesel fuel, converted
in its World Road Statistics 2009. Because this effort
particulate matter pollution facing urban residents.
from the local currency to U.S. dollars (see About
covers only 2002–07, time series data may not be
Major sources of urban outdoor particulate matter
the data). • Particulate matter concentration is fine
comparable. Another reason is coverage. For exam-
pollution are traffic and industrial emissions, but
suspended particulates of less than 10 microns in
ple, the 2005 estimate for U.S. passenger cars from
nonanthropogenic sources such as dust storms may
diameter (PM10) that are capable of penetrating
the U.S. Federal Highway Administration excludes
be a substantial contributor for some cities. Country
deep into the respiratory tract and causing severe
personal passenger vans, passenger minivans, and
technology and pollution controls are important deter-
health damage. Data are urban-population-weighted
utility-type vehicles. Road density is a rough indicator
minants of particulate matter. Data on particulate
PM10 levels in residential areas of cities with more
of accessibility and does not capture road width, type,
matter for selected cities are in table 3.14. Estimates
than 100,000 residents. The estimates represent
or condition. Thus comparisons over time and across
of economic damages from death and illness due to
the average annual exposure level of the average
countries require caution.
particulate matter pollution are in table 3.16.
urban resident to outdoor particulate matter.
Particulate matter concentration has fallen in all income groups, and the higher the income, the lower the concentration
3.13a Data sources
Urban-population-weighted particulate matter (PM10, micrograms per cubic meter) 150
1990
2006
Data on vehicles and road density are from the IRF’s electronic files and its annual World Road Statistics, except where noted. Data on road sector energy consumption are from the IRF and the Inter-
100
national Energy Agency. Data on fuel prices are from the GTZ’s electronic files. Data on particulate 50
matter concentrations are from Pandey and others’ “Ambient Particulate Matter Concentrations in Residential and Pollution Hotspot Areas of World
0 Low income Source: Table 3.13.
Lower middle income
Upper middle income
High income
Euro area
Cities: New Estimates Based on the Global Model of Ambient Particulates (GMAPS)” (2006b).
2010 World Development Indicators
205
ENVIRONMENT
Traffic and congestion
3.14
Air pollution City
City population
thousands 2007
Argentina Australia
Austria Belgium Brazil Bulgaria Canada
Chile China
Colombia Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. Finland France Germany
Ghana Greece Hungary Iceland India
206
Córdoba Melbourne Perth Sydney Vienna Brussels Rio de Janeiro São Paulo Sofia Montréal Toronto Vancouver Santiago Anshan Beijing Changchun Chengdu Chongqing Dalian Guangzhou Guiyang Harbin Jinan Kunming Lanzhou Liupanshui Nanchang Pingxiang Quingdao Shanghai Shenyang Taiyuan Tianjin Wulumqi Wuhan Zhengzhou Zibo Bogotá Zagreb Havana Prague Copenhagen Guayaquil Quito Cairo Helsinki Paris Berlin Frankfurt Munich Accra Athens Budapest Reykjavik Ahmadabad Bengaluru
2010 World Development Indicators
1,452 3,728 1,532 4,327 2,315 1,743 11,748 18,845 1,185 3,678 5,213 2,146 5,720 1,639 11,106 3,183 4,123 6,461 3,167 8,829 3,662 3,621 2,798 2,931 2,561 1,221 2,350 905 2,817 14,987 4,787 2,794 7,180 2,025 7,243 2,636 3,061 7,772 908 2,174 1,162 1,085 2,514 1,701 11,893 1,115 9,904 3,406 668 1,275 2,121 3,242 1,679 164 5,375 6,787
Particulate matter concentration
Sulfur dioxide
Nitrogen dioxide
Urbanpopulationweighted PM10 micrograms per micrograms per micrograms per cubic meter cubic meter cubic meter 2006 2001 a 2001 a
55 12 12 19 39 25 29 34 63 17 20 12 54 83 90 75 87 124 50 64 71 77 95 71 92 60 79 67 62 74 102 89 126 57 80 98 75 30 32 20 21 19 23 30 149 19 11 21 18 19 33 38 20 18 76 41
.. .. 5 28 14 20 129 43 39 10 17 14 29 115 90 21 77 340 61 57 424 23 132 19 102 102 69 75 190 53 99 211 82 60 40 63 198 .. 31 1 14 7 15 22 69 4 14 18 11 8 .. 34 39 5 30 ..
97 30 19 81 42 48 .. 83 122 42 43 37 81 88 122 64 74 70 100 136 53 30 45 33 104 .. 29 .. 64 73 73 55 50 70 43 95 43 .. .. 5 33 54 .. .. .. 35 57 26 45 53 .. 64 51 42 21 ..
About the data
Indoor and outdoor air pollution place a major burden on world health. More than half the world’s people rely on dung, wood, crop waste, or coal to meet basic energy needs. Cooking and heating with these fuels on open fires or stoves without chimneys lead to indoor air pollution, which is responsible for 1.6 million deaths a year—one every 20 seconds. In many urban areas air pollution exposure is the main environmental threat to health. Long-term exposure to high levels of soot and small particles contributes to a range of health effects, including respiratory diseases, lung cancer, and heart disease. Particulate pollution, alone or with sulfur dioxide, creates an enormous burden of ill health. Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide emissions lead to deposition of acid rain and other acidic compounds over long distances, which can lead to the leaching of trace minerals and nutrients critical to trees and plants. Sulfur dioxide emissions can damage human health, particularly that of the young and old. Nitrogen dioxide is emitted by bacteria, motor vehicles, industrial activities, nitrogen fertilizers, fuel and biomass combustion, and aerobic decomposition of organic matter in soils and oceans. Where coal is the primary fuel for power plants without effective dust controls, steel mills, industrial boilers, and domestic heating, high levels of urban air pollution are common— especially particulates and sulfur dioxide. Elsewhere the worst emissions are from petroleum product combustion. Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide concentration data are based on average observed concentrations at urban monitoring sites, which not all cities have. The data on particulate matter are estimated average annual concentrations in residential areas away from air pollution “hotspots,” such as industrial districts and transport corridors. The data are from the World Bank’s Development Research Group and Environment Department estimates of annual ambient concentrations of particulate matter in cities with populations exceeding 100,000 (Pandey and others 2006b). A country’s technology and pollution controls are important determinants of particulate matter concentrations. Pollutant concentrations are sensitive to local conditions, and even monitoring sites in the same city may register different levels. Thus these data should be considered only a general indication of air quality, and comparisons should be made with caution. Current World Health Organization (WHO) air quality guidelines are annual mean concentrations of 20 micrograms per cubic meter for particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter and 40 micrograms for nitrogen dioxide and daily mean concentrations of 20 micrograms per cubic meter for sulfur dioxide.
City
City population
thousands 2007
India
Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Ireland Italy
Japan
Kenya Korea, Rep.
Malaysia Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Philippines Poland
Portugal Romania Russian Federation Singapore Slovak Republic South Africa
Spain Sweden Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine United Kingdom
United States
Venezuela, RB
Chennai Delhi Hyderabad Kanpur Kolkata Lucknow Mumbai Nagpur Pune Jakarta Tehran Dublin Milan Rome Turin Osaka-Kobe Tokyo Yokohama Nairobi Pusan Seoul Taegu Kuala Lumpur Mexico City Amsterdam Auckland Oslo Manila Katowice Lódz Warsaw Lisbon Bucharest Moscow Omsk Singapore Bratislava Cape Town Durban Johannesburg Barcelona Madrid Stockholm Zurich Bangkok Ankara Istanbul Kiev Birmingham London Manchester Chicago Los Angeles New York-Newark Caracas
7,163 15,926 6,376 3,162 14,787 2,695 18,978 2,454 4,672 9,125 7,873 1,059 2,945 3,339 1,652 11,294 35,676 3,366 3,010 3,480 9,796 2,460 1,448 19,028 1,031 1,245 802 11,100 2,914 776 1,707 2,812 1,942 10,452 1,135 4,436 456 3,215 2,729 3,435 4,920 5,567 1,264 1,108 6,704 3,716 10,061 2,709 2,285 8,567 2,230 8,990 12,500 19,040 2,985
Particulate matter concentration
Sulfur dioxide
Nitrogen dioxide
Urbanpopulationweighted PM10 micrograms per micrograms per micrograms per cubic meter cubic meter cubic meter 2006 2001 a 2001 a
34 136 37 99 116 99 57 50 42 84 50 16 30 29 43 33 38 29 40 35 37 40 23 48 34 13 18 28 39 38 42 21 16 19 19 41 15 13 25 26 33 29 11 24 76 39 46 26 14 19 15 23 32 20 16
15 24 12 15 49 26 33 6 .. .. 209 20 31 .. .. 19 18 100 .. 60 44 81 24 74 10 3 8 33 83 21 16 8 10 109 20 20 21 21 31 19 11 24 3 11 11 55 120 14 9 25 26 14 9 26 33
17 41 17 14 34 25 39 13 .. .. .. .. 248 .. .. 63 68 13 .. 51 60 62 .. 130 58 20 43 .. 79 43 32 52 71 .. 34 30 27 72 .. 31 43 66 20 39 23 46 .. 51 45 77 49 57 74 79 57
3.14
Definitions
• City population is the number of residents of the city or metropolitan area as defined by national authorities and reported to the United Nations. • Particulate matter concentration is fine suspended particulates of less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10) that are capable of penetrating deep into the respiratory tract and causing significant health damage. Data are urban- population-weighted PM10 levels in residential areas of cities with more than 100,000 residents. The estimates represent the average annual exposure level of the average urban resident to outdoor particulate matter. • Sulfur dioxide is an air pollutant produced when fossil fuels containing sulfur are burned. • Nitrogen dioxide is a poisonous, pungent gas formed when nitric oxide combines with hydrocarbons and sunlight, producing a photochemical reaction. These conditions occur in both natural and anthropogenic activities.
Data sources Data on city population are from the United Nations Population Division. Data on particulate matter concentrations are from Pandey and others’ “Ambient Particulate Matter Concentration in Residential and Pollution Hotspot Areas of World Cities: New Estimates Based on the Global Model of Ambient Particulates (GMAPS)” (2006b). Data on sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide concentrations are from the WHO’s Healthy Cities Air Management Information System and the World Resources Institute.
a. Data are for the most recent year available.
2010 World Development Indicators
207
ENVIRONMENT
Air pollution
3.15
Government commitment EnvironBiodiversity mental assessments, strategies strategies, or or action action plans plans
Participation in treatiesa
Climate changeb
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
208
1993 2001 1992 1992
1994
1998 1991
1990
1993 1994
1988
1990
1993 1994 1999 1990
1991 1988 1994 1989 1989 1994
1990 1994 1998
1990 1994 2001
1993 1994 1988 1990 1990 1992 1991 2000
1994 1994 1993 1992 1994 1995 1998 1994 1995 1990 1992 1998
1995 1995 1988 1988
1991
1990 1989
1992
1988
1994 1994 1993 1999 1993
1988 1988 1991
2010 World Development Indicators
Ozone layer
CFC control
Law of the Seac 1982
1992
1985
1987
2002 1995 1994 2000 1994 1994 1994 1994 1995 1994 2000 1996 1994 1995 2000 1994 1994 1995 1994 1997 1996 1995 1994 1995 1994 1995 1994
2004d 1999 d 1992d 2000 d 1990 1999d 1987d 1987 1996d 1990d 1986e 1988 1993d 1994 d 1992g 1991d 1990d 1990d 1989 1997d 2001d 1989d 1986 1993d 1989d 1990 1989 d
2004d 1999d 1992d 2000d 1990 1999d 1989 1989 1996d 1990d 1988e 1988 1993d 1994 d 1992g 1991d 1990d 1990d 1989 1997d 2001d 1989d 1988 1993d 1994 1990 1991d
1995 1995 1997 1994 1995 1996 1994 1994 1994 1999 1994 1995 1996 1995 1994 1994 1994 1994 1998 1994 1994 1994 1995 1994 1996 1994 1996 1996 1996
1990d 1994 d 1994 d 1991d 1993d 1991e 1992d 1993e 1988 1993d 1990d 1988 1992 2005d 1996d 1994 d 1986 1987f 1994 d 1990d 1996 d 1988 1989 d 1988 1987d 1992d 2002d 2000d 1993d
1993d 1994 d 1994 d 1991d 1993d 1991e 1992d 1993e 1988 1993d 1990d 1988 1992 2005d 1996d 1994 d 1988 1988f 1994 d 1990d 1996d 1988 1989 1988 1989d 1992d 2002d 2000d 1993d
2003d 1996 1994 1995 2002d 1994 1995 2001 2006d 1998 1997 1995 1994g 1994 1994 1996 2005
1994 2003
1997 1996 1995 2008 1994 1994 1994g 1994 1996 2004
1994
2005d 1996 1996 1998 1994 1996d 1994 d 1994 1995 1997 1994 1994 1996 1994
Biological diversity b
Kyoto Protocol
1992
1997
2002 1994d 1995 1998 1994 1993e 1993 1994 2000f 1994 1993 1996 1994 1994 2002d 1995 1994 1996 1993 1997 1995d 1994 1992 1995 1994 1994 1993 1994 1996 1994 1994 1994 1996 1994 1993f 1993 1996 1993 1994 1994 1996d 1994 1994 1994 e 1994 1997 1994 1994d 1993 1994 1994 1995 1993 1995 1996 1995
2005d 2005 d 2007 2001 2008e 2002 2000 d 2001d 2007e 2002 2002d 1999 2007 2003d 2002 2002 2005 d 2001d 2002d 2002d 2002 2008 2002 2002 f 2001d 2005 d 2007 2002 2007 2002 2007e 2002 2002d 2000 2005 d 1998 2005d 2002 2005d 2002 2002 f 2001d 1999 d 2002 2003d 2002 1999 2000 d 2005 d 2000
CCD
Stockholm Convention
1973
1994
2001
1985d 2003d 1983d
1995d 2000 d 1996 1997 1997 1997 2000 1997d 1998 d 1996 2001d 1997d 1996 1996 2002d 1996 1997 2001d 1996 1997 1997 1997 1995 1996 1996 1997 1997
CITES
1981 1976 1982d 1998 d 1981 1995d 1983 1984 d 1979 2002 1977d 1975 1991d 1989 d 1988 d 1997 1981d 1975 1980 d 1989d 1975 1981d 1981 1976 d 1983 d 1975 1994 d 2000d 1990 d 993 g 1977 1986 d 1975 1978 1987d 1994 d 1992d 1989 d 1976 d 978 1989 d 1977d 1996 d 1976 1975 1992d 1979 1981d 1990 d 1985d
1999 1997 1999 1998 1997 2000 e 1997 2000 d 1995d 1997d 1995 1995 1997d 1996 1997 1995e 1997 1996 d 1996 1999 1996 1996 1997 1998 d 1997 1995 1996 1997
2004 2006 2006 2005 2003 2004 2002 2004d 2007 2004d 2006 2004 2003 2002d 2004 2004 2004 2005 2006 2001 2004 2005 2004
2005d 2007 2007 2004 2007 2007 2002 2003 2007 2004 2003 2005d 2003 2002e 2004f 2007 2006 2006 2002 2003 2006
2008 2005
EnvironBiodiversity mental assessments, strategies strategies, or or action action plans plans
Participation in treatiesa
Climate changeb
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
1995 1993 1993
1994 1993
1994 1991 1994
1992
1995 1995
1989
1988 1994 1991
1991 1988 1989
1988 1990 1988 2002 1995 1988 1994 1989 1992 1993 1994 1994 1994 1990
1994 1990 1992
1989 1993 1995
1991 1992 1994 1991 1993 1988 1989 1991
3.15
Ozone layer
CFC control
Law of the Seac
Biological diversity b
Kyoto Protocol
CITES
CCD
Stockholm Convention
1992
1985
1987
1982
1992
1997
1973
1994
2001
1994 1994 1994 1996
1988d 1991d 1992d 1990 d
1989d 1992d 1992 1990d
2002 1995 1994
1994 1994 1994 1996
2002d 2008 e 2004 2005d
1985 d 1976 1978 d 1976
1999 d 1996 1998 1997
2008 2006
1996 1995 1994 1995 1993e 1993 1994 1994 1994f 1994
2002 2004 2002 1999d 2002e 2003 d
2002 1979 1979 1997d 1980 1978 d 2000 d 1978
1997 1996 1997 1997d 1998 e 1996 1997 1997 2003d 1999
2002 1996f 1996f 1995 1994 1995 2000 2001 1996 1997d 1996 1994 1994 1995 1996 1992 1993 1995 1993 1995 1995 1995 1997 1993 1994 e 1993 1995 1995 1994 1993 1995 1994 1995 1993 1994 1993 1993 1996 1993
2005d 2003 d 2003 d 2002 2006 2000 d 2002d 2006 2003 2004 d 2003d 2001d 2002 2002 2005 d 2001d 2000 2008 e 1999 d 2002d 2005 d 2003 d 2003d 2005d 2002d 2002 1999 2004 2004 d 2008 e 2005d 2005 d 1999 2002 1999 2002 2003 2002 2002 f
1994 1996 1994 1995 1994 1994 1995 1994 1995 1994
1988d 1992d 1988 1993d 1988 d 1989d 1998 d 1988 d 1995d 1992
1988 1992 1988 1993d 1988 1989d 1998d 1988 1995d 1992
1995 2000 1995 1995 1995 1995 2003 1999 1995 1998 1999 1994 1994 1995 1994 1994 1994 1995 1994 1996 1995 1995 1995 1994 1994 1994 1996 1995 1994 1994 1995 1994 1995 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994
1992d 2000 d 1998d 1995d 1993d 1994 d 1996d 1990d 1995d 1994g 1996d 1991d 1989d 1994 d 1994 d 1992d 1987 1996d 1996d 1995 1994 d 1993d 1993d 1994 d 1988 d 1987 1993d 1992d 1988 d 1986 1999 d 1992d 1989 d 1992d 1992d 1989 1991d 1990d 1988 d
1992d 2000d 1998d 1995d 1993d 1994 d 1996d 1990d 1995d 1994g 1996d 1991d 1989d 1994 d 1994 d 1992d 1988 1996d 1996d 1995 1994 d 1993d 1993d 1994 d 1988e 1988 1993d 1992d 1988d 1988 1999d 1992d 1989 1992d 1992d 1993d 1991 1990d 1988
1994 1996 1995 1994 1996 1995d 1994 1996 1994 1998 2004d 1995 2007 2008 2003d 1994g 2001 1996 1994 1996 1994 1994 2007 1996 2007 1997 1996 1994 1998 1996 1996 2000 1994 1996 1994 1997 1996 1997 1994 1994 1998 1997
2005d 2005d 2002
1993d 2002 2004d 1997d 2003 2005d 2003d 2001d 2000 d 1975 1982d 1977d 1994 d 1998 d 1975 1991d 2001d 1996 d 1975 1981d 1997d 1990d 1975 d 1984 1989 d 1977d 1975 1974 1976 1976 d 1978 1975 d 1976 1975 1981 1989 1980
1997 1997d 1996 e 2002d 1996 1995 1998 d 1996 2003d 2002d 1997 1996 1997 1995 1996 1996 1995 1999 d 1996 1996 1997 1997d 1997 1996 1995 e 2000 d 1998 1996 1997 1996 1996 d 1997 1996 2000 d 1997 1995 2000 2001d 1996
2010 World Development Indicators
2006
2007 2002d 2004 2004 2002d 2007 2006 2006 2006 2004 2003 2002 2002d 2005d 2006 2004
2003 2005 2004 2003 2004 2004 2004 2005 2004d 2005d 2007 2002e 2004 2006 2004 2002 2005 2003 2003 2004 2005 2004 2008 2004 e
209
ENVIRONMENT
Government commitment
3.15
Government commitment EnvironBiodiversity mental assessments, strategies strategies, or or action action plans plans
Participation in treatiesa
Climate changeb
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe
1995 1999 1991
1994
1984 1994 1993
1991 1995
1994 1993
1994
1991
1999 1994
1988
1991 1994 1998
1988
1994 1999
1988
1995 1995
1994 1995
1993 1996 1994 1987
1992
Ozone layer
CFC control
Law of the Seac
Biological diversity b
Kyoto Protocol
CITES
CCD
Stockholm Convention
1992
1985
1987
1982
1992
1997
1973
1994
2001
1994 1995 1998 1995 1995 2001h 1995 1997 1994 1996
1993d 1988e 2001d 1993d 1993 2001g,h 2001d 1989d 1993g 1992g 2001d 1990d 1988 1989d 1993d 1992d 1988 1988 1989d 1998d 1993d 1989 1991 1989d 1989d 1991d 1993d 1988 1988e 1989d 1988 1988 1991d 1993d 1989 1994 d
1996 1997
1994 1995 1996 2001f 1994 2002h 1994f 1995 1994f 1996
2001 2008 e 2004 d 2005d 2001d 2007 2006d 2006d 2002 2002
2004
1995 1995 1994 1995 1994 1993 1994 1996 1997f 1996 2004 1995e 1996 1993 1997 1996f 1993 1995 2000 1994
2002d 2002 2002d 2004 d
1994 d 1992 1980 d 1996 d 1977d 2002h 1994 d 1986 d 1993 2000 d 1985d 1975 1986d 1979 d 1982 1997d 1974 1974 2003d
1998 d 2003d 1998 1997d 1995
1997 1994 1994 1994 1997 1994 1994 1996 1998 1996 1995 1995 1994 1994 2004 1995 1994 1997 1996 1994 1994 1994 1994 1995 1995
1993 d 1986e 2001d 1993d 1993d 2001g,h 2001d 1989d 1993g 1992g 2001d 1990 d 1988 d 1989d 1993d 1992d 1986 1987 1989d 1996d 1993d 1989 d 1991d 1989d 1989 d 1991d 1993d 1988 d 1986e 1989d 1987 1986 1989d 1993d 1988 d 1994d
2006d
1993 1995f 1994 1994
1996 1994 1994
1996d 1990 d 1992d
1996d 1990d 1992d
1994 1994 1994
1996 1993 1994
1996 1994 2001g,h 1994 1994 1996 1995g 1994 1997 1997 1994 1994 1996
1994 1994 1994 1994
1994 1999 1997d 1994
2002 2006 d 2006d 2002d 2002 2004 d 1999 2003d 2008e 2002d 2004 2005 d 2002 2001 2007e 2008 e 2004 d 2006d
1991d 1999d 1990d 1976 1974 1975 1997d 1977 1994 d
1997 1999 d 2002d 2001d 2002d 1997 1996 1998 d 1995 1996 1995 1996 1997 1997d 1997 2001d 1995e 2000 d 1995 1998 1996 1997 2002d 1998 d 1996 2000 1999d 1995 1998 d 1998 d
1997d 1980 d 1981d
1997d 1996 1997
1979 1983 1978 1984 d 1974 1996 d
2002d 2003 2002h 2003d 2005 2002 2004 2002 2004 2006 2006 2002 2003 2005 2007 2004 2005 2004 2002d 2004
2004d 2002 2005 2004 2005 2002 2004 2006
a. Ratification of the treaty. b. Year the treaty entered into force in the country. c. Convention became effective November 16, 1994. d. Accession. e. Acceptance. f. Approval. g. Succession. h. Signed by Serbia and Montenegro as a unified country before Montenegro declared its independence.
210
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
3.15
Definitions
National environmental strategies and participation
Environment and Development (the Earth Summit) in
• Environmental strategies or action plans pro-
in international treaties on environmental issues pro-
Rio de Janeiro, which produced Agenda 21—an array
vide a comprehensive analysis of conservation and
vide some evidence of government commitment to
of actions to address environmental challenges:
resource management issues that integrate envi-
sound environmental management. But the signing
• The Framework Convention on Climate Change
ronmental concerns with development. They include
of these treaties does not always imply ratification,
aims to stabilize atmospheric concentrations of
national conservation strategies, environmental
nor does it guarantee that governments will comply
greenhouse gases at levels that will prevent human
action plans, environmental management strategies,
with treaty obligations.
activities from interfering dangerously with the
and sustainable development strategies. The date
global climate.
is the year a country adopted a strategy or action
In many countries efforts to halt environmental degradation have failed, primarily because govern-
• The Vienna Convention for the Protection of the
plan. • Biodiversity assessments, strategies, or
ments have neglected to make this issue a priority, a
Ozone Layer aims to protect human health and the
action plans include biodiversity profiles (see About
reflection of competing claims on scarce resources.
environment by promoting research on the effects
the data). • Participation in treaties covers nine
To address this problem, many countries are prepar-
of changes in the ozone layer and on alternative
international treaties (see About the data). • Climate
ing national environmental strategies—some focus-
substances (such as substitutes for chlorofluoro-
change refers to the Framework Convention on Cli-
ing narrowly on environmental issues, and others
carbon) and technologies, monitoring the ozone
mate Change (signed in 1992). • Ozone layer refers
integrating environmental, economic, and social
layer, and taking measures to control the activities
to the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the
concerns. Among such initiatives are conservation
that produce adverse effects.
Ozone Layer (signed in 1985). • CFC control refers to
strategies and environmental action plans. Some
• The Montreal Protocol for Chlorofl uorocarbon
the Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone
countries have also prepared country environmental
Control requires that countries help protect the
Layer (the Montreal Protocol for Chlorofluorocarbon
profiles and biodiversity strategies and profiles.
earth from excessive ultraviolet radiation by cut-
Control) (signed in 1987). • Law of the Sea refers
National conservation strategies—promoted by
ting chlorofluorocarbon consumption by 20 per-
to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the
the World Conservation Union (IUCN)—provide a
cent over their 1986 level by 1994 and by 50
Sea (signed in 1982). • Biological diversity refers
comprehensive, cross-sectoral analysis of conser-
percent over their 1986 level by 1999, with allow-
to the Convention on Biological Diversity (signed at
vation and resource management issues to help inte-
ances for increases in consumption by developing
the Earth Summit in 1992). • Kyoto Protocol refers
grate environmental concerns with the development
countries.
to the protocol on climate change adopted at the
process. Such strategies discuss current and future
• The United Nations Convention on the Law of the
third conference of the parties to the United Nations
needs, institutional capabilities, prevailing technical
Sea, which became effective in November 1994,
Framework Convention on Climate Change in Decem-
conditions, and the status of natural resources in
establishes a comprehensive legal regime for seas
ber 1997. • CITES is the Convention on International
a country.
and oceans, establishes rules for environmental
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora,
National environmental action plans, supported by
standards and enforcement provisions, and devel-
an agreement among governments to ensure that
the World Bank and other development agencies,
ops international rules and national legislation to
the survival of wild animals and plants is not threat-
describe a country’s main environmental concerns,
prevent and control marine pollution.
ened by uncontrolled exploitation. Adopted in 1973,
identify the principal causes of environmental prob-
• The Convention on Biological Diversity promotes
it entered into force in 1975. • CCD is the United
lems, and formulate policies and actions to deal with
conservation of biodiversity through scientifi c
Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, an
them. These plans are a continuing process in which
and technological cooperation among countries,
international convention addressing the problems
governments develop comprehensive environmental
access to financial and genetic resources, and
of land degradation in the world’s drylands. Adopted
policies, recommend specific actions, and outline the
transfer of ecologically sound technologies.
in 1994, it entered into force in 1996. • Stockholm
investment strategies, legislation, and institutional
But 10 years after the Earth Summit in Rio de
Convention is an international legally binding instru-
Janeiro the World Summit on Sustainable Develop-
ment to protect human health and the environment
Biodiversity profiles—prepared by the World Con-
ment in Johannesburg recognized that many of the
from persistent organic pollutants. Adopted in 2001,
servation Monitoring Centre and the IUCN—provide
proposed actions had yet to materialize. To help
it entered into force in 2004.
basic background on species diversity, protected
developing countries comply with their obligations
areas, major ecosystems and habitat types, and
under these agreements, the Global Environment
legislative and administrative support. In an effort
Facility (GEF) was created to focus on global improve-
to establish a scientific baseline for measuring prog-
ment in biodiversity, climate change, international
Data on environmental strategies and participation
ress in biodiversity conservation, the United Nations
waters, and ozone layer depletion. The UNEP, United
in international environmental treaties are from
Environment Programme (UNEP) coordinates global
Nations Development Programme, and World Bank
the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework
biodiversity assessments.
manage the GEF according to the policies of its gov-
Convention on Climate Change, the Ozone Secre-
To address global issues, many governments have
erning body of country representatives. The World
tariat of the UNEP, the World Resources Institute,
also signed international treaties and agreements
Bank is responsible for the GEF Trust Fund and chairs
the UNEP, the Center for International Earth Sci-
launched in the wake of the 1972 United Nations
the GEF.
ence Information Network, and the United Nations
arrangements required to implement them.
Conference on the Human Environment in Stock-
Data sources
Treaty Series.
holm and the 1992 United Nations Conference on
2010 World Development Indicators
211
ENVIRONMENT
Government commitment
3.16 Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
212
Toward a broader measure of savings Gross savings
Consumption of fixed capital
Net national savings
Education expenditure
Energy depletion
Mineral depletion
Net forest depletion
Carbon dioxide damage
Particulate emission damage
Adjusted net savings
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
.. 18.0 58.8 24.1 25.5 28.1 32.9 27.2 63.0 33.9 28.4 .. .. 29.9 41.0 46.3 17.5 14.1 .. .. .. .. 23.4 1.8 3.7 24.2 53.9 29.7 20.2 9.4 26.7 15.9 12.7 21.8 .. 24.2 23.6 9.0 31.8 23.5 7.9 .. 20.1 17.3 24.8 18.7 48.8 11.1 8.3 .. 7.3 7.4 14.4 2.9 22.4 .. 21.2
7.0 10.1 10.9 12.9 11.8 10.0 14.7 14.3 12.3 6.8 11.2 13.9 8.1 9.5 10.4 11.5 11.8 11.6 7.5 5.6 8.3 8.8 14.0 7.4 10.0 12.9 10.1 13.4 11.4 6.7 14.1 11.5 9.0 12.9 .. 13.8 14.2 11.1 10.8 9.3 10.5 6.9 13.5 6.7 14.1 13.9 13.9 7.9 10.1 13.8 8.8 13.9 10.1 7.7 6.7 .. 9.5
–7.0 7.9 47.9 11.2 13.8 18.1 18.1 12.9 50.7 27.1 17.2 .. .. 20.4 30.6 34.8 5.8 2.5 .. .. .. .. 9.4 –5.6 –6.4 11.4 43.8 16.3 8.8 2.7 12.6 4.5 3.8 8.9 .. 10.4 9.4 –2.1 21.0 14.2 –2.6 .. 6.6 10.6 10.7 4.9 34.9 3.2 –1.8 .. –1.5 –6.5 4.3 –4.8 15.7 .. 11.7
.. 2.8 4.5 2.3 4.5 2.2 5.1 5.3 2.0 2.0 4.9 5.8 3.3 4.7 .. 6.6 4.8 4.1 3.3 5.1 1.7 2.6 4.8 1.3 1.2 3.6 1.8 3.0 3.6 0.9 2.3 5.0 4.7 4.3 13.2 4.4 7.4 3.5 1.4 4.4 3.3 1.9 4.6 3.7 5.6 5.1 3.1 2.0 2.8 4.3 4.7 2.8 2.9 2.0 2.3 1.5 3.5
0.0 1.7 29.9 54.6 8.6 0.0 4.1 0.2 51.4 4.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 27.6 2.0 0.5 2.7 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.8 5.5 0.0 43.7 0.3 6.7 0.0 10.0 3.1 71.2 0.0 6.2 1.3 .. 0.7 3.0 0.0 21.1 14.5 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.3 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.8 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.4 0.8 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 3.2 2.3 0.8 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 14.3 1.7 0.0 0.6 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 0.1 0.0 5.2 0.0 .. 1.4
3.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 10.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.8 0.0 4.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.7 2.6 0.0 .. 0.0
0.1 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.1 1.2 0.4 1.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.2 0.3 0.2 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.3 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 .. 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.9 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.5 .. 0.5
0.2 0.2 0.2 1.3 1.1 1.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.9 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.9 0.6 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.2 1.0 0.4 0.8 .. 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.5 0.8 0.4 0.2
.. 8.5 21.4 –42.6 7.7 18.1 15.0 17.6a –0.1 23.7 19.8 .. .. –4.7 .. 37.2b 5.2 2.9 .. .. .. .. 7.6 –4.6 –49.9 –0.4 35.1 19.1c 1.5 –2.5 –57.1 9.1 1.7 11.3 .. 13.4 13.7 –0.3 0.4 2.1 –0.1 .. 9.0 8.9 16.0a 9.8 3.6 3.9 –0.3 .. –6.5 –4.8 5.3 –11.3 16.6 .. 13.1
2010 World Development Indicators
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
3.16
Gross savings
Consumption of fixed capital
Net national savings
Education expenditure
Energy depletion
Mineral depletion
Net forest depletion
Carbon dioxide damage
Particulate emission damage
Adjusted net savings
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
15.9 38.2 22.2 .. .. 19.7 19.8 18.5 .. 25.9 13.7 46.2 13.1 .. 30.5 .. 58.7 14.9 25.2 22.3 10.2 17.8 –2.7 66.8 15.2 16.1 14.7 29.3 .. .. .. 16.5 25.3 20.8 26.5 31.4 7.4 .. 17.1 37.5 10.3 .. .. .. .. 41.2 .. 19.3 25.9 30.8 16.1 24.1 30.3 19.1 12.6 .. ..
15.1 8.5 10.7 .. .. 17.1 13.5 14.0 11.4 13.3 9.8 13.5 8.0 .. 12.6 .. 13.3 8.5 8.6 12.6 11.3 6.4 7.8 12.3 12.7 10.8 7.4 6.5 11.9 8.1 .. 11.1 12.0 8.3 9.7 10.1 7.9 .. 12.1 7.1 13.9 14.5 8.9 2.6 1.2 15.0 .. 8.2 11.1 9.4 9.9 11.4 8.4 12.7 13.6 .. ..
0.8 29.7 11.6 .. .. 2.5 6.3 4.5 .. 12.6 3.8 32.8 5.0 .. 17.9 .. 45.3 6.4 16.6 9.6 –1.1 11.4 –10.5 54.5 2.5 5.3 7.2 22.8 .. .. .. 5.4 13.3 12.5 16.8 21.3 –0.5 .. 5.0 30.4 –3.6 .. .. .. .. 26.2 .. 11.1 14.8 21.4 6.2 12.7 21.9 6.4 –1.0 .. ..
5.3 3.2 1.1 4.2 .. 5.2 5.9 4.5 5.3 3.2 5.6 4.4 6.6 .. 3.9 .. 3.0 5.8 1.2 5.6 1.8 9.4 .. .. 4.6 4.9 2.6 3.5 4.0 3.6 2.8 3.4 4.8 6.5 4.6 5.2 3.8 0.8 7.3 3.4 4.8 6.6 3.0 2.6 0.9 6.0 3.9 2.1 4.4 6.3 3.9 2.5 2.2 5.4 5.3 .. ..
0.8 4.9 12.6 .. .. 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 31.3 0.0 .. 0.0 .. 38.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 38.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.1 0.0 .. 0.0 8.2 0.0 5.9 0.0 7.0 .. 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 23.8 15.9 .. 4.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.5 1.5 0.0 .. ..
0.0 1.4 1.4 .. .. 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 4.5 1.8 0.1 .. 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 .. 0.0 0.3 0.0 9.2 6.1 0.0 .. 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 24.1 0.0 6.2 0.8 0.3 0.1 .. ..
0.0 0.8 0.0 .. .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 .. 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.3 7.7 0.0 0.1 0.1 2.5 0.9 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.5 .. 0.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 .. ..
0.3 1.2 0.6 .. .. 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.6 0.2 0.8 1.4 0.3 .. 0.4 .. 0.4 1.0 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.9 0.5 0.3 1.0 0.3 0.2 0.7 0.1 .. 0.3 0.3 1.0 1.7 0.4 0.2 .. 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.1 .. 0.7 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.2 .. ..
0.0 0.5 0.5 0.4 2.7 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.8 0.3 .. 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 1.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.1 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.5 1.6 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.0 .. 0.1
5.0 24.2 –2.4 .. .. 7.5a 11.3 8.5 .. 15.3a 3.6 2.5 10.2 .. 21.1
2010 World Development Indicators
9.7 10.4 17.1 14.8 0.1 19.4 .. .. 6.6 9.0 7.0 25.1 .. .. .. 8.5 9.0 17.3 3.0 19.8 –4.6 .. 9.9 30.5 –1.2 .. .. .. .. 16.2 .. 6.1 18.8 3.1 9.0 7.0 22.3 9.2 4.1 .. ..
213
ENVIRONMENT
Toward a broader measure of savings
3.16
Toward a broader measure of savings Gross savings
Consumption of fixed capital
Net national savings
Education expenditure
Energy depletion
Mineral depletion
Net forest depletion
Carbon dioxide damage
Particulate emission damage
Adjusted net savings
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
% of GNI
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
25.0 32.8 25.4 48.3 18.0 .. 5.5 47.0 –70.9 27.0 .. 16.1 20.6 18.4 15.9 10.7 27.1 .. 12.6 25.5 .. 30.7 .. .. 41.8 22.6 17.7 32.1 12.6 20.2 .. 14.8 12.6 18.2 40.5 34.6 30.4 .. .. 21.4 .. 20.9 w 25.3 31.6 41.1 23.8 31.4 47.3 24.8 22.4 .. 35.0 16.5 18.5 ..
2008
11.7 12.4 6.7 12.5 8.6 .. 7.0 14.1 13.1 13.6 .. 13.9 14.0 9.7 9.9 9.6 12.5 13.3 10.1 8.2 7.6 10.9 1.2 7.3 13.1 11.1 11.8 10.9 7.4 10.5 .. 13.7 14.0 11.9 8.5 11.9 8.8 .. 9.4 9.5 .. 13.0 w 7.9 10.9 9.6 12.1 10.8 10.1 12.1 11.8 10.5 8.4 9.0 13.8 14.0
13.3 20.4 18.7 35.9 9.4 .. –1.6 32.9 –83.9 13.4 .. 2.2 6.6 8.8 6.0 1.1 14.6 .. 2.6 17.3 .. 19.8 .. .. 28.7 11.5 5.9 21.2 5.2 9.7 .. 1.2 –1.4 6.3 32.0 22.7 21.6 .. .. 11.9 .. 7.9 w 17.4 20.7 31.4 11.8 20.6 37.1 12.7 10.6 .. 26.6 7.6 4.7 ..
3.4 3.5 4.6 7.2 4.5 .. 3.9 2.7 3.7 5.3 .. 5.1 3.9 2.6 0.9 6.4 6.4 4.7 2.6 3.2 2.4 4.8 0.9 3.7 4.0 6.7 3.7 .. 3.3 5.9 .. 5.1 4.8 2.6 9.4 3.5 2.8 .. .. 1.3 6.9 4.2 w 3.4 3.3 2.3 4.2 3.3 2.0 4.1 4.4 4.4 3.0 3.3 4.6 4.6
2.4 20.5 0.0 43.5 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 .. 6.4 0.0 0.0 19.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.6 0.4 0.7 5.3 0.0 0.0 50.5 5.8 0.3 133.3 0.0 5.3 .. 2.1 1.9 0.0 51.1 18.6 12.9 .. 22.3 0.1 .. 3.9 w 7.8 8.8 8.1 9.4 8.7 7.2 12.1 6.3 18.6 4.6 14.2 2.0 0.3
0.1 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 .. 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.0 1.1 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 5.2 0.0 4.7 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.3 .. 0.0 13.4 .. 0.5 w 1.0 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.5 0.6 1.8 1.5 1.1 1.3 0.2 0.0
0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 .. 1.5 0.0 0.4 0.2 .. 0.5 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 .. 2.5 0.0 0.1 0.0 .. 5.1 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 .. 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 w 1.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.8 0.6 0.0 0.0
0.4 0.9 0.2 0.6 0.3 .. 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.2 .. 1.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 1.1 1.1 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.4 1.2 0.5 0.3 3.1 0.1 1.6 .. 0.2 0.3 0.2 4.0 0.5 1.0 .. 0.7 0.2 .. 0.4 w 0.7 0.8 1.1 0.5 0.8 1.1 0.8 0.3 0.7 1.0 0.6 0.2 0.2
a. World Bank staff estimate. b. Likely to be overestimated because mineral depletion excludes diamonds. c. Excludes particulate emissions damage.
214
2010 World Development Indicators
0.0 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.5 .. 0.8 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.2 .. 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.1 1.1 0.4 0.0 0.3 .. .. 0.3 0.1 0.2 w 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.1
2008
13.7 1.5 20.1 –1.8 12.2 .. –1.0 34.7 –81.1 18.1 .. –3.4 10.1 10.4 –13.1 7.1 20.5 .. –15.2 18.8 .. 18.0 .. .. –19.2 7.0 8.3 .. 3.3 8.5 .. 3.9 0.9 7.2 –14.1 6.5 9.7 .. .. –0.7 .. 7.2 w 10.1 12.6 22.4 4.6 12.5 28.6 3.2 6.3 21.6 –6.2 6.7
About the data
3.16
Definitions
Adjusted net savings measure the change in value of
future rents from resource extractions. An economic
• Gross savings are the difference between gross
a specified set of assets, excluding capital gains. If
rent represents an excess return to a given factor
national income and public and private consumption,
a country’s net savings are positive and the account-
of production. Natural resources give rise to rents
plus net current transfers. • Consumption of fixed
ing includes a sufficiently broad range of assets,
because they are not produced; in contrast, for pro-
capital is the replacement value of capital used up in
economic theory suggests that the present value
duced goods and services competitive forces will
production. • Net national savings are gross savings
of social welfare is increasing. Conversely, persis-
expand supply until economic profits are driven to
minus consumption of fixed capital. • Education expen-
tently negative adjusted net savings indicate that an
zero. For each type of resource and each country, unit
diture is public current operating expenditures in edu-
economy is on an unsustainable path.
resource rents are derived by taking the difference
cation, including wages and salaries and excluding capi-
The table provides a check on the extent to which
between world prices (to reflect the social oppor-
tal investments in buildings and equipment. • Energy
today’s rents from a number of natural resources
tunity cost of resource extraction) and the average
depletion is the ratio of the value of the stock of energy
and changes in human capital are balanced by
unit extraction or harvest costs (including a “normal”
resources to the remaining reserve lifetime (capped at
net savings, or this generation’s bequest to future
return on capital). Unit rents are then multiplied by
25 years). It covers coal, crude oil, and natural gas.
generations.
the physical quantity extracted or harvested to arrive
• Mineral depletion is the ratio of the value of the stock
Adjusted net savings are derived from standard
at total rent. To estimate the value of the resource,
of mineral resources to the remaining reserve lifetime
national accounting measures of gross savings by
rents are assumed to be constant over the life of the
(capped at 25 years). It covers tin, gold, lead, zinc, iron,
making four adjustments. First, estimates of capital
resource (the El Serafy approach), and the present
copper, nickel, silver, bauxite, and phosphate. • Net for-
consumption of produced assets are deducted to
value of the rent flow is calculated using a 4 percent
est depletion is unit resource rents times the excess of
obtain net savings. Second, current public expen-
social discount rate. For details on the estimation of
roundwood harvest over natural growth. • Carbon diox-
ditures on education are added to net savings (in
natural wealth see World Bank (2006).
ide damage is estimated at $20 per ton of carbon (the
standard national accounting these expenditures
A positive net depletion figure for forest resources
unit damage in 1995 U.S. dollars) times tons of carbon
are treated as consumption). Third, estimates of
implies that the harvest rate exceeds the rate of
emitted. • Particulate emission damage is the will-
the depletion of a variety of natural resources are
natural growth; this is not the same as deforesta-
ingness to pay to avoid illness and death attributable
deducted to reflect the decline in asset values asso-
tion, which represents a change in land use (see
to particulate emissions.• Adjusted net savings are
ciated with their extraction and harvest. And fourth,
Definitions for table 3.4). In principle, there should
net savings plus education expenditure minus energy
deductions are made for damages from carbon diox-
be an addition to savings in countries where growth
depletion, mineral depletion, net forest depletion, and
ide and particulate emissions.
exceeds harvest, but empirical estimates suggest
carbon dioxide and particulate emissions damage.
The exercise treats public education expenditures
that most of this net growth is in forested areas that
as an addition to savings. However, because of the
cannot currently be exploited economically. Because
wide variability in the effectiveness of public edu-
the depletion estimates reflect only timber values,
Data on gross savings are from World Bank
cation expenditures, these figures cannot be con-
they ignore all the external and nontimber benefits
national accounts data files (see table 4.8).
strued as the value of investments in human capital.
associated with standing forests.
Data on consumption of fi xed capital are from
Data sources
A current expenditure of $1 on education does not
Pollution damage from emissions of carbon dioxide
the United Nations Statistics Division’s National
necessarily yield $1 of human capital. The calcula-
is calculated as the marginal social cost per unit mul-
Accounts Statistics: Main Aggregates and Detailed
tion should also consider private education expen-
tiplied by the increase in the stock of carbon dioxide.
Tables, 1997, extrapolated to 2008. Data on edu-
diture, but data are not available for a large number
The unit damage figure represents the present value
cation expenditure are from the United Nations
of countries.
of global damage to economic assets and to human
Statistics Division’s Statistical Yearbook 1997 and
welfare over the time the unit of pollution remains
from the United Nations Educational, Scientific,
While extensive, the accounting of natural resource depletion and pollution costs still has some gaps.
in the atmosphere.
Key estimates missing on the resource side include
Pollution damage from particulate emissions is
the value of fossil water extracted from aquifers, net
estimated by valuing the human health effects from
depletion of fish stocks, and depletion and degrada-
exposure to particulate matter pollution in urban
tion of soils. Important pollutants affecting human
areas. The estimates are calculated as willingness
health and economic assets are excluded because
to pay to avoid illness and death from cardiopulmo-
no internationally comparable data are widely avail-
nary disease and lung cancer in adults and acute
able on damage from ground-level ozone or sulfur
respiratory infections in children that is attributable
oxides.
to particulate emissions.
Estimates of resource depletion are based on the “change in real wealth” method described in Hamilton and Ruta (2008), which estimates depletion as
ENVIRONMENT
Toward a broader measure of savings
For a detailed note on methodology, see www. worldbank.org/data.
and Cultural Organization Institute for Statistics online database. Missing data are estimated by World Bank staff. Data on energy, mineral, and forest depletion are estimates based on sources and methods in Kunte and others’ “Estimating National Wealth: Methodology and Results” (1998). Data on carbon dioxide damage are from Fankhauser’s Valuing Climate Change: The Economics of the Greenhouse (1995). Data on particulate emission damage are from Pandey and others’ “The Human Costs of Air Pollution: New Estimates for Developing Countries” (2006). The conceptual underpinnings of the savings measure appear in
the ratio between the total value of the resource
Hamilton and Clemens’ “Genuine Savings Rates
and the remaining reserve lifetime. The total value
in Developing Countries” (1999).
of the resource is the present value of current and
2010 World Development Indicators
215
Text figures, tables, and boxes
ECONOMY
Introduction
E
conomic growth is not explicitly targeted in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), yet income per capita measures are highly correlated with widely used indicators of poverty, health, and education. As countries become richer, poverty rates generally fall (figure 4a). During 2000–08 low- and middle-income countries averaged economic growth of 6.2 percent a year, and during 1999–2005 the number of people living on less than $1.25 a day fell by 325 million. Economic growth is clearly necessary for achieving the MDG targets. The 2008 financial crisis and ensuing global recession have substantially increased the challenge of meeting the MDG targets. In contrast to the record growth in 2000–07, the global economy grew only 1.9 percent in 2008 and declined an estimated 2.2 percent in 2009. Some 64 million more people will be living in extreme poverty by 2010 because of the crisis. The effects on human welfare may be costly and long-lasting. Relationship between economic growth and development outcomes Income per capita is highly correlated with many development indicators, such as secondary school enrollment, access to water and sanitation, births attended by skilled staff, total fertility rate, children immunized against measles, malnutrition prevalence, and infant mortality. The correlation coefficients—measuring the degree of relationship—between gross national income (GNI) per capita and selected nonmonetary measures of welfare are generally high using either the World Bank Atlas method for calculating GNI or purchasing power parity–converted GNI (figure 4b). The highest correlation is between GNI per capita and the poverty headcount ratio ($2 a day).
4
nearly $1 trillion in 2007—dropped to $765 billion in 2008 and are estimated to have been much lower in 2009 (figure 4e). Workers’ remittances were more 4a
As incomes rise, poverty rates fall
6,000
Poverty headcount ratio at PPP $1.25 a day (percent) 60
5,000
50
4,000
40
3,000
30
2,000
20
1,000
10
PPP GNI per capita (international $)
0
0 1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
Note: PPP is purchasing power parity. Source: World Development Indicators data files.
The global economy in 2009 The 2008 financial crisis led to a global economic recession in 2009, the most severe in 50 years. GDP fell 3.2 percent in high-income economies and grew only 1.2 percent in developing economies (figure 4c). The effects of the crisis were transmitted from high-income economies to developing economies as exports, private capital flows, commodity prices, and workers’ remittances declined. Global trade, whose growth had slowed to 3 percent in 2008, declined an estimated 12 percent in 2009 (figure 4d). Developing economies’ trade shrank an estimated 9 percent in 2009. Private capital flows to developing economies—after peaking at
Income per capita is highly correlated with many development indicators
4b
Poverty headcount ratio at PPP $2 a day (percent) 100
75 50 25 0 0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
PPP GNI per capita (international $) Note: PPP is purchasing power parity. Source: World Development Indicators data files.
2010 World Development Indicators
217
After years of record economic growth the global economy experienced a recession in 2009
4c
GDP growth (percent) 10 Developing economies
5
0 World
–5 2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Source: World Bank 2010 and World Development Indicators data files.
4d
Trade contracted in almost every region Average annual growth (percent)
2008
2009
South Asia
SubSaharan Africa
20 10 0 –10 –20 East Europe & Latin Middle Asia & Central America East & Pacific Asia & Carib. N. Africa Exports
South Asia
SubSaharan Africa
East Europe & Latin Middle Asia & Central America East & Pacific Asia & Carib. N. Africa Imports
Source: World Development Indicators data files.
4e
Private capital flows began to slow in 2008
Foreign direct investment, net inflows Equity Bonds Commercial banks and other creditors
Private capital flows, net ($ millions) 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 –200 2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Source: World Development Indicators data files.
4f
Some developing country regions maintained growth GDP growth (percent) 12 Middle East & North Africa East Asia & Pacific
8
South Asia
4 Sub-Saharan Africa Latin America & Caribbean
0 –4
High income Europe & Central Asia
–8 2007
2008
Source: World Development Indicators data files.
218
2010 World Development Indicators
2009
resilient—falling 6.1 percent to $317 billion in 2009—but varied by country. Among developing country regions Europe and Central Asia fared the worst, as GDP fell 6.2 percent (figure 4f). Severe economic adjustments were necessary as private capital flows, which had financed large current account defi cits, were cut from $97 billion in 2007 to $50 billion in 2008. Latin America and the Caribbean economies contracted 2.6 percent, with Mexico—relying almost solely on the U.S. market for its exports—the worst off. China and India managed to continue growing at nearly the same rate as before the crisis, but other economies in Asia did not do as well. Growth in the Middle East and North Africa dropped to 2.3 percent on lower oil prices and exports to Europe. Sub-Saharan Africa barely grew, hurt by falling export commodity prices, falling remittances, lower tourism revenues, and declining private capital flows. Home to 30 of the 43 low-income economies, Sub-Saharan Africa has been subject to the most severe consequences of the crisis. Low-income households, at risk of being pushed into poverty, have suffered from deteriorating health and lost education opportunities.
Global imbalances are easing The structural imbalances in the global economy predating the crisis eased as the current account balances of the largest surplus and defi cit economies moderated (figure 4g). The crisis has given impetus to rebalancing the economies of China and the United States. China focused on domestic sources of growth in its 11th fiveyear plan, and in the United States the 2010 Economic Report of the President proposed a transition from consumption-driven growth to an emphasis on investment and exports. Consumers in high-income economies have reduced spending, and imports have declined faster than exports. In 2008 and 2009 private consumption expenditures declined in the United States. In China imports outpaced exports, driven by domestic demand as the government increased spending on infrastructure, social programs, and environmental protection. The result: China’s current account surplus dropped from its peak of 11.0 percent of GDP in 2007 to 6.6 percent in the first half of 2009. And the U.S. current account deficit was more than halved, from –6.0 percent in 2006 to –2.8 percent in the second quarter of 2009.
ECONOMY
New risks have emerged If household consumption in high-income economies continues to decline, new drivers of global economic growth will be crucial. China and India might become new drivers, but large differences between the scale and structure of their economies and of the U.S. economy will delay their replacing the U.S. role in the global economy. For example, U.S. household consumption was more than $10 trillion in 2008, four times that of China and India combined. Developing economies have growth potential because they have room for productivity gains from increased investment. High-income economies face overcapacity that could limit recovery, but they are investing in transforming their economies through technological innovations to protect the environment and combat global warming. Although the world avoided the most catastrophic potential effects of the crisis, the resulting conditions require careful navigation and eventual resolution. Fiscal deficits and public debt have increased substantially in many highincome economies (figures 4h and 4i). In some cases high deficits and debt levels raised perceptions of sovereign default risk, indicated by the mounting cost of credit default swaps (figure 4j). Rising public deficits and debt are accompanied by increased uncertainty in measuring risk when debt includes derivatives. Private corporations took on high levels of debt in the runup to the financial crisis. They believed—as did creditors, rating agencies, and regulators—that complex financial instruments, or derivatives, provided a hedge against default. Derivatives also play a role in public debt. For example, governments can use interest and currency swaps to raise capital in return for increased future payments. But such derivatives are not included in traditional measures of indebtedness. Governments must maintain reasonable budget balances and debt levels to keep the confidence of taxpayers and creditors. Without fiscal credibility, creditors will refuse to continue lending. To reduce deficits, governments must raise revenues or reduce spending. Economic expansion can boost revenues through higher tax receipts, but if expansion is too slow, governments must resort to the unpopular alternatives of increasing tax rates and cutting spending— as in the United Kingdom and the United States, where buoyant revenues created by structural imbalances cannot be restored by returning to the unsustainable conditions of 2007.
4g
Current account surpluses and deficits both decreased Current account balance as a share of GDP (percent) 12 China
8 Germany
4 0
United Kingdom
–4 United States
–8 1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
second quarter
Source: Principal Global Indicators, Haver Analytics, and World Development Indicators data files.
4h
Economies with large government deficits Central government cash deficit as a share of GDP (percent) 0
2007
2008
–2 –4 –6 –8 –10 –12 Lebanon
Pakistan
Egypt, Arab Rep.
United States
Jamaica
United Kingdom
Romania
Burkina Faso
Kenya
Hungary
Source: World Development Indicators data files.
4i
Economies with large government debts Ratio of public debt to GDP (percent)
2007
2008
180 150 120 90 60 30 0 Japan
Jamaica
Greece
Singapore
Italy
Belgium
Portugal
Hungary
Austria
Brazil
Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Japan Ministry of Finance, and World Development Indicators data files.
4j
Economies with increasing default risk Five-year sovereign credit default swap spreads (basis points) 400
Greece
300 200
Portugal Spain Italy
100
United Kingdom Japan
0 Jan-08
Jul-08
United States
Jan-09
Jul-09
Jan-10
Source: Thomson Reuters Datastream.
2010 World Development Indicators
219
Growth in GDP Quarterly data for selected major economies in each developing country region show economic contraction in Brazil, the Russian Federation, and South Africa and slowing output in China, Egypt, and India. The contractions and slowdowns bottom out around the first quarter of 2009.
4m
Brazil
Year on year change in GDP (percent) 15
Year on year change in GDP (percent) 15
10
10
5
5
0
0
–5
–5
–10 Q1-07
Q1-08
Q1-09
Q4-09
The industrial sector shrank in all the large developing countries shown here except China. The low point at the end of 2008 was followed by improvements throughout 2009.
–10 Q1-07
Q1-08
Q1-09
4s
Brazil
4t
China
Year on year change in industrial production (percent) 30
Year on year change in industrial production (percent) 30
15
15
0
0
–15
–15
–30 Jan-07
Jan-08
Q4-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
Source: Haver Analytics.
Growth in industrial production
4n
China
Jan-09
Dec-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
–30 Jan-07
Jan-08
Jan-09
Dec-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
4y
Brazil
4z
China
Lending and inflation rates Inflation accelerated in 2008 as food and fuel prices rose but fell in 2009 with the slowdown in output. India was the exception, as food prices remained high because of drought.
Lending and inflation rates (percent)
Lending and inflation rates (percent)
50
50
40
Lending rate
40
30
30
20
20
10
10 Consumer price index
0
Lending rate
0 Consumer price index
–10 Jan-07
Jan-08
Jan-09
Dec-09
These countries have increased public spending without substantially increasing debt levels.
4ee
Brazil Central government debt (percent of GDP) 120
Domestic debt Foreign debt
2010 World Development Indicators
Dec-09
4ff
China
90
60
60
30
30
0
0
Domestic debt Foreign debt
–30 Q1-08
Source: Haver Analytics.
220
Jan-09
Central government debt (percent of GDP) 120
90
–30 Q1-07
Jan-08
Source: Haver Analytics.
Source: Haver Analytics.
Central government debt
–10 Jan-07
Q1-09
Q4-09
2000
2002
2004
Source: Haver Analytics.
2006
2008
ECONOMY
4o
Arab Republic of Egypt
4p
India
4q
Russian Federation
4r
South Africa
Year on year change in GDP (percent) 15
Year on year change in GDP (percent) 15
Year on year change in GDP (percent) 15
Year on year change in GDP (percent) 15
10
10
10
10
5
5
5
5
0
0
0
0
–5
–5
–5
–5
–10 Q1-07
Q1-08
Q1-09
Q4-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
–10 Q1-07
Q1-08
Q1-09
Q4-09
4u
Q1-08
Q1-09
Q4-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
Source: Haver Analytics.
Arab Republic of Egypt
–10 Q1-07
4v
India
–10 Q1-07
Q1-08
Q1-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
4w
Russian Federation
4x
South Africa
Year on year change in industrial production (percent) 30
Year on year change in industrial production (percent) 30
Year on year change in industrial production (percent) 30
Year on year change in industrial production (percent) 30
15
15
15
15
0
0
0
0
–15
–15
–15
–15
–30 Jan-07
Jan-08
Jan-09
Dec-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
–30 Jan-07
Jan-08
Jan-09
Dec-09
4aa
Lending and inflation rates (percent)
Jan-08
Jan-09
Dec-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
Source: Haver Analytics.
Arab Republic of Egypt
–30 Jan-07
4bb
India
–30 Jan-07
4cc
Russian Federation
50
50
40
40
40
40
30
30
30
20
10
10
10
0
0
–10 Jan-07
Jan-08
Jan-09
Dec-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
Jan-08
4gg
Domestic debt Foreign debt
10
0
Jan-09
Dec-09
4hh
India Central government debt (percent of GDP) 120
Domestic debt Foreign debt
Consumer price index
0
–10 Jan-07
Jan-08
Jan-09
Dec-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
Source: Haver Analytics.
Arab Republic of Egypt Central government debt (percent of GDP) 120
–10 Jan-07
Lending rate
20
Consumer price index
Consumer price index
4ii
Domestic debt Foreign debt
90
60
60
60
60
30
30
30
30
0
0
0
0
Source: Haver Analytics.
Q4-09
–30 Q1-07
Q1-08
Source: Haver Analytics.
Q1-09
Q4-09
–30 Q1-07
Q1-08
Source: Haver Analytics.
Dec-09
Q1-09
Q4-09
4jj
South Africa
90
Q1-09
Jan-09
Central government debt (percent of GDP) 120
90
Q1-08
Jan-08
Source: Haver Analytics.
Russian Federation Central government debt (percent of GDP) 120
–10 Jan-07
90
–30 Q1-07
4dd
30 Lending rate
20
Lending rate
Lending rate
Dec-09
Lending and inflation rates (percent)
50
20
Jan-09
South Africa
50
Consumer price index
Jan-08
Source: Haver Analytics.
Lending and inflation rates (percent)
Lending and inflation rates (percent)
Q4-09
–30 Q1-07
Q1-08
Domestic debt Foreign debt
Q1-09
Q4-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
2010 World Development Indicators
221
Merchandise trade China’s imports have declined less than exports, resulting in a smaller trade surplus. For most countries trade has declined in absolute terms as well as relative to GDP.
4kk
Brazil
4ll
China
Percent of GDP 50
Percent of GDP 50
40
40
30
30
20
Merchandise exports
20
Merchandise exports
10
Merchandise imports
10 Merchandise imports
0 Q1-07
Q1-08
Q1-09
Q4-09
Equity prices in large developing countries have rebounded from their lows in late 2008 as investors regained confi dence on growing signs of economic recovery.
Q1-08
4qq
Brazil
4rr
MSCI equity price index (January 1, 2008 = 100) 150
100
100
50
50
Jan-09
Nov-09
Source: MSCI Barra and Thomson Reuters Datastream.
0 Jan-08
Jan-09
Nov-09
Source: MSCI Barra and Thomson Reuters Datastream.
4ww
Brazil
Q4-09
China
MSCI equity price index (January 1, 2008 = 100) 150
0 Jan-08
Q1-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
Source: Haver Analytics.
Equity price indexes
0 Q1-07
4xx
China
Bond spreads The cost of borrowing for large developing countries has declined after rising in reaction to the financial crisis but remains above precrisis levels.
Spreads over U.S. Treasury notes (basis points) 2,500
Spreads over U.S. Treasury notes (basis points) 2,500
2,000
2,000
1,500
1,500 Corporate—CEMBI
1,000
1,000 Corporate—CEMBI
500 0 Jan-08
500 Sovereign EMBI-Global
Jan-09
Source: JP Morgan Chase, Bloomberg, and Thomson Reuters Datastream.
Financing through international capital markets Capital flows to large developing countries rebounded somewhat in 2008 but remain below their peak levels of 2007.
Jan-10
Source: JP Morgan Chase, Bloomberg, and Thomson Reuters Datastream.
4ddd
China
Gross capital inflows over previous 12 months ($ billions) 160
120
120
80
80
40
40
Source: Dealogic.
2010 World Development Indicators
Sovereign EMBI-Global
Jan-09
Gross capital inflows over previous 12 months ($ billions) 160
0 Jan-08
222
4ccc
Brazil
0 Jan-08
Jan-10
Jan-09
Dec-09
0 Jan-08 Source: Dealogic.
Jan-09
Dec-09
ECONOMY
Arab Republic of Egypt 4mm
4nn
India
Percent of GDP 50
Percent of GDP 50
40
40
30
Merchandise imports
30
4oo
Russian Federation Percent of GDP 50
Percent of GDP 50
40
40
30
4pp
South Africa
Merchandise imports
Merchandise exports
30
Merchandise imports
20
20
20
10
10
Merchandise exports
Merchandise exports
0 Q1-07
Q1-08
Q1-09
Q4-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
Arab Republic of Egypt
10
0 Q1-07
Q1-08
Q1-09
Q4-09
0 Q1-07
Q1-08
4tt
India
Merchandise exports
10
Q1-09
Q4-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
Source: Haver Analytics.
4ss
20 Merchandise imports
0 Q1-07
Q1-08
Q1-09
Source: Haver Analytics.
4uu
Russian Federation
4vv
South Africa
MSCI equity price index (January 1, 2008 = 100) 150
MSCI equity price index (January 1, 2008 = 100) 150
MSCI equity price index (January 1, 2008 = 100) 150
MSCI equity price index (January 1, 2008 = 100) 150
100
100
100
100
50
50
50
50
0 Jan-08
Jan-09
Nov-09
Source: MSCI Barra and Thomson Reuters Datastream.
Arab Republic of Egypt
0 Jan-08
Jan-09
Nov-09
Spreads over U.S. Treasury notes (basis points) 2,500
4zz
India
Jan-09
Nov-09
Source: MSCI Barra and Thomson Reuters Datastream.
Source: MSCI Barra and Thomson Reuters Datastream.
4yy
0 Jan-08
Q4-09
Jan-09
Nov-09
Source: MSCI Barra and Thomson Reuters Datastream.
4aaa
Russian Federation
0 Jan-08
4bbb
South Africa
Spreads over U.S. Treasury notes (basis points) 2,500
Spreads over U.S. Treasury notes (basis points) 2,500
Spreads over U.S. Treasury notes (basis points) 2,500
2,000
2,000
2,000
Corporate—CEMBI
2,000
Corporate—CEMBI
1,500
1,500
1,500
1,000
1,000
1,000
500
500
500
1,500 Corporate—CEMBI
1,000
Sovereign EMBI-Global
500 0 Jan-08
Sovereign EMBI-Global
Jan-09
0 Jan-08
Jan-10
Source: JP Morgan Chase, Bloomberg, and Thomson Reuters Datastream.
Arab Republic of Egypt 4eee
Jan-09
Jan-10
Source: JP Morgan Chase, Bloomberg, and Thomson Reuters Datastream.
4fff
India
0 Jan-08
Sovereign EMBI-Global
Jan-09
Source: JP Morgan Chase, Bloomberg, and Thomson Reuters Datastream.
Russian Federation
0 Jan-08
Jan-10
4ggg
Jan-09
Jan-10
Source: JP Morgan Chase, Bloomberg, and Thomson Reuters Datastream.
4hhh
South Africa
Gross capital inflows over previous 12 months ($ billions) 160
Gross capital inflows over previous 12 months ($ billions) 160
Gross capital inflows over previous 12 months ($ billions) 160
Gross capital inflows over previous 12 months ($ billions) 160
120
120
120
120
80
80
80
80
40
40
40
40
0 Jan-08 Source: Dealogic.
Jan-09
Dec-09
0 Jan-08 Source: Dealogic.
Jan-09
Dec-09
0 Jan-08 Source: Dealogic.
Jan-09
Dec-09
0 Jan-08
Jan-09
Dec-09
Source: Dealogic.
2010 World Development Indicators
223
Tables
4.a Recent economic performance of selected developing countries
Algeria Angola Argentinab Armenia Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Cameroon Chile China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Gabon Ghana Guatemala Honduras India Indonesia Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Lithuania Macedonia, FYR
224
Gross domestic product
Exports of goods and services
Imports of goods and services
GDP deflator
average annual % growth 2008 2009a
average annual % growth 2008 2009a
average annual % growth 2008 2009a
average annual % growth 2008 2009a
3.0 13.2 6.8 6.8 10.8 6.2 10.0 6.1 5.4 2.9 5.1 6.0 3.9 3.2 9.0 2.5 6.2 2.6 2.2 2.4 5.3 6.5 7.2 2.5 2.3 7.3 4.0 4.0 6.1 6.1 7.9 3.2 1.7 –4.6 8.5 3.9 3.0 5.0
2.1 0.2 –1.5 –15.6 2.1 5.9 –1.0 0.9 –4.0 –1.8 –0.5 –6.3 4.1 –1.6 8.7 –0.2 2.7 –1.5 3.6 –5.8 0.5 –1.0 4.7 –2.5 –1.0 4.5 0.6 –2.0 6.8 4.5 3.2 1.2 3.0 –18.4 6.0 2.1 –15.0 –1.3
2010 World Development Indicators
1.6 .. 1.2 –13.1 10.4 7.0 1.7 2.2 4.2 2.5 –0.6 2.9 4.7 3.1 –9.6 7.0 –3.9 –1.8 –8.1 1.7 –1.8 3.3 28.8 6.8 0.3 2.0 3.0 2.6 12.8 9.5 –11.3 1.0 3.6 –1.3 14.8 –22.0 .. –9.2
–3.0 .. .. –32.8 2.8 12.2 –6.1 –5.9 –3.5 0.4 11.4 –9.2 6.1 –4.7 –12.1 6.6 –32.9 0.6 9.3 –4.0 –21.8 –3.8 –12.8 –14.6 –4.9 4.4 –4.2 –6.7 –15.8 –9.7 –8.0 6.9 1.6 .. 10.0 –17.1 –29.3 –12.8
6.6 .. 14.1 7.3 13.2 –2.1 14.6 9.4 –1.9 11.8 18.5 4.9 5.1 12.9 –13.4 9.8 15.7 4.3 –5.4 3.6 0.0 10.2 26.3 4.8 3.1 13.3 –3.4 8.8 17.9 10.0 3.3 8.9 5.3 –13.6 28.4 7.5 .. –1.0
.. .. .. –21.0 –5.3 15.2 –8.7 3.1 –4.5 6.5 8.1 –12.8 3.4 –13.8 –5.7 9.5 –17.4 –12.4 11.0 –5.9 –35.9 3.3 –17.9 –14.8 –2.8 1.7 .. –7.5 –17.2 –15.0 –14.1 9.1 4.5 .. 3.8 –5.9 –15.5 –10.6
10.8 23.9 19.1 8.4 20.9 8.8 20.5 10.4 7.8 17.0 5.9 11.4 1.7 0.2 7.2 8.3 19.4 12.1 8.1 6.4 9.8 12.1 11.8 5.9 14.7 16.9 8.5 9.8 6.2 18.3 15.7 21.1 13.1 15.2 7.7 9.6 10.3 7.2
.. .. 13.1 1.5 –17.8 6.4 9.8 –5.6 1.6 –10.6 4.2 2.7 –2.6 –0.8 0.3 3.5 32.7 8.9 1.3 3.5 3.9 2.7 10.8 2.8 –19.0 17.2 2.4 5.3 3.6 8.4 4.1 –4.0 17.0 .. 4.0 8.7 .. 1.1
Current account balance
Gross international reserves
% of GDP 2008 2009a
$ millions 2009a
months of import coverage 2009a
149,347 13,349 46,190 2,003 5,364 10,225 4,872 7,634 6,269 12,438 237,424 17,198 4,590 25,282 2,544,706 24,760 .. 4,066 .. 14,895 2,886 2,920 45,757 2,882 .. 3,050 4,976 3,004 266,166 63,692 11,132 20,844 3,127 6,645 29,609 1,323 6,463 2,063
34.4 5.6 .. 7.6 6.2 5.2 1.2 15.6 5.6 19.5 13.4 7.1 7.2 5.6 21.6 7.3 .. 3.6 .. 5.4 2.9 2.0 6.3 4.1 .. 2.8 4.8 2.9 9.0 8.7 8.6 6.1 3.0 .. 14.8 8.0 .. 3.9
.. 7.5 2.2 –11.6 35.7 1.3 –8.6 12.1 –14.9 3.7 –1.8 –25.2 –2.2 –2.0 9.8 –2.8 .. –9.2 2.1 –9.0 –9.7 2.0 –0.9 –7.2 .. –21.3 –4.8 –14.8 –3.1 0.0 –11.3 4.9 –6.5 –13.3 –10.4 15.1 –11.9 –12.7
.. .. .. –12.5 22.9 2.8 1.8 –0.1 –9.4 –7.6 –1.0 –11.6 –4.0 1.5 7.4 –2.9 –21.0 –3.6 1.6 –7.4 –6.1 –1.5 –2.3 –1.8 2.8 –6.9 –1.7 –9.2 –2.7 2.0 –10.1 –3.1 –6.6 .. –13.9 –8.5 .. –9.4
ECONOMY
Malawi Malaysia Mauritius Mexico Moldova Morocco Montenegro Nicaragua Nigeria Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Romania Russian Federation Senegal Serbia Slovak Republic South Africa Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Syrian Arab Republic Thailand Tunisia Turkey Uganda Ukraine Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam Zambia
Gross domestic product
Exports of goods and services
Imports of goods and services
GDP deflator
average annual % growth 2008 2009a
average annual % growth 2008 2009a
average annual % growth 2008 2009a
average annual % growth 2008 2009a
–4.6 .. 2.0 4.1 –6.1 10.9 7.7 .. .. 3.6 9.2 .. 18.0 19.9 2.4 8.2 17.5 17.7 6.9 11.4 3.3 2.2 .. 0.3 1.4 2.5 8.5 8.3 –3.8 28.1 12.5 19.9 20.0 3.8 7.6 15.3
8.9 10.3 7.6 6.5 9.7 5.9 10.4 16.8 11.0 16.3 8.5 11.6 7.1 2.3 7.5 3.0 11.6 19.2 6.0 12.7 2.9 10.8 16.3 15.8 10.1 20.5 3.8 5.9 11.7 6.3 29.1 8.8 19.9 31.3 21.7 10.8
9.7 4.6 4.5 1.8 7.2 5.6 7.7 3.5 6.0 2.0 9.2 6.6 5.8 9.8 3.8 4.9 9.4 5.6 3.3 1.2 6.2 3.1 6.0 8.3 2.4 5.2 2.5 4.5 0.9 9.5 2.1 8.9 9.0 4.8 6.2 6.0
6.9 –1.7 2.0 –6.5 –9.0 5.0 5.1 4.0 2.9 3.7 1.5 3.9 –3.8 1.0 0.9 1.7 –8.5 –7.9 1.5 –3.4 –4.7 –1.8 3.5 9.7 0.4 5.7 –2.3 3.3 –6.0 2.1 –15.0 1.5 7.0 –3.5 5.3 4.0
–5.4 .. 2.6 1.0 –11.4 –1.1 7.7 .. .. –5.3 9.2 .. 11.6 8.2 –1.9 7.2 19.4 0.2 6.2 11.6 3.2 1.7 .. 23.0 –12.3 –2.4 5.1 3.5 2.3 7.3 2.5 10.5 15.8 –2.8 5.0 20.7
–5.4 –10.1 –12.6 –15.9 –22.5 –9.4 5.1 .. .. 9.0 –3.1 .. –14.9 0.2 –14.2 –10.5 –11.8 –4.9 –11.2 –25.3 .. –9.2 .. .. 2.9 5.6 –12.7 –1.6 .. 9.3 –16.0 3.8 13.6 –4.4 –11.6 21.5
–4.6 –12.5 –5.4 –21.0 –36.4 –3.2 5.1 .. .. –9.2 11.9 .. –11.5 –8.9 –5.8 –13.9 –24.6 –26.6 –10.5 –33.1 .. .. .. .. 3.5 6.4 –21.8 6.7 .. 12.3 –32.8 1.1 13.4 –19.1 –10.9 15.6
10.0 –7.1 3.7 5.4 5.4 2.5 –5.1 11.2 –2.0 22.7 5.3 –3.3 3.0 3.0 2.3 3.5 7.0 10.0 2.2 –1.1 0.0 8.0 4.0 4.2 8.0 –14.4 2.0 3.5 6.0 2.5 13.0 8.5 19.9 24.0 5.8 7.9
Current account balance
Gross international reserves
% of GDP 2008 2009a
months of import coverage 2009a
.. 17.5 –10.5 –1.5 –16.3 –5.1 –33.1 –22.9 19.0 –9.4 –11.6 .. –2.2 –3.2 2.3 –5.1 –11.9 6.1 .. –17.7 –6.5 –7.3 –9.3 –2.3 .. .. 0.0 –4.2 –5.6 –5.9 –7.1 –3.8 .. 11.9 –11.8 –7.3
.. 15.3 –8.8 –0.6 –21.2 –6.0 –20.3 –22.7 7.1 –5.1 –9.4 –6.7 –0.6 –3.0 3.4 –2.0 –5.3 3.8 .. –27.4 –0.9 –5.3 –1.4 –7.5 –6.9 –1.1 7.7 –3.5 –1.8 .. –1.7 0.1 12.8 3.0 –5.1 ..
$ millions 2009a
.. 95,496 2,186 99,604 1,480 22,836 573 1,573 102,614 11,434 2,492 2,620 3,840 32,074 38,152 76,105 42,353 417,773 2,227 14,792 .. 35,458 5,578 .. 660 6,512 135,631 11,069 71,078 2,664 25,605 8,029 2,747 22,339 .. 2,562
.. 6.4 5.0 4.8 2.5 7.3 2.9 3.2 12.1 3.6 1.3 4.9 6.5 14.3 5.1 4.5 5.9 19.8 3.8 5.6 .. 4.8 4.2 .. 2.7 3.7 6.4 5.5 6.2 5.5 3.2 11.2 3.1 5.8 .. 2.4
a. Data are preliminary estimates. b. Private analysts estimate that consumer price index inflation was considerably higher for 2007–09 and believe that GDP volume growth has been significantly lower than official reports indicate since the last quarter of 2008. Source: World Development Indicators data files.
2010 World Development Indicators
225
4.1 Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angolaa Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benina Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile Chinaa Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep.a Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoirea Croatia Cubaa Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republica Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabona Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghanaa Greece Guatemalaa Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
226
Growth of output Gross domestic product
Agriculture
Industry
Manufacturing
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
.. 3.8 1.9 1.6 4.3 –1.9 3.6 2.4 –6.3 4.8 –1.6 2.1 4.8 4.0 .. 6.0 2.7 –1.8 5.5 –2.9 7.0 1.7 3.1 2.0 2.2 6.6 10.6 3.6 2.8 –4.9 1.0 5.3 3.2 0.5 4.2 1.1 2.7 6.3 1.9 4.4 4.8 5.7 0.5 3.8 2.7 1.9 2.3 3.0 –7.1 1.8 4.3 2.2 4.2 4.4 1.2 0.5 3.2
2010 World Development Indicators
11.8 5.4 4.3 13.5 5.3 b 12.4 3.3 2.2 18.1 5.8 8.6 2.0 3.9 4.1 5.4 4.5 3.6 5.8 5.6 2.9 9.8 3.5 2.5 0.5 11.9 4.4 10.4 5.2 4.9 5.2 3.9 5.4 0.5 4.5 .. 4.6 1.6 5.4 5.0 4.7 2.9 1.3 7.4 8.2 3.0 1.8 2.2 5.1 8.1 1.2 5.6 4.2 3.9 3.2 0.6 0.5 5.3
.. 4.3 3.6 –1.4 3.5 0.5 3.1 –0.1 –1.7 2.9 –4.0 2.7 5.8 2.9 .. –1.2 3.6 3.0 5.9 –1.9 3.7 5.4 1.1 3.8 4.9 2.2 4.1 .. –2.6 1.4 0.7 4.1 3.5 –2.1 .. 0.0 4.6 1.9 –1.7 3.1 1.2 1.5 .. 2.6 –1.1 2.0 2.0 3.3 –11.0 0.1 3.4 0.5 2.8 4.3 3.9 .. 2.2
4.4 1.4 5.3 13.6 3.7 7.3 0.0 0.9 5.4 3.2 5.5 –2.7 4.6 3.2 5.2 –1.0 4.2 –3.8 6.2 –1.5 5.6 3.4 2.3 0.3 2.2 5.6 4.4 –3.3 3.0 1.5 .. 4.0 1.3 1.7 .. 0.1 –3.5 2.9 4.9 3.3 3.9 9.3 –2.9 6.8 1.2 –0.1 1.5 2.8 2.3 0.2 3.5 –4.3 3.1 9.9 4.5 –0.6 3.8
.. –0.5 1.8 4.4 3.8 –7.8 2.7 2.5 –2.1 7.3 –1.8 1.8 4.1 4.1 .. 5.8 2.4 –5.0 5.9 –4.3 14.3 –0.9 3.2 0.7 0.6 5.6 13.7 .. 1.5 –8.0 1.7 6.2 6.3 –2.3 .. 0.2 2.5 7.1 2.6 5.1 5.1 15.0 –14.6 4.1 4.1 1.1 1.6 1.0 –8.1 –0.1 2.7 1.0 4.3 4.9 –3.1 .. 3.6
17.5 4.0 3.5 13.9 6.4 15.1 2.6 3.1 24.2 7.9 12.6 1.4 3.8 5.1 7.4 4.2 3.2 6.1 7.3 –6.2 13.3 –0.4 1.5 –0.4 50.7 3.2 11.7 –2.6 4.9 9.5 .. 5.8 –0.7 5.1 .. 6.6 0.4 2.6 4.9 5.3 2.3 0.8 8.6 9.2 4.7 1.0 1.1 7.4 11.3 1.9 7.4 4.5 3.0 4.0 3.7 0.9 4.6
.. .. –2.1 –0.3 2.7 –4.3 1.8 2.5 –15.7 7.2 –0.7 3.1 5.8 3.8 .. 4.4 2.0 .. 5.9 –8.7 18.6 1.4 .. –0.2 .. 4.4 12.9 .. –2.5 –8.7 –2.4 6.8 5.5 –3.5 .. 4.3 2.2 7.0 1.5 6.3 5.2 10.6 7.7 3.9 6.4 .. 3.0 0.9 .. 0.2 .. .. 2.8 4.0 –2.0 .. 4.0
.. –0.2 2.4 20.7 6.0 5.7 1.3 3.3 10.8 7.9 11.6 1.1 2.7 4.3 8.3 3.5 3.1 6.7 6.3 .. 12.9 5.8 0.1 –0.1 .. 3.8 11.6 –3.1 5.3 6.3 .. 5.5 –2.3 3.7 .. 8.3 0.4 3.0 5.5 4.5 2.4 –4.9 8.9 6.7 5.4 0.8 3.3 4.2 10.8 2.8 .. 5.2 2.9 3.1 3.7 0.6 5.4
Services
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
.. 6.9 1.8 –2.2 4.5 6.4 4.2 2.5 –2.7 4.5 –0.4 1.9 4.2 4.3 .. 7.8 3.8 –5.2 3.9 –2.8 7.1 0.2 .. 0.2 0.8 6.9 11.0 .. 4.1 –13.0 –0.7 4.7 2.0 1.9 .. 1.2 2.7 5.9 2.4 4.1 4.0 5.7 .. 5.2 2.5 2.2 3.1 3.7 –0.3 2.9 5.6 2.6 4.7 3.6 –0.6 .. 3.8
15.4 8.3 5.3 12.4 4.4 13.4 3.7 2.1 10.6 6.0 6.0 2.2 3.2 3.2 4.6 5.2 3.8 6.4 5.5 10.4 10.2 6.2 .. –2.5 9.1 4.9 10.7 5.3 4.8 11.5 .. 5.7 0.7 4.7 .. 4.3 1.7 7.0 3.1 5.2 3.0 0.1 7.0 9.5 1.8 2.1 3.1 6.1 9.7 1.2 6.7 4.8 4.4 –4.2 1.0 0.8 6.4
Hungary India Indonesiaa Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israela Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwaita Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysiaa Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmara Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Nigera Nigeria Norway Omana Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguaya Peru Philippinesa Poland Portugal Puerto Ricoa Qatar
Gross domestic product
Agriculture
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
1.5 5.9 4.2 3.1 .. 7.4 5.5 1.5 1.6 1.1 5.0 –4.1 2.2 .. 5.8 .. 4.9 –4.1 6.4 –1.5 5.3 3.8 4.1 .. –2.7 –0.8 2.0 3.7 7.0 4.1 2.9 5.2 3.1 –9.6 1.0 2.4 6.1 7.0 4.0 4.9 3.2 3.3 3.7 2.4 2.5 3.9 4.5 3.8 4.7 3.8 2.2 4.7 3.3 4.7 2.8 4.2 ..
3.6 7.9 5.2 5.9 –11.4 5.0 3.5 1.0 1.8 1.6 7.2 9.5 4.5 .. 4.5 .. 8.4 4.4 6.9 8.2 4.0 3.9 –1.1 5.6 7.7 3.2 3.8 4.2 5.5 5.2 5.1 3.7 2.7 6.3 7.8 5.0 8.0 .. 5.6 3.5 1.9 3.1 3.5 4.4 6.6 2.4 4.0 5.4 6.6 2.9 3.7 6.0 5.1 4.4 0.9 .. 9.0
–2.4 3.2 2.0 3.2 .. 1.1 .. 2.1 –0.6 –1.3 –3.0 –8.0 1.9 .. 1.6 .. 1.0 1.5 4.8 –5.2 2.9 0.9 .. .. –3.3 0.2 1.8 8.6 0.3 2.6 –0.2 0.0 1.5 –11.2 2.5 –0.4 5.2 5.7 3.8 2.5 1.8 2.9 4.7 3.0 .. 2.6 5.0 4.4 3.1 4.5 3.3 5.5 1.7 0.5 –0.4 .. ..
5.3 3.2 3.3 5.9 .. –3.4 .. 0.0 –1.1 –1.1 8.5 5.3 2.7 .. 1.7 .. .. 1.8 3.3 2.7 0.7 –3.6 .. .. 1.7 1.7 2.0 1.1 3.8 4.8 0.6 –1.2 2.1 –1.6 5.6 4.9 7.8 .. 1.3 3.2 1.0 2.0 3.0 .. 7.0 3.4 2.2 3.4 4.1 1.9 5.8 4.0 3.8 1.3 –0.2 .. ..
Industry
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
3.6 6.1 5.2 2.6 .. 12.7 .. 1.0 –0.8 –0.3 5.2 0.6 1.2 .. 6.0 .. 0.3 –10.3 11.1 –8.3 –0.2 4.0 .. .. 3.3 –2.3 2.4 2.0 8.6 6.4 3.4 5.4 3.8 –13.6 –2.5 3.2 12.3 .. 2.4 7.1 1.7 2.5 5.5 2.0 .. 3.8 3.9 4.1 6.0 5.4 0.6 5.4 3.5 7.1 3.2 .. ..
3.5 8.4 4.2 6.9 .. 5.2 .. 0.4 1.4 1.9 8.8 10.6 4.9 .. 5.9 .. .. 0.8 11.9 7.6 3.6 5.8 .. .. 0.3 2.9 3.5 5.1 4.6 4.5 4.2 1.4 1.8 0.6 7.4 4.4 10.1 .. 7.4 2.8 1.1 2.7 4.4 .. 3.8 0.1 –0.5 7.6 5.2 3.8 1.8 6.8 4.2 5.7 –0.3 .. ..
4.1
Manufacturing
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
8.0 6.7 6.7 5.1 .. .. .. 1.6 –1.8 .. 5.6 2.7 1.3 .. 7.3 .. –0.1 –7.5 11.7 –7.3 1.9 7.7 .. .. 7.0 –5.3 2.0 0.5 9.5 –1.4 5.8 5.3 4.3 –7.1 –9.7 2.6 10.2 7.9 7.4 8.9 2.6 2.2 5.3 2.6 .. 1.5 6.0 3.8 2.7 4.6 1.4 3.8 3.0 9.9 2.6 .. ..
5.0 7.8 4.9 9.9 .. .. .. –0.4 –1.3 1.9 10.1 8.2 4.4 .. 6.9 .. .. –1.2 –1.9 5.2 2.5 9.5 .. .. 10.0 2.3 4.3 3.6 5.8 5.1 –1.4 0.2 1.8 4.1 8.2 3.2 9.4 .. 5.4 1.0 1.4 2.6 5.5 .. .. 3.3 9.3 9.6 1.2 3.7 1.3 6.7 4.4 8.5 –0.2 .. ..
ECONOMY
Growth of output
Services
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
1.3 7.7 4.0 3.8 .. 7.9 .. 1.6 3.8 2.0 5.0 0.3 3.2 .. 5.6 .. 3.5 –5.2 6.6 2.7 1.5 5.0 .. .. 5.8 0.5 2.3 1.6 7.3 3.0 4.9 6.3 2.9 0.7 0.7 3.1 5.0 7.2 4.2 6.2 3.6 .. 5.0 1.9 .. 3.8 5.0 4.4 4.5 –0.6 2.5 4.0 4.0 5.1 2.4 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
3.4 9.5 7.1 5.3 .. 6.0 .. 1.3 2.2 1.6 6.4 10.6 4.4 .. 3.9 .. .. 7.9 7.6 8.7 3.6 3.0 .. .. 6.0 3.4 4.4 4.3 6.6 6.5 6.9 5.9 3.1 11.3 8.8 5.2 7.2 .. 5.4 3.8 2.3 .. 3.5 .. 14.4 3.2 5.9 6.2 7.1 3.5 3.4 5.9 6.4 3.7 1.7 .. ..
227
4.1
Growth of output Gross domestic product
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
Romania Russian Federation Rwandaa Saudi Arabiaa Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lankaa Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania c Thailanda Timor-Lestea Togoa Trinidad and Tobago Tunisiaa Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnama West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep.a Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
–0.6 –4.7 –0.2 2.1 3.0 –4.7 –5.0 7.6 2.2 2.7 .. 2.1 2.7 5.3 5.5 3.4 2.1 1.0 5.1 –10.4 2.9 4.2 .. 3.5 3.2 4.7 3.9 –4.9 7.1 –9.3 4.8 2.8 3.5 3.4 –0.2 1.6 7.9 7.3 6.0 0.5 2.1 2.9 w 3.5 3.9 6.3 2.3 3.9 8.5 –0.8 3.2 3.8 5.5 2.5 2.7 2.1
6.4 6.7 6.7 4.1 4.5 5.4 10.3 5.8 6.3 4.4 .. 4.3 3.3 5.5 7.4 2.6 2.8 1.9 4.4 8.6 6.8 5.2 1.9 2.4 8.4 4.9 5.7 14.5 7.5 7.2 7.8 2.5 2.4 3.8 6.6 5.2 7.7 –0.9 3.9 5.3 –5.7 3.2 w 5.8 6.4 8.3 4.6 6.4 9.1 6.2 3.9 4.8 7.3 5.2 2.3 1.8
Agriculture
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
–1.9 –4.9 2.5 1.6 2.4 .. –13.0 –2.4 0.4 0.4 .. 1.0 3.1 1.8 7.4 0.9 –0.8 –0.9 6.0 –6.8 3.2 1.0 .. 4.0 2.7 2.3 1.3 4.9 3.7 –5.6 13.2 –0.2 3.7 2.8 0.5 1.2 4.3 .. 5.6 4.2 4.3 2.0 w 2.9 2.4 3.1 0.8 2.5 3.5 –1.7 2.1 2.9 3.3 3.2 1.3 1.6
7.5 4.0 3.5 1.5 1.3 .. .. 2.3 0.6 –1.8 .. 1.7 –1.3 2.4 2.1 1.3 3.9 –0.8 3.6 8.3 4.9 2.5 .. 2.8 –9.2 2.7 1.4 –13.3 1.8 3.1 3.6 1.1 2.8 4.4 6.6 3.9 3.9 .. .. 1.3 –8.5 2.5 w 3.8 3.6 3.8 3.2 3.7 4.1 3.0 3.6 4.2 3.2 3.2 0.7 –0.6
Industry
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
–1.2 –7.1 –3.8 2.2 3.8 .. –4.5 7.8 3.8 1.6 .. 1.1 2.3 6.9 8.5 3.2 4.3 0.3 9.2 –11.4 3.1 5.7 .. 1.8 3.2 2.3 4.7 –2.7 12.1 –12.6 3.0 1.5 3.7 1.1 –3.4 1.2 11.9 .. 8.2 –4.2 0.4 2.4 w 4.6 4.7 8.4 1.7 4.7 11.0 –2.6 3.1 4.2 6.0 2.0 1.9 1.1
6.2 5.6 8.7 4.4 3.5 .. .. 5.4 7.7 5.3 .. 3.3 2.3 5.4 10.6 1.7 3.9 2.1 2.7 8.8 9.6 6.3 .. 8.1 11.4 2.7 6.5 27.3 10.2 6.6 6.0 0.2 1.2 4.4 4.6 3.2 10.0 .. .. 9.0 –10.0 3.0 w 7.5 7.3 9.5 4.3 7.3 10.2 6.7 3.5 3.6 8.1 5.1 1.7 1.6
Manufacturing
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
.. .. –5.8 5.6 3.1 .. 6.1 7.0 9.3 1.8 .. 1.6 5.2 8.1 7.5 2.8 8.7 .. .. –12.6 2.7 6.9 .. 1.8 4.9 4.6 4.7 .. 14.1 –11.2 11.9 1.3 .. –0.1 0.7 4.5 11.2 .. 5.7 0.8 0.4 .. w 5.0 6.3 9.0 3.5 6.3 10.9 .. 2.9 4.3 6.4 2.2 .. 2.2
5.7 .. 5.4 6.0 1.4 .. .. 6.5 10.7 5.3 .. 3.2 1.2 4.3 3.8 1.8 5.4 2.1 15.5 9.0 8.0 6.6 .. 7.5 10.4 3.5 6.3 .. 6.7 10.5 8.1 –0.4 2.5 6.3 2.1 3.4 11.9 .. .. 5.3 –12.0 3.2 w 7.6 7.7 9.8 4.4 7.7 10.3 .. 3.4 5.4 7.9 3.3 2.1 1.1
Services
average annual % growth 1990–2000 2000–08
0.9 –1.7 –0.9 2.2 3.0 .. –2.9 7.8 5.3 3.3 .. 2.7 2.7 5.7 1.9 3.9 1.8 1.2 1.5 –10.8 2.7 3.7 .. 3.9 3.2 5.5 4.0 –4.7 8.2 –8.1 7.2 3.4 3.4 1.3 0.4 –0.1 7.5 .. 5.0 2.5 2.9 3.1 w 3.4 4.3 6.7 3.1 4.3 8.5 0.9 3.5 3.3 6.9 2.5 2.9 2.5
5.0 7.4 8.9 4.2 6.5 .. .. 6.2 5.6 4.2 .. 4.9 3.8 6.4 10.5 4.1 2.4 1.7 7.9 8.3 6.2 4.5 .. –0.7 6.2 3.4 5.9 17.1 10.0 7.0 9.6 3.2 2.9 2.9 7.8 6.5 7.5 .. .. 7.3 –10.0 3.2 w 6.3 6.4 8.8 4.7 6.4 9.4 6.2 4.0 5.6 8.7 5.3 2.6 2.0
a. Components are at producer prices. b. Private analysts estimate that consumer price index inflation was considerably higher for 2007–09 and believe that GDP volume growth has been significantly lower than official reports indicate since the last quarter of 2008. c. Covers mainland Tanzania only.
228
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
4.1
ECONOMY
Growth of output Definitions
An economy’s growth is measured by the change in
Rebasing national accounts
• Gross domestic product (GDP) at purchaser prices
the volume of its output or in the real incomes of
When countries rebase their national accounts, they
is the sum of gross value added by all resident pro-
its residents. The 1993 United Nations System of
update the weights assigned to various components
ducers in the economy plus any product taxes (less
National Accounts (1993 SNA) offers three plausible
to better reflect current patterns of production or
subsidies) not included in the valuation of output. It
indicators for calculating growth: the volume of gross
uses of output. The new base year should represent
is calculated without deducting for depreciation of
domestic product (GDP), real gross domestic income,
normal operation of the economy—it should be a
fabricated capital assets or for depletion and degra-
and real gross national income. The volume of GDP
year without major shocks or distortions. Some
dation of natural resources. Value added is the net
is the sum of value added, measured at constant
developing countries have not rebased their national
output of an industry after adding up all outputs and
prices, by households, government, and industries
accounts for many years. Using an old base year
subtracting intermediate inputs. The industrial origin
operating in the economy.
can be misleading because implicit price and vol-
of value added is determined by the International
ume weights become progressively less relevant
Standard Industrial Classifi cation (ISIC) revision
and useful.
3. • Agriculture is the sum of gross output less
Each industry’s contribution to growth in the economy’s output is measured by growth in the industry’s value added. In principle, value added in constant
To obtain comparable series of constant price data,
the value of intermediate input used in production
prices can be estimated by measuring the quantity
the World Bank rescales GDP and value added by
for industries classified in ISIC divisions 1–5 and
of goods and services produced in a period, valu-
industrial origin to a common reference year. This
includes forestry and fishing. • Industry is the sum
ing them at an agreed set of base year prices, and
year’s World Development Indicators continues to
of gross output less the value of intermediate input
subtracting the cost of intermediate inputs, also in
use 2000 as the reference year. Because rescaling
used in production for industries classified in ISIC
constant prices. This double-deflation method, rec-
changes the implicit weights used in forming regional
divisions 10–45, which cover mining, manufactur-
ommended by the 1993 SNA and its predecessors,
and income group aggregates, aggregate growth rates
ing (also reported separately), construction, electric-
requires detailed information on the structure of
in this year’s edition are not comparable with those
ity, water, and gas. • Manufacturing is the sum of
prices of inputs and outputs.
from earlier editions with different base years.
gross output less the value of intermediate input
In many industries, however, value added is
Rescaling may result in a discrepancy between
used in production for industries classified in ISIC
extrapolated from the base year using single volume
the rescaled GDP and the sum of the rescaled com-
divisions 15–37. • Services correspond to ISIC divi-
indexes of outputs or, less commonly, inputs. Par-
ponents. Because allocating the discrepancy would
sions 50–99. This sector is derived as a residual
ticularly in the services industries, including most of
cause distortions in the growth rates, the discrep-
(from GDP less agriculture and industry) and may not
government, value added in constant prices is often
ancy is left unallocated. As a result, the weighted
properly reflect the sum of services output, including
imputed from labor inputs, such as real wages or
average of the growth rates of the components gen-
banking and financial services. For some countries
number of employees. In the absence of well defined
erally will not equal the GDP growth rate.
it includes product taxes (minus subsidies) and may also include statistical discrepancies.
measures of output, measuring the growth of services remains difficult.
Computing growth rates
Moreover, technical progress can lead to improve-
Growth rates of GDP and its components are calcu-
ments in production processes and in the quality of
lated using the least squares method and constant
goods and services that, if not properly accounted
price data in the local currency. Constant price U.S.
for, can distort measures of value added and thus
dollar series are used to calculate regional and
of growth. When inputs are used to estimate output,
income group growth rates. Local currency series are
as for nonmarket services, unmeasured technical
converted to constant U.S. dollars using an exchange
progress leads to underestimates of the volume of
rate in the common reference year. The growth rates
Data on national accounts for most developing
output. Similarly, unmeasured improvements in qual-
in the table are average annual compound growth
countries are collected from national statistical
ity lead to underestimates of the value of output and
rates. Methods of computing growth are described
organizations and central banks by visiting and
value added. The result can be underestimates of
in Statistical methods.
resident World Bank missions. Data for highincome economies are from Organisation for
growth and productivity improvement and overestimates of inflation.
Data sources
Changes in the System of National Accounts
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
Informal economic activities pose a particular
World Development Indicators adopted the termi-
data files. The World Bank rescales constant price
measurement problem, especially in developing
nology of the 1993 SNA in 2001. Although many
data to a common reference year. The complete
countries, where much economic activity is unre-
countries continue to compile their national accounts
national accounts time series is available on the
corded. A complete picture of the economy requires
according to the SNA version 3 (referred to as the
World Development Indicators 2010 CD-ROM.
estimating household outputs produced for home
1968 SNA), more and more are adopting the 1993
The United Nations Statistics Division publishes
use, sales in informal markets, barter exchanges,
SNA. Some low-income countries still use concepts
detailed national accounts for UN member coun-
and illicit or deliberately unreported activities. The
from the even older 1953 SNA guidelines, including
tries in National Accounts Statistics: Main Aggre-
consistency and completeness of such estimates
valuations such as factor cost, in describing major
gates and Detailed Tables and publishes updates
depend on the skill and methods of the compiling
economic aggregates. Countries that use the 1993
in the Monthly Bulletin of Statistics.
statisticians.
SNA are identified in Primary data documentation.
2010 World Development Indicators
229
4.2
Structure of output Gross domestic product
Agriculture
$ millions
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angolaa Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benina Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China a Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep.a Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoirea Croatia Cubaa Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republica Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabona Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghanaa Greece Guatemalaa Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
230
% of GDP
1995
2008
.. 2,424 41,764 5,040 258,032 1,468 361,306 238,314 3,052 37,940 13,973 284,321 2,009 6,715 1,867 4,774 768,951 13,107 2,380 1,000 3,441 8,733 590,517 1,122 1,446 71,349 728,007 144,230 92,503 5,643 2,116 11,722 11,000 22,122 .. 55,257 181,984 16,358 20,206 60,159 9,500 578 4,353 7,606 130,599 1,569,983 4,959 382 2,694 2,522,792 6,457 131,718 14,657 3,694 254 2,696 3,911
10,624 12,295 166,545 84,945 328,465 11,917 1,015,217 413,503 46,135 79,554 60,313 504,206 6,680 16,674 18,512 13,414 1,575,151 49,900 7,948 1,163 10,354 23,396 1,501,329 1,988 8,400 169,458 4,326,996 215,355 243,765 11,668 10,723 29,664 23,414 69,332 .. 215,500 341,255 45,541 54,686 162,283 22,115 1,654 23,401 25,585 272,700 2,856,556 14,535 811 12,791 3,649,494 16,653 355,876 38,983 3,799 430 7,205 13,343
2010 World Development Indicators
Industry
Manufacturing
% of GDP
Services
% of GDP
% of GDP
1995
2008
1995
2008
1995
2008
1995
2008
.. 56 10 7 6 42 3 3 27 26 17 2 34 17 .. 4 6 14 35 48 50 24 3 46 36 9 20 0 15 57 10 14 25 10 6 5 3 10 .. 17 14 21 6 57 4 3 8 30 52 1 39 9 24 19 55 .. 22
32 21 7 7 10 18 3 2 6 19 10 1 .. 13 .. 2 7 7 33 .. 35 19 .. 53 14 4 11 0 9 40 4 7 25 6 .. 3 1 7 7 13 13 24 3 44 3 2 4 29 10 1 33 3 12 25 55 .. 14
.. 22 50 66 28 32 29 31 34 25 37 28 15 33 .. 51 28 35 21 19 15 31 31 21 14 35 47 15 32 17 45 30 21 31 45 38 25 36 .. 32 30 17 33 10 33 25 52 13 16 32 24 21 20 29 12 .. 31
26 20 62 68 32 45 29 31 70 29 44 23 .. 38 .. 53 28 31 22 .. 24 31 .. 14 49 44 49 8 36 28 75 29 26 28 .. 38 26 33 41 38 28 19 29 13 32 20 64 15 21 30 25 20 30 46 13 .. 31
.. 14 11 4 18 25 15 20 13 15 31 20 9 19 .. 5 19 24 15 9 10 22 18 10 11 18 34 8 16 9 8 22 15 22 38 24 17 26 .. 17 23 9 21 5 25 .. 5 6 17 23 9 .. 14 4 8 .. 18
16 20 5 5 21 15 10 20 4 18 33 16 .. 14 .. 4 16 15 14 .. 16 17 .. 8 7 13 34 3 16 6 4 21 18 17 .. 25 15 24 10 16 22 5 17 5 24 12 3 5 12 24 6 10 20 4 10 .. 22
.. 22 39 26 66 26 68 67 39 49 46 70 51 50 .. 45 67 50 43 33 36 45 66 33 51 55 33 85 53 26 45 57 55 59 49 57 71 54 .. 51 56 62 61 33 63 72 40 57 32 67 37 70 56 52 33 .. 48
42 60 31 26 58 37 68 67 24 52 46 76 .. 48 .. 45 65 62 44 .. 41 50 .. 33 38 52 40 92 55 32 21 64 49 65 .. 60 73 60 53 49 58 56 68 42 65 78 32 56 69 69 41 77 58 29 32 .. 55
Gross domestic product
Agriculture
$ millions
Hungary India Indonesiaa Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israela Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait a Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia a Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmara Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger a Nigeria Norway Omana Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguaya Peru Philippinesa Poland Portugal Puerto Ricoa Qatar
Industry
% of GDP
1995
2008
44,656 356,299 202,132 90,829 10,114 67,036 96,065 1,126,041 5,813 5,247,610 6,727 20,374 9,046 .. 517,118 .. 27,192 1,661 1,764 5,236 11,719 890 135 25,541 7,621 4,449 3,160 1,397 88,832 2,466 1,415 4,040 286,698 1,753 1,227 32,986 2,247 .. 3,503 4,401 418,969 62,049 3,191 1,881 28,109 148,920 13,803 60,636 7,906 4,636 8,066 53,674 74,120 139,062 112,960 42,647 8,138
154,668 1,159,171 510,730 286,058 .. 267,576 202,101 2,303,079 14,614 4,910,840 21,238 133,442 30,355 .. 929,121 5,448 148,024 5,059 5,543 33,784 29,264 1,622 843 93,168 47,341 9,521 9,463 4,269 221,773 8,740 2,858 9,320 1,088,128 6,047 5,258 88,883 9,846 .. 8,837 12,615 871,004 129,940 6,592 5,354 207,118 451,830 41,638 164,539 23,088 8,239 15,977 129,109 166,909 527,866 243,497 .. 71,041
4.2
Manufacturing
% of GDP
ECONOMY
Structure of output
Services
% of GDP
% of GDP
1995
2008
1995
2008
1995
2008
1995
2008
7 26 17 18 9 7 .. 3 9 2 4 13 31 .. 6 .. 0 44 56 9 8 17 82 .. 11 13 27 30 13 50 37 10 6 33 41 15 35 60 12 42 3 7 23 40 .. 3 3 26 8 35 21 9 22 8 6 1 ..
4 17 14 10 .. 2 .. 2 5 1 3 6 27 .. 3 12 .. 30 35 3 5 7 61 2 4 11 25 34 10 37 13 4 4 11 21 15 29 .. 9 34 2 .. 19 .. 33 1 .. 20 6 34 20 7 15 5 2 .. ..
32 28 42 34 75 38 .. 30 37 34 29 31 16 .. 42 .. 55 20 19 30 25 39 5 .. 33 30 9 20 41 19 25 32 28 32 29 34 15 10 28 23 27 27 27 17 .. 34 46 24 18 34 23 31 32 35 28 44 ..
29 29 48 44 .. 34 .. 27 25 29 34 43 19 .. 37 20 .. 20 28 23 21 35 17 78 33 34 17 21 48 24 47 29 37 15 40 30 24 .. 37 17 25 .. 30 .. 41 46 .. 27 17 48 18 36 32 31 24 .. ..
24 18 24 12 1 30 .. 22 16 23 15 15 10 .. 28 .. 4 9 14 21 14 16 3 .. 20 23 8 16 26 8 8 23 21 26 12 19 8 7 13 10 17 19 19 6 .. 13 5 16 9 8 16 17 23 21 18 42 ..
22 16 28 11 .. 22 .. 18 9 21 20 13 12 .. 28 16 .. 13 9 11 10 16 13 4 19 22 15 14 28 3 .. 20 19 14 4 14 14 .. 14 7 14 .. 19 .. 3 9 .. 20 7 6 13 16 22 17 14 .. ..
61 46 41 47 16 55 .. 66 54 64 67 56 53 .. 52 .. 45 37 25 61 68 44 13 .. 56 57 64 50 46 32 37 58 66 35 30 51 51 30 60 35 69 66 49 43 .. 63 51 50 74 31 56 60 46 57 66 55 ..
66 54 37 45 .. 64 .. 71 69 69 63 51 54 .. 60 68 .. 51 37 74 73 58 22 20 63 55 57 45 42 39 41 67 59 74 39 55 47 .. 53 50 73 .. 51 .. 27 53 .. 53 76 18 61 57 53 65 74 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
231
4.2
Structure of output Gross domestic product
Agriculture
$ millions
Romania Russian Federation Rwandaa Saudi Arabiaa Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka a Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzaniab Thailanda Timor-Lestea Togoa Trinidad and Tobago Tunisiaa Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam a West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep.a Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
% of GDP
Manufacturing
% of GDP
Services
% of GDP
% of GDP
1995
2008
1995
2008
1995
2008
1995
2008
1995
2008
35,477 395,528 1,293 142,458 4,879 19,681 871 84,291 19,579 20,814 .. 151,113 596,751 13,030 13,830 1,699 253,705 315,940 11,397 1,232 5,255 168,019 .. 1,309 5,329 18,031 169,708 2,482 5,756 48,214 42,807 1,157,119 7,342,300 19,298 13,350 74,889 20,736 3,220 4,236 3,478 7,111 29,604,170 t 195,611 4,894,312 2,044,366 2,851,464 5,091,618 1,312,702 904,254 1,755,662 315,651 476,175 327,684 24,508,224 7,274,360
200,071 1,679,484 4,457 468,800 13,273 50,061 1,954 181,948 94,957 54,613 .. 276,445 1,604,235 40,565 55,927 2,837 478,961 491,950 55,204 5,134 20,490 272,429 498 2,898 24,145 40,309 734,853 15,327 14,326 180,355 198,693 2,674,057 14,591,381 32,186 27,934 314,150 90,645 .. 26,576 14,314 .. 60,521,123 t 564,572 16,722,126 8,277,781 8,442,445 17,299,923 5,695,585 3,872,528 4,216,075 1,074,015 1,469,613 978,062 43,273,506 13,566,882
21 7 44 6 21 .. 43 0 6 4 .. 4 5 23 39 12 3 2 32 38 47 10 .. 38 2 11 16 17 49 15 3 2 2 9 32 6 27 .. 20 18 15 4w 35 14 21 8 15 19 13 7 16 26 18 2 3
7 5 37 2 16 .. 50 0 4 2 .. 3 3 13 26 7 2 1 20 18 45 12 .. .. 0 10 9 12 23 8 2 1 1 11 21 .. 22 .. .. 21 .. 3w 25 9 13 6 10 12 7 7 11 18 12 1 2
43 37 16 49 24 .. 39 35 38 35 .. 35 29 27 11 45 31 30 20 39 14 41 .. 22 47 29 33 63 14 43 52 31 26 29 28 41 29 .. 32 36 29 31 w 22 35 39 32 34 44 36 29 34 27 29 30 29
25 37 14 70 22 .. 23 28 41 34 .. 34 29 29 34 49 28 28 35 23 17 44 .. .. 62 33 28 54 26 37 61 24 22 27 31 .. 40 .. .. 46 .. 28 w 28 37 41 34 37 47 32 33 43 28 33 26 27
29 .. 10 10 17 .. 9 27 27 26 .. 21 18 16 5 39 23 20 15 28 7 30 .. 10 9 19 23 40 7 35 10 21 19 20 12 15 15 .. 14 11 22 20 w 12 23 26 20 22 31 22 19 15 17 16 20 22
21 18 4 8 13 .. .. 21 22 23 .. 19 15 18 6 44 20 20 13 16 7 35 .. .. 5 18 18 50 8 23 12 .. 14 18 12 .. 21 .. .. 12 .. 18 w 14 22 27 17 21 33 18 18 12 16 15 17 18
36 56 40 45 55 .. 18 65 56 60 .. 61 66 50 51 43 67 68 48 22 38 50 .. 40 51 59 50 20 36 42 45 67 72 62 40 53 44 .. 48 46 56 65 w 43 51 41 60 51 36 52 64 50 46 53 68 68
68 58 48 27 63 .. 26 72 55 63 .. 63 68 57 40 43 70 71 45 59 37 44 .. .. 37 58 64 34 52 55 38 76 77 63 48 .. 38 .. .. 33 .. 69 w 47 53 46 60 53 41 61 61 46 53 55 73 72
a. Components are at producer prices. b. Covers mainland Tanzania only.
232
Industry
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
4.2
ECONOMY
Structure of output Definitions
An economy’s gross domestic product (GDP) rep-
Ideally, industrial output should be measured
• Gross domestic product (GDP) at purchaser prices
resents the sum of value added by all its produc-
through regular censuses and surveys of fi rms.
is the sum of gross value added by all resident pro-
ers. Value added is the value of the gross output of
But in most developing countries such surveys are
ducers in the economy plus any product taxes (less
producers less the value of intermediate goods and
infrequent, so earlier survey results must be extrapo-
subsidies) not included in the valuation of output.
services consumed in production, before accounting
lated using an appropriate indicator. The choice of
It is calculated without deducting for depreciation
for consumption of fixed capital in production. The
sampling unit, which may be the enterprise (where
of fabricated assets or for depletion and degrada-
United Nations System of National Accounts calls
responses may be based on financial records) or
tion of natural resources. Value added is the net
for value added to be valued at either basic prices
the establishment (where production units may be
output of an industry after adding up all outputs and
(excluding net taxes on products) or producer prices
recorded separately), also affects the quality of
subtracting intermediate inputs. The industrial origin
(including net taxes on products paid by producers
the data. Moreover, much industrial production is
of value added is determined by the International
but excluding sales or value added taxes). Both valu-
organized in unincorporated or owner-operated ven-
Standard Industrial Classifi cation (ISIC) revision
ations exclude transport charges that are invoiced
tures that are not captured by surveys aimed at the
3. • Agriculture is the sum of gross output less
separately by producers. Total GDP shown in the
formal sector. Even in large industries, where regu-
the value of intermediate input used in production
table and elsewhere in this volume is measured at
lar surveys are more likely, evasion of excise and
for industries classified in ISIC divisions 1–5 and
purchaser prices. Value added by industry is normally
other taxes and nondisclosure of income lower the
includes forestry and fishing. • Industry is the sum
measured at basic prices. When value added is mea-
estimates of value added. Such problems become
of gross output less the value of intermediate input
sured at producer prices, this is noted in Primary data
more acute as countries move from state control of
used in production for industries classified in ISIC
documentation and footnoted in the table.
industry to private enterprise, because new firms and
divisions 10–45, which cover mining, manufactur-
While GDP estimates based on the production
growing numbers of established firms fail to report.
ing (also reported separately), construction, electric-
approach are generally more reliable than estimates
In accordance with the System of National Accounts,
ity, water, and gas. • Manufacturing is the sum of
compiled from the income or expenditure side, dif-
output should include all such unreported activity as
gross output less the value of intermediate input
ferent countries use different definitions, methods,
well as the value of illegal activities and other unre-
used in production for industries classified in ISIC
and reporting standards. World Bank staff review the
corded, informal, or small-scale operations. Data
divisions 15–37. • Services correspond to ISIC divi-
quality of national accounts data and sometimes
on these activities need to be collected using tech-
sions 50–99. This sector is derived as a residual
make adjustments to improve consistency with
niques other than conventional surveys of firms.
(from GDP less agriculture and industry) and may not
international guidelines. Nevertheless, significant
In industries dominated by large organizations
properly reflect the sum of services output, including
discrepancies remain between international stan-
and enterprises, such as public utilities, data on
banking and financial services. For some countries
dards and actual practice. Many statistical offices,
output, employment, and wages are usually read-
it includes product taxes (minus subsidies) and may
especially those in developing countries, face severe
ily available and reasonably reliable. But in the
also include statistical discrepancies.
limitations in the resources, time, training, and bud-
services industry the many self-employed workers
gets required to produce reliable and comprehensive
and one-person businesses are sometimes difficult
series of national accounts statistics.
to locate, and they have little incentive to respond to surveys, let alone to report their full earnings.
Data problems in measuring output
Compounding these problems are the many forms
Among the difficulties faced by compilers of national
of economic activity that go unrecorded, including
accounts is the extent of unreported economic activ-
the work that women and children do for little or no
ity in the informal or secondary economy. In develop-
pay. For further discussion of the problems of using
ing countries a large share of agricultural output is
national accounts data, see Srinivasan (1994) and
either not exchanged (because it is consumed within
Heston (1994).
the household) or not exchanged for money.
Data sources Data on national accounts for most developing countries are collected from national statistical
Dollar conversion
organizations and central banks by visiting and
indirectly, using a combination of methods involv-
To produce national accounts aggregates that are
resident World Bank missions. Data for high-
ing estimates of inputs, yields, and area under cul-
measured in the same standard monetary units,
income economies are from Organisation for Eco-
tivation. This approach sometimes leads to crude
the value of output must be converted to a single
nomic Co-operation and Development (OECD) data
approximations that can differ from the true values
common currency. The World Bank conventionally
files. The complete national accounts time series
over time and across crops for reasons other than
uses the U.S. dollar and applies the average official
is available on the World Development Indicators
climate conditions or farming techniques. Similarly,
exchange rate reported by the International Monetary
2010 CD-ROM. The United Nations Statistics Divi-
agricultural inputs that cannot easily be allocated to
Fund for the year shown. An alternative conversion
sion publishes detailed national accounts for UN
specific outputs are frequently “netted out” using
factor is applied if the official exchange rate is judged
member countries in National Accounts Statistics:
equally crude and ad hoc approximations. For further
to diverge by an exceptionally large margin from the
Main Aggregates and Detailed Tables and publishes
discussion of the measurement of agricultural pro-
rate effectively applied to transactions in foreign cur-
updates in the Monthly Bulletin of Statistics.
duction, see About the data for table 3.3.
rencies and traded products.
Agricultural production often must be estimated
2010 World Development Indicators
233
4.3
Structure of manufacturing Manufacturing value added
1995
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
234
$ millions 2008
.. 405 4,366 202 44,502 356 50,044 42,134 352 5,586 3,909 51,721 174 1,123 213 242 124,976 2,015 336 83 315 1,758 100,393 108 159 10,594 245,002 10,524 13,506 510 172 2,339 1,655 4,121 .. 12,124 26,925 3,824 2,830 9,829 2,026 47 804 344 28,814 .. 224 20 523 516,542 602 .. 2,069 142 19 .. 607
1,663 2,047 7,471 4,040 63,983 1,558 97,613 67,615 1,922 13,672 16,966 66,902 .. 1,862 2,130 458 212,923 6,199 775 .. 1,589 3,328 .. 106 383 21,660 1,487,812 5,040 35,885 630 411 5,505 4,219 10,137 .. 47,842 39,213 9,785 5,004 24,461 4,452 72 3,472 1,149 50,717 306,281 503 35 1,362 711,089 1,055 28,544 7,312 155 41 .. 2,593
2010 World Development Indicators
Food, beverages, and tobacco
Textiles and clothing
Machinery and transport equipment
Chemicals
Other manufacturinga
% of total 1995 2005
% of total 1995 2005
% of total 1995 2005
% of total 1995 2005
% of total 1995 2005
.. .. .. .. 29 .. .. 10 .. 28 .. 13 .. 31 .. 25 21 23 .. .. 20 .. 14 .. .. .. 4 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 12 20 .. 26 19 .. 63 .. 52 10 13 .. 65 .. 8 .. 25 .. .. .. .. ..
.. 17 .. .. .. .. 17 9 15 .. .. 13 .. .. .. 22 19 16 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 14 4 .. 27 .. .. .. .. .. .. 9 14 .. 30 .. .. 35 12 47 7 13 .. .. 36 8 .. 23 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 7 .. .. 5 .. 44 .. 6 .. 4 .. 8 8 12 .. .. 22 .. 4 .. .. .. 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 7 2 .. 6 13 .. 9 .. 18 3 5 .. 8 .. 3 .. 14 .. .. .. .. ..
.. 22 .. .. .. .. 1 3 1 .. .. 4 .. .. .. 5 6 13 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2 2 .. 9 .. .. .. .. .. .. 3 2 .. 4 .. .. 16 5 9 2 4 .. .. 2 2 .. 9 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 13 .. .. 27 .. 4 .. 23 .. 1 .. 15 23 20 .. .. 0 .. 23 .. .. .. 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 23 23 .. 4 12 .. 1 .. 2 30 28 .. 1 .. 43 .. 13 .. .. .. .. ..
.. 3 .. .. .. .. 5 31 13 .. .. 21 .. .. .. .. 21 18 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2 3 .. 7 .. .. .. .. .. .. 37 17 .. 3 .. .. 4 10 2 36 29 .. .. 5 42 .. 13 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 4 .. .. 2 .. 11 .. 8 .. 4 .. 5 13 15 .. .. 0 .. 10 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4 1 .. 7 18 .. 13 .. 4 6 12 .. 9 .. 10 .. 10 .. .. .. .. ..
.. 17 .. .. .. .. 7 6 4 .. .. 22 .. .. .. .. 11 7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 14 .. .. 13 .. .. .. .. .. .. 3 2 .. 5 .. .. 10 4 4 3 12 .. .. 15 10 .. 6 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 46 .. .. 56 .. 13 .. 50 .. 60 .. 66 35 30 .. .. 57 .. 49 .. .. .. 93 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 54 53 .. 56 38 .. 15 .. 23 51 41 .. 17 .. 37 .. 38 .. .. .. .. ..
.. 41 .. .. .. .. 69 51 67 .. .. 41 .. .. .. 73 43 45 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 68 93 .. 44 .. .. .. .. .. .. 48 65 .. 58 .. .. 34 69 38 51 42 .. .. 42 38 .. 50 .. .. .. .. ..
Manufacturing value added
1995
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
$ millions 2008
8,839 57,917 48,781 10,918 67 18,096 .. 225,513 865 1,077,348 866 2,976 757 .. 128,839 .. 1,032 142 245 965 1,465 129 4 .. 1,351 873 233 195 23,432 174 107 822 54,546 400 143 6,056 166 .. 403 393 65,999 10,645 533 120 .. 17,018 643 8,864 694 372 1,280 8,105 17,043 25,885 18,249 17,867 ..
28,619 169,986 142,345 29,832 .. 50,926 .. 344,676 983 923,108 3,834 15,711 3,229 .. 234,688 732 .. 570 484 3,200 2,448 234 105 3,879 6,615 1,780 1,345 504 52,224 195 .. 1,648 199,410 702 210 11,225 1,298 .. 1,108 862 94,324 .. 946 .. 3,760 38,595 .. 31,196 1,454 446 2,022 18,770 37,247 80,227 23,939 .. ..
4.3
ECONOMY
Structure of manufacturing Food, beverages, and tobacco
Textiles and clothing
Machinery and transport equipment
Chemicals
Other manufacturinga
% of total 1995 2005
% of total 1995 2005
% of total 1995 2005
% of total 1995 2005
% of total 1995 2005
18 13 21 13 23 15 13 9 .. 10 31 .. .. .. 9 .. .. .. .. 39 26 .. .. .. .. 35 .. .. .. .. .. 25 26 .. 46 .. .. .. .. 35 19 29 .. .. .. 17 15 .. 54 .. .. 26 29 23 13 .. ..
12 9 25 10 .. 14 11 9 .. 11 24 .. 30 .. 6 .. .. 14 .. 20 .. .. .. .. 22 .. 46 .. 9 .. .. 30 .. 50 .. 37 .. .. .. .. 15 25 .. .. .. 23 6 .. .. .. .. 30 24 23 14 .. 1
3 12 18 10 26 1 6 14 .. 4 6 .. .. .. 10 .. .. .. .. 11 10 .. .. .. .. 17 .. .. .. .. .. 52 4 .. 36 .. .. .. .. 34 3 .. .. .. .. 2 6 .. 7 .. .. 10 7 8 22 .. ..
3 9 12 4 .. 0 4 10 .. 2 11 .. 6 .. 5 .. .. 5 .. 7 .. .. .. .. 11 .. 31 .. 3 .. .. 42 .. 13 .. 14 .. .. .. .. 1 .. .. .. .. 1 0 .. .. .. .. 13 6 4 9 .. 2
14 20 16 18 4 21 25 27 .. 38 4 .. .. .. 40 .. .. .. .. 15 5 .. .. .. .. 9 .. .. .. .. .. 2 24 .. 3 .. .. .. .. 2 16 .. .. .. .. 25 4 .. .. .. .. 6 20 22 18 .. ..
42 20 23 27 .. 10 23 27 .. 41 6 .. 4 .. 50 .. .. 1 .. 11 .. .. .. .. 13 .. 1 .. 34 .. .. 3 .. 5 .. 8 .. .. .. .. 19 .. .. .. .. 23 2 .. .. .. .. 3 30 20 15 .. 0
11 22 10 16 8 18 6 8 .. 10 15 .. .. .. 8 .. .. .. .. 4 6 .. .. .. .. 8 .. .. .. .. .. .. 14 .. 2 .. .. .. .. .. 14 .. .. .. .. 9 8 .. 7 .. .. 9 11 3 6 .. ..
10 16 11 13 .. 26 10 7 .. 11 15 .. 5 .. 8 .. .. 1 .. 4 .. .. .. .. 6 .. 2 .. 13 .. .. .. .. .. .. 13 .. .. .. .. 18 .. .. .. .. 9 11 .. .. .. .. 11 8 7 2 .. 17
54 34 35 44 39 45 50 43 .. 38 43 .. .. .. 33 .. .. .. .. 31 53 .. .. .. .. 31 .. .. .. .. .. 21 31 .. 12 .. .. .. .. 29 48 71 .. .. .. 48 66 .. 32 .. .. 49 34 44 41 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
33 46 30 46 .. 50 53 46 .. 35 44 .. 55 .. 31 .. .. 78 .. 58 .. .. .. .. 49 .. 20 .. 42 .. .. 25 .. 31 .. 28 .. .. .. .. 47 75 .. .. .. 43 80 .. .. .. .. 44 33 46 61 .. 80
235
4.3
Structure of manufacturing Manufacturing value added
1995
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzaniab Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
$ millions 2008
9,387 .. 132 13,714 730 .. 75 20,799 6,064 4,573 .. 29,274 101,524 1,836 640 557 49,767 50,562 1,574 331 349 50,231 .. 130 439 3,419 38,296 948 359 14,922 4,452 219,282 1,289,100 3,801 1,376 10,668 3,109 .. 599 344 1,370 5,484,300 t 22,364 990,706 496,790 503,477 1,013,160 390,767 .. 292,587 39,269 75,041 46,018 4,490,475 1,325,850
37,959 256,618 200 38,737 1,548 .. .. 35,535 21,332 9,677 .. 46,692 195,804 7,283 3,028 1,054 79,279 72,675 6,092 745 819 95,146 .. .. 1,263 7,209 118,702 9,158 1,000 37,161 24,643 .. 1,755,600 4,996 3,061 .. 19,129 .. .. 1,421 .. 9,054,590 t 68,035 3,514,162 2,159,122 1,319,723 3,584,044 1,859,969 .. 640,171 106,905 224,444 89,446 6,039,774 1,958,265
a. Includes unallocated data. b. Covers mainland Tanzania only.
236
2010 World Development Indicators
Food, beverages, and tobacco
Textiles and clothing
Machinery and transport equipment
Chemicals
Other manufacturinga
% of total 1995 2005
% of total 1995 2005
% of total 1995 2005
% of total 1995 2005
% of total 1995 2005
31 .. .. .. 44 .. .. 4 13 10 .. 15 16 .. .. .. 8 .. .. .. .. 21 .. .. 30 .. 16 .. 50 .. .. 14 12 36 .. .. 30 .. 45 .. 30 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
15 15 .. 19 .. .. .. 2 7 7 .. 18 15 29 .. .. 7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 12 .. .. .. .. .. .. 15 14 42 .. .. .. .. 60 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
12 .. .. .. 3 .. .. 1 2 12 .. 8 7 .. .. .. 1 .. .. .. .. 9 .. .. 1 .. 17 .. 3 .. .. 5 4 9 .. .. 22 .. 5 .. 7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
14 2 .. 5 .. .. .. 1 4 6 .. 4 5 29 .. .. 1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 .. .. .. .. .. .. 3 2 9 .. .. .. .. 9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
18 .. .. .. 1 .. .. 60 19 21 .. 19 25 .. .. .. 35 .. .. .. .. 29 .. .. 2 .. 16 .. 6 .. .. 29 34 4 .. .. 12 .. 0 .. 29 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
18 12 .. 13 .. .. .. 49 24 26 .. 17 21 4 .. .. 29 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 .. .. .. .. .. .. 26 28 2 .. .. .. .. 0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
6 .. .. .. 29 .. .. 9 8 2 .. 10 9 .. .. .. 2 .. .. .. .. 6 .. .. 26 .. 10 .. .. .. .. 11 12 8 .. .. 7 .. 2 .. 6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
5 8 .. 27 .. .. .. 29 3 2 .. 7 8 14 .. .. 12 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 38 .. .. .. .. .. .. 11 15 9 .. .. .. .. 4 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
33 .. .. .. 23 .. .. 26 57 56 .. 47 42 .. .. .. 53 .. .. .. .. 35 .. .. 41 .. 41 .. 41 .. .. 41 38 43 .. .. 29 .. 48 .. 29 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
47 63 .. 35 .. .. .. 19 62 60 .. 55 51 24 .. .. 51 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 48 .. .. .. .. .. .. 45 40 38 .. .. .. .. 27 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
About the data
4.3
ECONOMY
Structure of manufacturing Definitions
The data on the distribution of manufacturing value
revision 3. Concordances matching ISIC categories
added by industry are provided by the United Nations
to national classifi cation systems and to related
output less the value of intermediate inputs used in
Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO). UNIDO
systems such as the Standard International Trade
production for industries classified in ISIC major divi-
obtains the data from a variety of national and inter-
Classification are available.
sion 3. • Food, beverages, and tobacco correspond
• Manufacturing value added is the sum of gross
national sources, including the United Nations Sta-
In establishing classifi cations systems compil-
to ISIC divisions 15 and 16. • Textiles and clothing
tistics Division, the World Bank, the Organisation for
ers must define both the types of activities to be
correspond to ISIC divisions 17–19. • Machinery and
Economic Co-operation and Development, and the
described and the units whose activities are to
transport equipment correspond to ISIC divisions
International Monetary Fund. To improve comparabil-
be reported. There are many possibilities, and the
29, 30, 32, 34, and 35. • Chemicals correspond to
ity over time and across countries, UNIDO supple-
choices affect how the statistics can be interpreted
ISIC division 24. • Other manufacturing, a residual,
ments these data with information from industrial
and how useful they are in analyzing economic
covers wood and related products (ISIC division 20),
censuses, statistics from national and international
behavior. The ISIC emphasizes commonalities in the
paper and related products (ISIC divisions 21 and
organizations, unpublished data that it collects in the
production process and is explicitly not intended to
22), petroleum and related products (ISIC division
field, and estimates by the UNIDO Secretariat. Nev-
measure outputs (for which there is a newly devel-
23), basic metals and mineral products (ISIC divi-
ertheless, coverage may be incomplete, particularly
oped Central Product Classification). Nevertheless,
sion 27), fabricated metal products and professional
for the informal sector. When direct information on
the ISIC views an activity as defined by “a process
goods (ISIC division 28), and other industries (ISIC
inputs and outputs is not available, estimates may
resulting in a homogeneous set of products” (United
divisions 25, 26, 31, 33, 36, and 37).
be used, which may result in errors in industry totals.
Nations 1990 [ISIC, series M, no. 4, rev. 3], p. 9).
Moreover, countries use different reference periods
Firms typically use multiple processes to produce
(calendar or fiscal year) and valuation methods (basic
a product. For example, an automobile manufac-
or producer prices) to estimate value added. (See
turer engages in forging, welding, and painting as
About the data for table 4.2.)
well as advertising, accounting, and other service
The data on manufacturing value added in U.S. dol-
activities. Collecting data at such a detailed level
lars are from the World Bank’s national accounts files
is not practical, nor is it useful to record produc-
and may differ from those UNIDO uses to calculate
tion data at the highest level of a large, multiplant,
shares of value added by industry, in part because
multiproduct firm. The ISIC has therefore adopted as
of differences in exchange rates. Thus value added
the definition of an establishment “an enterprise or
in a particular industry estimated by applying the
part of an enterprise which independently engages in
shares to total manufacturing value added will not
one, or predominantly one, kind of economic activity
match those from UNIDO sources. Classification of
at or from one location . . . for which data are avail-
manufacturing industries in the table accords with
able . . .” (United Nations 1990, p. 25). By design,
the United Nations International Standard Industrial
this definition matches the reporting unit required
Classifi cation (ISIC) revision 3. Editions of World
for the production accounts of the United Nations
Development Indicators prior to 2008 used revision
System of National Accounts. The ISIC system is
2, first published in 1948. Revision 3 was completed
described in the United Nations’ International Stan-
in 1989, and many countries now use it. But revi-
dard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activi-
sion 2 is still widely used for compiling cross-country
ties, Third Revision (1990). The discussion of the ISIC
data. UNIDO has converted these data to accord with
draws on Ryten (1998).
4.3a
Manufacturing continues to show strong growth in East Asia through 2008 Value added in manufacturing (index, 1990 = 100) 600
East Asia & Pacific
500 400 South Asia 300
Middle East & North Africa
Sub-Saharan Africa
100 0
Data sources
Latin America & Caribbean
200
Data on manufacturing value added are from the World Bank’s national accounts files. Data used to calculate shares of industry value added are
1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
provided to the World Bank in electronic files
Manufacturing continues to be the dominant sector in East Asia and Pacific, growing an average of about
by UNIDO. The most recent published source is
10.5 percent a year between 1990 and 2008.
UNIDO’s International Yearbook of Industrial Sta-
Source: World Development Indicators data files.
tistics 2010.
2010 World Development Indicators
237
4.4
Structure of merchandise exports Merchandise exports
Food
Agricultural raw materials
Fuels
Ores and metals
Manufactures
$ millions
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
1995
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China† Hong Kong SAR, China b Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras †Data for Taiwan, China
238
166 202 10,258 3,642 20,967 271 53,111 57,738 635 3,501 4,803 178,265a 420 1,100 152 2,142 46,506 5,355 276 105 855 1,651 192,197 171 243 16,024 148,780 173,871 10,056 1,563 1,172 3,453 3,806 4,517 1,600 21,335 50,906 3,780 4,307 3,450 1,652 86 1,840 422 40,490 301,162 2,713 16 151 523,461 1,724 11,054 2,155 702 24 110 1,769 113,047
2008
680 1,353 78,233 66,300 70,588 1,069 187,428 182,158 31,500 15,369 32,902 476,953 1,050 6,370 5,064 5,040 197,942 23,124 620 56 4,290 4,350 456,420 185 4,800 67,788 1,428,488 370,242 37,626 3,950 9,050 9,675 10,100 14,112 3,500 146,934 117,174 6,910 18,511 25,483 4,549 20 12,343 1,500 96,714 608,684 8,350 14 1,498 1,465,215 5,650 25,311 7,765 1,300 98 490 6,130 255,629
2010 World Development Indicators
.. 11 1 .. 50 11 22 4 4 10 .. 10 a 14 21 .. .. 29 18 25 91 .. 27 8 4 .. 24 8 3 31 .. 1 63 63 11 .. 6 24 19 53 10 57 .. 16 73 2 14 0 60 29 5 58 30 65 8 89 37 87 3
5 4 0 .. 53 19 12 7 1 7 7 9 41 14 6 3 28 12 .. 65 .. 12 9 .. .. 16 3 4 15 .. .. 32 41 10 10 4 17 21 25 10 20 .. 9 75 2 12 1 60 18 5 63 21 38 2 .. .. 53 1
.. 9 0 .. 4 5 8 3 8 3 .. 1a 75 10 .. .. 5 3 69 4 .. 28 9 20 .. 12 2 0 5 .. 8 5 20 5 .. 4 3 0 3 6 1 .. 10 13 8 1 13 1 3 1 15 4 4 1 11 0 3 2
0 8 0 .. 1 2 2 2 0 3 1 1 44 1 7 0 4 1 .. 6 .. 16 5 .. .. 6 0 2 4 .. .. 3 9 3 0 1 2 1 4 2 1 .. 4 14 4 1 7 4 2 1 9 2 4 5 .. .. 2 1
.. 3 95 .. 10 1 19 1 66 0 .. 3a 5 15 .. .. 1 7 0 0 .. 29 9 1 .. 0 4 0 28 .. 88 1 10 9 .. 4 3 0 36 37 0 .. 6 3 2 2 83 0 19 1 5 7 2 0 0 0 0 1
.. 22 98 .. 10 0 34 3 97 2 37 9 0 52 10 0 9 16 .. 1 .. 62 29 .. .. 1 2 3 47 .. .. 1 37 13 0 3 11 0 62 44 3 .. 12 0 7 5 86 0 3 3 2 11 7 2 .. .. 6 7
.. 12 1 .. 2 26 18 3 1 0 .. 3a 0 35 .. .. 10 10 0 1 .. 8 7 30 .. 48 2 1 1 .. 0 1 0 2 .. 3 1 0 0 6 3 .. 3 0 3 3 2 1 8 3 9 7 0 67 0 0 0 1
.. 33 1 .. 3 29 27 3 0 0 1 3 1 27 13 20 12 17 .. 9 .. 5 8 .. .. 61 2 8 2 .. .. 1 1 4 2 2 2 3 1 7 2 .. 4 1 4 3 3 15 22 3 6 9 4 59 .. .. 8 2
.. 65 4 .. 34 54 30 88 20 85 .. 78a 6 19 .. .. 54 60 6 3 .. 8 63 45 .. 13 84 94 35 .. 3 25 7 74 .. 82 60 78 8 40 39 .. 65 11 83 79 2 36 41 87 13 50 28 24 0 62 9 93
41 33 2 .. 31 51 20 81 1 88 52 75 14 6 64 77 45 51 .. 18 .. 3 47 .. .. 12 93 83 32 .. .. 63 12 70 24 87 66 75 9 37 74 .. 66 9 81 78 4 21 55 82 19 54 47 32 .. .. 29 88
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
4.4
ECONOMY
Structure of merchandise exports Merchandise exports
Food
Agricultural raw materials
Fuels
Ores and metals
Manufactures
$ millions
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
1995
2008
12,865 30,630 45,417 18,360 496 44,705 19,046 233,766 1,427 443,116 1,769 5,250 1,878 959 125,058 .. 12,785 409 311 1,305 816 160 820 8,975 2,705 1,204 507 405 73,914 441 488 1,538 79,542 745 473 6,881 168 860 1,409 345 203,171 13,645 466 288 12,342 41,992 6,068 8,029 625 2,654 919 5,575 17,502 22,895 22,783 .. 3,651
107,904 179,073 139,281 116,350 59,800 124,158 60,825 539,727 2,400 782,337 7,790 71,184 4,972 1,950 422,007 .. 93,180 1,642 1,080 10,081 4,454 900 262 63,050 23,728 3,978 1,345 790 199,516 1,650 1,750 2,351 291,807 1,597 2,539 20,065 2,600 6,900 2,960 1,100 633,974 30,586 1,489 820 81,900 167,941 37,670 20,375 1,180 5,700 4,434 31,529 49,025 167,944 55,861 .. 63,830
21 19 11 4 .. 19 5 7 22 0 25 10 56 .. 2 .. 0 23 .. 14 20 .. .. 0 18 18 69 90 10 23 57 29 8 72 2 31 66 .. .. 8 20 45 75 17 2 8 5 12 75 13 44 31 13 10 7 .. 0
7 10 18 4 0 10 3 7 15 1 14 4 44 .. 1 .. 0 23 .. 16 11 .. .. .. 15 14 21 86 12 28 12 27 6 59 2 19 15 .. 23 .. 13 53 85 18 1 5 2 18 84 .. 88 19 7 9 10 .. 0
2 1 7 1 .. 1 2 1 0 1 2 3 7 .. 1 .. 0 13 .. 23 2 .. .. 0 8 5 6 2 6 75 0 1 1 2 28 3 16 .. .. 1 4 19 3 1 2 2 0 4 0 20 36 3 1 3 5 .. 0
1 2 6 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 14 .. 1 .. 0 7 .. 9 1 .. .. .. 2 1 3 4 2 42 0 1 0 1 12 2 4 .. 0 .. 3 9 1 4 1 0 0 1 1 .. 3 1 1 1 2 .. 0
3 2 25 86 .. 0 0 1 1 1 0 25 6 .. 2 .. 95 11 .. 2 0 .. .. 95 11 0 1 0 7 0 1 0 10 1 0 2 2 .. .. 0 7 2 1 0 96 47 79 1 3 38 0 5 2 8 3 .. 82
3 18 29 83 34 1 1 5 18 2 0 69 2 .. 7 .. 96 16 .. 3 0 .. .. .. 25 5 6 0 18 6 22 0 17 0 10 2 11 .. 0 .. 11 7 1 2 92 68 86 6 1 .. 0 11 3 4 6 .. 94
5 3 6 1 .. 1 1 1 6 1 24 24 3 .. 1 .. 0 13 .. 1 8 .. .. 0 5 18 7 0 1 0 42 0 3 3 60 12 2 .. .. 0 3 5 1 80 0 9 2 0 1 25 0 46 4 7 2 .. 0
2 6 8 2 0 1 1 2 6 3 11 12 3 .. 3 .. 0 5 .. 4 11 .. .. .. 2 5 3 0 2 1 60 1 3 8 70 10 57 .. 31 .. 2 5 2 69 0 6 1 1 5 .. 1 52 5 4 3 .. 0
68 74 51 9 .. 72 89 89 71 95 49 38 28 .. 93 .. 5 40 .. 58 70 .. .. 5 58 58 14 7 75 2 0 70 78 23 10 51 13 .. .. 84 63 29 21 1 1 27 14 83 20 4 19 15 42 71 83 .. 17
2010 World Development Indicators
80 63 39 10 0 85 92 83 61 89 75 15 37 .. 89 .. 3 47 .. 63 34 .. .. .. 55 76 67 10 54 22 0 57 74 32 6 67 6 .. 45 .. 55 23 10 7 5 17 7 73 9 .. 8 16 83 80 72 .. 5
239
4.4 Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singaporeb Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Structure of merchandise exports Merchandise exports
Food
Agricultural raw materials
Fuels
Ores and metals
Manufactures
$ millions
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
1995
2008
7,910 81,095 54 50,040 993 .. 42 118,268 8,580 8,316 .. 27,853c 97,849 3,798 555 866 80,440 81,641 3,563 750 682 56,439 .. 378 2,455 5,475 21,637 1,880 460 13,128 28,364 237,953 584,743 2,106 3,430 18,457 5,449 .. 1,945 1,040 2,118 5,172,492 t 35,717 906,854 408,391 498,548 942,571 354,784 179,048 223,927 62,002 46,657 76,554 4,229,538 1,742,200
49,546 471,763 250 328,930 2,390 10,973 220 338,176 70,967 34,199 .. 80,781 268,108 8,370 12,450 1,790 183,975 200,387 14,300 1,406 2,870 177,844 .. 790 17,800 19,319 131,975 10,780 2,180 67,049 231,550 457,983 1,300,532 5,949 10,360 93,542 62,906 .. 9,270 5,093 2,150 16,129,607 t 167,308 4,905,095 2,627,173 2,276,454 5,072,412 2,081,208 1,141,248 873,299 418,183 225,882 336,637 11,060,159 4,612,227
7 2 57 1 9 28 .. 4 6 4 .. 8c 15 21 44 .. 2 3 12 .. 65 19 .. 19 8 10 20 1 90 19 8 8 11 44 .. 3 30 .. 3 3 43 9w 27 14 14 15 15 11 9 20 6 17 18 8 11
6 2 66 1 21 19 .. 2 4 4 .. 7 13 25 3 21 4 3 21 .. 49 13 .. 16 2 9 8 .. 63 16 1 6 10 59 .. 0 20 .. 5 6 17 8w 21 10 8 11 10 8 6 16 5 13 12 7 8
3 3 16 0 7 4 .. 1 4 2 .. 4c 2 4 47 .. 6 1 7 .. 23 5 .. 42 0 1 1 13 5 1 0 1 4 15 .. 0 3 .. 1 1 7 3w 7 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 1 2 7 3 2
2 2 1 0 2 2 .. 0 1 2 .. 2 1 3 1 7 4 0 1 .. 9 5 .. 9 0 0 0 .. 6 1 0 1 2 8 .. 0 3 .. 0 1 12 2w 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 3 2 1
8 43 0 88 22 2 .. 7 4 1 .. 9c 2 0 0 .. 2 0 63 .. 0 1 .. 0 48 8 1 77 0 4 9 6 2 1 .. 77 18 .. 95 3 1 7w 19 11 7 15 11 6 25 15 73 1 36 6 2
9 66 0 90 34 3 .. 18 5 3 .. 9 5 0 94 1 7 3 41 .. 1 6 .. 0 70 17 6 .. 1 6 65 13 7 3 .. 94 21 .. 92 1 1 12 w 20 21 13 27 21 9 39 22 75 14 36 10 5
3 10 12 1 12 15 .. 2 4 3 .. 8c 2 1 0 .. 3 3 1 .. 0 1 .. 32 0 2 3 1 1 7 55 3 3 1 .. 6 0 .. 1 87 12 3w 6 5 3 6 5 2 8 7 3 3 8 3 2
Note: Components may not sum to 100 percent because of unclassified trade. Exports of gold are excluded. a. Includes Luxembourg. b. Includes re-exports. c. Refers to the South African Customs Union (Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, South Africa, and Swaziland).
240
2010 World Development Indicators
5 6 28 0 4 10 .. 1 2 4 .. 29 3 2 1 1 4 4 1 .. 18 1 .. 13 3 2 3 .. 2 6 1 5 4 0 .. 2 1 .. 0 85 20 4w 7 6 3 8 6 3 5 8 2 5 16 4 3
78 26 14 10 48 49 .. 84 82 90 .. 44 c 78 73 6 .. 79 94 17 .. 10 73 .. 7 43 79 74 8 4 68 28 81 77 39 .. 14 44 .. 1 7 37 76 w 40 64 70 59 63 74 47 55 17 76 28 79 81
77 17 4 9 39 66 .. 70 86 87 .. 52 76 67 0 70 75 89 35 .. 23 74 .. 62 25 72 81 .. 27 70 4 70 74 29 .. 4 55 .. 2 7 50 70 w 46 59 71 49 59 76 43 51 16 65 32 73 77
About the data
4.4
ECONOMY
Structure of merchandise exports Definitions
Data on merchandise trade are from customs
are classified as re-exports. Because of differences
• Merchandise exports are the f.o.b. value of goods
reports of goods moving into or out of an economy
in reporting practices, data on exports may not be
provided to the rest of the world. • Food corresponds
or from reports of financial transactions related to
fully comparable across economies.
to the commodities in SITC sections 0 (food and live
merchandise trade recorded in the balance of pay-
The data on total exports of goods (merchandise)
animals), 1 (beverages and tobacco), and 4 (animal
ments. Because of differences in timing and defi -
are from the World Trade Organization (WTO), which
and vegetable oils and fats) and SITC division 22
nitions, trade flow estimates from customs reports
obtains data from national statistical offices and the
(oil seeds, oil nuts, and oil kernels). • Agricultural
and balance of payments may differ. Several inter-
IMF’s International Financial Statistics, supplemented
raw materials correspond to SITC section 2 (crude
national agencies process trade data, each correct-
by the Comtrade database and publications or data-
materials except fuels), excluding divisions 22, 27
ing unreported or misreported data, leading to other
bases of regional organizations, specialized agen-
(crude fertilizers and minerals excluding coal, petro-
differences.
cies, economic groups, and private sources (such as
leum, and precious stones), and 28 (metalliferous
The most detailed source of data on international
Eurostat, the Food and Agriculture Organization, and
ores and scrap). • Fuels correspond to SITC section
trade in goods is the United Nations Statistics Divi-
country reports of the Economist Intelligence Unit).
3 (mineral fuels). • Ores and metals correspond to
sion’s Commodity Trade (Comtrade) database. The
Country websites and email contact have improved
the commodities in SITC divisions 27, 28, and 68
International Monetary Fund (IMF) also collects
collection of up-to-date statistics, reducing the pro-
(nonferrous metals). • Manufactures correspond to
customs-based data on trade in goods. Exports are
portion of estimates. The WTO database now covers
the commodities in SITC sections 5 (chemicals), 6
recorded as the cost of the goods delivered to the
most major traders in Africa, Asia, and Latin America,
(basic manufactures), 7 (machinery and transport
frontier of the exporting country for shipment—the
which together with high-income countries account
equipment), and 8 (miscellaneous manufactured
free on board (f.o.b.) value. Many countries report
for nearly 95 percent of world trade. Reliability of
goods), excluding division 68.
trade data in U.S. dollars. When countries report in
data for countries in Europe and Central Asia has
local currency, the United Nations Statistics Division
also improved.
applies the average official exchange rate to the U.S. dollar for the period shown.
Export shares by major commodity group are from Comtrade. The values of total exports reported
Countries may report trade according to the gen-
here have not been fully reconciled with the esti-
eral or special system of trade. Under the general
mates from the national accounts or the balance
system exports comprise outward-moving goods that
of payments.
are (a) goods wholly or partly produced in the country;
The classification of commodity groups is based
(b) foreign goods, neither transformed nor declared
on the Standard International Trade Classification
for domestic consumption in the country, that move
(SITC) revision 3. Previous editions contained data
outward from customs storage; and (c) goods previ-
based on the SITC revision 1. Data for earlier years in
ously included as imports for domestic consumption
previous editions may differ because of this change
but subsequently exported without transformation.
in methodology. Concordance tables are available to
Under the special system exports comprise catego-
convert data reported in one system to another.
ries a and c. In some compilations categories b and c Developing economies’ share of world merchandise exports continues to expand 1995 ($5.2 billion)
4.4a
2008 ($16 billion)
Data sources East Asia & Pacific 13% Europe & Central Asia 7%
East Asia & Pacific 7% Latin America & Caribbean 4% Europe & Central Asia 3% Middle East & N. Africa 1% South Asia 1% Sub-Saharan Africa 1% High income 83%
Data on merchandise exports are from the WTO. Data on shares of exports by major commodity group are from Comtrade. The WTO publishes
Latin America & Caribbean 5% Middle East & N. Africa 3% High income 69%
South Asia 2% Sub-Saharan Africa 1%
data on world trade in its Annual Report. The IMF publishes estimates of total exports of goods in its International Financial Statistics and Direction of Trade Statistics, as does the United Nations Statistics Division in its Monthly Bulletin of Statistics. And the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development publishes data on the
Developing economies’ share of world merchandise exports increased 13 percentage points from 1995
structure of exports in its Handbook of Statistics.
to 2008. East Asia and Pacific was the biggest gainer, capturing an additional 6 percentage points. Every
Tariff line records of exports are compiled in the
region increased its share in world trade.
United Nations Statistics Division’s Comtrade
Source: World Development Indicators data files and World Trade Organization.
database.
2010 World Development Indicators
241
4.5
Structure of merchandise imports Merchandise imports
Food
Agricultural raw materials
Fuels
Ores and metals
Manufactures
$ millions
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
1995
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China† Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras †Data for Taiwan, China
242
387 714 10,100 1,468 20,122 674 61,283 66,237 668 6,694 5,564 164,934 a 746 1,424 1,082 1,911 54,137 5,660 455 234 1,187 1,199 168,426 175 365 15,900 132,084 196,072 13,853 871 670 4,036 2,931 7,352 2,825 25,085 45,939 5,170 4,152 11,760 3,329 454 2,546 1,145 29,470 289,391 882 182 392 463,872 1,906 25,898 3,292 819 133 653 1,879 103,558
2008
3,350 5,230 39,156 21,100 57,413 4,412 200,272 184,247 7,200 23,860 39,483 469,889 1,990 4,987 12,282 5,180 182,810 38,256 1,800 403 6,510 4,360 418,336 310 1,700 61,901 1,133,040 392,962 39,669 4,100 2,850 15,374 7,150 30,728 14,500 141,882 112,296 16,400 18,686 48,382 9,755 530 15,990 7,600 91,045 707,720 2,550 329 6,058 1,206,213 10,400 77,970 14,545 1,600 160 2,148 9,990 240,448
2010 World Development Indicators
.. 34 29 .. 5 31 5 6 39 17 .. 11a 27 10 .. .. 11 8 21 21 .. 17 6 16 24 7 7 5 9 .. 21 10 21 12 .. 7 12 .. 8 28 15 .. 14 14 6 11 19 36 36 10 8 16 12 31 44 .. 13 6
7 16 20 .. 5 19 5 7 16 22 7 8 31 9 16 12 4 7 .. 11 .. 18 6 .. .. 7 5 4 10 .. .. 9 20 8 12 5 12 12 9 17 15 .. 10 14 5 8 17 30 15 7 15 11 13 13 .. .. 15 4
.. 1 3 .. 2 0 2 3 1 3 .. 2a 3 2 .. .. 3 3 2 2 .. 3 2 10 1 2 5 2 3 .. 1 1 1 2 .. 3 3 .. 3 7 2 .. 3 2 4 3 1 1 0 3 1 2 2 1 0 .. 1 4
.. 1 2 .. 1 2 1 2 1 8 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 .. 2 .. 2 1 .. .. 1 4 1 1 .. .. 1 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 3 2 .. 2 1 3 1 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 .. .. 1 1
.. 2 1 .. 4 27 5 4 4 8 .. 7a 9 5 .. .. 12 34 14 11 .. 3 4 9 18 9 4 2 3 .. 20 9 19 12 .. 8 3 .. 6 1 9 .. 11 11 9 7 4 14 39 6 6 7 12 19 16 .. 12 7
8 16 1 .. 7 16 16 12 2 11 35 15 22 11 16 17 20 14 .. 3 .. 31 12 .. .. 29 16 4 5 .. .. 14 36 18 0 10 8 26 14 12 19 .. 16 23 18 17 4 20 18 14 14 20 20 33 .. .. 20 26
.. 1 2 .. 2 0 1 4 2 2 .. 5a 1 3 .. .. 3 4 1 1 .. 2 3 2 1 2 4 2 2 .. 1 2 1 3 .. 4 2 .. 2 3 2 .. 1 1 6 4 1 0 0 4 0 3 1 1 0 .. 1 6
.. 3 2 .. 3 3 2 5 2 3 4 4 1 1 3 2 4 8 .. 1 .. 1 3 .. .. 3 13 2 3 .. .. 2 1 3 1 4 2 1 1 9 1 .. 2 1 7 3 1 1 2 5 1 4 1 0 .. .. 1 8
.. 61 65 .. 86 39 86 82 53 69 .. 70a 59 82 .. .. 71 48 62 64 .. 76 83 64 56 79 79 88 78 .. 58 78 57 67 .. 77 73 .. 82 61 72 .. 71 72 74 76 75 46 24 73 77 71 73 47 40 .. 74 75
12 63 75 .. 83 61 75 73 79 54 49 70 42 77 63 67 70 66 .. 83 .. 48 76 .. .. 60 62 90 80 .. .. 74 42 70 50 78 75 60 75 59 63 .. 66 60 64 70 77 47 64 65 69 64 65 53 .. .. 64 60
Merchandise imports
Food
Agricultural raw materials
Fuels
Ores and metals
Manufactures
$ millions
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
1995
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
ECONOMY
4.5
Structure of merchandise imports
15,465 34,707 40,630 13,882 665 32,340 29,578 205,990 2,818 335,882 3,697 3,807 2,991 1,380 135,119 .. 7,790 522 589 1,815 7,278 1,107 510 5,392 3,650 1,719 628 475 77,691 772 431 1,976 75,858 840 415 10,023 704 1,348 1,616 1,333 185,232 13,957 975 374 8,222 32,968 4,379 11,515 2,510 1,452 3,144 7,584 28,341 29,050 32,610 .. 3,398
2008
107,864 291,598 126,177 57,230 31,200 82,774 67,410 556,311 7,880 761,984 16,888 37,889 11,074 3,950 435,275 .. 25,125 4,058 1,390 16,007 16,754 2,030 865 11,500 30,811 6,852 4,040 1,700 156,896 2,550 1,750 4,646 323,151 4,899 3,616 41,699 4,100 4,290 4,520 3,570 573,924 34,366 4,287 1,450 41,700 89,070 23,095 42,326 9,050 3,550 10,180 29,981 59,170 203,924 89,753 .. 26,850
6 4 9 21 .. 8 7 12 14 16 21 10 10 .. 6 .. 16 18 .. 10 21 .. .. 23 13 17 16 14 5 20 24 17 6 8 14 20 22 .. .. 12 14 7 18 32 18 7 20 18 11 .. 19 14 8 10 14 .. 9
4 2 7 2 .. 10 7 8 12 9 17 8 12 .. 4 .. 13 15 .. 13 16 .. .. .. 11 11 11 12 7 12 28 21 7 12 12 12 14 .. 14 .. 10 9 16 25 10 7 11 12 11 .. 7 4 11 7 12 .. 6
3 4 6 2 .. 1 2 6 2 6 2 2 2 .. 6 .. 1 3 .. 2 2 .. .. 1 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 3 1 6 3 .. .. 3 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 6 1 .. 0 2 2 3 4 .. 1
1 2 3 1 .. 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 .. 2 .. 1 2 .. 2 1 .. .. .. 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 3 1 1 0 3 1 .. 1 .. 1 1 0 5 1 1 1 5 0 .. 0 5 1 2 1 .. 0
12 24 8 2 .. 3 6 7 13 16 13 25 15 .. 14 .. 1 36 .. 21 9 .. .. 0 19 12 14 11 2 16 22 7 2 46 19 14 10 .. .. 12 8 5 18 13 1 3 2 16 14 .. 7 9 9 9 8 .. 1
9 39 24 4 .. 12 20 14 41 35 22 14 27 .. 27 .. 1 31 .. 15 22 .. .. .. 28 21 13 10 11 21 35 21 10 23 27 20 20 .. 14 .. 15 18 23 17 2 5 3 33 21 .. 16 0 21 11 17 .. 1
4 7 4 3 .. 2 2 5 1 7 3 5 2 .. 6 .. 2 3 .. 1 2 .. .. 1 4 3 1 1 3 1 0 1 2 2 1 4 1 .. .. 3 3 3 1 3 2 6 2 3 1 .. 1 1 3 3 2 .. 2
2 6 4 0 .. 2 2 5 0 8 3 2 2 .. 9 .. 3 2 .. 2 2 .. .. .. 2 5 0 1 5 1 0 1 3 1 1 4 0 .. 1 .. 3 3 0 2 2 7 4 3 1 .. 1 0 2 3 3 .. 3
75 54 73 71 .. 76 82 68 68 54 61 59 71 .. 68 .. 81 40 .. 66 66 .. .. 75 58 64 65 73 86 62 53 72 80 42 65 56 62 .. .. 46 72 83 63 51 77 81 70 57 73 .. 74 75 58 74 72 .. 87
2010 World Development Indicators
73 47 62 16 .. 70 70 62 45 45 56 74 58 .. 58 .. 83 50 .. 65 35 .. .. .. 56 62 75 77 66 65 36 54 78 61 60 61 47 .. 70 .. 58 69 60 52 85 79 80 47 67 .. 77 77 65 73 61 .. 90
243
4.5
Structure of merchandise imports Merchandise imports
Food
Agricultural raw materials
Fuels
Ores and metals
Manufactures
$ millions
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
% of total 1995 2008
1995
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
2008
10,278 82,707 60,945 291,971 236 1,110 28,091 111,870 1,412 5,702 .. 22,999 133 560 124,507 319,780 8,770 73,321 9,492 36,993 .. .. 99,480 30,546b 113,537 402,302 5,306 14,008 1,218 9,200 1,008 2,200 65,036 166,971 80,152 183,491 4,709 18,320 810 3,270 1,675 6,954 70,786 178,655 .. .. 594 1,540 1,714 9,900 7,902 24,612 35,709 201,960 1,365 4,680 1,056 4,800 15,484 84,032 23,778 158,900 267,250 631,913 770,852 2,165,982 2,867 8,933 2,750 5,260 12,649 49,635 8,155 80,416 .. .. 1,582 9,300 700 5,070 2,660 2,900 5,228,953 t 16,300,527 w 239,464 50,461 965,308 4,547,215 436,271 2,376,905 528,947 2,164,216 1,015,776 4,786,667 366,057 1,762,013 193,383 1,146,612 241,363 896,683 77,167 315,621 60,322 380,660 78,377 296,944 4,212,901 11,522,679 1,644,739 4,599,680
8 18 19 17 25 14 .. 5 9 8 .. 7b 14 16 24 .. 7 6 17 .. 10 4 .. 18 16 13 7 24 16 8 15 10 5 10 .. 14 5 .. 29 10 6 9w 13 8 8 8 8 6 11 8 22 8 12 9 11
7 12 10 13 26 6 .. 3 6 7 .. 5 9 14 7 21 8 6 13 .. 12 5 .. 15 8 10 4 .. 13 7 7 9 4 8 .. 16 6 .. 25 6 11 7w 13 7 7 7 7 6 8 8 12 5 10 7 8
2 1 3 1 2 4 .. 1 3 5 .. 2b 3 2 2 .. 2 2 3 .. 1 4 .. 2 1 4 6 0 3 2 0 2 2 4 .. 4 2 .. 2 2 2 3w 3 4 5 3 3 4 3 2 4 4 2 3 3
1 1 2 1 1 2 .. 0 1 3 .. 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 2 .. 1 2 .. 1 0 2 2 .. 1 1 0 1 1 2 .. 1 3 .. 1 0 1 1w 3 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 2 2 1 1 1
21 3 12 0 30 14 .. 8 13 7 .. 8b 8 6 14 .. 6 3 1 .. 1 7 .. 30 1 7 13 3 2 48 4 4 8 10 .. 1 10 .. 8 13 9 7w 13 7 8 7 7 5 14 5 6 21 10 7 7
Note: Components may not sum to 100 percent because of unclassified trade. a. Includes Luxembourg. b. Refers to the South African Customs Union (Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, South Africa, and Swaziland).
244
2010 World Development Indicators
13 2 7 0 28 17 .. 27 13 13 .. 22 15 23 0 14 15 9 33 .. 30 21 .. 27 35 17 17 .. 19 27 1 13 23 30 .. 1 14 .. 29 16 17 18 w 16 16 21 13 16 17 14 13 14 36 19 18 15
4 2 3 4 1 7 .. 2 6 4 .. 2b 4 1 0 .. 4 3 1 .. 4 3 .. 1 6 3 6 2 2 3 6 3 3 1 .. 4 2 .. 1 2 2 4w 2 3 4 3 3 4 3 2 3 6 2 4 4
3 2 3 5 2 6 .. 2 3 5 .. 3 4 2 0 1 4 5 4 .. 1 5 .. 2 6 6 9 .. 1 4 5 4 3 1 .. 2 4 .. 1 13 6 4w 3 6 8 4 6 9 4 3 2 5 2 4 4
63 45 64 76 42 60 .. 83 70 74 .. 78b 71 75 59 .. 80 85 76 .. 84 81 .. 49 77 73 68 71 78 38 75 80 79 74 .. 77 76 .. 59 72 78 75 w 67 75 72 77 75 78 61 78 66 56 73 76 73
74 79 78 81 42 69 .. 64 77 72 .. 62 70 60 68 63 69 80 48 .. 55 66 .. 55 50 65 60 .. 66 60 73 68 66 59 .. 79 72 .. 45 64 57 67 w 63 67 61 71 67 64 68 74 50 48 64 67 66
About the data
4.5
ECONOMY
Structure of merchandise imports Definitions
Data on imports of goods are derived from the
and free trade zones. Goods transported through a
• Merchandise imports are the c.i.f. value of goods
same sources as data on exports. In principle, world
country en route to another are excluded.
purchased from the rest of the world valued in U.S.
exports and imports should be identical. Similarly,
The data on total imports of goods (merchandise)
dollars. • Food corresponds to the commodities in
exports from an economy should equal the sum of
in the table come from the World Trade Organization
SITC sections 0 (food and live animals), 1 (beverages
imports by the rest of the world from that economy.
(WTO). For further discussion of the WTO’s sources
and tobacco), and 4 (animal and vegetable oils and
But differences in timing and definitions result in dis-
and methodology, see About the data for table 4.4.
fats) and SITC division 22 (oil seeds, oil nuts, and oil
crepancies in reported values at all levels. For further
The import shares by major commodity group are
kernels). • Agricultural raw materials correspond to
discussion of indicators of merchandise trade, see
from the United Nations Statistics Division’s Com-
SITC section 2 (crude materials except fuels), exclud-
About the data for tables 4.4 and 6.2.
modity Trade (Comtrade) database. The values of
ing divisions 22, 27 (crude fertilizers and minerals
The value of imports is generally recorded as the
total imports reported here have not been fully rec-
excluding coal, petroleum, and precious stones), and
cost of the goods when purchased by the importer
onciled with the estimates of imports of goods and
28 (metalliferous ores and scrap). • Fuels correspond
plus the cost of transport and insurance to the fron-
services from the national accounts (shown in table
to SITC section 3 (mineral fuels). • Ores and met-
tier of the importing country—the cost, insurance,
4.8) or those from the balance of payments (table
als correspond to the commodities in SITC divisions
and freight (c.i.f.) value, corresponding to the landed
4.15).
27, 28, and 68 (nonferrous metals). • Manufactures
cost at the point of entry of foreign goods into the
The classification of commodity groups is based
correspond to the commodities in SITC sections 5
country. A few countries, including Australia, Canada,
on the Standard International Trade Classification
(chemicals), 6 (basic manufactures), 7 (machinery
and the United States, collect import data on a free
(SITC) revision 3. Previous editions contained data
and transport equipment), and 8 (miscellaneous
on board (f.o.b.) basis and adjust them for freight and
based on the SITC revision 1. Data for earlier years in
manufactured goods), excluding division 68.
insurance costs. Many countries report trade data in
previous editions may differ because of this change
U.S. dollars. When countries report in local currency,
in methodology. Concordance tables are available to
the United Nations Statistics Division applies the
convert data reported in one system to another.
average official exchange rate to the U.S. dollar for the period shown. Countries may report trade according to the general or special system of trade. Under the general system imports include goods imported for domestic consumption and imports into bonded warehouses and free trade zones. Under the special system imports comprise goods imported for domestic consumption (including transformation and repair) and withdrawals for domestic consumption from bonded warehouses
4.5a
Top 10 developing economy exporters of merchandise goods in 2008 Merchandise exports ($ billions)
1995
2008
1,500
Data sources Data on merchandise imports are from the WTO.
1,200
Data on shares of imports by major commodity group are from Comtrade. The WTO publishes data
900
on world trade in its Annual Report. The International Monetary Fund publishes estimates of total
600
imports of goods in its International Financial Statistics and Direction of Trade Statistics, as does the
300
United Nations Statistics Division in its Monthly Bulletin of Statistics. And the United Nations Con-
0 China
Russian Mexico Federation
Malaysia
Brazil
India
Thailand
Poland
Indonesia
Turkey
ference on Trade and Development publishes data on the structure of imports in its Handbook
China continues to dominate merchandise exports among developing economies. Even when developed
of Statistics. Tariff line records of imports are com-
economies are included, China ranks as the second leading merchandise exporter.
piled in the United Nations Statistics Division’s
Source: World Development Indicators data files and World Trade Organization.
Comtrade database.
2010 World Development Indicators
245
4.6
Structure of service exports Commercial service exports
Transport
$ millions 1995
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
246
.. 94 .. 113 3,676 27 16,076 31,692 166 469 466 33,619 a 159 174 457 236 6,005 1,431 38 4 103 242 25,425 0 23 3,249 18,430 33,790 1,641 .. 61 957 426 2,223 .. 6,638 15,171 1,894 687 8,262 342 49 868 310 7,334 83,108 191 38 188 73,576 139 9,528 628 17 2 98 221
% of total 2008
.. 2,419 .. 329 11,929 636 44,513 61,447 1,454 891 4,221 84,065 281 482 1,658 878 28,822 8,000 .. 3 1,615 1,384 64,795 .. .. 10,645 146,446 92,318 3,967 .. 303 4,055 845 15,160 .. 22,179 72,468 4,866 1,223 24,668 1,483 .. 5,129 1,775 31,784 163,573 120 123 1,157 241,590 1,559 50,377 1,649 99 .. 288 903
2010 World Development Indicators
Travel
Insurance and financial services
% of total
Computer, information, communications, and other commercial services
% of total
% of total
1995
2008
1995
2008
1995
2008
1995
2008
.. 19.1 .. 31.8 27.4 53.4 29.3 11.8 45.9 15.0 64.8 29.4 a 25.8 44.8 3.8 16.2 43.3 34.5 17.3 46.2 30.5 48.3 20.7 34.1 4.5 36.8 18.2 32.5 34.4 .. 52.2 14.0 28.9 31.8 .. 22.0 44.6 2.2 46.8 38.8 28.3 70.4 43.0 76.9 28.1 24.6 46.4 21.7 48.2 27.0 58.7 3.9 8.6 75.3 18.2 5.1 25.6
.. 8.8 .. 4.4 15.6 21.7 17.8 21.9 54.6 12.5 70.9 32.9 4.5 13.1 19.9 9.5 18.8 28.9 .. 27.3 14.8 46.4 18.4 .. .. 59.9 26.2 30.2 31.2 .. 4.0 9.1 28.2 11.8 .. 28.1 .. 7.8 29.9 33.1 23.7 .. 39.3 59.0 11.5 25.1 22.0 16.8 53.1 24.4 15.4 56.2 11.4 11.7 .. .. 5.8
.. 69.3 .. 0.7 60.5 5.2 50.6 42.4 42.3 5.3 5.0 17.4 a 53.2 31.5 54.1 68.5 16.2 33.0 47.8 32.4 51.7 14.8 31.1 33.9 49.8 28.0 47.4 16.8 40.0 .. 22.4 71.2 20.9 60.7 .. 43.4 24.3 82.9 37.1 32.5 25.0 3.1 41.1 5.3 22.4 33.2 9.0 73.4 25.0 24.5 7.9 43.4 33.9 5.1 14.0 91.9 36.3
.. 70.8 .. 86.5 39.0 52.0 56.3 35.2 13.1 10.2 8.6 14.0 73.5 57.0 49.8 58.4 20.1 47.5 .. 40.8 75.6 11.1 23.6 .. .. 16.5 27.9 16.3 46.5 .. 18.0 56.1 13.5 74.4 .. 34.8 .. 85.8 60.7 44.5 60.2 .. 23.6 21.2 10.1 34.4 7.7 67.6 38.6 16.6 58.9 34.6 64.8 1.5 .. 96.7 68.8
.. 1.4 .. 9.2 0.2 6.7 5.4 3.9 0.1 0.1 0.5 14.8 a 6.9 9.8 2.6 7.8 16.9 7.6 .. 0.5 .. 7.2 11.4 19.6 1.7 7.4 10.1 9.2 6.5 .. 0.0 –0.2 12.3 1.3 .. 1.1 .. 0.1 0.0 1.0 7.8 1.0 0.4 1.5 2.0 5.3 3.3 0.3 .. 5.0 3.0 0.3 4.0 1.4 .. 0.6 2.0
.. 3.1 .. .. 0.1 3.0 3.4 4.6 0.3 4.6 0.4 6.3 2.2 12.9 0.9 3.8 7.2 1.2 .. 7.6 0.4 3.6 10.4 .. .. 2.9 1.2 15.2 1.8 .. 31.4 0.3 12.8 0.5 .. 1.3 .. 0.9 0.0 2.0 2.1 .. 2.1 1.3 2.6 1.6 24.1 0.4 2.1 7.3 0.9 1.2 1.7 4.9 .. .. 7.7
.. 10.2 .. 59.0 11.9 41.3 14.8 41.9 11.7 79.6 29.7 38.4 a 14.1 13.9 39.5 7.5 23.6 32.5 34.8 21.0 17.7 29.7 36.8 12.5 43.9 27.8 24.4 41.5 19.1 .. 25.4 14.9 37.9 6.2 .. 33.5 31.0 14.9 16.0 27.8 39.0 26.5 15.5 16.4 47.5 36.9 41.3 4.7 26.9 43.5 30.3 52.4 53.6 18.2 81.8 2.4 36.1
.. 17.3 .. 9.1 45.3 23.3 22.5 38.2 32.0 72.6 20.1 46.7 19.8 17.1 29.4 28.3 54.0 22.4 .. 24.4 9.2 38.8 47.7 .. .. 20.6 44.7 38.3 20.5 .. 46.6 34.4 58.3 13.3 .. 35.8 .. 5.5 9.4 20.4 14.0 .. 35.0 18.4 75.8 38.9 46.2 15.1 6.2 51.8 24.8 8.0 22.2 81.9 .. 3.3 17.8
Commercial service exports
Transport
$ millions 1995
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
5,086 6,763 5,342 533 .. 4,799 7,906 61,173 1,568 63,966 1,689 535 1,183 .. 22,133 .. 1,124 39 68 718 .. 30 .. 20 482 151 219 24 11,438 68 19 773 9,585 143 47 2,020 242 353 301 592 44,646 4,401 94 12 608 13,458 13 1,432 1,298 321 566 1,042 9,323 10,637 8,161 .. ..
Travel
% of total
Insurance and financial services
% of total
4.6
ECONOMY
Structure of service exports
Computer, information, communications, and other commercial services
% of total
% of total
2008
1995
2008
1995
2008
1995
2008
1995
2008
19,910 102,562 14,731 .. 839 101,580 24,061 118,398 2,762 146,440 4,291 3,936 2,520 .. 74,107 .. 10,301 884 278 4,496 18,928 60 182 208 4,767 992 420 .. 30,283 359 .. 2,530 18,474 817 483 12,840 488 256 538 494 102,710 8,997 357 79 1,421 45,595 1,974 2,393 5,756 285 999 3,502 10,195 35,428 26,135 .. ..
8.0 28.0 1.1 25.9 .. 22.2 25.5 17.7 16.0 35.2 24.8 65.7 59.4 .. 41.9 .. 83.6 39.6 22.8 91.9 .. 7.0 .. 62.7 59.6 32.0 29.8 27.6 21.6 32.5 9.1 25.8 12.1 29.5 31.7 20.3 24.8 6.5 .. 9.3 40.4 34.7 17.7 3.3 16.4 63.3 .. 58.0 60.4 10.8 13.3 32.5 2.9 28.6 18.6 .. ..
20.0 11.0 19.0 .. 30.7 4.4 21.5 15.5 17.0 32.0 19.5 56.9 51.0 .. 58.8 .. 37.4 16.6 .. 51.2 2.6 1.1 10.6 56.7 59.6 33.0 28.2 .. 22.3 7.2 .. 17.6 12.5 43.7 44.4 19.5 32.3 50.8 21.4 5.5 30.2 21.9 12.6 14.8 80.7 47.4 23.7 49.6 53.8 10.9 20.4 23.4 13.4 30.9 26.9 .. ..
57.6 38.2 97.9 12.6 .. 46.1 37.9 47.0 68.2 5.0 39.1 22.7 35.7 .. 23.3 .. 10.7 11.9 76.0 2.8 .. 90.9 .. 12.0 16.0 13.6 26.3 72.4 34.7 37.3 57.9 55.6 64.5 39.8 43.6 64.2 .. 42.7 92.4 30.0 14.7 52.7 52.5 57.8 2.8 16.6 .. 7.7 23.8 7.8 24.3 41.1 12.2 21.7 59.2 .. ..
30.3 11.5 50.1 .. 61.5 6.2 16.9 39.0 71.5 7.4 68.6 25.7 29.9 .. 12.2 .. 2.5 58.2 .. 17.9 38.0 56.4 86.9 35.7 28.2 23.0 43.7 .. 50.5 61.5 .. 57.5 71.9 25.9 46.6 56.2 38.9 18.1 71.1 67.7 13.0 57.0 77.3 52.0 15.5 10.2 40.7 10.2 24.5 1.3 11.0 56.8 43.0 33.2 42.0 .. ..
3.2 2.5 .. 8.8 .. 17.9 0.2 6.6 1.1 0.9 0.2 0.0 1.4 .. 0.4 .. 5.7 0.6 0.6 2.4 .. 1.4 .. .. 0.9 3.6 2.2 0.3 0.1 5.1 .. 0.0 6.7 11.6 5.3 1.4 .. 0.0 1.5 .. 1.2 0.1 2.5 0.0 0.6 3.7 .. 1.0 6.1 1.2 5.0 7.2 0.7 8.3 4.5 .. ..
1.5 5.5 2.2 .. 2.3 22.3 0.1 5.2 1.9 4.4 .. 5.0 0.4 .. 5.6 .. 1.2 2.5 .. 6.8 2.0 0.5 .. 2.2 1.2 1.3 0.1 .. 1.5 1.3 .. 2.5 10.9 0.8 2.0 1.2 0.9 .. 3.5 0.1 2.1 1.3 1.2 6.9 1.1 3.3 0.8 5.3 10.0 5.4 2.3 7.8 0.8 2.0 1.9 .. ..
31.3 31.4 2.1 52.7 .. 31.7 36.5 28.8 14.7 58.8 36.1 11.6 3.4 .. 34.5 .. 0.0 48.4 0.6 3.0 .. 0.7 .. 25.3 23.5 50.7 41.6 0.0 43.7 25.2 33.0 18.5 16.7 19.1 19.5 14.2 75.2 50.9 6.2 60.7 43.7 12.6 27.4 38.9 80.2 16.4 .. 33.4 9.6 80.2 57.4 19.3 84.2 41.4 17.7 .. ..
48.2 72.0 28.7 .. 5.6 67.0 61.6 40.3 9.6 56.3 12.0 12.4 18.7 .. 23.4 .. 58.9 22.8 .. 24.1 57.4 42.0 2.5 5.3 11.0 42.6 28.1 .. 25.6 30.0 .. 22.4 4.7 29.6 7.0 23.1 27.9 31.2 4.0 26.6 54.7 19.8 8.9 26.2 2.7 39.1 34.8 34.9 11.7 82.4 66.4 11.9 42.8 33.8 29.2 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
247
4.6
Structure of service exports Commercial service exports
Transport
$ millions 1995
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
248
% of total 2008
1,476 12,818 10,567 50,694 11 326 3,475 9,383 364 1,097 .. 3,985 71 60 25,404 83,049 2,378 8,435 2,016 7,417 .. .. 4,414 12,394 40,019 142,612 800 1,982 82 457 150 447 15,336 71,592 25,179 76,349 1,632 3,562 .. 134 566 2,136 14,652 33,392 .. .. 64 197 331 910 2,401 5,831 14,475 34,519 79 .. 104 696 2,846 17,302 .. .. 77,549 285,123 198,501 518,319 1,309 2,192 .. .. 1,529 2,003 2,243 7,096 265 261 141 1,049 112 297 353 .. 1,211,384 t 3,799,197 t 32,263 9,383 183,323 753,498 85,495 424,953 97,818 330,409 192,169 785,087 62,745 247,458 46,721 195,032 37,663 108,606 .. .. 10,333 109,513 12,142 37,475 1,016,999 3,012,629 422,580 1,225,741
a. Includes Luxembourg.
2010 World Development Indicators
Travel
Insurance and financial services
% of total
Computer, information, communications, and other commercial services
% of total
1995
2008
1995
2008
31.9 35.8 60.6 .. 15.4 .. 13.7 32.7 25.9 25.1 .. 24.2 15.8 41.9 0.9 18.2 32.2 15.1 14.5 .. 0.3 16.8 .. 33.9 58.6 24.9 11.8 79.9 17.9 75.6 .. 20.7 22.7 30.5 .. 38.2 .. 0.3 21.9 64.3 26.4 26.9 w .. 24.8 21.6 27.4 24.9 17.4 37.3 24.0 .. 31.8 26.2 27.5 25.6
30.8 29.6 17.2 26.3 12.3 24.0 33.5 34.8 34.5 28.5 .. 12.6 17.0 50.4 3.8 2.0 17.7 8.5 6.3 35.4 17.1 21.8 .. 53.5 25.2 32.5 22.5 .. 7.4 44.1 .. 14.0 17.5 29.7 .. 36.8 .. 2.1 4.3 35.3 .. 24.3 w .. 24.8 25.6 24.2 24.7 23.1 33.1 19.8 .. 19.9 32.7 24.1 23.6
40.0 40.8 21.9 .. 46.1 .. 80.5 30.0 26.2 53.8 .. 48.2 63.4 28.2 9.7 32.2 22.6 37.6 77.1 .. 88.6 54.8 .. 19.9 23.4 63.7 34.2 9.3 75.1 6.7 .. 26.4 37.7 46.7 .. 55.5 .. 96.2 35.3 25.9 50.6 32.5 w .. 44.1 44.9 43.3 43.8 49.2 32.0 51.3 .. 29.7 31.3 29.3 31.5
15.5 23.6 62.0 63.0 48.4 23.6 56.2 12.7 30.7 38.5 .. 64.2 43.5 17.3 72.4 7.1 17.6 18.9 81.0 3.1 63.4 52.8 .. 17.3 50.9 50.7 63.6 .. 71.6 33.3 .. 12.8 26.0 48.1 .. 45.8 .. 81.3 84.5 49.2 .. 26.3 w .. 41.2 35.0 46.3 41.3 39.4 30.4 53.8 .. 12.5 48.0 22.1 24.1
1995
5.4 0.6 1.1 .. 0.6 .. 0.3 8.5 4.9 0.6 .. 9.9 3.9 3.4 3.7 0.0 2.4 27.8 .. .. 0.0 0.7 .. 1.8 9.2 1.5 1.5 0.9 .. 2.7 .. 17.5 4.2 1.5 .. 0.1 .. .. 0.0 .. 0.3 6.0 w .. 5.8 6.1 5.6 5.7 7.1 2.4 6.9 .. 2.1 5.8 6.1 5.6
% of total 2008
1995
2008
4.1 3.6 1.8 6.1 1.9 1.7 1.7 10.2 2.9 2.1 .. 8.5 5.1 3.5 15.4 6.9 3.9 32.7 2.9 12.9 1.1 1.3 .. 4.8 15.4 2.2 4.6 .. 3.8 3.2 .. 28.8 13.7 4.0 .. 0.1 .. .. 0.0 6.4 .. 7.8 w .. 3.7 1.9 5.1 3.7 1.3 3.3 7.0 .. 5.1 5.2 8.9 5.4
22.7 22.8 17.6 .. 37.9 .. 5.6 28.9 43.0 20.6 .. 17.7 16.9 26.5 85.8 49.6 42.7 19.5 8.4 .. 11.1 27.7 .. 44.3 8.8 9.8 52.4 10.0 7.0 15.0 .. 35.4 35.5 21.3 .. 6.1 .. 3.5 42.8 9.8 22.7 35.3 w .. 27.7 30.9 24.8 28.0 30.6 28.5 17.9 .. 36.4 40.1 37.5 37.6
49.6 43.2 19.0 4.6 37.4 50.7 8.6 42.3 31.8 30.9 .. 14.7 34.5 28.9 8.4 84.0 60.8 39.8 9.8 48.5 18.4 24.1 .. 24.4 8.5 14.6 9.3 .. 17.1 19.4 .. 44.5 42.8 18.3 .. 17.3 .. 16.5 11.2 9.1 .. 41.7 w .. 30.3 37.6 24.4 30.4 36.2 33.2 19.5 .. 62.5 14.9 44.9 46.9
About the data
4.6
ECONOMY
Structure of service exports Definitions
Balance of payments statistics, the main source of
payments statistics is establishment trade—sales
• Commercial service exports are total service
information on international trade in services, have
in the host country by foreign affiliates. By contrast,
exports minus exports of government services not
many weaknesses. Disaggregation of important
cross-border intrafirm transactions in merchandise
included elsewhere. • Transport covers all transport
components may be limited and varies considerably
may be reported as exports or imports in the balance
services (sea, air, land, internal waterway, space,
across countries. There are inconsistencies in the
of payments.
and pipeline) performed by residents of one economy
methods used to report items. And the recording of
The data on exports of services in the table and
for those of another and involving the carriage of
major flows as net items is common (for example,
on imports of services in table 4.7, unlike those in
passengers, movement of goods (freight), rental of
insurance transactions are often recorded as premi-
editions before 2000, include only commercial ser-
carriers with crew, and related support and auxiliary
ums less claims). These factors contribute to a down-
vices and exclude the category “government services
services. Excluded are freight insurance, which is
ward bias in the value of the service trade reported
not included elsewhere.” The data are compiled by
included in insurance services; goods procured in
in the balance of payments.
the IMF based on returns from national sources.
ports by nonresident carriers and repairs of trans-
Efforts are being made to improve the coverage,
Data on total trade in goods and services from the
port equipment, which are included in goods; repairs
quality, and consistency of these data. Eurostat and
IMF’s Balance of Payments database are shown in
of harbors, railway facilities, and airfield facilities,
the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
table 4.15.
which are included in construction services; and
Development, for example, are working together
International transactions in services are defined
rental of carriers without crew, which is included
to improve the collection of statistics on trade in
by the IMF’s Balance of Payments Manual (1993) as
in other services. • Travel covers goods and ser-
services in member countries. In addition, the Inter-
the economic output of intangible commodities that
vices acquired from an economy by travelers in that
national Monetary Fund (IMF) has implemented
may be produced, transferred, and consumed at the
economy for their own use during visits of less than
the new classifi cation of trade in services intro-
same time. Definitions may vary among reporting
one year for business or personal purposes. • Insur-
duced in the fifth edition of its Balance of Payments
economies. Travel services include the goods and
ance and financial services cover freight insurance
Manual (1993).
services consumed by travelers, such as meals,
on goods exported and other direct insurance such
lodging, and transport (within the economy visited),
as life insurance; financial intermediation services
including car rental.
such as commissions, foreign exchange transac-
Still, difficulties in capturing all the dimensions of international trade in services mean that the record is likely to remain incomplete. Cross-border intrafirm
tions, and brokerage services; and auxiliary services
service transactions, which are usually not captured
such as financial market operational and regulatory
in the balance of payments, have increased in recent
services. • Computer, information, communica-
years. An example is transnational corporations’ use
tions, and other commercial services cover such
of mainframe computers around the clock for data
activities as international telecommunications and
processing, exploiting time zone differences between
postal and courier services; computer data; news-
their home country and the host countries of their
related service transactions between residents and
affiliates. Another important dimension of service
nonresidents; construction services; royalties and
trade not captured by conventional balance of
license fees; miscellaneous business, professional, and technical services; and personal, cultural, and
4.6a
Top 10 developing economy exporters of commercial services in 2008 Commercial service exports ($ billions)
1995
recreational services.
2008
150
120
90
60
30
0 China
India
Russian Poland Federation
Turkey
Thailand Malaysia
Brazil
Egypt, Arab. Rep
Mexico
Data sources Data on exports of commercial services are from
The top 10 developing economy exporters of commercial services accounted for almost 64 percent of
the IMF, which publishes balance of payments
developing economy commercial service exports and 13 percent of world commercial service exports.
data in its International Financial Statistics and
Source: International Monetary Fund balance of payments data files.
Balance of Payments Statistics Yearbook.
2010 World Development Indicators
249
4.7
Structure of service imports Commercial service imports
Transport
$ millions 1995
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
250
.. 98 .. 1,665 6,992 52 16,979 27,552 297 1,192 276 32,511a 235 321 262 440 13,161 1,278 116 62 181 485 32,985 114 174 3,524 24,635 24,962 2,813 .. 690 895 1,235 1,373 .. 4,860 13,945 957 1,141 4,511 488 45 420 337 9,418 64,523 832 47 249 128,865 331 4,003 672 252 27 236 326
2010 World Development Indicators
Travel
% of total 2008
.. 2,361 .. 20,020 12,664 952 47,613 42,738 3,826 3,684 2,614 81,978 491 1,018 632 1,348 44,396 6,696 .. 173 959 2,859 86,644 .. .. 11,143 158,004 45,849 7,108 .. 3,523 1,878 2,444 4,517 .. 17,256 62,432 1,757 2,885 16,335 1,972 .. 3,374 2,379 29,257 141,704 1,020 88 1,154 283,196 2,038 24,392 2,125 398 .. 753 1,204
1995
.. 61 .. 18 30 83 37 12 31 65 36 24 a 59 66 51 43 44 42 56 49 46 35 24 44 55 54 39 22 42 .. 19 41 50 28 .. 16 45 61 42 35 55 2 53 63 23 33 18 60 27 18 61 30 41 58 53 78 60
Insurance and financial services
% of total 2008
.. 15 .. 19 31 49 31 32 18 87 50 28 60 42 43 34 23 33 .. 39 64 31 23 .. .. 60 32 33 42 .. 15 36 59 23 .. 26 .. 67 57 45 48 .. 39 68 23 30 31 46 56 23 54 56 54 67 .. 63 60
1995
.. 7 .. 5 47 6 30 40 49 20 32 28 a 15 15 31 33 26 15 20 41 5 22 31 38 15 20 15 54 31 .. 8 36 15 31 .. 34 31 18 21 28 15 7 22 8 24 25 17 30 63 47 6 33 21 8 14 15 18
Computer, information, communications, and other commercial services
% of total 2008
.. 66 .. 1 36 34 39 27 9 5 26 24 15 28 33 36 25 36 .. 52 11 12 32 .. .. 12 23 35 24 .. 5 32 16 25 .. 27 .. 18 19 18 32 .. 24 7 15 31 27 9 18 32 27 16 29 2 .. 8 29
1995
.. 22 .. 3 7 10 7 6 1 6 4 10a 10 9 10 8 10 9 5 6 4 7 11 8 2 4 17 6 12 .. 7 5 11 3 .. 5 .. 10 6 5 11 0 5 7 5 6 9 6 8 2 6 5 9 7 5 2 2
% of total 2008
.. 6 .. 10 4 8 3 4 2 1 3 6 10 13 7 4 6 4 .. 4 5 6 11 .. .. 9 8 8 8 .. 5 9 10 4 .. 6 .. 8 6 10 10 .. 2 4 1 3 7 8 14 4 5 7 10 4 .. 1 4
1995
.. 10 .. 75 16 1 26 43 19 10 29 38a 16 10 8 16 21 43 20 4 45 36 34 10 29 22 29 18 15 .. 67 18 23 38 .. 45 24 11 31 32 19 93 21 22 48 36 57 4 2 33 26 33 29 26 28 6 20
2008
.. 13 .. 70 29 8 27 37 72 6 22 42 15 18 17 26 46 28 .. 5 20 51 34 .. .. 19 37 23 25 .. 75 23 25 49 .. 42 .. 7 18 27 10 .. 35 22 61 37 35 36 12 41 14 20 7 27 .. 27 7
Commercial service imports
Transport
$ millions 1995
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
3,765 10,062 13,230 2,192 .. 11,252 8,131 54,613 1,073 121,547 1,385 776 900 .. 25,394 .. 3,826 193 119 225 .. 58 .. 510 457 300 277 151 14,821 412 197 630 9,021 193 87 1,350 350 233 538 305 43,618 4,571 207 120 4,398 13,052 985 2,431 1,049 642 676 1,781 6,906 7,008 6,339 .. ..
Travel
% of total 2008
18,491 56,053 27,994 .. 4,741 109,290 19,629 127,861 2,304 167,443 3,926 10,794 1,663 .. 91,768 .. 12,149 988 76 3,163 13,392 85 323 3,572 4,133 970 462 .. 30,060 774 .. 1,911 24,701 779 514 5,628 901 547 559 840 91,918 9,553 572 369 12,320 43,928 6,122 9,079 2,550 1,151 563 5,425 8,570 30,035 16,497 .. ..
Insurance and financial services
% of total
4.7
ECONOMY
Structure of service imports
Computer, information, communications, and other commercial services
% of total
% of total
1995
2008
1995
2008
1995
2008
1995
2008
13 57 37 43 .. 16 45 24 46 30 52 38 46 .. 38 .. 39 27 43 68 .. 75 .. 60 64 50 56 67 38 60 62 40 38 52 70 48 33 11 37 36 29 41 39 74 22 38 42 67 71 25 66 51 30 25 27 .. ..
20 24 50 .. 48 3 34 23 48 32 57 22 52 .. 40 .. 35 49 .. 26 14 79 65 42 48 42 48 .. 38 59 .. 34 14 42 50 47 40 46 43 40 25 33 54 74 30 33 42 44 61 24 66 46 50 24 31 .. ..
40 10 16 11 .. 18 26 27 14 30 31 36 21 .. 25 .. 59 3 25 11 .. 23 .. 15 23 9 21 26 16 12 12 25 35 29 22 22 .. 8 17 45 27 28 19 11 21 32 5 18 12 9 20 17 6 6 33 .. ..
22 17 20 .. 13 10 18 24 12 17 26 9 16 .. 19 .. 62 31 .. 36 27 16 9 36 36 14 16 .. 22 18 .. 24 35 35 37 19 23 7 16 45 24 31 25 8 29 36 14 17 14 5 22 20 26 33 26 .. ..
5 6 3 10 .. 1 3 10 9 2 6 2 10 .. 2 .. 2 4 4 7 .. 0 .. .. 1 21 4 0 .. 1 1 5 12 9 2 4 2 1 9 3 3 5 3 3 3 6 5 4 9 3 12 10 2 14 9 .. ..
3 8 4 .. 24 15 2 4 10 5 9 5 7 .. 2 .. 2 2 .. 5 2 .. 3 7 2 3 1 .. 3 4 .. 6 50 3 4 3 1 .. 4 4 3 3 10 3 2 2 7 4 16 10 9 9 4 5 4 .. ..
43 28 43 36 .. 65 26 39 31 38 11 25 22 .. 36 .. 0 65 28 14 .. 2 .. 25 12 21 20 7 47 27 25 30 14 10 8 26 65 81 37 16 41 26 38 12 54 24 49 10 9 63 1 22 63 55 31 .. ..
56 50 27 .. 14 73 46 49 30 46 9 63 25 .. 39 .. 1 18 .. 33 57 5 23 16 13 41 35 .. 36 19 .. 37 1 20 10 31 35 47 37 12 48 32 11 15 39 28 37 35 9 61 3 25 20 39 39 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
251
4.7
Structure of service imports Commercial service imports
Transport
$ millions 1995
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
252
% of total 2008
1,801 11,776 20,205 74,572 58 504 8,670 48,926 405 1,205 .. 4,223 79 117 20,728 78,967 1,800 9,084 1,429 4,944 .. .. 5,756 16,515 22,354 104,263 1,169 2,967 150 2,552 206 494 17,112 54,280 14,899 36,277 1,358 2,917 .. 453 729 1,576 18,629 46,314 .. .. 148 303 223 320 1,245 3,226 4,654 16,228 403 .. 563 1,219 1,334 15,777 .. .. 62,524 196,896 129,227 364,928 814 1,365 .. .. 4,654 10,073 2,304 7,931 349 638 604 2,289 282 881 645 .. 1,219,124 t 3,440,367 t 43,441 13,458 222,345 807,544 108,492 441,066 113,681 366,143 235,415 850,688 82,593 285,803 42,554 202,447 52,171 139,670 19,565 65,951 15,377 73,655 24,584 91,672 983,235 2,596,070 421,722 1,114,691
a. Includes Luxembourg.
2010 World Development Indicators
Travel
1995
34 16 73 25 57 .. 17 45 17 31 .. 40 31 58 27 16 28 35 57 .. 30 42 .. 71 42 45 30 40 38 34 .. 27 32 46 .. 31 .. 28 36 79 56 31 w .. 39 42 37 39 38 29 41 45 59 40 29 25
Insurance and financial services
% of total 2008
34 17 56 32 50 30 47 38 27 25 .. 46 25 66 51 12 17 23 58 40 42 50 .. 71 54 58 46 .. 72 42 .. 18 29 51 .. 48 .. 12 48 58 .. 29 w .. 34 39 30 35 38 33 27 47 38 45 27 26
1995
39 57 17 .. 18 .. 63 22 18 40 .. 32 20 16 29 21 32 50 37 .. 49 23 .. 12 31 20 20 18 14 16 .. 40 36 29 .. 37 .. 46 12 9 19 31 w .. 23 16 28 23 16 26 31 21 13 24 33 32
Computer, information, communications, and other commercial services
% of total 2008
18 33 14 31 21 30 21 18 24 27 .. 27 20 14 47 10 28 30 22 2 46 11 .. 6 29 14 22 .. 13 25 .. 35 23 26 .. 18 .. 57 8 7 .. 25 w .. 25 21 28 25 21 28 29 20 16 24 26 26
1995
5 0 1 3 7 .. 4 10 5 2 .. 14 7 5 0 4 1 1 6 .. 3 5 .. 4 8 6 8 7 4 7 .. 4 6 5 .. 3 .. 3 7 0 3 6w .. 10 10 9 10 12 7 10 .. 5 9 5 5
% of total 2008
4 4 0 7 9 3 10 6 11 3 .. 4 7 6 1 12 2 8 9 11 4 5 .. 11 0 8 15 .. 8 10 .. 8 17 4 .. 6 .. 2 9 11 .. 9w .. 13 7 18 13 6 7 28 11 7 5 8 4
1995
22 26 10 72 18 .. 16 23 60 27 .. 14 41 21 44 59 38 14 6 .. 18 30 .. 12 19 28 42 35 43 43 .. 29 26 20 .. 30 .. 25 45 12 23 32 w .. 29 32 27 29 37 38 17 28 23 28 33 38
2008
43 45 29 30 21 37 22 39 38 45 .. 23 49 13 2 66 52 38 11 47 8 34 .. 12 17 20 17 .. 8 22 .. 38 31 19 .. 28 .. 29 34 24 .. 37 w .. 28 33 24 28 34 32 15 22 39 27 39 43
About the data
4.7
ECONOMY
Structure of service imports Definitions
Trade in services differs from trade in goods because
• Commercial service imports are total service
services are produced and consumed at the same
imports minus imports of government services not
time. Thus services to a traveler may be consumed
included elsewhere. • Transport covers all transport
in the producing country (for example, use of a hotel
services (sea, air, land, internal waterway, space,
room) but are classified as imports of the traveler’s
and pipeline) performed by residents of one economy
country. In other cases services may be supplied
for those of another and involving the carriage of
from a remote location; for example, insurance
passengers, movement of goods (freight), rental of
services may be supplied from one location and
carriers with crew, and related support and auxiliary
consumed in another. For further discussion of the
services. Excluded are freight insurance, which is
problems of measuring trade in services, see About
included in insurance services; goods procured in
the data for table 4.6.
ports by nonresident carriers and repairs of trans-
The data on imports of services in the table and on
port equipment, which are included in goods; repairs
exports of services in table 4.6, unlike those in edi-
of harbors, railway facilities, and airfield facilities,
tions before 2000, include only commercial services
which are included in construction services; and
and exclude the category “government services not
rental of carriers without crew, which is included
included elsewhere.” The data are compiled by the
in other services. • Travel covers goods and ser-
International Monetary Fund (IMF) based on returns
vices acquired from an economy by travelers in that
from national sources.
economy for their own use during visits of less than
International transactions in services are defined
one year for business or personal purposes. • Insur-
by the IMF’s Balance of Payments Manual (1993) as
ance and financial services cover freight insurance
the economic output of intangible commodities that
on goods imported and other direct insurance such
may be produced, transferred, and consumed at the
as life insurance; financial intermediation services
same time. Definitions may vary among reporting
such as commissions, foreign exchange transac-
economies.
tions, and brokerage services; and auxiliary services
Travel services include the goods and services
such as financial market operational and regulatory
consumed by travelers, such as meals, lodging, and
services. • Computer, information, communica-
transport (within the economy visited), including car
tions, and other commercial services cover such
rental.
activities as international telecommunications, and postal and courier services; computer data; newsrelated service transactions between residents and nonresidents; construction services; royalties and license fees; miscellaneous business, professional,
4.7a
The mix of commercial service imports by developing economies is changing
and technical services; and personal, cultural, and recreational services.
1995 ($235 million)
Other 28%
Insurance and financial 10%
Transport 39%
2008 ($850 million)
Other 28%
Transport 35%
Travel 23% Insurance and financial 13% Travel 25%
Data sources Between 1995 and 2008 developing economies’ commercial service imports more than tripled. Insur-
Data on imports of commercial services are from
ance and financial services and travel services are displacing transport and other services as the most
the IMF, which publishes balance of payments
important services imported.
data in its International Financial Statistics and
Source: International Monetary Fund balance of payments data files.
Balance of Payments Statistics Yearbook.
2010 World Development Indicators
253
4.8 Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
254
Structure of demand Household final consumption expenditure
General government final consumption expenditure
Gross capital formation
Exports of goods and services
Imports of goods and services
Gross savings
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
.. 12 26 82 10 24 18 35 28 11 50 68 20 23 20 51 7 45 14 13 31 24 37 20 22 29 23 143 15 28 65 38 42 33 13 51 38 36 26 23 22 22 68 10 36 23 59 49 26 24 24 17 19 21 12 9 44
.. 35 29 68 10 62 20 36 42 17 54 63 33 27 71 38 9 46 27 27 47 18 34 28 34 27 21 148 21 24 64 40 34 41 16 55 33 39 28 28 38 83 76 16 29 22 36 73 42 23 33 27 25 25 35 29 48
.. 87 55 .. 69 109 59 56 77 83 59 54 82 76 .. 34 62 71 63 89 95 72 57 79 91 61 42 62 65 81 49 71 66 66 71 51 51 81 68 74 87 94 54 80 52 57 41 90 102 58 76 75 86 74 95 .. 64
98 86 29 .. 59 73 55 53 24 79 54 54 .. 62 87 40 61 68 75 91 83 72 55 94 68 59 34 60 63 80 39 70 74 59 .. 50 49 87 61 72 98 86 55 90 53 57 33 78 85 56 77 71 88 81 81 .. 83
2010 World Development Indicators
.. 14 17 .. 13 11 18 20 13 5 21 22 11 14 .. 29 21 15 25 19 6 9 21 15 7 10 14 8 15 5 13 14 11 25 24 21 25 5 13 11 9 44 26 8 23 24 12 14 11 20 12 15 6 8 6 .. 9
10 9 13 .. 13 12 18 18 11 5 17 23 .. 13 21 20 20 16 22 29 3 9 19 7 12 12 14 8 16 11 13 14 9 19 .. 20 27 8 11 11 9 31 19 10 22 23 8 16 14 18 20 17 9 9 14 .. 16
.. 21 31 35 18 18 24 25 24 19 25 20 20 15 20 25 18 16 24 6 15 13 19 14 13 26 42 34 26 9 37 18 16 16 7 33 20 18 22 20 20 23 28 18 18 19 23 20 4 22 20 19 15 21 22 26 32
28 32 34 12 23 41 29 23 20 24 36 24 21 18 24 32 19 38 18 16 21 18 23 12 15 25 44 20 25 24 21 26 10 31 .. 25 22 18 28 22 15 11 30 20 21 22 24 25 30 19 36 21 18 15 25 26 34
17 31 48 76 24 15 21 59 69 20 62 92 15 45 37 46 14 60 12 11 65 30 35 11 54 45 37 212 18 23 79 46 47 42 .. 77 55 26 38 33 28 6 76 12 44 26 67 30 29 47 42 23 25 33 30 11 49
53 59 24 51 21 40 23 54 25 29 69 93 29 38 69 39 14 83 27 47 73 29 33 23 50 41 28 202 22 39 51 55 39 50 .. 73 52 39 38 39 50 34 80 31 40 29 32 49 58 41 75 32 40 38 50 37 82
.. 20 .. 78 16 –9 23 22 13 22 21 24 11 11 .. 36 16 12 29 6 5 14 18 11 12 25 43 .. 19 .. –2 15 12 11 .. 29 22 16 17 21 18 19 24 21 22 19 33 8 1 20 18 18 11 21 10 .. 27
.. 19 .. 20 25 29 29 27 56 37 28 22 9 29 42 45 17 14 .. 4 16 20 24 .. .. 22 54 30 19 .. 14 16 12 21 .. 22 25 9 31 24 8 .. 20 17 24 19 .. 10 8 26 7 10 14 3 .. .. 21
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
4.8
ECONOMY
Structure of demand Household final consumption expenditure
General government final consumption expenditure
Gross capital formation
Exports of goods and services
Imports of goods and services
Gross savings
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
45 11 26 22 .. 76 29 26 51 9 52 39 33 .. 29 .. 52 29 23 43 11 22 9 29 49 33 24 30 94 21 37 59 30 49 48 27 16 1 49 25 59 29 19 17 44 38 44 17 101 61 59 13 36 23 29 72 44
45 12 28 13 .. 65 37 22 61 8 73 44 39 .. 30 .. 42 42 37 45 62 117 72 22 60 43 32 48 98 36 45 61 28 58 49 34 41 2 56 35 54 28 35 24 42 32 36 19 98 44 71 18 44 21 35 97 43
66 64 62 46 .. 54 56 58 70 55 65 68 70 .. 52 .. 43 75 .. 63 103 105 .. 59 67 70 90 79 48 83 77 63 67 57 56 68 90 .. 54 75 49 58 83 86 .. 50 51 72 52 44 76 71 74 60 65 .. 32
67 54 63 45 .. 47 58 59 82 56 81 35 78 .. 55 97 28 104 66 58 84 108 202 23 66 79 85 63 46 76 61 74 66 93 61 60 82 .. 74 79 46 58 90 .. .. 39 35 77 65 58 75 64 77 60 67 .. 21
11 11 8 16 .. 16 28 18 11 15 24 14 15 .. 11 .. 32 20 .. 24 12 27 .. 22 22 19 7 21 12 10 11 14 10 27 13 17 8 .. 30 9 24 17 11 14 .. 22 25 12 15 17 10 10 11 20 18 .. 32
9 12 8 11 .. 16 25 20 14 18 25 10 17 .. 15 18 13 9 8 20 14 27 19 9 18 19 5 13 12 11 20 13 10 21 15 17 12 .. 20 10 25 19 12 .. .. 19 18 12 11 10 11 9 10 19 21 .. 21
23 27 32 29 .. 18 25 20 29 28 33 23 22 .. 38 .. 15 18 .. 14 36 63 .. 12 22 21 11 17 44 23 20 26 20 25 32 21 27 14 22 25 21 23 22 7 .. 22 15 19 30 22 26 25 22 19 23 .. 35
22 40 28 33 .. 26 18 21 .. 24 26 34 19 .. 31 27 19 24 37 35 31 28 20 28 27 28 36 27 22 23 26 27 26 37 39 36 19 .. 26 32 21 24 32 .. .. 23 31 22 23 19 20 26 15 24 22 .. 32
81 23 30 32 .. 79 40 29 .. 18 58 57 27 .. 53 14 66 57 33 42 27 47 31 67 59 53 27 23 110 27 58 53 28 41 57 37 33 .. 42 12 77 29 33 .. 42 48 56 13 75 72 53 27 37 40 33 .. 64
80 28 29 22 .. 69 42 29 .. 16 91 37 41 .. 54 57 26 94 44 55 57 111 173 27 71 79 52 26 90 37 65 68 30 92 72 50 46 .. 61 33 69 30 67 .. 25 29 40 24 74 60 59 26 39 43 42 .. 38
19 27 28 37 .. 23 13 22 25 30 29 18 23 .. 36 .. 38 8 .. 14 .. 30 .. .. 12 13 2 8 34 15 14 25 19 18 35 17 9 .. 32 21 27 18 –1 –1 .. 26 10 21 30 35 18 16 19 20 23 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
15 38 20 .. .. 22 19 18 14 29 14 40 13 .. 31 .. 63 15 22 22 10 22 –2 67 15 16 .. .. 38 28 .. 17 25 23 46 31 7 .. 17 38 26 16 14 .. .. 42 36 20 26 .. 16 22 34 18 10 .. ..
255
4.8
Structure of demand
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzaniaa Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Household final consumption expenditure
General government final consumption expenditure
Gross capital formation
Exports of goods and services
Imports of goods and services
Gross savings
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
68 52 97 47 80 73 88 41 52 60 .. 63 60 73 85 82 50 60 66 62 86 55 .. 77 53 63 68 44 85 55 48 63 68 73 51 69 74 98 71 72 65 61 w 77 60 54 64 60 47 61 66 63 67 69 61 57
64 48 82 27 82 78 86 39 56 52 .. 60 57 70 59 74 46 58 75 114 73 56 .. .. 45 63 70 55 82 64 44 64 71 69 49 54 69 .. .. 66 .. 61 w 76 55 49 60 56 42 59 63 55 60 66 62 57
a. Covers mainland Tanzania only.
256
2010 World Development Indicators
14 19 10 24 13 23 14 8 22 19 .. 18 18 11 5 15 27 12 13 16 12 10 .. 12 12 16 11 12 11 21 16 20 15 12 22 7 8 18 14 15 18 17 w 11 14 13 15 14 13 17 15 15 10 15 17 20
16 17 10 20 10 21 12 11 17 18 .. 20 19 16 16 21 26 11 12 8 16 12 .. 9 11 15 13 8 12 17 10 22 16 12 18 11 6 .. .. 9 .. 17 w 10 14 13 15 14 13 16 15 13 11 17 18 20
24 25 13 20 14 12 6 34 24 24 .. 18 22 26 14 16 17 23 27 29 20 42 .. 16 21 25 25 49 12 27 30 17 18 15 27 18 27 35 22 16 20 22 w 20 27 34 21 27 40 23 19 25 25 18 21 21
31 26 24 21 30 23 15 31 29 31 .. 23 30 27 24 17 20 22 14 20 17 29 .. .. 13 27 22 6 24 25 21 17 18 23 23 25 41 .. .. 22 .. 22 w 27 30 37 24 30 40 25 23 28 36 23 21 22
28 29 5 38 31 17 19 .. 58 50 .. 23 22 36 5 60 40 36 31 66 24 42 .. 32 54 45 20 84 12 47 69 28 11 19 28 27 33 16 51 36 38 21 w 22 23 24 23 23 29 28 18 26 12 28 21 29
30 31 15 69 25 30 16 234 83 70 .. 35 26 25 24 69 54 56 31 17 22 77 .. 42 73 61 24 81 16 42 91 29 12 28 42 30 78 .. .. 37 .. 28 w 34 31 35 28 31 40 34 24 38 21 36 27 41
33 26 26 28 37 24 26 .. 56 52 .. 22 22 46 10 74 33 31 38 72 42 49 .. 37 39 49 24 84 21 50 63 28 12 19 28 22 42 68 58 40 41 21 w 30 24 24 24 24 29 29 19 29 15 30 20 28
40 22 31 38 47 52 29 215 85 71 .. 38 32 38 23 81 47 47 32 58 27 74 .. 62 42 65 28 51 33 48 67 32 17 32 32 20 95 .. .. 34 .. 28 w 47 30 34 27 31 35 35 24 33 28 39 28 39
19 28 20 20 8 .. –3 52 41 23 .. 17 22 20 3 16 20 30 27 .. 7 34 .. 17 27 20 22 50 13 23 .. 15 15 14 .. 21 20 12 26 9 18 20 w 17 26 33 20 26 39 23 18 .. 25 16 19 15
25 32 27 49 19 7 5 46 –16 27 .. 16 20 18 14 19 28 36 20 25 13 29 .. .. 38 21 18 .. 12 20 .. 15 14 18 .. 35 29 .. .. 19 .. 21 w .. 31 41 23 31 48 24 22 .. 35 16 19 16
About the data
4.8
ECONOMY
Structure of demand Definitions
Gross domestic product (GDP) from the expenditure
capital outlays on defense establishments that may
• Household final consumption expenditure is the
side is made up of household final consumption
be used by the general public, such as schools, air-
market value of all goods and services, including
expenditure, general government final consumption
fields, and hospitals, and intangibles such as com-
durable products (such as cars and computers),
expenditure, gross capital formation (private and
puter software and mineral exploration outlays. Data
purchased by households. It excludes purchases
public investment in fixed assets, changes in inven-
on capital formation may be estimated from direct
of dwellings but includes imputed rent for owner-
tories, and net acquisitions of valuables), and net
surveys of enterprises and administrative records
occupied dwellings. It also includes government fees
exports (exports minus imports) of goods and ser-
or based on the commodity flow method using data
for permits and licenses. Expenditures of nonprofit
vices. Such expenditures are recorded in purchaser
from production, trade, and construction activities.
institutions serving households are included, even
prices and include net taxes on products.
The quality of data on government fixed capital forma-
when reported separately. Household consumption
Because policymakers have tended to focus on
tion depends on the quality of government account-
expenditure may include any statistical discrepancy
fostering the growth of output, and because data on
ing systems (which tend to be weak in developing
in the use of resources relative to the supply of
production are easier to collect than data on spend-
countries). Measures of fixed capital formation by
resources. • General government final consump-
ing, many countries generate their primary estimate
households and corporations—particularly capital
tion expenditure is all government current expendi-
of GDP using the production approach. Moreover,
outlays by small, unincorporated enterprises—are
tures for purchases of goods and services (including
many countries do not estimate all the components
usually unreliable.
compensation of employees). It also includes most
of national expenditures but instead derive some
Estimates of changes in inventories are rarely
expenditures on national defense and security but
of the main aggregates indirectly using GDP (based
complete but usually include the most important
excludes military expenditures with potentially wider
on the production approach) as the control total.
activities or commodities. In some countries these
public use that are part of government capital forma-
Household final consumption expenditure (private
estimates are derived as a composite residual along
tion. • Gross capital formation is outlays on addi-
consumption in the 1968 United Nations System of
with household fi nal consumption expenditure.
tions to fixed assets of the economy, net changes in
National Accounts, or SNA) is often estimated as
According to national accounts conventions, adjust-
inventories, and net acquisitions of valuables. Fixed
a residual, by subtracting all other known expendi-
ments should be made for appreciation of the value
assets include land improvements (fences, ditches,
tures from GDP. The resulting aggregate may incor-
of inventory holdings due to price changes, but this
drains); plant, machinery, and equipment purchases;
porate fairly large discrepancies. When household
is not always done. In highly inflationary economies
and construction (roads, railways, schools, buildings,
consumption is calculated separately, many of the
this element can be substantial.
and so on). Inventories are goods held to meet tem-
estimates are based on household surveys, which
Data on exports and imports are compiled from
porary or unexpected fluctuations in production or
tend to be one-year studies with limited coverage.
customs reports and balance of payments data.
sales, and “work in progress.” • Exports and imports
Thus the estimates quickly become outdated and
Although the data from the payments side provide
of goods and services are the value of all goods
must be supplemented by estimates using price- and
reasonably reliable records of cross-border transac-
and other market services provided to or received
quantity-based statistical procedures. Complicating
tions, they may not adhere strictly to the appropriate
from the rest of the world. They include the value of
the issue, in many developing countries the distinc-
definitions of valuation and timing used in the bal-
merchandise, freight, insurance, transport, travel,
tion between cash outlays for personal business
ance of payments or correspond to the change-of-
royalties, license fees, and other services (com-
and those for household use may be blurred. World
ownership criterion. This issue has assumed greater
munication, construction, financial, information,
Development Indicators includes in household con-
significance with the increasing globalization of inter-
business, personal, government services, and so
sumption the expenditures of nonprofit institutions
national business. Neither customs nor balance of
on). They exclude compensation of employees and
serving households.
payments data usually capture the illegal transac-
investment income (factor services in the 1968 SNA)
General government final consumption expenditure
tions that occur in many countries. Goods carried
and transfer payments. • Gross savings are gross
(general government consumption in the 1968 SNA)
by travelers across borders in legal but unreported
national income less total consumption, plus net
includes expenditures on goods and services for
shuttle trade may further distort trade statistics.
transfers.
individual consumption as well as those on services
Gross savings represent the difference between
for collective consumption. Defense expenditures,
disposable income and consumption and replace
including those on capital outlays (with certain excep-
gross domestic savings, a concept used by the World
tions), are treated as current spending.
Bank and included in World Development Indicators Data sources
Gross capital formation (gross domestic investment
editions before 2006. The change was made to con-
in the 1968 SNA) consists of outlays on additions
form to SNA concepts and definitions. For further
Data on national accounts indicators for most
to the economy’s fixed assets plus net changes in
discussion of the problems in compiling national
developing countries are collected from national
the level of inventories. It is generally obtained from
accounts, see Srinivasan (1994), Heston (1994),
statistical organizations and central banks by vis-
industry reports of acquisitions and distinguishes only
and Ruggles (1994). For an analysis of the reliability
iting and resident World Bank missions. Data for
the broad categories of capital formation. The 1993
of foreign trade and national income statistics, see
high-income economies are from Organisation for
SNA recognizes a third category of capital forma-
Morgenstern (1963).
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
tion: net acquisitions of valuables. Included in gross
data files.
capital formation under the 1993 SNA guidelines are
2010 World Development Indicators
257
4.9
Growth of consumption and investment Household final consumption expenditure
General government final consumption expenditure
Gross capital formation
Goods and services
average annual % growth average annual average annual Total Per capita Exports Imports % growth % growth 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 average annual % growth
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland Francea Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
258
.. 1.3 –0.1 .. 2.8 –0.5 3.2 1.7 2.0 2.6 –0.5 1.8 2.6 3.6 .. 2.5 3.7 –3.7 5.7 –4.9 6.0 3.1 2.6 .. 1.5 7.3 8.9 3.8 2.2 –4.5 –1.8 5.1 4.1 2.3 .. 3.0 2.2 6.1 2.1 3.7 5.3 –5.0 0.7 3.6 1.7 1.6 –0.3 3.6 6.1 1.9 4.7 2.1 4.2 5.2 2.6 .. 3.0
.. 5.3 5.2 .. 4.6 8.8 3.9 1.7 14.5 4.3 11.5 1.3 2.3 3.4 1.9 7.7 3.3 6.3 4.5 .. 8.9 4.5 3.5 –0.9 9.2 5.7 7.1 3.4 4.5 .. .. 4.1 .. 4.8 .. 3.8 2.7 6.6 5.7 4.2 3.8 1.6 8.8 9.7 3.3 2.3 5.1 1.8 9.5 0.2 .. 3.9 3.9 4.0 3.9 .. 6.1
2010 World Development Indicators
.. 2.2 –1.9 .. 1.5 1.1 2.0 1.3 1.0 0.6 –0.3 1.5 –0.7 1.4 .. 0.1 2.2 –3.0 2.8 .. 3.4 0.5 1.6 .. –1.7 5.6 7.8 2.0 0.4 –3.8 .. 2.5 0.9 3.0 .. 3.0 1.8 4.2 0.3 1.7 4.1 –6.6 2.2 0.4 1.4 1.2 –3.1 –0.2 7.6 1.6 .. 1.4 1.8 2.0 0.2 .. 0.6
.. 4.9 3.7 .. 3.6 8.7 2.4 1.1 13.4 2.6 12.0 0.8 –1.1 1.5 .. 6.3 2.0 7.0 1.1 .. 7.1 2.1 2.5 –2.7 5.4 4.5 6.5 2.9 2.9 .. .. 2.3 .. 4.8 .. 3.6 2.3 5.0 4.5 2.2 3.4 –2.2 9.1 6.9 3.0 1.6 3.0 –1.5 10.9 0.2 .. 3.6 1.4 1.9 1.4 .. 4.0
.. 14.5 3.6 .. 2.2 –1.5 2.9 2.7 –4.8 4.7 –1.9 1.4 4.4 3.6 .. 6.5 1.0 –8.4 2.9 –2.6 7.2 0.7 0.3 .. –8.3 3.7 9.7 3.7 10.5 –17.4 –4.4 2.0 0.8 1.5 .. –0.9 2.4 7.0 –1.5 4.4 2.8 22.6 5.6 9.0 0.6 1.4 3.7 –2.2 12.0 1.9 4.8 2.1 5.1 –0.5 1.9 .. 2.0
.. 8.0 5.3 .. 3.0 11.3 3.2 1.3 24.2 9.4 0.1 1.6 8.3 3.4 7.0 3.6 3.3 3.1 8.7 .. 1.9 2.8 2.7 –1.3 5.8 5.1 8.2 1.0 4.3 .. .. 1.6 3.1 1.7 .. 2.2 1.5 5.0 3.9 2.6 1.4 1.2 2.1 2.2 1.6 1.6 0.7 4.2 8.8 0.7 –6.0 2.5 1.6 –0.3 –1.9 .. 6.1
.. 25.8 –0.6 .. 7.4 –1.9 5.1 2.3 41.6 9.2 –7.5 2.3 12.2 8.5 .. 6.7 4.2 –5.0 3.1 –0.5 10.3 0.4 4.6 .. 4.0 9.3 11.7 4.8 2.0 –0.7 10.4 5.1 8.1 4.9 .. 4.6 5.7 11.7 –0.6 5.8 7.1 19.1 0.5 6.5 2.2 1.8 3.0 1.9 –12.5 1.1 4.3 4.1 6.1 0.1 –6.5 9.0 6.9
.. 6.4 8.4 .. 12.0 23.4 7.6 1.8 23.6 8.2 19.2 4.4 7.7 2.6 8.9 –2.6 4.0 17.2 9.0 .. 13.5 3.9 6.6 –0.1 19.7 9.6 12.1 2.2 13.4 .. .. 8.6 1.0 10.7 .. 4.5 3.2 1.7 8.1 7.4 2.3 –1.0 12.0 10.0 4.2 2.8 5.9 .. 17.2 0.6 19.3 4.1 3.2 –3.7 –0.1 1.1 7.2
.. 18.9 3.2 .. 8.7 –18.4 7.7 5.8 5.7 13.1 –4.8 4.7 1.8 4.5 .. 4.7 5.9 3.9 4.4 –1.2 21.7 3.2 8.7 .. 2.3 9.4 12.9 7.8 5.3 –0.5 3.0 10.9 1.9 6.3 .. 8.7 5.0 8.3 5.3 3.5 13.4 –2.5 11.0 7.1 10.3 6.9 2.1 0.1 12.2 6.0 10.1 7.6 6.1 0.3 15.4 10.1 1.6
.. 10.4 2.9 .. 7.2 9.6 2.2 6.1 23.8 12.0 6.9 3.3 2.7 9.3 9.8 4.0 8.6 8.8 10.9 .. 16.9 0.4 0.9 –3.6 52.0 6.4 18.9 9.7 5.8 7.0 .. 7.5 3.0 5.5 .. 11.8 4.1 2.0 7.1 18.1 5.1 –6.3 8.3 11.2 5.3 2.3 –2.0 0.6 6.9 7.2 5.9 4.5 2.5 1.9 2.6 3.7 6.5
.. 15.7 –1.0 .. 15.6 –12.7 7.6 4.8 14.1 9.7 –8.7 4.5 2.1 6.0 .. 3.8 11.6 2.7 1.9 –1.6 14.8 5.1 7.1 .. –1.8 11.7 14.3 8.4 9.0 –2.4 2.0 9.2 8.2 4.9 .. 12.0 6.0 9.9 2.8 3.0 11.6 7.5 12.0 5.8 6.5 5.7 0.1 0.1 11.2 5.8 10.4 7.4 9.2 –1.1 –0.4 19.4 3.8
.. 15.1 7.5 .. 10.0 10.8 9.2 5.4 22.2 9.5 11.9 3.4 1.8 6.5 8.0 4.6 8.0 12.1 7.2 .. 15.4 4.2 4.4 –3.9 27.0 12.0 13.7 8.6 11.2 18.9 .. 6.6 3.9 7.5 .. 10.4 6.4 2.9 9.8 15.5 5.3 –3.7 10.9 16.1 5.9 4.2 3.9 1.1 9.4 5.6 8.5 3.1 3.1 –0.8 –0.6 1.5 7.9
Household final consumption expenditure
General government final consumption expenditure
Gross capital formation
4.9
ECONOMY
Growth of consumption and investment
Goods and services
average annual % growth average annual average annual Total Per capita Exports Imports % growth % growth 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 average annual % growth
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldovab Mongolia Moroccoc Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
–0.1 4.8 6.6 3.2 .. 5.5 5.0 1.5 .. 1.5 4.9 –8.1 3.6 .. 4.9 .. 4.5 –5.0 .. –3.9 –0.2 1.8 .. .. 5.2 2.2 2.2 5.4 5.3 3.0 .. 5.1 3.9 9.9 .. 1.8 5.8 .. 4.8 .. 3.1 3.3 6.1 1.8 .. 3.5 5.4 4.9 6.4 2.5 2.6 4.0 3.7 5.2 3.0 .. ..
3.8 5.9 4.2 7.4 .. 5.0 3.4 0.8 .. 1.2 6.8 10.4 4.2 .. 3.5 .. 5.9 11.8 –7.8 10.0 2.5 13.7 .. .. 10.0 5.1 3.8 3.6 7.5 0.9 7.4 5.7 3.7 9.4 .. 4.9 7.6 .. 5.8 .. 0.9 4.5 3.6 .. .. 4.0 1.3 4.6 7.1 0.4 3.0 5.1 5.1 3.7 1.6 .. ..
0.1 2.9 5.0 1.6 .. 4.7 2.5 1.5 .. 1.3 1.1 –7.0 0.6 .. 3.9 .. 0.6 –5.9 .. –2.7 –1.9 0.2 .. .. 5.9 1.7 –0.8 3.2 2.6 1.0 .. 3.9 2.2 11.7 .. 0.3 2.6 .. 2.3 .. 2.4 2.0 3.9 .. .. 2.9 2.6 2.3 4.2 –0.2 0.3 2.2 1.5 5.1 2.7 .. ..
4.1 4.4 2.8 5.8 .. 3.0 1.5 0.1 .. 1.1 4.1 9.6 1.5 .. 3.1 .. 2.9 10.8 –9.4 10.6 1.1 12.6 .. .. 10.6 4.9 1.0 0.7 5.6 –1.5 4.5 4.8 2.7 9.7 .. 3.7 4.9 .. 3.8 .. 0.5 3.1 2.3 .. .. 3.3 –0.4 2.2 5.2 –2.2 1.0 3.7 3.1 3.8 1.1 .. ..
0.9 6.6 0.1 1.6 .. 4.0 2.7 –0.2 .. 2.9 4.7 –7.1 6.9 .. 4.7 .. –2.4 –7.2 .. 1.8 10.9 7.2 .. .. 1.9 –0.4 0.0 –4.4 4.8 3.2 .. 3.6 1.8 –12.4 .. 3.9 3.2 .. 3.3 .. 2.0 2.4 –1.5 0.8 .. 2.7 2.4 0.7 1.7 2.5 2.5 5.2 3.8 3.7 2.9 .. ..
1.3 5.0 7.8 3.6 .. 4.5 1.4 1.7 .. 1.9 6.6 8.1 2.6 .. 4.8 .. 6.6 3.4 9.7 2.8 2.4 1.4 .. .. 4.1 –0.2 8.3 5.6 8.4 .. 3.1 3.9 0.4 6.7 .. 3.3 –7.0 .. 3.3 .. 3.0 4.0 2.7 .. .. 2.2 6.1 10.2 4.4 1.1 3.0 4.6 2.6 4.2 1.3 .. ..
9.6 6.9 –0.6 –0.1 .. 10.0 2.0 1.6 .. –0.8 0.3 –18.3 6.1 .. 3.4 .. 1.0 –1.1 .. –3.7 –5.8 –1.5 .. .. 11.1 3.6 3.3 –8.4 5.3 0.4 .. 4.8 4.7 –15.5 .. 2.5 8.6 .. 7.3 .. 4.4 6.1 11.3 4.0 .. 6.0 4.0 1.8 10.4 1.9 0.7 7.4 4.1 10.6 5.8 .. ..
1.3 15.0 6.0 8.3 .. 6.2 2.3 1.4 .. 0.4 11.0 21.0 8.5 .. 3.4 .. 13.7 2.9 15.2 16.4 8.5 –2.1 .. .. 14.2 4.8 19.3 24.5 2.7 6.2 23.8 6.1 1.4 11.9 .. 9.1 3.3 .. 8.8 .. 1.5 6.5 2.2 .. .. 6.7 17.0 6.7 8.3 –1.1 3.5 10.9 1.3 6.4 –1.3 .. ..
9.9 12.3 5.9 1.2 .. 15.7 10.9 5.9 .. 4.1 2.6 –2.6 1.0 .. 16.0 .. –1.6 –0.3 .. 4.3 18.6 9.7 .. .. 4.9 4.2 3.8 4.0 12.0 9.9 –1.3 5.6 14.6 1.0 .. 5.9 13.1 .. 3.8 .. 7.3 5.2 9.3 3.1 .. 5.5 6.2 1.7 –0.4 5.1 3.1 8.5 7.8 11.3 5.3 1.6 ..
11.2 15.2 8.7 5.0 .. 5.2 5.9 1.7 .. 8.0 7.0 6.9 7.0 .. 11.4 .. 5.4 14.2 –7.6 8.8 11.1 11.5 .. .. 11.7 3.3 5.3 –9.6 6.8 6.3 11.5 2.2 5.7 11.2 .. 7.1 16.5 .. 7.6 .. 4.8 3.1 8.8 .. .. 1.0 7.0 8.6 6.8 6.3 8.0 8.6 6.6 10.2 4.0 .. ..
11.4 14.4 5.7 –6.8 .. 14.5 7.6 4.4 .. 4.2 1.5 –11.2 9.4 .. 10.0 .. 0.8 –2.0 .. 7.6 –1.1 2.1 .. .. 7.5 7.5 4.1 –1.1 10.3 3.5 0.6 5.1 12.3 5.9 .. 5.1 7.6 .. 5.4 .. 7.6 6.2 12.2 –2.1 .. 5.8 5.9 2.5 1.2 3.4 2.9 9.0 7.8 16.7 7.3 4.5 ..
2010 World Development Indicators
10.0 19.5 10.0 13.2 .. 4.9 3.8 2.4 .. 4.2 8.0 8.6 8.4 .. 9.4 .. 9.4 20.6 –7.2 12.1 6.3 13.7 .. .. 14.5 4.6 8.3 1.0 7.8 3.9 14.1 2.6 6.3 13.8 .. 8.8 6.7 .. 8.6 .. 4.5 7.2 5.5 .. .. 5.7 12.8 9.0 7.2 6.3 6.6 10.1 3.7 9.4 3.2 .. ..
259
4.9
Growth of consumption and investment Household final consumption expenditure
General government final consumption expenditure
Gross capital formation
Goods and services
average annual % growth average annual average annual Total Per capita Exports Imports % growth % growth 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 average annual % growth
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzaniad Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
1.3 –0.9 0.4 .. 2.6 .. –4.4 .. 6.0 3.9 .. 2.9 2.4 .. 3.7 7.3 1.4 1.1 3.0 –11.8 4.9 3.7 .. 5.0 0.7 4.3 3.8 .. 6.7 –6.9 7.1 3.0 3.7 5.0 .. 0.6 5.4 5.3 3.2 2.4 0.0 3.0 w 3.7 4.1 5.6 3.0 4.0 7.4 1.3 3.6 2.8 4.6 3.1 2.8 1.9
6.7 10.5 .. 5.5 5.3 5.4 .. .. 5.2 3.0 .. 5.5 3.4 .. 5.9 2.2 2.2 1.4 7.6 11.9 2.8 4.5 .. 0.5 13.3 5.0 6.0 .. 7.9 13.8 12.9 2.6 3.0 2.7 .. 9.0 7.9 –1.5 .. 0.2 –3.8 3.0 w 4.7 5.6 6.2 5.1 5.6 6.5 7.5 4.2 5.3 5.5 5.3 2.4 1.5
1.7 –0.7 .. .. –0.2 .. .. .. 5.8 4.0 .. 0.6 2.0 .. 1.1 4.9 1.0 0.5 0.3 –13.1 1.9 2.7 .. 2.0 0.1 2.6 2.1 .. 3.3 –6.4 1.2 2.7 2.4 4.3 .. –1.5 3.9 1.1 –0.7 –0.5 –1.7 1.6 w 1.3 2.6 4.0 1.9 2.4 6.1 1.1 2.0 0.7 2.6 0.4 2.0 1.6
7.2 11.0 .. 3.1 2.6 5.7 .. .. 5.1 2.8 .. 4.3 1.8 .. 3.7 1.3 1.7 0.7 4.7 10.5 0.1 3.5 .. –2.1 12.9 4.1 4.6 .. 4.5 14.7 7.5 2.1 2.0 2.6 .. 7.1 6.5 –4.9 .. –2.1 –3.8 1.8 w 2.5 4.4 4.9 4.3 4.2 5.7 7.4 2.9 3.4 3.9 2.7 1.7 0.9
0.8 –2.2 –2.6 .. 0.9 .. 10.4 .. 1.8 2.2 .. 0.3 2.7 10.5 5.5 7.1 0.6 0.5 2.0 –15.7 –7.0 5.1 .. 0.0 0.3 4.1 4.6 .. 7.1 –4.1 6.8 1.0 0.7 2.3 .. 3.7 3.2 12.7 1.7 –8.1 –2.2 1.7 w 0.2 3.5 6.4 1.7 3.4 8.1 0.2 2.1 3.5 5.9 0.5 1.5 1.5
5.0 2.1 .. 7.6 0.5 2.7 .. .. 3.2 3.2 .. 5.2 5.1 .. 8.4 3.2 0.8 1.0 8.0 1.5 16.9 5.2 .. 1.3 4.3 4.3 3.7 .. 3.9 2.9 0.8 2.6 2.3 0.3 .. 7.0 7.6 1.3 .. 25.2 –3.0 2.6 w 5.8 5.0 6.9 3.4 5.0 7.8 3.5 3.0 3.6 5.7 5.0 2.2 1.8
–5.1 –19.1 0.4 .. 3.5 .. –5.6 .. 7.7 10.4 .. 5.0 3.2 6.9 22.0 –4.7 1.8 0.7 3.3 –17.6 –1.6 –4.0 .. –0.1 12.5 3.6 4.7 .. 8.9 –18.5 5.5 4.7 7.5 6.1 –2.5 11.0 19.8 9.2 11.4 3.9 –2.5 3.3 w 6.5 2.9 6.1 –0.1 3.0 8.3 –8.5 5.4 1.2 6.5 4.5 3.3 2.1
12.3 12.3 .. 11.4 9.9 15.8 .. .. 7.5 7.2 .. 9.3 4.9 .. 12.5 –1.1 4.8 1.1 0.4 8.6 7.3 7.0 .. 5.9 4.2 2.1 10.1 –16.9 12.1 9.6 5.5 3.3 2.1 5.6 8.3 12.4 12.7 –3.0 .. 6.8 –10.6 4.1 w 9.9 9.7 11.3 7.4 9.7 11.0 10.9 5.7 7.5 13.8 8.5 2.3 2.3
8.1 0.8 –6.4 .. 4.1 .. –11.2 .. 9.6 1.7 .. 5.6 10.5 7.5 11.6 6.4 8.5 4.1 12.0 –5.3 9.3 9.5 .. 1.2 6.9 5.1 11.1 –2.4 14.7 –3.6 5.5 6.5 7.3 6.0 2.5 1.0 19.2 8.7 16.6 6.7 10.5 6.9 w 9.4 7.3 8.1 6.8 7.4 10.9 2.7 8.5 4.0 10.0 5.0 6.8 6.8
10.8 8.2 .. 6.9 4.0 12.1 .. .. 11.2 9.2 .. 4.0 3.8 .. 14.3 7.0 5.8 4.9 6.6 8.8 12.0 7.0 .. 6.0 5.8 4.3 7.2 21.5 12.4 3.2 12.2 3.8 4.4 7.9 8.2 –1.1 12.1 –3.1 .. 21.7 –7.5 6.8 w 10.3 10.4 14.0 6.8 10.4 13.8 8.6 6.0 7.7 14.0 4.3 5.1 4.7
6.0 –6.1 6.1 .. 2.0 .. –0.2 .. 12.4 5.2 .. 7.1 9.4 8.6 8.4 6.2 6.3 4.3 4.4 –6.0 3.9 4.5 .. 1.1 9.9 3.8 10.8 7.2 10.0 –6.6 6.4 6.8 9.8 9.9 –0.4 8.2 19.5 7.5 8.3 15.5 9.4 7.0 w 8.2 6.6 6.9 6.4 6.6 10.2 0.1 10.8 0.0 11.2 6.0 7.1 6.2
15.8 19.7 .. 16.9 7.9 12.8 .. .. 9.8 8.8 .. 10.0 6.6 .. 12.0 5.7 5.1 4.2 12.1 10.0 5.7 7.7 .. 3.1 9.5 3.0 11.1 13.3 11.4 8.0 13.6 4.7 5.2 6.3 10.4 15.3 14.4 –2.3 .. 15.6 –3.3 6.6 w 10.9 11.0 12.2 10.1 11.0 11.0 13.6 7.9 10.6 17.5 8.7 5.3 4.7
a. Includes the French overseas departments of French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, and Réunion. b. Excludes Transnistria. c. Includes Former Spanish Sahara. d. Covers mainland Tanzania only.
260
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
4.9
ECONOMY
Growth of consumption and investment Definitions
Measures of growth in consumption and capital for-
the change in government employment. Neither
• Household final consumption expenditure is the
mation are subject to two kinds of inaccuracy. The
technique captures improvements in productivity
market value of all goods and services, including
first stems from the difficulty of measuring expendi-
or changes in the quality of government services.
durable products (such as cars and computers),
tures at current price levels, as described in About
Deflators for household consumption are usually cal-
purchased by households. It excludes purchases of
the data for table 4.8. The second arises in deflat-
culated on the basis of the consumer price index.
dwellings but includes imputed rent for owner-occu-
ing current price data to measure volume growth,
Many countries estimate household consumption
pied dwellings. It also includes government fees for
where results depend on the relevance and reliability
as a residual that includes statistical discrepancies
permits and licenses. Expenditures of nonprofit insti-
of the price indexes and weights used. Measuring
associated with the estimation of other expenditure
tutions serving households are included, even when
price changes is more difficult for investment goods
items, including changes in inventories; thus these
reported separately. Household consumption expen-
than for consumption goods because of the one-time
estimates lack detailed breakdowns of household
diture may include any statistical discrepancy in the
nature of many investments and because the rate
consumption expenditures.
use of resources relative to the supply of resources.
of technological progress in capital goods makes
• Household fi nal consumption expenditure per
capturing change in quality diffi cult. (An example
capita is household final consumption expenditure
is computers—prices have fallen as quality has
divided by midyear population. • General government
improved.) Several countries estimate capital forma-
final consumption expenditure is all government cur-
tion from the supply side, identifying capital goods
rent expenditures for goods and services (including
entering an economy directly from detailed produc-
compensation of employees). It also includes most
tion and international trade statistics. This means
expenditures on national defense and security but
that the price indexes used in deflating production
excludes military expenditures with potentially wider
and international trade, reflecting delivered or offered
public use that are part of government capital forma-
prices, will determine the deflator for capital forma-
tion. • Gross capital formation is outlays on addi-
tion expenditures on the demand side.
tions to fixed assets of the economy, net changes in
Growth rates of household final consumption expen-
inventories, and net acquisitions of valuables. Fixed
diture, household final consumption expenditure per
assets include land improvements (fences, ditches,
capita, general government final consumption expen-
drains); plant, machinery, and equipment purchases;
diture, gross capital formation, and exports and
and construction (roads, railways, schools, buildings,
imports of goods and services are estimated using
and so on). Inventories are goods held to meet tem-
constant price data. (Consumption, capital forma-
porary or unexpected fluctuations in production or
tion, and exports and imports of goods and services
sales, and “work in progress.” • Exports and imports
as shares of GDP are shown in table 4.8.)
of goods and services are the value of all goods
To obtain government consumption in constant
and other market services provided to or received
prices, countries may defl ate current values by
from the rest of the world. They include the value of
applying a wage (price) index or extrapolate from
merchandise, freight, insurance, transport, travel, royalties, license fees, and other services (commu-
4.9a
GDP per capita is still lagging in some regions
nication, construction, financial, information, business, personal, government services, and so on).
GDP per capita (2000 $) 5,000
They exclude compensation of employees and invest-
Latin America & Caribbean
ment income (factor services in the 1968 System of
4,000
National Accounts) and transfer payments. Europe & Central Asia
3,000 Middle East & North Africa
2,000
Data sources
East Asia & Pacific
1,000
South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa
0 1990
1995
2000
2005
Data on national accounts indicators for most developing countries are collected from national
2008
statistical organizations and central banks by vis-
Although GDP per capita more than tripled in East Asia and Pacific between 1990 and 2008, it is still
iting and resident World Bank missions. Data for
less than GDP per capita in Latin America and Caribbean, Europe and Central Asia, and Middle East
high-income economies are from Organisation for
and North Africa.
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
Source: World Development Indicators data files.
data files.
2010 World Development Indicators
261
4.10
Central government finances Revenuea
Expense
Cash surplus or deficit
Net incurrence of liabilities
Debt and interest payments
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
Domestic 1995 2008
1995
2008
Total debt % of GDP 2008
.. 21.2 .. .. .. .. .. 36.6 18.0 .. 30.0 41.5 .. .. .. 40.5 .. 35.5 .. 19.3 .. 11.8 20.3 .. .. .. 5.4 .. .. 5.3 .. .. .. 36.7 .. 33.2 39.1 .. 30.9 34.8 .. .. .. .. 40.6 43.3 .. 23.7 12.2 29.9 17.0 35.1 8.4 11.2 .. .. ..
.. 25.6 .. .. .. .. .. 42.5 19.8 .. 28.7 45.6 .. .. .. 30.3 .. 39.4 .. 23.6 .. 10.6 24.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. 8.2 .. .. .. 36.1 .. 32.6 38.2 .. 26.3 28.1 .. .. .. .. 49.9 47.6 .. .. 15.4 38.6 .. 42.6 7.6 12.1 .. .. ..
.. –8.9 .. .. .. .. .. –5.5 –3.1 .. –2.7 –3.9 .. .. .. 4.9 .. –5.1 .. –4.7 .. 0.2 –4.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. –1.1 .. –0.9 1.5 .. 0.1 3.4 .. .. .. .. –7.5 –4.1 .. .. –4.3 –8.3 .. –9.1 –0.5 –4.3 .. .. ..
.. 7.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.2 2.5 .. .. .. 0.2 .. 7.4 .. 3.1 .. –0.3 4.9 .. .. .. 1.6 .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. –2.3 .. –0.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 8.9 .. .. .. 2.2 .. .. .. .. –0.1 .. .. ..
.. 2.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.4 –0.5 .. .. .. –0.4 .. –0.8 .. 4.0 .. 0.3 0.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.2 .. –0.8 .. 0.7 .. –0.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.2 .. .. .. 2.4 .. .. .. 0.4 4.5 .. .. ..
1.9 .. 0.0 .. .. 1.2 .. .. 0.2 1.1 2.3 6.5 2.4 –0.1 0.6 .. –0.2 –1.4 2.8 .. 2.1 .. 0.2 .. .. –0.4 –0.1 .. 1.5 .. .. .. .. –0.5 .. 0.8 .. 0.6 .. 1.3 –0.8 .. .. .. –0.8 .. .. .. 5.3 0.1 2.3 .. 0.3 .. .. .. 2.6
9.6 .. .. .. .. .. 19.4 64.5 .. .. 10.7 88.0 .. .. .. .. 60.9 .. .. .. .. .. 45.2 .. .. .. .. .. 54.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. 26.6 24.1 .. .. .. 39.4 .. 4.1 .. 37.3 66.6 .. .. 27.0 40.8 .. 114.1 20.1 .. .. .. ..
% of GDP
Afghanistanb Albaniab Algeriab Angola Argentina Armeniab Australia Austria Azerbaijanb Bangladeshb Belarusb Belgium Beninb Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswanab Brazilb Bulgariab Burkina Faso Burundib Cambodia Cameroonb Canadab Central African Republicb Chad Chile Chinab Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep.b Congo, Rep. Costa Ricab Côte d’Ivoireb Croatiab Cuba Czech Republicb Denmark Dominican Republicb Ecuador b Egypt, Arab Rep.b El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopiab Finland France Gabon Gambia, Theb Georgiab Germany Ghanab Greece Guatemalab Guineab Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
262
7.6 .. 48.5 .. .. 22.4 25.4 37.4 27.3 11.0 39.2 41.2 18.6 23.3 39.1 .. 24.7 36.4 13.6 .. 9.8 .. 19.6 .. .. 26.0 10.3 .. 23.5 .. 39.9 25.3 18.9 35.9 .. 31.4 40.6 17.6 .. 27.7 19.9 .. 31.9 .. 38.7 41.8 .. .. 25.7 28.5 25.8 39.0 11.9 .. .. .. 22.3
2010 World Development Indicators
23.0 .. 23.9 .. .. 20.7 23.6 38.4 15.5 10.9 34.2 42.5 14.9 21.8 38.9 .. 25.0 30.9 12.8 .. 8.6 .. 17.8 .. .. 19.7 11.4 .. 23.7 .. 24.8 22.5 17.9 34.7 .. 34.1 36.5 14.8 .. 30.4 18.5 .. 26.8 .. 33.8 44.4 .. .. 29.1 29.0 29.5 41.8 11.7 .. .. .. 21.6
–2.2 .. 9.5 .. .. –0.5 1.5 –0.7 0.4 –1.0 2.4 –1.1 –0.3 1.2 –1.5 .. –1.3 3.2 –4.2 .. –1.7 .. 1.6 .. .. 4.8 –1.4 .. –2.1 .. 9.6 –0.8 –0.3 –1.1 .. –1.5 4.8 0.3 .. –6.4 0.3 .. 3.1 .. 5.5 –2.3 .. .. –1.9 –0.4 –7.7 –3.7 –1.6 .. .. .. –0.2
0.2 .. 1.2 .. .. 0.7 .. .. 0.0 4.1 1.3 1.0 –2.6 –0.2 1.0 .. 4.6 –0.5 0.5 .. –0.3 .. –0.9 .. .. –0.3 1.2 .. –2.0 .. .. .. –0.1 0.6 .. 1.5 .. –0.4 .. 8.5 –0.7 .. .. .. –0.4 .. .. .. –0.3 0.2 5.1 .. 0.6 .. .. .. –1.2
Foreign
Interest % of revenue 2008
0.1 .. 1.2 .. .. 1.3 3.5 6.5 0.3 21.8 1.4 8.5 1.7 8.0 1.2 .. 15.2 2.3 2.0 .. 1.5 .. 6.1 .. .. 1.9 4.3 .. 29.4 .. 6.5 8.6 8.4 4.8 .. 3.6 4.5 6.8 .. 16.5 9.8 .. 0.2 .. 3.2 5.9 .. .. 2.2 6.0 9.6 11.1 11.2 .. .. .. 2.5
Revenuea
Expense
Cash surplus or deficit
Net incurrence of liabilities
Debt and interest payments
% of GDP
Hungary Indiab Indonesiab Iran, Islamic Rep.b Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaicab Japan Jordanb Kazakhstanb Kenyab Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep.b Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republicb Lao PDR Latviab Lebanon Lesotho b Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysiab Mali Mauritania Mauritiusb Mexico b Moldovab Mongolia Morocco b Mozambique Myanmar Namibiab Nepalb Netherlands New Zealand Nicaraguab Niger Nigeria Norway Omanb Pakistanb Panamab Papua New Guineab Paraguayb Perub Philippinesb Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
43.0 12.3 17.7 24.2 .. 33.6 .. 40.4 .. 20.7 .. 14.0 21.6 .. 17.8 .. 36.8 16.7 .. 25.8 .. 52.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. 24.4 .. .. 20.5 15.3 28.4 19.0 .. .. 6.4 31.7 10.5 41.5 .. 12.8 .. .. .. 27.8 17.2 26.1 22.7 .. 17.4 17.7 .. 33.3 .. ..
53.2 14.4 9.7 15.8 .. 37.5 .. 48.0 .. .. .. 18.7 25.8 .. 14.3 .. 46.4 25.6 .. 28.3 .. 36.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 17.2 .. .. 18.9 15.0 38.4 13.8 .. .. .. 35.7 .. 50.8 .. 14.2 .. .. .. 32.4 19.1 22.0 24.5 .. 17.4 15.9 .. 38.9 .. ..
40.7 15.0 .. 34.8 .. 33.1 36.8 37.5 29.1 .. 32.9 13.4 19.5 .. 24.6 .. 47.4 20.5 13.0 26.0 21.5 65.3 .. .. 28.7 34.0 11.9 .. .. 16.2 .. 21.7 .. 34.4 32.1 36.0 .. .. 29.1 12.3 40.8 37.1 18.4 13.6 .. 51.2 .. 13.4 .. .. 21.3 19.6 15.8 32.0 39.2 .. 45.5
45.0 16.2 .. 20.6 .. 32.0 40.7 40.1 33.2 .. 36.6 14.8 21.5 .. 18.6 .. 24.0 17.0 10.3 29.4 30.4 51.2 .. .. 31.4 31.3 11.2 .. .. 15.2 .. 19.3 .. 32.8 26.3 30.1 .. .. 24.0 15.1 40.3 32.9 19.6 11.8 .. 30.7 .. 18.6 .. .. 16.7 16.5 17.0 35.3 42.9 .. 17.8
% of GDP 1995 2008
–9.1 –2.2 3.0 1.1 .. –2.2 .. –7.5 .. .. .. –1.8 –5.1 .. 2.4 .. –13.6 –10.8 .. –2.7 .. 5.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.4 .. .. –1.2 –0.6 –6.3 2.9 .. .. .. –5.0 .. –9.2 .. 0.6 .. .. .. –8.9 –5.3 1.5 –0.5 .. –1.3 –0.8 .. –5.1 .. ..
–3.9 –1.6 .. 7.9 .. 0.4 –1.9 –2.5 –5.1 .. –1.1 4.3 –4.1 .. 4.3 .. 23.4 0.0 –2.9 –2.6 –10.0 5.7 .. .. –3.1 –0.8 –2.7 .. .. –5.6 .. 0.6 .. –0.4 –3.5 2.9 .. .. 2.0 –1.0 0.3 3.2 –1.1 –0.9 .. 19.9 .. –7.4 .. .. 3.4 2.0 –1.3 –3.7 –2.7 .. 12.5
Domestic 1995 2008
1995
2008
17.0 5.1 –0.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1.5 .. 0.8 3.9 .. –0.3 .. .. .. .. 2.4 .. 0.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.9 .. 3.0 1.6 .. .. .. .. 0.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. –0.1 .. .. 1.5 .. .. –0.5 .. –1.4 .. ..
0.2 0.0 –0.4 0.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.8 –1.3 .. –0.1 .. .. .. .. 1.5 .. 6.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. –0.8 .. .. –0.5 5.5 2.7 1.3 .. .. .. .. 2.5 .. .. 3.4 .. .. .. 0.0 .. .. –0.7 .. 3.9 –0.7 .. 4.3 .. ..
6.1 0.1 .. 0.0 .. .. .. .. 6.3 .. –11.6 0.0 0.1 .. –0.1 .. .. 0.3 3.6 4.7 –0.1 1.5 .. .. –0.1 0.2 2.2 .. .. 3.5 .. –0.1 .. 0.0 0.7 0.3 .. .. –0.1 0.1 .. 2.8 .. 2.4 .. –10.7 .. .. .. .. –0.5 –1.0 0.2 –0.9 4.6 .. ..
2.3 2.1 .. 1.4 .. .. .. .. –0.8 .. 13.5 1.9 –0.7 .. –2.4 .. .. 0.1 0.1 5.0 17.1 –0.4 .. .. 1.1 –0.6 0.7 .. .. –1.0 .. 2.0 .. –0.5 –0.4 –0.7 .. .. –0.8 1.5 .. –1.7 .. –1.9 .. 1.9 .. .. .. .. –0.6 0.1 1.5 5.0 –0.9 .. ..
4.10
Foreign
Total debt % of GDP 2008
Interest % of revenue 2008
73.8 57.6 .. .. .. 27.2 .. 106.3 112.9 .. 115.1 6.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 22.8 .. .. .. .. 18.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. 36.1 .. 18.5 46.9 .. .. .. .. 43.7 43.4 38.9 .. .. .. 44.9 .. .. .. .. .. 24.3 .. 44.8 76.0 .. ..
9.7 23.3 .. 0.8 .. 2.8 9.0 12.8 39.1 .. 6.7 1.9 11.3 .. 5.6 .. 0.0 3.3 3.1 1.3 50.1 1.3 .. .. 2.0 1.9 7.0 .. .. 1.7 .. 13.7 .. 3.2 1.0 3.6 .. .. 6.3 5.3 4.4 3.4 5.4 1.8 .. 1.6 .. 34.8 .. .. 2.9 7.7 24.1 7.0 7.2 .. 1.5
2010 World Development Indicators
263
ECONOMY
Central government finances
4.10
Central government finances Revenuea
Expense
Cash surplus or deficit
Net incurrence of liabilities
Debt and interest payments
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
% of GDP 1995 2008
Domestic 1995 2008
1995
2008
Total debt % of GDP 2008
.. .. 10.6 .. 15.2 .. 9.4 26.7 .. 35.8 .. .. 32.0 20.4 7.2 .. 35.0 22.6 22.9 9.3 .. .. .. .. 27.2 30.0 .. .. 10.6 .. 10.1 35.2 .. 27.6 .. 16.9 .. .. 17.3 20.0 26.7 .. w .. .. 11.4 .. .. 8.4 .. .. .. 13.1 .. .. 34.8
.. .. 15.0 .. .. .. .. 12.4 .. 34.3 .. .. 37.1 26.0 6.8 .. 44.1 25.7 .. 11.4 .. .. .. .. 25.3 28.4 .. .. .. .. 9.3 40.4 .. 27.1 .. 18.5 .. .. 19.1 21.4 32.1 .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 15.3 .. .. 42.3
.. .. –5.6 .. .. .. .. 19.8 .. –0.1 .. .. –5.8 –7.6 –0.4 .. –9.3 –0.6 .. –3.3 .. .. .. .. –0.1 –2.4 .. .. .. .. 0.5 –5.5 .. –1.2 .. –2.3 .. .. –3.9 –3.1 –5.4 .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. –2.7 .. .. –7.4
.. .. 2.9 .. .. .. 0.3 10.3 .. –0.4 .. .. .. 5.2 0.3 .. .. –0.5 .. 0.1 .. .. .. .. 2.8 0.9 .. .. .. .. .. –0.3 .. 7.9 .. 1.1 .. .. .. 28.0 –1.4 .. m .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 3.8 .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. 0.3 .. .. .. 3.2 .. .. –1.2 .. .. 2.3 .. .. .. .. 2.6 2.9 .. .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. 1.1 .. 0.1 .. .. .. 16.2 1.6 .. m .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1.1 .. .. ..
0.9 0.2 .. .. .. –0.1 .. .. 0.0 –0.1 .. –0.1 .. 2.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. –0.5 .. –0.2 0.5 0.3 0.4 .. 1.7 0.4 .. .. 5.0 –1.3 .. 3.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. m .. 0.2 .. 0.0 .. .. 0.3 –0.2 0.1 0.6 .. .. ..
.. 6.4 .. .. .. .. .. 102.6 36.5 .. .. .. 33.8 85.0 .. .. 47.3 23.6 .. .. .. 24.0 .. .. .. 48.2 44.5 .. 28.9 .. .. 57.5 53.8 54.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. m .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 61.3 .. 43.4 51.7
% of GDP
Romania Russian Federation Rwandab Saudi Arabia Senegalb Serbiab Sierra Leoneb Singaporeb Slovak Republic Sloveniab Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lankab Sudanb Swazilandb Sweden Switzerlandb Syrian Arab Republicb Tajikistanb Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togob Trinidad and Tobagob Tunisiab Turkey b Turkmenistan Ugandab Ukraineb United Arab Emiratesb United Kingdom United States Uruguay b Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB b Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep.b Zambiab Zimbabweb World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
30.9 33.4 .. .. .. 37.6 .. 21.7 28.9 38.1 .. 30.7 24.5 15.8 .. .. .. 18.3 .. .. .. 20.1 .. 17.0 30.3 32.5 22.6 .. 13.2 35.7 .. 38.4 17.3 25.0 .. 28.3 .. .. .. 17.6 .. 27.4 w .. 20.2 15.2 .. 20.0 11.6 29.6 .. 32.2 14.4 .. 27.9 38.1
33.8 21.3 .. .. .. 37.4 .. 15.4 30.8 37.4 .. 30.9 26.3 20.0 .. .. .. 17.6 .. .. .. 18.2 .. 15.1 24.4 30.4 22.8 .. 15.2 37.2 .. 42.8 22.7 24.2 .. 25.1 .. .. .. 22.9 .. 28.1 w .. 19.7 15.6 .. 19.6 12.2 26.7 .. 24.9 16.1 .. 28.9 39.0
–4.6 5.6 .. .. .. –1.6 .. 8.1 –2.2 –0.2 .. –0.4 –2.0 –6.5 .. .. .. 1.1 .. .. .. 0.5 .. 0.3 0.7 –0.7 –1.9 .. –1.5 –1.5 .. –4.7 –5.4 –0.9 .. 2.2 .. .. .. –0.8 .. –0.9 w .. –0.6 –1.5 .. –0.6 –1.1 0.3 .. 1.7 –2.2 .. –1.0 –0.9
a. Excludes grants. b. Data were reported on a cash basis and have been adjusted to the accrual framework.
264
2010 World Development Indicators
2.4 0.2 .. .. .. –0.8 .. 7.9 1.2 –0.5 .. 1.6 .. 4.2 .. .. .. –1.1 .. .. .. 1.1 .. 1.8 –0.8 –1.3 1.7 .. 2.1 3.1 .. .. 4.1 1.4 .. 1.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. m .. 0.9 .. 1.2 .. .. 0.9 0.9 4.8 1.8 .. .. ..
Foreign
Interest % of revenue 2008
2.0 1.1 .. .. .. 1.4 .. 0.1 4.1 2.8 .. 7.8 4.8 30.7 .. .. .. 4.4 .. .. .. 4.9 .. 4.3 6.5 7.0 24.2 .. 7.9 1.3 .. 5.8 11.6 10.9 .. 10.4 .. .. .. 7.2 .. 5.6 m .. 3.6 4.3 2.3 5.8 .. 1.9 9.2 6.7 21.8 .. 4.8 6.5
About the data
4.10
Definitions
Tables 4.10–4.12 present an overview of the size
borrowing for temporary periods can also be used.
• Revenue is cash receipts from taxes, social con-
and role of central governments relative to national
Government excludes public corporations and quasi
tributions, and other revenues such as fines, fees,
economies. The tables are based on the concepts
corporations (such as the central bank).
rent, and income from property or sales. Grants, usu-
and recommendations of the second edition of the
Units of government at many levels meet this defini-
ally considered revenue, are excluded. • Expense is
International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Government
tion, from local administrative units to the national
cash payments for government operating activities in
Finance Statistics Manual 2001. Before 2005 World
government, but inadequate statistical coverage pre-
providing goods and services. It includes compensa-
Development Indicators reported data derived on the
cludes presenting subnational data. Although data
tion of employees, interest and subsidies, grants,
basis of the 1986 manual’s cash-based method. The
for general government under the 2001 manual are
social benefi ts, and other expenses such as rent
2001 manual, harmonized with the 1993 United
available for a few countries, only data for the cen-
and dividends. • Cash surplus or deficit is revenue
Nations System of National Accounts, recommends
tral government are shown to minimize disparities.
(including grants) minus expense, minus net acquisi-
an accrual accounting method, focusing on all eco-
Still, different accounting concepts of central govern-
tion of nonfinancial assets. In editions before 2005
nomic events affecting assets, liabilities, revenues,
ment make cross-country comparisons potentially
nonfinancial assets were included under revenue
and expenses, not only those represented by cash
misleading.
and expenditure in gross terms. This cash surplus
transactions. It takes all stocks into account, so
Central government can refer to consolidated or bud-
or deficit is close to the earlier overall budget balance
that stock data at the end of an accounting period
getary accounting. For most countries central govern-
(still missing is lending minus repayments, which are
equal stock data at the beginning of the period plus
ment finance data have been consolidated into one
included as a financing item under net acquisition
flows over the period. The 1986 manual considered
account, but for others only budgetary central gov-
of financial assets). • Net incurrence of liabilities
only the debt stock data. Further, the new manual no
ernment accounts are available. Countries reporting
is domestic financing (obtained from residents) and
longer distinguishes between current and capital rev-
budgetary data are noted in Primary data documenta-
foreign financing (obtained from nonresidents), or
enue or expenditures, and it introduces the concepts
tion. Because budgetary accounts may not include
the means by which a government provides financial
of nonfinancial and financial assets. Most countries
all central government units (such as social security
resources to cover a budget deficit or allocates finan-
still follow the 1986 manual, however. The IMF has
funds), they usually provide an incomplete picture.
cial resources arising from a budget surplus. The net
reclassified historical Government Finance Statistics
Data on government revenue and expense are col-
incurrence of liabilities should be offset by the net
Yearbook data to conform to the 2001 manual’s for-
lected by the IMF through questionnaires to member
acquisition of financial assets (a third financing item).
mat. Because of reporting differences, the reclassi-
countries and by the Organisation for Economic Co-
The difference between the cash surplus or deficit
fied data understate both revenue and expense.
operation and Development. Despite IMF efforts to stan-
and the three financing items is the net change in
dardize data collection, statistics are often incomplete,
the stock of cash. • Total debt is the entire stock of
untimely, and not comparable across countries.
direct government fixed-term contractual obligations
The 2001 manual describes government’s economic functions as the provision of goods and services on a nonmarket basis for collective or individual
Government finance statistics are reported in local
to others outstanding on a particular date. It includes
consumption, and the redistribution of income and
currency. The indicators here are shown as percent-
domestic and foreign liabilities such as currency and
wealth through transfer payments. Government
ages of GDP. Many countries report government
money deposits, securities other than shares, and
activities are financed mainly by taxation and other
finance data by fiscal year; see Primary data documen-
loans. It is the gross amount of government liabili-
income transfers, though other financing such as
tation for information on fiscal year end by country.
ties reduced by the amount of equity and financial derivatives held by the government. Because debt
Twenty developing economies had a government expenditure to GDP ratio of 30 percent or higher
4.10a
Central government expense, 2008 (percent of GDP) 75
is a stock rather than a flow, it is measured as of a given date, usually the last day of the fiscal year. • Interest payments are interest payments on government debt—including long-term bonds, long-term loans, and other debt instruments —to domestic and foreign residents.
50
Data sources
25
Data on central government finances are from the IMF’s Government Finance Statistics Yearbook s ov in a Se rb i Uk a ra in e Jo rd an Po la n Be d la ru s Ro m Se ani yc a he lle Ja s m ai ca M ol do va L M ac ithu an ed ia on ia ,F YR Bu So lga Eg uth ria yp t, Afri c Ar ab a Re Le p. ba no n Tu ni s M ia or oc co
2008 and data files. Each country’s accounts are reported using the system of common defi nitions and classifications in the IMF’s Government Finance Statistics Manual 2001. See these
Bo
sn
ia
an
d
He
rz
eg
di al M
Le
so
th
ve
o
0
sources for complete and authoritative explanaSource: International Monetary Fund, Government Finance Statistics data files, and World Development Indicators data files.
tions of concepts, definitions, and data sources.
2010 World Development Indicators
265
ECONOMY
Central government finances
4.11 Afghanistana Albaniaa Algeriaa Angola Argentina Armeniaa Australia Austria Azerbaijana Bangladesha Belarusa Belgium Benina Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswanaa Brazila Bulgaria a Burkina Faso Burundia Cambodia Cameroona Canadaa Central African Republic a Chad Chile Chinaa Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep.a Congo, Rep. Costa Ricaa Côte d’Ivoirea Croatiaa Cuba Czech Republica Denmark Dominican Republic a Ecuador a Egypt, Arab Rep.a El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopiaa Finland France Gabon Gambia, Thea Georgiaa Germany Ghanaa Greece Guatemalaa Guineaa Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
266
Central government expenses Goods and services
Compensation of employees
Interest payments
Subsidies and other transfers
Other expense
% of expense 1995 2008
% of expense 1995 2008
% of expense 1995 2008
% of expense 1995 2008
% of expense 1995 2008
.. 18 .. .. .. .. .. 5 .. .. 39 3 .. .. .. 32 .. 18 .. 20 .. 17 8 .. .. .. .. .. .. 37 .. .. .. 35 .. 7 8 .. 6 18 .. .. .. .. 8 8 .. .. 52 4 .. 10 15 17 .. .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
42 .. 12 .. .. 12 11 6 9 12 12 3 23 14 23 .. 13 13 21 .. 41 .. 8 .. .. 10 27 .. 8 .. 18 12 32 10 .. 6 9 19 .. 7 17 .. 14 .. 10 6 .. .. 27 5 15 11 15 .. .. .. 16
.. 14 .. .. .. .. .. 14 .. .. 5 7 .. .. .. 31 .. 7 .. 30 .. 40 10 .. .. .. .. .. .. 58 .. .. .. 27 .. 9 13 .. 49 22 .. .. .. .. 9 23 .. .. 11 5 .. 22 50 34 .. .. ..
39 .. 31 .. .. 21 11 13 12 21 10 7 40 22 28 .. 18 18 44 .. 33 .. 12 .. .. 20 5 .. 15 .. 18 44 38 26 .. 8 13 34 .. 23 37 .. 22 .. 10 22 .. .. 16 5 38 24 27 .. .. .. 50
.. 9 .. .. .. .. .. 9 .. .. 1 18 .. .. .. 2 .. 37 .. 6 .. 26 18 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 .. .. .. 3 .. 3 13 .. 26 26 .. .. .. .. 8 7 .. .. 10 6 .. 27 12 28 .. .. ..
0 .. 3 .. .. 2 4 6 1 23 2 8 2 10 1 .. 15 3 3 .. 2 .. 7 .. .. 3 4 .. 29 .. 11 10 10 5 .. 4 5 8 .. 15 11 .. 0 .. 4 6 .. .. 2 6 11 10 12 .. .. .. 3
.. 59 .. .. .. .. .. 68 .. .. 55 71 .. .. .. 36 .. 38 .. 14 .. 14 64 .. .. .. .. .. .. 2 .. .. .. 32 .. 75 64 .. .. 6 .. .. .. .. 68 59 .. .. 26 67 .. 36 18 9 .. .. ..
16 .. 49 .. .. 43 70 70 18 32 69 81 33 47 45 .. 52 60 10 .. 19 .. 67 .. .. 59 60 .. 41 .. 53 14 13 53 .. 70 70 29 .. 46 22 .. 43 .. 72 62 .. .. 45 82 37 45 37 .. .. .. 13
.. 0 .. .. .. .. .. 6 .. .. 0 2 .. .. .. 2 .. 2 .. 10 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 3 .. 5 5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 11 6 .. .. .. 20 .. 5 6 1 .. .. ..
4 .. 6 .. .. 22 6 6 61 13 7 2 2 7 3 .. 2 6 23 .. 5 .. 6 .. .. 13 4 .. 7 .. 0 20 7 6 .. 12 4 8 .. 9 15 .. 4 .. 8 6 .. .. 9 3 0 4 10 .. .. .. 18
Hungary Indiaa Indonesiaa Iran, Islamic Rep.a Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaicaa Japan Jordana Kazakhstana Kenyaa Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep.a Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republica Lao PDR Latviaa Lebanon Lesothoa Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysiaa Mali Mauritania Mauritius a Mexicoa Moldovaa Mongolia Moroccoa Mozambique Myanmar Namibiaa Nepala Netherlands New Zealand Nicaraguaa Niger Nigeria Norway Omana Pakistana Panamaa Papua New Guineaa Paraguaya Peru a Philippinesa Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
4.11
Goods and services
Compensation of employees
Interest payments
Subsidies and other transfers
Other expense
% of expense 1995 2008
% of expense 1995 2008
% of expense 1995 2008
% of expense 1995 2008
% of expense 1995 2008
8 15 21 21 .. 5 .. 4 .. .. .. .. 15 .. 16 .. 33 32 .. 20 .. 32 .. .. .. .. .. .. 23 .. .. 12 9 10 30 .. .. .. 29 .. 5 .. 14 .. .. .. 55 .. 16 19 .. 20 15 .. 8 .. ..
9 11 .. 10 .. 12 28 4 8 .. 8 20 20 .. 7 .. 19 29 37 11 3 42 .. .. 13 28 14 .. .. 38 .. 11 .. 20 27 9 .. .. 20 .. 8 30 16 30 .. 11 .. 21 .. .. 10 18 25 8 7 .. 29
10 10 20 56 .. 15 .. 14 .. .. .. .. 28 .. 15 .. 31 37 .. 20 .. 45 .. .. .. .. .. .. 34 .. .. 45 19 8 12 .. .. .. 53 .. 8 .. 25 .. .. .. 30 .. 45 36 .. 19 34 .. 29 .. ..
13 7 .. 38 .. 24 25 15 17 .. 45 7 38 .. 12 .. 29 28 38 19 27 35 .. .. 18 17 46 .. .. 33 .. 34 .. 14 34 43 .. .. 45 .. 8 25 36 30 .. 17 .. 4 .. .. 55 18 30 12 26 .. 33
17 27 16 0 .. 14 .. 24 .. .. .. 3 46 .. 3 .. 5 5 .. 3 .. 5 .. .. .. .. .. .. 17 .. .. 13 19 11 2 .. .. .. 1 .. 9 .. 17 .. .. .. 7 28 8 20 .. 19 33 .. 14 .. ..
9 22 .. 1 .. 3 9 12 35 .. 7 3 11 .. 7 .. 0 4 5 1 37 2 .. .. 2 2 10 .. .. 2 .. 16 .. 4 1 5 .. .. 8 7 5 4 6 3 .. 3 .. 26 .. .. 4 9 22 6 7 .. 4
56 33 41 .. .. 33 .. 54 .. .. .. 58 .. .. 63 .. 24 27 .. 56 .. 8 .. .. .. .. .. .. 27 .. .. 28 .. 71 56 .. .. .. .. .. 77 .. 29 .. .. .. 8 2 30 26 .. 33 15 .. 42 .. ..
63 54 .. 37 .. 37 31 65 6 .. 36 68 31 .. 58 .. 29 36 18 65 29 14 .. .. 65 49 14 .. .. 16 .. 34 .. 57 38 36 .. .. 13 .. 79 38 36 9 .. 67 .. 27 .. .. 23 49 19 69 50 .. 17
13 0 2 .. .. 1 .. 6 .. .. .. .. 2 .. 3 .. 7 .. .. 0 .. 3 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 .. .. 2 .. 1 0 .. .. .. 4 .. 3 .. 14 .. .. .. 0 .. 1 1 .. 8 .. .. 9 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
9 7 .. 13 .. 1 9 5 33 .. 5 2 0 .. 15 .. 23 3 3 4 3 7 .. .. 6 4 16 .. .. 11 .. 6 .. 6 1 9 .. .. 14 .. 3 7 7 28 .. 6 .. 23 .. .. 8 7 4 7 2 .. 18
267
ECONOMY
Central government expenses
4.11 Romania Russian Federation Rwanda a Saudi Arabia Senegala Serbia Sierra Leonea Singaporea Slovak Republic Sloveniaa Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lankaa Sudana Swazilanda Sweden Switzerland a Syrian Arab Republica Tajikistana Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togoa Trinidad and Tobagoa Tunisiaa Turkey a Turkmenistan Ugandaa Ukrainea United Arab Emirates a United Kingdom United States Uruguaya Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB a Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep.a Zambiaa Zimbabwea World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Central government expenses Goods and services
Compensation of employees
Interest payments
Subsidies and other transfers
Other expense
% of expense 1995 2008
% of expense 1995 2008
% of expense 1995 2008
% of expense 1995 2008
% of expense 1995 2008
.. .. 52 .. .. .. .. 38 .. 19 .. .. 5 23 44 .. 10 24 .. 47 .. .. .. .. 20 7 .. .. .. .. 50 14 .. 13 .. 6 .. .. 8 32 16 .. m .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 8 5
13 14 .. .. .. 13 .. 40 11 13 .. 12 4 11 .. .. .. 8 .. .. .. 27 .. 21 17 6 8 .. 28 12 .. 18 16 15 .. 6 .. .. .. 32 .. 14 m .. 13 16 12 15 .. 13 14 8 17 .. 10 6
.. .. 36 .. .. .. .. 39 .. 21 .. .. 14 20 38 .. 5 6 .. 8 .. .. .. .. 36 37 .. .. .. .. 37 15 .. 17 .. 22 .. .. 67 35 34 .. m .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 14 14
19 18 .. .. .. 27 .. 27 14 19 .. 13 9 30 .. .. .. 7 .. .. .. 35 .. 35 26 35 26 .. 13 13 .. 14 12 24 .. 16 .. .. .. 30 .. 24 m .. 23 34 18 26 .. 18 25 35 14 .. 15 14
Note: Components may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding or missing data. a. Data were reported on a cash basis and have been adjusted to the accrual framework.
268
2010 World Development Indicators
.. .. 12 .. .. .. .. 8 .. 3 .. .. 12 22 8 .. 13 4 .. 12 .. .. .. .. 20 13 .. .. .. .. .. 9 .. 6 .. 27 .. .. 16 16 31 .. m .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 27 .. 9 12
2 2 .. .. .. 2 .. 0 4 3 .. 8 5 26 .. .. .. 5 .. .. .. 5 .. 6 8 8 24 .. 8 1 .. 5 9 11 .. 12 .. .. .. 7 .. 6m .. 5 5 3 6 .. 2 10 7 22 .. 5 6
.. .. 5 .. .. .. .. 15 .. 55 .. .. 42 24 10 .. 71 66 .. 33 .. .. .. .. 24 36 .. .. .. .. .. 57 .. 64 .. 61 .. .. 8 19 19 .. m .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 24 .. 56 55
60 64 .. .. .. 57 .. 0 67 62 .. 61 79 23 .. .. .. 76 .. .. .. 31 .. 19 40 41 41 .. 51 71 .. 51 60 50 .. 64 .. .. .. 24 .. 43 m .. 43 36 52 36 .. 59 36 37 29 .. 62 67
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 3 .. .. 2 10 .. .. 1 1 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 7 .. .. .. .. .. 8 .. 0 .. 2 .. .. 0 0 .. .. m .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4 5
8 7 .. .. .. 1 .. .. 5 3 .. 6 6 10 .. .. .. 4 .. .. .. 4 .. 19 8 11 4 .. 0 4 .. 13 5 .. .. 3 .. .. .. 7 .. 7m .. 7 9 6 .. .. 6 10 9 10 .. 6 5
About the data
4.11
ECONOMY
Central government expenses Definitions
The term expense has replaced expenditure in the
transfers, and other expenses. The economic clas-
• Goods and services are all government payments
table since the 2005 edition of World Development
sification can be problematic. For example, the dis-
in exchange for goods and services used for the
Indicators in accordance with use in the International
tinction between current and capital expense may
production of market and nonmarket goods and ser-
Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Government Finance Statis-
be arbitrary, and subsidies to public corporations or
vices. Own-account capital formation is excluded.
tics Manual 2001. Government expenses include all
banks may be disguised as capital financing. Subsi-
• Compensation of employees is all payments in
nonrepayable payments, whether current or capital,
dies may also be hidden in special contractual pric-
cash, as well as in kind (such as food and hous-
requited or unrequited. The concept of total central
ing for goods and services. For further discussion of
ing), to employees in return for services rendered,
government expense as presented in the IMF’s Gov-
government finance statistics, see About the data for
and government contributions to social insurance
ernment Finance Statistics Yearbook is comparable to
tables 4.10 and 4.12.
schemes such as social security and pensions that
the concept used in the 1993 United Nations System
provide benefits to employees. • Interest payments
of National Accounts.
are payments made to nonresidents, to residents,
Expenses can be measured either by function
and to other general government units for the use of
(health, defense, education) or by economic type
borrowed money. (Repayment of principal is shown
(interest payments, wages and salaries, purchases
as a financing item, and commission charges are
of goods and services). Functional data are often
shown as purchases of services.) • Subsidies and
incomplete, and coverage varies by country because
other transfers include all unrequited, nonrepayable
functional responsibilities stretch across levels of
transfers on current account to private and public
government for which no data are available. Defense
enterprises; grants to foreign governments, inter-
expenses, usually the central government’s respon-
national organizations, and other government units;
sibility, are shown in table 5.7. For more information
and social security, social assistance benefits, and
on education expenses, see table 2.11; for more on
employer social benefits in cash and in kind. • Other
health expenses, see table 2.16.
expense is spending on dividends, rent, and other
The classification of expenses by economic type in
miscellaneous expenses, including provision for con-
the table shows whether the government produces
sumption of fixed capital.
goods and services and distributes them, purchases the goods and services from a third party and distributes them, or transfers cash to households to make the purchases directly. When the government produces and provides goods and services, the cost is reflected in compensation of employees, use of goods and services, and consumption of fixed capital. Purchases from a third party and cash transfers to households are shown as subsidies and other Interest payments are a large part of government expenses for some developing economies
4.11a
Central government interest payments as a share of total expense, 2008 (percent) 40
30
20
Data sources 10
Data on central government expenses are from the IMF’s Government Finance Statistics Yearbook Ke ny a
Ur
ug
al
ua y
a
il m
p.
az
te Gu a
Br
s
2008 and data files. Each country’s accounts are reported using the system of common defi nitions and classifications in the IMF’s Govern-
Eg
yp
t,
Ar
M
ab
au
rit
Re
iu
s
a
lle
di In
in
he Se yc
es
h es
pp ili Ph
n ta
ke y
gl ad
Ba n
Tu r
bi
a is Pa k
ai
om Co l
m Ja
Le
ba
no
n
ca
0
ment Finance Statistics Manual 2001. See these Interest payments accounted for more than 11 percent of total expenses in 2008 for 15 countries.
sources for complete and authoritative explana-
Source: International Monetary Fund, Government Finance Statistics data files.
tions of concepts, definitions, and data sources.
2010 World Development Indicators
269
4.12 Afghanistana Albaniaa Algeriaa Angola Argentina Armeniaa Australia Austria Azerbaijana Bangladesha Belarusa Belgium Benina Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswanaa Brazila Bulgariaa Burkina Faso Burundia Cambodia Cameroon a Canadaa Central African Republic a Chad Chile Chinaa Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep.a Congo, Rep. Costa Ricaa Côte d’Ivoirea Croatiaa Cuba Czech Republica Denmark Dominican Republica Ecuador a Egypt, Arab Rep.a El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopiaa Finland France Gabon Gambia, Thea Georgia a Germany Ghanaa Greece Guatemalaa Guineaa Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
270
Central government revenues Taxes on income, profits, and capital gains
Taxes on goods and services
Taxes on international trade
Other taxes
Social contributions
Grants and other revenue
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
.. 8 .. .. .. .. .. 21 .. .. 16 36 .. .. .. 21 .. 17 .. 14 .. 17 50 .. .. .. 9 .. .. 21 .. .. .. 11 .. 15 34 .. 50 17 .. .. .. .. 16 17 .. 14 7 16 15 18 19 8 .. .. ..
5 .. 58 .. .. 17 66 26 33 19 7 37 18 10 3 .. 31 17 12 .. 10 .. 55 .. .. 29 25 .. 16 .. 5 17 23 9 .. 18 44 22 .. 27 24 .. 11 .. 21 25 .. .. 33 18 19 19 27 .. .. .. 20
2010 World Development Indicators
.. 39 .. .. .. .. .. 22 .. .. 33 23 .. .. .. 4 .. 28 .. 30 .. 25 17 .. .. .. 61 .. .. 12 .. .. .. 42 .. 32 40 .. 26 13 .. .. .. .. 31 26 .. 32 48 20 31 32 46 5 .. .. ..
5 .. 34 .. .. 43 23 23 23 28 30 24 38 43 46 .. 23 47 39 .. 40 .. 16 .. .. 39 57 .. 25 .. 6 37 15 45 .. 26 40 52 .. 20 41 .. 41 .. 32 23 .. .. 47 23 34 29 58 .. .. .. 39
.. 14 .. .. .. .. .. 0 .. .. 6 .. .. .. .. 15 .. 8 .. 20 .. 28 2 .. .. .. 8 .. .. 21 .. .. .. 9 .. 4 .. .. 11 10 .. .. .. .. 0 0 .. 42 10 .. 24 0 23 62 .. .. ..
9 .. 3 .. .. 5 2 0 4 27 21 .. 20 3 0 .. 2 1 13 .. 22 .. 1 .. .. 1 5 .. 5 .. 3 5 35 1 .. 0 .. 10 .. 6 4 .. .. .. 0 0 .. .. 1 .. 18 0 8 .. .. .. 5
.. 1 .. .. .. .. .. 5 .. .. 11 2 .. .. .. 0 .. 4 .. 1 .. 3 .. .. .. .. 0 .. .. 5 .. .. .. 1 .. 1 7 .. 1 10 .. .. .. .. 1 3 .. 0 .. 0 .. 3 3 2 .. .. ..
0 .. 1 .. .. 10 0 5 1 4 7 1 10 9 4 .. 10 0 7 .. 0 .. .. .. .. 7 1 .. 8 .. 1 3 3 1 .. 1 2 4 .. 3 1 .. .. .. 2 4 .. .. 2 .. .. 3 1 .. .. .. 1
.. 15 .. .. .. .. .. 43 .. .. 31 36 .. .. .. .. .. 21 .. 5 .. 2 22 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 .. .. .. 33 .. 40 5 .. .. 10 .. .. .. .. 34 47 .. 0 13 58 .. 31 2 1 .. .. ..
1 .. .. .. .. 13 .. 40 .. .. 29 35 2 7 37 .. 23 22 .. .. .. .. 21 .. .. 6 .. .. 4 .. 1 31 7 33 .. 45 3 1 .. .. 10 .. 34 .. 31 43 .. .. 17 55 .. 36 2 .. .. .. 11
.. 23 .. .. .. .. .. 9 .. .. 3 3 .. .. .. 59 .. 23 .. 31 .. 25 10 .. .. .. 22 .. .. 41 .. .. .. 4 .. 8 14 .. 12 41 .. .. .. .. 17 8 .. 7 22 6 9 16 6 23 .. .. ..
80 .. 4 .. .. 13 9 6 39 23 6 3 13 28 10 .. 11 14 30 .. 28 .. 7 .. .. 18 12 .. 42 .. 84 7 18 11 .. 10 10 11 .. 45 21 .. .. .. 14 6 .. .. 18 4 30 14 4 .. .. .. 24
Hungary Indiaa Indonesiaa Iran, Islamic Rep.a Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaicaa Japan Jordana Kazakhstana Kenyaa Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep.a Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic a Lao PDR Latviaa Lebanon Lesothoa Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysiaa Mali Mauritania Mauritiusa Mexicoa Moldovaa Mongolia Moroccoa Mozambique Myanmar Namibiaa Nepala Netherlands New Zealand Nicaraguaa Niger Nigeria Norway Omana Pakistana Panamaa Papua New Guineaa Paraguaya Perua Philippinesa Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
4.12
Taxes on income, profits, and capital gains
Taxes on goods and services
Taxes on international trade
Other taxes
Social contributions
Grants and other revenue
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
16 23 46 12 .. 37 .. 32 .. 35 .. 11 35 .. 32 .. 1 26 .. 7 .. 15 .. .. .. .. .. .. 37 .. .. 12 27 6 31 .. .. 20 27 10 26 .. 9 .. .. .. 21 18 20 40 .. 15 33 .. 22 .. ..
25 44 .. 16 .. 37 29 35 37 .. 11 28 37 .. 31 .. 1 11 19 15 13 17 .. .. 21 13 9 .. .. 18 .. 18 .. 1 38 31 .. 25 28 14 27 57 26 12 .. 33 .. 27 .. .. 10 33 41 16 23 .. 45
28 28 33 6 .. .. .. 21 .. 14 .. 28 40 .. 32 .. 0 56 .. 41 .. 12 .. .. .. .. .. .. 26 .. .. 25 54 38 18 .. .. 26 32 33 24 .. 52 .. .. .. 1 27 17 8 .. 46 26 .. 32 .. ..
31 27 .. 2 .. 34 30 20 31 .. 30 21 41 .. 25 .. .. 53 36 36 39 12 .. .. 37 40 18 .. .. 38 .. 46 .. 50 26 32 .. 31 19 35 28 26 50 18 .. 21 .. 33 .. .. 39 37 26 39 32 .. ..
10 24 4 9 .. 0 .. .. .. 1 .. 3 14 .. 7 .. 2 5 .. 3 .. 49 .. .. .. .. .. .. 12 .. .. 34 4 5 9 .. .. 12 28 26 .. .. 7 .. .. .. 3 24 11 27 .. 10 29 .. 0 .. ..
0 15 .. 6 .. 0 1 .. 7 .. 5 13 11 .. 3 .. 1 11 9 1 7 57 .. .. .. 5 35 .. .. 9 .. 11 .. 5 8 6 .. 2 44 18 1 3 4 26 .. 0 .. 11 .. .. 7 3 22 0 0 .. 3
1 0 1 1 .. 2 .. 6 .. 6 .. 5 1 .. 10 .. 0 1 .. 0 .. 1 .. .. .. .. .. .. 5 .. .. 6 2 1 0 .. .. .. 2 4 2 .. 0 .. .. .. 2 7 3 2 .. 8 4 .. 2 .. ..
2 0 .. 1 .. 6 5 5 10 .. 3 0 1 .. 8 .. 0 .. 1 0 14 3 .. .. 0 0 9 .. .. 8 .. 8 .. 0 1 5 .. .. 2 5 3 0 0 3 .. 1 .. 1 .. .. 1 6 6 1 2 .. ..
35 0 6 7 .. 17 .. 35 .. 26 .. 48 0 .. 8 .. .. .. .. 35 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 .. .. 6 14 38 15 .. .. .. .. .. 40 .. 11 .. .. .. .. .. 16 1 .. 11 .. .. 30 .. ..
34 0 .. 14 .. 18 17 36 2 .. 0 .. 0 .. 15 .. .. .. .. 30 1 .. .. .. 32 29 .. .. .. .. .. 4 .. 29 11 10 .. .. 0 .. 34 0 19 .. .. 17 .. .. .. .. 17 8 .. 35 33 .. ..
9 25 9 66 .. 9 .. 6 .. 18 .. 6 10 .. 12 .. 97 11 .. 14 .. 24 .. .. .. .. .. .. 19 .. .. 17 16 2 27 .. .. 42 11 27 8 .. 31 .. .. .. 74 24 34 23 .. 11 8 .. 14 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
9 14 .. 62 .. 4 18 4 13 .. 51 38 10 .. 18 .. 98 25 36 18 26 11 .. .. 10 14 29 .. .. 27 .. 13 .. 14 17 16 .. 42 7 29 8 15 20 41 .. 28 .. 28 .. .. 26 13 11 9 .. .. 53
271
ECONOMY
Central government revenues
4.12 Romania Russian Federation Rwandaa Saudi Arabia Senegala Serbiaa Sierra Leonea Singaporea Slovak Republic Sloveniaa Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lankaa Sudana Swazilanda Sweden Switzerlanda Syrian Arab Republica Tajikistana Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togoa Trinidad and Tobagoa Tunisiaa Turkeya Turkmenistan Ugandaa Ukrainea United Arab Emiratesa United Kingdom United States Uruguaya Uzbekistan Venezuela, RBa Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep.a Zambiaa Zimbabwea World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Central government revenues Taxes on income, profits, and capital gains
Taxes on goods and services
Taxes on international trade
Other taxes
Social contributions
Grants and other revenue
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
% of revenue 1995 2008
.. .. 11 .. 17 .. 15 26 .. 13 .. .. 28 12 17 .. 12 11 23 6 .. .. .. .. 50 16 .. .. 10 .. .. 37 .. 10 .. 38 .. .. 17 27 36 .. m .. .. .. .. .. 33 .. .. .. 15 .. 21 22
22 5 .. .. .. 10 .. 34 13 17 .. 54 28 18 .. .. .. 19 .. .. .. 39 .. 17 57 28 26 .. 22 14 .. 37 53 20 .. 22 .. .. .. 33 .. 21 m .. 22 26 18 18 .. 16 25 27 19 .. 29 26
.. .. 25 .. 19 .. 34 20 .. 33 .. .. 21 50 41 .. 31 21 37 63 .. .. .. .. 26 20 .. .. 45 .. 15 32 .. 32 .. 33 .. .. 10 22 23 .. m .. .. .. .. .. 26 .. .. .. 31 .. 25 24
35 16 .. .. .. 42 .. 22 33 32 .. 30 15 48 .. .. .. 32 .. .. .. 37 .. 43 15 31 49 .. 49 31 .. 27 3 48 .. 25 .. .. .. 36 .. 33 m .. 36 32 37 36 .. 40 39 31 28 .. 27 24
.. .. 23 .. 36 .. 39 1 .. 9 .. .. 0 17 27 .. 1 1 13 12 .. .. .. .. 6 28 .. .. 7 .. .. .. .. 4 .. 9 .. .. 18 36 17 .. m .. .. .. .. .. 12 .. .. .. 24 .. .. 0
0 25 .. .. .. 6 .. 0 0 0 .. 3 .. 14 .. .. .. 1 .. .. .. 5 .. 21 5 6 1 .. 9 4 .. .. 1 4 .. 5 .. .. .. 8 .. 5m .. 5 6 4 7 .. 4 4 6 15 .. 1 0
Note: Components may not sum to 100 percent because of missing data or adjustment to tax revenue. a. Data were reported on a cash basis and have been adjusted to the accrual framework.
272
2010 World Development Indicators
.. .. 3 .. 2 .. 0 15 .. 0 .. .. 0 4 1 .. 7 2 8 0 .. .. .. .. 1 4 .. .. 2 .. .. 6 .. 10 .. 0 .. .. 3 0 3 .. m .. .. .. .. .. 2 .. .. .. 4 .. 2 2
0 0 .. .. .. 0 .. 11 0 2 .. 3 0 5 .. .. .. 2 .. .. .. 1 .. 3 9 4 6 .. 0 0 .. 10 1 –3 .. 4 .. .. .. 0 .. 2m .. 1 1 3 2 .. 0 2 3 1 .. 2 2
.. .. 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. 42 .. .. 40 1 .. .. 37 49 0 14 .. .. .. .. 2 15 .. .. .. .. 1 20 .. 31 .. 4 .. .. .. 0 3 .. m .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 35 36
33 16 .. .. .. 35 .. .. 41 38 .. 2 52 2 .. .. .. 36 .. .. .. 5 .. .. 4 17 .. .. .. 36 .. 21 39 22 .. 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. m .. 13 .. 22 .. .. 30 10 .. 0 .. 34 38
.. .. 36 .. 26 .. 12 38 .. 3 .. .. .. 18 14 .. 13 17 19 5 .. .. .. .. 15 17 .. .. 37 .. 84 6 .. 8 .. 20 .. .. 51 15 19 .. m .. .. .. .. .. 22 .. .. .. 25 .. 10 8
10 38 .. .. .. 7 .. 33 14 11 .. 8 5 13 .. .. .. 10 .. .. .. 14 .. 16 11 13 18 .. 19 16 .. 5 4 9 .. 43 .. .. .. 23 .. 14 m .. 14 17 13 16 .. 14 16 26 28 .. 10 6
About the data
4.12
Definitions
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) classifi es
Direct taxes tend to be progressive, whereas indirect
• Taxes on income, profits, and capital gains are
government revenues as taxes, grants, and property
taxes are proportional.
levied on the actual or presumptive net income
income. Taxes are classified by the base on which
Social security taxes do not reflect compulsory pay-
of individuals, on the profi ts of corporations and
the tax is levied, grants by the source, and property
ments made by employers to provident funds or other
enterprises, and on capital gains, whether real-
income by type (for example, interest, dividends,
agencies with a like purpose. Similarly, expenditures
ized or not, on land, securities, and other assets.
or rent). The most important source of revenue is
from such funds are not refl ected in government
Intragovernmental payments are eliminated in con-
taxes. Grants are unrequited, nonrepayable, non-
expenses (see table 4.11). For further discussion of
solidation. • Taxes on goods and services include
compulsory receipts from other government units
taxes and tax policies, see About the data for table
general sales and turnover or value added taxes,
and foreign governments or from international orga-
5.6. For further discussion of government revenues
selective excises on goods, selective taxes on ser-
nizations. Transactions are generally recorded on an
and expenditures, see About the data for tables 4.10
vices, taxes on the use of goods or property, taxes
accrual basis.
and 4.11.
on extraction and production of minerals, and prof-
The IMF’s Government Finance Statistics Manual
its of fiscal monopolies. • Taxes on international
2001 describes taxes as compulsory, unrequited
trade include import duties, export duties, profi ts
payments made to governments by individuals, busi-
of export or import monopolies, exchange profi ts,
nesses, or institutions. Taxes are classified in six
and exchange taxes. • Other taxes include employer
major groups by the base on which the tax is levied:
payroll or labor taxes, taxes on property, and taxes
income, profits, and capital gains; payroll and work-
not allocable to other categories, such as penalties
force; property; goods and services; international
for late payment or nonpayment of taxes. • Social
trade and transactions; and other. However, the dis-
contributions include social security contributions by
tinctions are not always clear. Taxes levied on the
employees, employers, and self-employed individu-
income and profits of individuals and corporations
als, and other contributions whose source cannot
are classified as direct taxes, and taxes and duties
be determined. They also include actual or imputed
levied on goods and services are classified as indi-
contributions to social insurance schemes operated
rect taxes. This distinction may be a useful simplifica-
by governments. • Grants and other revenue include
tion, but it has no particular analytical significance
grants from other foreign governments, international
except with respect to the capacity to fix tax rates.
organizations, and other government units; interest; dividends; rent; requited, nonrepayable receipts for
4.12a
Rich economies rely more on direct taxes
public purposes (such as fines, administrative fees, and entrepreneurial income from government owner-
Taxes on income and capital gains as a share of central government revenue, 2008 (percent)
ship of property); and voluntary, unrequited, nonre-
70
payable receipts other than grants.
60
South Africa
50
United States India
40
30 Norway
Data sources
20
Data on central government revenues are from 10
the IMF’s Government Finance Statistics Yearbook 2008 and data files. Each country’s accounts
0 100
10,000
1,000
100,000
GNI per capita ($, log scale) Low income
Middle income
are reported using the system of common definitions and classifications in the IMF’s Government Finance Statistics Manual 2001. The IMF receives
High income
additional information from the Organisation for
High-income economies tend to tax income and property, whereas low-income economies tend to rely on
Economic Co-operation and Development on the
indirect taxes on international trade and goods and services. But there are exceptions in all groups.
tax revenues of some of its members. See the IMF sources for complete and authoritative explana-
Note: Data are for the most recent year for 2005–08. Source: International Monetary Fund, Government Finance Statistics data files, and World Development Indicators data files.
tions of concepts, definitions, and data sources.
2010 World Development Indicators
273
ECONOMY
Central government revenues
4.13 Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austriaa Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgiuma Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finlanda Francea Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germanya Ghana Greecea Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
274
Monetary indicators Money and quasi money
Claims on private sector
Claims on governments and other public entities
annual % growth 1995 2008
Annual growth % of M2 1995 2008
Annual growth % of M2 1995 2008
.. 51.8 9.6 4,105.6 –2.8 64.3 8.5 .. 25.4 12.1 158.4 .. –1.8 7.7 22.0 12.3 44.3 40.5 22.3 –8.0 43.6 –6.2 4.8 4.3 48.8 24.3 29.5 10.6 28.2 357.6 –0.1 4.7 18.1 40.4 .. 29.3 6.2 16.6 6.8 9.9 13.5 21.0 27.5 9.0 .. .. 10.1 14.2 40.2 .. 43.2 .. 15.6 11.3 43.0 27.1 28.9
27.8 7.7 15.7 66.2 8.1 2.4 14.2 .. 44.3 16.3 28.3 .. 26.6 22.7 –0.1 21.1 17.3 8.8 12.3 42.4 5.4 13.7 15.1 16.5 13.6 15.6 17.8 4.2 8.5 55.7 37.1 11.2 5.7 4.4 .. 8.6 7.8 1.3 23.6 10.5 –0.4 15.9 6.0 23.4 .. .. 9.1 18.4 6.9 .. 42.8 .. 8.9 33.4 29.5 11.1 5.4
2010 World Development Indicators
.. 1.8 1.0 471.4 –1.1 70.3 12.5 .. 6.1 25.0 61.4 .. 2.2 13.7 23.9 –1.7 40.5 22.1 2.9 –7.1 12.5 0.3 3.8 3.9 6.4 34.9 22.5 9.8 34.3 59.6 6.3 –1.4 13.3 30.5 .. 15.8 2.6 14.4 15.1 12.1 22.6 27.8 28.9 13.4 .. .. 11.9 –5.0 –11.1 .. 10.2 .. 36.1 12.1 –6.7 15.7 18.0
12.8 12.3 3.6 36.9 9.1 29.9 15.0 .. 37.2 13.5 55.8 .. 12.0 4.5 17.3 12.6 20.6 27.5 15.3 11.3 30.7 9.3 6.1 6.0 10.1 24.6 9.9 2.8 23.1 42.7 10.6 51.7 6.1 11.0 .. 9.7 30.7 10.5 21.6 6.2 4.5 1.9 12.5 17.7 .. .. –10.6 6.8 37.9 .. 20.1 .. 6.2 19.8 11.8 2.7 10.8
.. –8.3 –10.0 119.5 7.8 7.2 0.4 .. –32.7 4.8 44.7 .. 6.0 1.1 –0.4 10.0 14.6 –7.2 –7.3 0.2 1.2 –2.2 0.2 –7.9 –18.6 –2.0 0.8 –2.4 2.9 –7.9 2.0 5.6 0.3 –2.4 .. 2.1 –1.5 –1.7 –74.8 0.6 –0.9 20.5 –9.3 –3.5 .. .. 5.8 15.2 73.8 .. 28.1 .. –7.1 8.4 –20.4 0.1 –7.5
1.2 2.1 –26.9 18.0 –1.2 2.2 3.3 .. –15.2 3.4 –12.5 .. 12.2 –2.1 0.6 –5.9 7.6 –2.0 4.1 4.0 –10.5 –9.1 5.0 10.2 –46.5 –3.6 0.3 –1.5 2.5 5.3 –83.4 0.4 –1.1 2.9 .. 0.4 –14.0 12.3 –12.8 4.6 0.7 14.0 1.8 2.5 .. .. 30.3 21.4 –13.6 .. 10.9 .. 0.1 18.1 –1.6 –3.6 2.9
Interest rate
Deposit 1995 2008
.. 15.3 16.6 125.9 11.9 63.2 6.1 2.2 .. 6.0 100.8 4.0 3.5 18.9 51.9 9.8 52.2 35.9 3.5 .. 8.7 5.5 5.3 5.5 5.5 13.7 11.0 5.6 32.3 60.0 5.5 23.9 3.5 5.5 .. 7.0 3.9 14.9 43.3 10.9 14.4 .. 8.7 11.5 3.2 4.5 5.5 12.5 31.0 3.9 28.7 15.8 7.9 17.5 3.5 32.5 12.0
.. 6.8 1.8 6.2 11.0 6.6 5.2 .. 12.2 9.7 8.5 .. 3.5 4.7 3.5 8.7 11.7 4.4 3.5 .. 1.9 3.8 1.5 3.8 3.8 7.5 2.3 0.4 9.7 .. 3.8 4.2 3.5 2.8 .. 1.6 .. 10.3 4.9 6.6 .. .. 5.7 3.6 .. 3.7 3.8 12.9 10.4 .. 8.9 2.2 5.1 14.4 3.5 2.1 9.5
% Lending 1995 2008
.. 19.7 18.4 206.3 17.9 111.9 10.7 6.4 .. 14.0 175.0 8.4 16.8 51.0 73.5 14.4 78.2 79.4 16.8 15.3 18.7 16.0 8.7 16.0 16.0 18.2 12.1 8.8 42.7 293.9 16.0 36.7 16.8 20.2 .. 12.8 10.3 30.7 55.7 16.5 19.1 .. 19.0 15.1 7.8 8.1 16.0 25.0 58.2 10.9 .. 23.1 21.2 21.5 32.9 15.1 27.0
14.9 13.0 8.0 12.5 19.5 17.1 8.9 .. 19.8 16.4 8.6 8.6 .. 13.9 7.0 16.5 47.3 10.9 .. 16.5 16.4 15.0 4.7 15.0 15.0 13.3 5.3 5.0 17.2 .. 15.0 15.8 .. 10.1 .. 6.3 .. 20.0 12.1 12.3 .. .. 8.6 8.0 .. .. 15.0 27.0 21.2 .. .. .. 13.4 .. .. 17.8 17.9
Real 1995
2008
.. 13.3 –7.9 –84.7 14.2 –18.9 9.1 6.1 .. 6.2 –63.9 7.1 13.0 35.5 76.3 5.2 65.5 10.1 16.5 –0.7 6.4 6.0 6.2 5.2 6.6 7.0 –1.5 4.4 20.1 –30.5 12.2 11.9 16.8 –2.9 .. –3.6 9.0 19.4 45.7 4.6 7.8 .. –11.4 2.1 2.9 6.7 14.5 20.3 10.6 8.9 .. 12.1 11.5 14.7 –8.2 –0.8 1.7
9.6 10.3 –2.5 –9.2 0.3 8.0 4.3 .. –1.0 7.0 –9.9 6.8 .. 3.2 –0.7 –0.4 39.1 –0.5 .. –6.4 11.2 12.7 0.5 12.2 9.4 13.0 –1.8 3.5 8.2 .. 24.9 3.3 .. 3.5 .. 4.3 .. 9.2 4.8 0.4 .. .. 1.8 –15.9 .. .. 9.3 21.0 10.2 .. .. .. 4.5 .. .. –2.8 7.4
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Irelanda Israel Italya Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlandsa New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugala Puerto Rico Qatar
Money and quasi money
Claims on private sector
Claims on governments and other public entities
annual % growth 1995 2008
Annual growth % of M2 1995 2008
Annual growth % of M2 1995 2008
20.9 11.0 27.5 30.1 .. .. 21.7 .. 28.0 4.1 5.7 108.2 29.0 .. 15.6 .. 9.4 14.8 16.4 –21.4 16.4 9.8 29.5 9.6 28.9 1.8 16.2 56.2 18.5 7.3 –5.1 18.6 31.9 65.3 32.6 7.0 47.7 36.5 22.6 15.4 .. 9.4 35.1 3.8 19.4 3.8 7.7 13.8 8.4 13.7 0.5 29.3 23.9 35.6 .. .. 1.1
9.4 20.5 15.0 7.9 35.2 .. –3.4 .. 5.7 0.8 21.1 35.4 15.6 .. 15.9 23.6 15.6 33.2 18.3 –4.0 14.8 19.7 42.6 49.2 –0.7 10.9 12.8 62.6 11.3 –1.5 .. 14.7 9.9 15.9 –6.7 10.8 23.9 14.8 17.9 23.3 .. 10.3 7.3 11.9 52.5 .. 23.3 19.5 14.6 11.2 12.2 23.2 5.4 19.1 .. .. 19.7
4.9 6.0 25.9 9.8 .. .. 18.3 .. 18.0 1.3 9.6 –72.5 26.7 .. 21.6 .. 10.9 0.1 18.1 –23.8 13.1 –2.3 –6.0 3.1 12.7 –138.9 9.4 2.8 29.2 18.9 –42.5 8.7 –2.9 34.6 14.4 6.9 21.8 13.4 30.5 18.1 .. 16.2 30.3 –22.8 22.3 9.5 9.3 10.8 14.5 0.2 4.9 31.1 27.9 19.1 .. .. 3.9
21.0 14.1 18.7 8.4 5.3 .. 6.9 .. 14.2 0.5 9.5 8.6 17.3 .. 24.5 25.8 20.3 29.2 19.4 24.2 6.4 6.8 17.5 9.5 24.3 24.7 12.8 39.8 8.8 5.1 .. 20.8 1.3 11.9 24.4 16.0 24.5 2.6 9.2 15.9 .. 14.0 11.9 19.9 51.9 .. 40.5 10.0 16.4 17.4 29.4 22.0 2.1 29.9 .. .. 32.9
20.2 3.4 –2.3 17.3 .. .. –0.5 .. 6.1 2.5 –3.8 24.7 6.6 .. –1.2 .. –2.0 62.6 –9.7 6.5 5.1 –18.7 37.2 3.6 –2.4 –229.7 –10.3 –10.4 –0.7 –11.6 –28.9 3.0 27.6 19.1 –31.8 5.1 –12.5 19.7 1.7 3.3 .. –4.1 –21.5 10.2 –9.1 –1.9 –2.3 8.7 –4.3 5.0 0.1 –8.1 3.0 3.1 .. .. –3.8
–2.3 7.9 –7.0 –4.7 –54.7 .. 3.6 .. 11.3 2.7 12.0 –9.6 3.3 .. 2.5 –1.6 –0.8 –8.8 –3.4 –4.7 2.1 –15.9 21.6 –37.4 3.9 2.2 –8.5 74.3 4.1 –2.5 .. 0.6 2.1 –2.5 5.8 –0.1 –1.8 13.2 –10.0 0.5 .. 4.5 4.4 –18.3 –23.5 .. –20.4 7.1 –3.1 –2.8 –8.8 –7.2 0.1 9.0 .. .. –1.3
4.13
Interest rate
Deposit 1995 2008
24.4 .. 16.7 .. .. 0.4 14.1 6.4 23.2 0.9 7.7 .. 13.6 .. 8.8 .. 6.5 36.7 14.0 14.8 16.3 13.3 6.4 5.5 20.1 24.1 18.5 37.3 5.9 3.5 9.0 12.2 39.8 25.4 74.6 7.3 38.8 9.8 10.8 9.6 4.4 8.5 11.1 3.5 13.5 5.0 6.5 .. 7.2 7.3 21.2 9.6 8.4 26.8 8.4 .. 6.2
9.9 .. 8.5 11.6 11.4 0.0 3.3 .. 7.6 0.6 5.5 .. 5.3 .. 5.9 .. 4.8 4.0 5.0 6.3 7.7 7.6 3.8 2.5 7.7 5.9 11.5 6.0 3.1 3.5 8.0 10.1 3.0 17.9 11.2 3.9 11.0 12.0 8.4 2.3 4.4 7.6 6.6 3.5 12.0 5.5 4.5 6.9 3.5 1.3 3.1 3.5 4.5 2.2 .. .. 3.0
% Lending 1995 2008
32.6 15.5 18.9 .. .. 6.6 20.2 13.2 43.6 3.5 10.7 .. 28.8 .. 9.0 .. 8.4 65.0 25.7 34.6 24.7 16.4 15.6 7.0 27.1 46.0 37.5 47.3 8.7 16.8 20.3 20.8 59.4 36.7 134.4 11.3 24.4 16.5 18.5 12.9 7.2 11.3 19.9 16.8 20.2 7.6 9.4 .. 11.1 13.1 33.9 36.2 14.7 33.5 13.8 .. 8.9
10.2 13.3 13.6 12.0 19.7 2.7 6.1 6.8 16.8 1.9 9.0 .. 14.0 .. 7.2 13.8 7.6 19.9 24.0 11.9 10.0 16.2 14.4 6.0 8.4 9.7 45.0 25.3 6.1 .. 23.5 21.5 8.7 21.1 20.6 .. 18.3 17.0 13.7 8.0 4.6 12.2 13.2 .. 15.5 7.3 7.1 12.9 8.2 9.3 25.8 23.7 8.8 5.5 .. .. 6.8
Real 1995
2008
4.6 5.9 8.3 .. .. 3.4 –0.3 7.9 17.5 4.0 8.6 .. 15.8 .. 1.5 .. 3.4 21.9 5.0 5.5 12.8 6.0 8.5 .. –14.5 24.6 –5.3 –16.9 4.9 14.5 17.0 14.6 15.6 7.7 46.9 3.1 18.0 –2.6 12.1 4.7 5.0 9.1 5.7 15.5 –22.9 4.4 7.5 .. 10.6 –2.3 17.9 20.5 6.6 –5.2 10.0 .. ..
6.1 6.7 –4.0 –7.0 .. 0.1 4.4 3.8 –3.6 3.0 –5.8 .. 0.8 .. 4.3 .. 2.5 –1.1 14.6 –2.9 2.1 6.0 3.6 –15.5 –1.7 2.4 32.5 15.0 –3.8 .. 26.7 12.9 2.1 10.3 –1.5 .. 9.8 .. 0.0 0.3 1.7 7.9 –3.1 .. 4.1 –1.8 2.1 –2.9 –0.3 –2.1 17.4 20.9 1.1 3.9 .. .. –10.0
2010 World Development Indicators
275
ECONOMY
Monetary indicators
4.13 Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republica Sloveniaa Somalia South Africa Spaina Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe
Monetary indicators Money and quasi money
Claims on private sector
Claims on governments and other public entities
annual % growth 1995 2008
Annual growth % of M2 1995 2008
Annual growth % of M2 1995 2008
69.6 112.6 69.5 3.4 7.4 33.0 19.6 8.5 .. .. .. 16.0 .. 35.8 72.7 3.9 .. 4.6 9.2 .. 33.0 17.7 .. 22.3 4.0 6.6 104.2 449.5 13.9 115.5 10.2 .. 6.9 36.9 .. 36.6 25.8 .. 50.7 55.5 25.5
17.5 14.6 18.0 18.0 1.8 9.8 22.5 12.0 .. .. .. 15.2 .. 8.4 16.3 15.4 10.1 3.0 25.2 –3.6 19.8 8.7 34.1 18.2 17.1 14.8 24.9 .. 30.8 31.0 19.2 .. 8.0 31.2 .. 26.1 20.7 5.6 13.2 23.2 60,376.3
23.1 46.2 32.7 3.4 1.2 88.5 1.6 19.7 .. .. .. 18.9 .. 75.4 10.6 1.3 .. 4.0 3.9 .. –3.9 40.3 .. 17.6 9.0 10.4 66.9 76.3 9.6 7.7 10.7 .. 6.0 35.2 .. 15.3 18.9 .. 6.0 34.2 25.5
33.2 31.2 14.5 19.7 10.6 29.8 13.9 11.9 .. .. .. 12.1 .. 6.2 4.8 6.5 17.2 –1.2 7.3 145.1 13.9 8.0 1.4 –2.6 7.9 14.7 16.5 .. 28.2 71.9 43.6 .. 1.7 22.4 .. 18.6 21.7 2.9 4.1 26.5 67,582.1
11.6 73.6 –41.0 1.4 1.0 34.1 –101.6 –8.1 .. .. .. –4.1 .. 5.4 389.1 –14.8 .. 0.2 6.1 .. 16.3 –4.2 .. 14.9 0.6 –1.2 30.1 –573.1 –41.2 95.4 –4.3 .. 0.2 1.0 .. 32.8 0.7 .. 13.3 185.8 –0.3
7.9 –17.2 –13.8 –59.6 –3.3 6.8 19.9 –4.9 .. .. .. 0.4 .. 13.3 0.7 –26.2 –2.8 2.7 –2.9 –9.8 –0.2 0.9 –7.6 15.7 –17.4 –0.3 5.8 .. 12.0 7.0 –1.3 .. –3.1 16.4 .. –1.9 2.6 2.4 1.6 2.0 11,566.1
a. As members of the European Monetary Union, these countries share a single currency, the euro.
276
2010 World Development Indicators
Interest rate
Deposit 1995 2008
44.7 102.0 11.1 6.2 3.5 19.1 7.0 3.5 9.0 15.4 .. 13.5 7.7 12.1 .. 9.4 6.2 1.3 4.0 23.9 24.6 11.6 .. 3.5 6.9 .. 76.0 .. 7.6 70.3 .. 4.1 .. 57.7 .. 24.7 8.5 .. 23.8 30.2 25.9
9.5 5.8 6.8 2.9 3.5 7.3 9.7 0.4 3.7 4.1 .. 11.6 .. 10.9 .. 8.2 0.8 0.2 8.3 8.4 8.0 2.5 0.8 3.5 7.4 .. 22.9 .. 9.3 9.9 .. .. .. 3.2 .. 16.2 12.7 3.0 13.0 6.6 121.5
% Lending 1995 2008
50.7 320.3 18.5 .. 16.8 78.0 28.8 6.4 16.9 23.4 .. 17.9 10.1 18.0 .. 17.1 11.1 5.5 9.0 75.5 42.8 13.3 .. 17.5 15.2 .. .. .. 20.2 122.7 .. 6.7 8.8 93.1 .. 39.7 20.1 .. 31.5 45.5 34.7
15.0 12.2 16.5 .. .. 18.1 24.5 5.4 8.0 6.7 .. 15.1 .. 18.9 .. 14.8 3.3 3.3 10.2 23.7 15.0 7.0 13.1 .. 12.4 .. .. .. 20.5 17.5 .. 4.6 5.1 12.5 .. 22.4 15.8 7.7 18.0 19.1 579.0
Real 1995
2008
11.4 72.3 6.9 .. 17.8 23.0 –3.6 4.0 7.1 –4.0 .. 6.9 4.9 8.0 .. –1.5 7.2 4.7 2.2 6.2 12.6 7.3 .. 13.8 10.7 .. .. .. 9.9 –56.8 .. 3.9 6.7 36.9 .. –7.9 10.5 .. –3.2 5.4 23.0
3.1 –5.8 –0.8 .. .. 0.5 12.0 4.2 6.8 2.5 .. 3.9 .. 2.2 .. 4.3 2.4 1.1 –3.2 –3.1 5.6 3.1 2.2 .. 5.1 .. .. .. 13.3 –9.0 .. 2.2 2.9 3.4 .. –6.8 –4.9 2.3 –0.5 7.5 –0.7
About the data
4.13
Definitions
Money and the financial accounts that record the
reporting period. The valuation of financial deriva-
• Money and quasi money are the sum of currency
supply of money lie at the heart of a country’s
tives and the net liabilities of the banking system
outside banks, demand deposits other than those of
financial system. There are several commonly used
can also be difficult. The quality of commercial bank
the central government, and the time, savings, and
defi nitions of the money supply. The narrowest,
reporting also may be adversely affected by delays in
foreign currency deposits of resident sectors other
M1, encompasses currency held by the public and
reports from bank branches, especially in countries
than the central government. This definition of the
demand deposits with banks. M2 includes M1 plus
where branch accounts are not computerized. Thus
money supply, often called M2, corresponds to lines
time and savings deposits with banks that require
the data in the balance sheets of commercial banks
34 and 35 in the IMF’s International Financial Statis-
prior notice for withdrawal. M3 includes M2 as well
may be based on preliminary estimates subject to
tics (IFS). The change in money supply is measured
as various money market instruments, such as cer-
constant revision. This problem is likely to be even
as the difference in end-of-year totals relative to M2
tificates of deposit issued by banks, bank deposits
more serious for nonbank financial intermediaries.
in the preceding year. • Claims on private sector
denominated in foreign currency, and deposits with
Many interest rates coexist in an economy, reflect-
(IFS line 32 d) include gross credit from the financial
fi nancial institutions other than banks. However
ing competitive conditions, the terms governing loans
system to individuals, enterprises, nonfinancial pub-
defined, money is a liability of the banking system,
and deposits, and differences in the position and
lic entities not included under net domestic credit,
distinguished from other bank liabilities by the spe-
status of creditors and debtors. In some economies
and financial institutions not included elsewhere.
cial role it plays as a medium of exchange, a unit of
interest rates are set by regulation or administra-
• Claims on governments and other public enti-
account, and a store of value.
tive fiat. In economies with imperfect markets, or
ties (IFS line 32 an + 32 b + 32 bx + 32 c) usually
The banking system’s assets include its net for-
where reported nominal rates are not indicative of
comprise direct credit for specific purposes, such
eign assets and net domestic credit. Net domestic
effective rates, it may be difficult to obtain data on
as financing the government budget deficit; loans
credit includes credit extended to the private sector
interest rates that reflect actual market transactions.
to state enterprises; advances against future credit
and general government and credit extended to the
Deposit and lending rates are collected by the Inter-
authorizations; and purchases of treasury bills and
nonfinancial public sector in the form of investments
national Monetary Fund (IMF) as representative inter-
bonds, net of deposits by the public sector. Public
in short- and long-term government securities and
est rates offered by banks to resident customers.
sector deposits with the banking system also include
loans to state enterprises; liabilities to the public
The terms and conditions attached to these rates
sinking funds for the service of debt and temporary
and private sectors in the form of deposits with the
differ by country, however, limiting their comparabil-
deposits of government revenues. • Deposit interest
banking system are netted out. Net domestic credit
ity. Real interest rates are calculated by adjusting
rate is the rate paid by commercial or similar banks
also includes credit to banking and nonbank financial
nominal rates by an estimate of the inflation rate in
for demand, time, or savings deposits. • Lending
institutions.
the economy. A negative real interest rate indicates
interest rate is the rate charged by banks on loans to
Domestic credit is the main vehicle through which
a loss in the purchasing power of the principal. The
prime customers. • Real interest rate is the lending
changes in the money supply are regulated, with cen-
real interest rates in the table are calculated as
interest rate adjusted for inflation as measured by
tral bank lending to the government often playing the
(i – P) / (1 + P), where i is the nominal lending inter-
the GDP deflator.
most important role. The central bank can regulate
est rate and P is the inflation rate (as measured by
lending to the private sector in several ways—for
the GDP deflator).
example, by adjusting the cost of the refinancing facilities it provides to banks, by changing market interest rates through open market operations, or by controlling the availability of credit through changes
Data sources
in the reserve requirements imposed on banks and
Data on monetary and financial statistics are
ceilings on the credit provided by banks to the pri-
published by the IMF in its monthly International
vate sector.
Financial Statistics and annual International Finan-
Monetary accounts are derived from the balance
cial Statistics Yearbook. The IMF collects data on
sheets of financial institutions—the central bank,
the financial systems of its member countries. The
commercial banks, and nonbank financial interme-
World Bank receives data from the IMF in elec-
diaries. Although these balance sheets are usually
tronic files that may contain more recent revisions
reliable, they are subject to errors of classification,
than the published sources. The discussion of
valuation, and timing and to differences in account-
monetary indicators draws from an IMF publication
ing practices. For example, whether interest income
by Marcello Caiola, A Manual for Country Econo-
is recorded on an accrual or a cash basis can make
mists (1995). Also see the IMF’s Monetary and
a substantial difference, as can the treatment of non-
Financial Statistics Manual (2000) for guidelines
performing assets. Valuation errors typically arise
for the presentation of monetary and financial sta-
for foreign exchange transactions, particularly in
tistics. Data on real interest rates are derived from
countries with flexible exchange rates or in countries
World Bank data on the GDP deflator.
that have undergone currency devaluation during the
2010 World Development Indicators
277
ECONOMY
Monetary indicators
4.14 Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austriac Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgiumc Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland c Francec Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germanyc Ghana Greecec Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
278
Exchange rates and prices Official exchange rate
Purchasing power parity (PPP) conversion factor
local currency units to $ 2008 2009a
local currency units to international $ 1995 2008
2008
49.04 .. 17.0 93.98 26.0 46.4 72.93 15.4 39.0 88.75 0.0 60.8 3.79 1.0 1.8 380.47 116.6 195.2 1.11 1.3 1.5 0.68 0.9 0.9 0.80 0.2 0.5 69.16 19.2 25.6 2,838.98 3.5 1,084.7 0.68 0.9 0.9 449.31 187.5 234.6 7.02 1.7 2.9 1.34 0.6 0.8 6.54 1.4 3.5 1.75 0.7 1.5 1.34 0.0 0.7 449.31 189.6 201.5 1,230.50 126.6 446.2 4,160.00 1,142.8 1,478.8 449.31 241.2 250.3 1.05 1.2 1.2 449.31 272.0 277.1 449.31 163.2 256.9 501.45 263.8 365.3 6.83 3.4 3.8 7.75 7.9 5.5 2,016.70 423.8 1,212.2 904.31 0.0 323.8 449.31 149.1 336.6 567.99 103.1 307.8 449.31 261.9 308.4 4.98 3.1 4.4 .. .. .. 17.84 11.1 14.4 5.09 8.5 8.6 36.21 7.3 19.5 1.00 0.4 0.5 5.60 1.2 2.0 1.00 0.4 0.5 15.38 1.9 8.1 10.70 4.8 9.1 12.58 2.1 3.5 0.68 1.0 1.0 0.68 1.0 0.9 449.31 188.0 308.6 26.90 3.9 8.0 1.68 0.4 0.9 0.68 1.0 0.9 1.43 0.1 0.5 0.68 0.6 0.7 8.33 2.9 4.5 .. 747.7 2,013.9 449.31 114.6 243.1 41.88 5.8 25.4 18.90 3.0 9.3
0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.6 1.3 1.3 0.6 0.4 0.5 1.3 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.6 1.2 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.7 0.9 .. 0.8 1.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.9 0.4 1.4 1.4 0.7 0.4 0.6 1.3 0.5 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.5
50.25 83.89 64.58 75.03 3.14 305.97 1.19 0.68 0.82 68.60 2,136.40 0.68 447.81 7.24 1.34 6.83 1.83 1.34 447.81 1,185.73 4,054.17 447.81 1.07 447.81 447.81 522.46 6.95 7.79 1,967.71 559.29 447.81 526.24 447.81 4.94 .. 17.07 5.10 34.62 1.00 5.43 1.00 15.38 10.69 9.60 0.68 0.68 447.81 22.19 1.49 0.68 1.06 0.68 7.56 5,500.00 447.81 39.11 18.90
2010 World Development Indicators
Ratio of PPP conversion factor to market exchange rate
Real effective exchange rate
GDP implicit deflator
Consumer price index
Wholesale price index
Index average annual average annual average annual 2000 = 100 % growth % growth % growth 2008 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08
.. .. 101.9 .. .. 140.4 105.6 101.8 .. .. .. 104.9 .. 117.6 .. .. .. 121.6 .. 99.5 94.3 108.7 108.8 113.6 126.7 106.0 116.2 .. 114.3 107.4 .. 109.2 106.0 107.1 .. 125.9 103.6 97.3 93.1 .. .. .. .. 99.6 104.2 103.0 105.9 125.6 127.4 103.0 101.7 105.6 .. .. .. .. ..
.. 37.7 18.5 739.4 5.2 212.5 1.5 1.6 203.0 4.1 355.1 1.8 8.7 8.6 3.7 9.7 211.8 103.3 3.7 13.4 4.4 6.3 1.5 4.5 7.1 7.9 7.9 4.5 22.3 964.9 9.0 15.9 9.2 90.1 3.0 12.8 1.6 9.8 4.4 8.7 6.2 7.9 53.6 6.5 2.0 1.3 7.0 4.2 356.7 1.7 26.7 9.2 10.4 5.5 32.5 18.1 19.9
6.9 3.5 9.2 48.4 12.8b 4.6 3.8 1.8 10.9 4.9 25.5 2.1 3.4 7.0 4.2 9.2 8.1 5.6 2.4 9.6 4.6 2.2 2.8 2.4 6.5 6.6 4.3 –1.7 7.0 28.5 7.2 10.2 3.4 3.8 2.6 2.2 2.4 15.1 9.8 7.8 3.7 18.0 5.6 8.7 1.2 2.1 6.0 10.8 7.3 1.1 18.6 3.3 5.2 16.5 3.3 17.5 6.5
.. 27.8 17.3 711.0 8.9 70.5 2.1 2.2 170.9 5.5 271.3 1.9 8.7 8.7 .. 10.4 199.5 117.5 5.5 16.1 6.3 6.5 1.7 5.3 6.9 8.9 8.6 5.9 20.2 930.2 9.3 15.6 7.2 86.3 .. 7.8 2.1 8.7 37.1 8.8 8.5 .. 21.6 5.5 1.5 1.6 4.6 4.0 24.7 2.1 28.4 9.0 10.1 .. 34.0 21.9 18.8
12.9 2.9 2.8 47.0 10.4b 3.8 3.0 2.0 10.0 6.7 20.2 2.2 3.1 4.9 .. 8.7 7.3 6.3 2.9 8.5 5.6 2.3 2.2 3.0 2.2 3.2 2.2 0.0 5.9 26.9 3.1 11.3 3.0 2.8 .. 2.5 2.0 16.0 7.0 7.2 3.9 .. 4.3 11.1 1.5 1.9 1.5 8.1 7.1 1.7 16.4 3.4 7.5 .. 2.3 18.0 7.9
.. .. .. .. 0.1 .. 1.1 0.3 .. .. 267.8 1.2 .. .. .. .. 204.9 85.7 .. .. .. .. 2.7 6.0 .. 7.0 .. 0.6 16.4 .. .. 14.1 .. 69.8 .. 8.2 1.1 .. .. 6.1 .. .. 8.1 .. 1.0 .. .. .. .. 0.4 .. 3.6 .. .. .. .. ..
.. 4.8 3.5 .. 16.9 1.0 3.9 2.8 .. .. 24.3 2.8 .. .. .. .. 11.0 6.7 .. .. .. .. 1.5 4.4 .. 6.5 .. 1.1 5.2 .. .. 13.0 .. 2.9 .. 2.5 2.7 .. 9.3 10.2 5.2 .. 3.3 .. 2.4 2.1 .. .. 7.4 2.7 .. 4.7 .. .. .. .. ..
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Irelandc Israel Italyc Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands c New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal c Puerto Rico Qatar
Official exchange rate
Purchasing power parity (PPP) conversion factor
local currency units to $ 2008 2009a
local currency units to international $ 1995 2008
2008
172.11 186.76 61.7 134.0 43.51 46.63 11.1 15.9 9,698.96 9,457.75 1,031.8 5,460.4 9,428.53 9,969.95 567.5 3,412.4 1,193.08 1,170.00 .. .. 0.68 0.68 0.8 1.0 3.59 3.79 3.1 3.6 0.68 0.68 0.8 0.8 72.76 88.92 14.6 51.3 103.36 89.56 174.6 116.5 0.71 0.71 0.4 0.5 120.30 148.69 17.5 90.5 69.18 74.74 15.8 35.0 .. .. .. .. 1,102.05 1,166.13 691.1 761.7 .. .. .. .. 0.27 0.29 0.2 0.3 36.57 43.99 3.5 16.0 8,744.06 8,486.32 327.7 3,634.2 0.48 0.48 0.2 0.4 1,507.50 1,507.50 775.4 893.9 8.26 7.48 2.1 4.2 63.21 67.81 0.6 36.2 1.22 1.21 .. 1.1 2.36 2.36 1.2 1.9 41.87 41.81 17.7 20.9 1,708.37 1,951.98 287.6 803.1 140.52 142.73 3.9 50.2 3.34 3.41 1.4 1.9 447.81 449.31 226.8 273.1 258.59 .. 62.4 118.1 28.45 29.29 10.5 16.9 11.13 12.85 2.9 7.8 10.39 11.93 1.2 5.9 1,165.74 1,446.52 158.7 653.0 7.75 7.76 4.9 5.0 24.30 27.15 4.0 12.8 5.39 5.38 .. .. 8.26 7.48 2.2 5.4 69.76 74.54 15.4 25.7 0.68 0.68 0.9 0.9 1.42 1.40 1.5 1.6 19.37 20.80 3.5 8.4 447.81 449.31 209.8 239.0 118.55 149.36 15.5 77.4 5.64 5.75 9.2 9.1 0.38 0.38 0.2 0.3 70.41 84.12 10.1 24.4 1.00 1.00 0.5 0.5 2.70 2.70 0.7 1.6 4,363.24 4,654.00 949.3 2,377.3 2.92 2.88 1.2 1.5 44.32 46.42 14.1 23.4 2.41 2.84 1.2 1.9 0.68 0.68 0.7 0.7 1.00 1.00 .. .. 3.64 3.64 .. 3.2
0.8 0.4 0.6 0.4 .. 1.4 1.0 1.2 0.7 1.1 0.7 0.8 0.5 .. 0.7 .. 0.9 0.4 0.4 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.5 .. 0.7 0.4 1.3 1.1 0.4 0.5 0.7 1.6 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.8 1.0 .. 0.9
Ratio of PPP conversion factor to market exchange rate
Real effective exchange rate
GDP implicit deflator
Consumer price index
4.14 Wholesale price index
Index average annual average annual average annual 2000 = 100 % growth % growth % growth 2008 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08
112.9 .. .. 126.7 .. 113.8 114.3 103.5 .. 91.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 87.7 .. .. .. 104.7 .. 102.7 108.4 .. .. .. .. 134.8 .. 102.0 .. .. .. .. 102.5 93.7 107.8 .. 116.6 102.0 .. 100.1 .. 108.7 146.0 .. 128.6 116.8 103.7 .. ..
19.6 8.1 15.8 27.7 .. 3.6 11.0 3.8 24.8 0.1 3.2 204.7 16.6 .. 5.9 .. 1.5 110.6 27.2 48.0 19.0 9.5 51.8 .. 75.2 79.3 19.1 33.6 4.1 7.0 8.7 6.3 19.0 119.6 57.8 4.0 34.1 25.3 11.1 8.0 2.1 1.7 42.4 6.0 29.5 2.7 0.1 11.1 3.6 7.6 11.5 26.7 8.4 24.7 5.2 3.0 ..
5.0 4.5 10.9 17.4 .. 2.6 1.2 2.6 11.5 –1.2 4.3 15.1 5.7 .. 2.2 .. 9.8 7.8 9.6 8.7 2.0 7.2 10.3 21.9 4.0 3.5 11.5 19.3 4.4 4.2 11.3 6.3 8.2 11.6 15.0 1.8 8.2 23.5 6.7 6.2 2.3 2.7 8.5 2.6 16.8 4.8 7.9 7.4 2.2 7.4 10.5 3.6 5.2 2.6 2.9 .. 12.6
20.3 9.1 13.7 26.0 .. 2.6 9.7 3.7 23.5 0.8 3.5 67.8 15.6 .. 5.1 .. 2.0 23.3 28.3 29.2 .. 5.9 .. 5.6 32.6 10.6 18.7 33.8 3.6 5.2 6.1 6.9 19.5 21.4 35.7 3.9 31.8 25.9 .. 8.7 2.4 1.8 .. 6.1 32.5 2.2 .. 9.7 1.1 9.3 13.1 27.3 7.7 25.3 4.5 .. 2.8
5.5 4.8 9.3 15.1 .. 3.6 1.7 2.3 11.4 –0.1 4.2 8.3 10.7 .. 3.1 1.3 3.0 6.1 9.0 6.1 .. 7.8 .. –0.5 2.5 2.3 10.8 12.7 2.3 2.2 7.5 6.3 4.5 11.3 8.1 1.9 11.5 23.7 5.4 5.6 2.0 2.7 8.6 2.4 12.9 1.7 2.3 7.1 2.1 5.9 8.7 2.3 5.5 2.4 2.9 .. 7.3
16.8 7.4 15.4 28.4 .. 1.6 8.1 2.9 .. –1.0 .. 16.3 .. .. 3.7 .. 1.4 35.6 .. 12.0 .. .. .. .. 24.8 8.5 .. .. 3.4 .. .. .. 18.4 .. .. 2.9 .. .. .. .. 1.3 1.4 .. .. .. 1.6 .. 10.4 1.0 .. .. 23.7 5.6 19.8 .. .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
3.3 5.2 11.0 10.8 .. –1.9 4.9 3.0 .. 0.8 13.6 14.9 .. .. 2.5 .. 2.5 9.4 .. 7.6 .. .. .. .. 5.5 0.7 .. .. 5.0 .. .. .. 6.1 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 3.0 3.2 .. .. .. 7.8 .. 8.3 3.8 .. 11.2 2.8 7.7 2.7 2.9 .. ..
279
ECONOMY
Exchange rates and prices
4.14
Exchange rates and prices Official exchange rate
Purchasing power parity (PPP) conversion factor
local currency units to $ 2008 2009a
local currency units to international $ 1995 2008
Romania 2.52 Russian Federation 24.85 Rwanda 546.85 Saudi Arabia 3.75 Senegal 447.81 Serbia 55.72 Sierra Leone 2,981.51 Singapore 1.41 0.68 Slovak Republic c 0.68 Sloveniac Somalia .. South Africa 8.26 0.68 Spainc Sri Lanka 108.33 Sudan 2.09 Swaziland 8.26 Sweden 6.59 Switzerland 1.08 Syrian Arab Republic 11.23 Tajikistan 3.43 Tanzania 1,196.31 Thailand 33.31 Timor-Leste 1.00 Togo 447.81 Trinidad and Tobago 6.29 Tunisia 1.23 Turkey 1.30 Turkmenistan .. Uganda 1,720.44 Ukraine 5.27 United Arab Emirates 3.67 United Kingdom 0.54 United States 1.00 Uruguay 20.95 Uzbekistan .. Venezuela, RB 2.14 Vietnam 16,302.25 West Bank and Gaza .. Yemen, Rep. 199.76 Zambia 3,745.66 Zimbabwe 6,715,424,238.75
2.90 0.1 29.94 1.5 568.80 128.7 3.75 1.8 449.31 252.0 65.73 2.8 3,280.15 379.6 1.40 1.3 0.68 0.4 0.68 0.4 .. .. 7.48 2.3 0.68 0.7 114.35 18.3 2.20 0.3 7.48 2.2 7.13 9.4 1.03 2.0 .. 12.8 4.37 0.0 1,327.00 154.8 33.18 15.1 1.00 .. 449.31 238.6 6.35 2.9 1.29 0.5 1.45 0.0 .. 0.0 1,873.78 472.1 7.98 0.3 3.67 1.7 0.62 0.6 1.00 1.0 19.70 5.5 .. 11.2 2.14 0.1 16,968.00 3,170.2 .. .. 205.04 22.0 4,682.22 404.2 .. 25.7
1.7 18.5 244.3 3.0 271.6 36.0 1,340.7 1.1 0.6 0.7 .. 4.6 0.8 48.0 1.3 4.1 9.3 1.6 27.2 1.4 456.9 16.7 0.6 242.3 4.5 0.6 1.0 1.3 668.5 2.8 3.0 0.7 1.0 15.9 507.8 1.9 6,154.4 .. 95.9 3,133.5 ..
Ratio of PPP conversion factor to market exchange rate
2008
0.7 0.7 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.8 0.0 1.0 .. 0.6 1.1 0.4 0.6 0.5 1.4 1.5 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.8 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.4 0.9 0.4 .. 0.5 0.8 ..
Real effective exchange rate
GDP implicit deflator
Consumer price index
Wholesale price index
Index average annual average annual average annual 2000 = 100 % growth % growth % growth 2008 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08 1990–2000 2000–08
112.4 123.4 .. 97.8 .. .. 109.5 110.1 127.8 .. .. 81.8 106.9 .. .. .. 100.6 99.2 .. .. .. .. .. 107.1 113.9 95.8 .. .. 104.0 115.8 .. 93.8 92.5 116.2 .. 144.9 .. .. .. 145.2 ..
98.0 161.5 14.3 1.6 6.0 .. 31.9 1.3 11.1 29.3 .. 9.9 3.9 9.1 65.5 10.5 2.2 1.1 7.9 235.0 21.6 4.2 .. 7.0 5.4 4.4 81.7 408.2 12.0 271.0 2.2 2.8 2.0 33.2 245.8 45.3 15.2 5.7 22.4 52.1 26.7
17.1 16.8 10.0 8.9 2.8 17.6 9.4 1.5 3.7 4.2 .. 7.1 4.0 10.6 9.9 7.8 1.6 1.0 8.4 21.0 9.4 3.2 3.6 1.3 6.9 3.0 16.8 11.5 5.1 15.7 8.9 2.6 2.9 8.2 25.5 26.3 7.7 3.4 13.6 17.1 232.0
100.5 99.1 16.2 1.0 5.4 50.2 .. 1.7 8.4 12.0 .. 8.7 3.8 9.9 72.0 9.5 1.9 1.6 6.4 .. 20.9 4.9 .. 8.5 5.7 4.4 79.9 .. 8.3 155.7 .. 2.9 2.7 33.9 .. 49.0 4.1 .. 26.3 57.0 29.0
12.5 12.7 8.5 1.7 2.2 16.6 .. 1.3 5.2 4.4 .. 4.3 3.3 11.0 8.2 6.9 1.5 1.0 5.9 13.0 6.0 3.0 5.2 2.7 6.1 3.2 18.6 .. 6.0 9.8 .. 3.0 2.8 9.5 .. 20.6 7.1 3.8 11.7 16.6 497.7
93.8 99.8 .. 1.3 .. .. .. –1.0 9.5 9.1 .. 7.7 2.4 8.1 .. .. 2.0 –0.4 4.7 .. .. 3.8 .. .. 2.8 3.6 75.2 .. .. 161.6 .. 2.4 1.2 27.2 .. 44.1 .. .. .. 101.4 25.9
16.6 17.1 .. 2.5 .. .. .. 3.7 5.2 4.1 .. 6.7 3.4 12.6 .. .. 2.9 1.1 2.2 .. .. 5.8 .. .. 2.0 4.3 19.0 .. .. 14.1 .. 1.8 4.7 14.6 .. 26.4 .. .. .. .. ..
Note: The differences in the growth rates of the GDP deflator and consumer and wholesale price indexes are due mainly to differences in data availability for each of the indexes during the period. a. Average for December or latest monthly data available. b. Private analysts estimate that consumer price index inflation was considerably higher for 2007–09 and believe that GDP volume growth has been significantly lower than official reports indicate since the last quarter of 2008. c. As members of the euro area, these countries share a single currency, the euro.
280
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
4.14
Definitions
In a market-based economy, household, producer,
for currencies of selected countries and the euro
• Official exchange rate is the exchange rate deter-
and government choices about resource allocation
area. For most high-income countries weights are
mined by national authorities or the rate determined
are influenced by relative prices, including the real
derived from industrial country trade in manufac-
in the legally sanctioned exchange market. It is cal-
exchange rate, real wages, real interest rates, and
tured goods. Data are compiled from the nominal
culated as an annual average based on monthly
other prices in the economy. Relative prices also
effective exchange rate index and a cost indicator
averages (local currency units relative to the U.S.
largely reflect these agents’ choices. Thus relative
of relative normalized unit labor costs in manufactur-
dollar). • Purchasing power parity (PPP) conversion
prices convey vital information about the interaction
ing. For selected other countries the nominal effec-
factor is the number of units of a country’s currency
of economic agents in an economy and with the rest
tive exchange rate index is based on manufactured
required to buy the same amount of goods and ser-
of the world.
goods and primary products trade with partner or
vices in the domestic market that a U.S. dollar would
The exchange rate is the price of one currency
competitor countries. For these countries the real
buy in the United States. • Ratio of PPP conver-
in terms of another. Offi cial exchange rates and
effective exchange rate index is the nominal index
sion factor to market exchange rate is the result
exchange rate arrangements are established by
adjusted for relative changes in consumer prices; an
obtained by dividing the PPP conversion factor by the
governments. Other exchange rates recognized by
increase represents an appreciation of the local cur-
market exchange rate. • Real effective exchange
governments include market rates, which are deter-
rency. Because of conceptual and data limitations,
rate is the nominal effective exchange rate (a mea-
mined largely by legal market forces, and for coun-
changes in real effective exchange rates should be
sure of the value of a currency against a weighted
tries with multiple exchange arrangements, principal
interpreted with caution.
average of several foreign currencies) divided by
rates, secondary rates, and tertiary rates. (Also see
Inflation is measured by the rate of increase in a
a price deflator or index of costs. • GDP implicit
Statistical methods for alternative conversion factors
price index, but actual price change can be nega-
deflator measures the average annual rate of price
in the World Bank Atlas method of calculating gross
tive. The index used depends on the prices being
change in the economy as a whole for the periods
national income [GNI] per capita in U.S. dollars.)
examined. The GDP deflator reflects price changes
shown. • Consumer price index reflects changes
Official or market exchange rates are often used
for total GDP. The most general measure of the over-
in the cost to the average consumer of acquiring a
to convert economic statistics in local currencies to
all price level, it accounts for changes in government
basket of goods and services that may be fixed or
a common currency in order to make comparisons
consumption, capital formation (including inventory
may change at specified intervals, such as yearly.
across countries. Since market rates reflect at best
appreciation), international trade, and the main com-
The Laspeyres formula is generally used. • Whole-
the relative prices of tradable goods, the volume of
ponent, household final consumption expenditure.
sale price index refers to a mix of agricultural and
goods and services that a U.S. dollar buys in the
The GDP deflator is usually derived implicitly as the
industrial goods at various stages of production and
United States may not correspond to what a U.S.
ratio of current to constant price GDP—or a Paasche
distribution, including import duties. The Laspeyres
dollar converted to another country’s currency at
index. It is defective as a general measure of inflation
formula is generally used.
the official exchange rate would buy in that country,
for policy use because of long lags in deriving esti-
particularly when nontradable goods and services
mates and because it is often an annual measure.
account for a significant share of a country’s output.
Consumer price indexes are produced more fre-
An alternative exchange rate—the purchasing power
quently and so are more current. They are also con-
parity (PPP) conversion factor—is preferred because
structed explicitly, based on surveys of the cost of
it reflects differences in price levels for both tradable
a defined basket of consumer goods and services.
and nontradable goods and services and therefore
Nevertheless, consumer price indexes should be
provides a more meaningful comparison of real out-
interpreted with caution. The definition of a house-
put. See table 1.1 for further discussion.
hold, the basket of goods, and the geographic (urban
The ratio of the PPP conversion factor to the official
or rural) and income group coverage of consumer
exchange rate—the national price level or compara-
price surveys can vary widely by country. In addi-
tive price level—measures differences in the price
tion, weights are derived from household expendi-
level at the gross domestic product (GDP) level. The
ture surveys, which, for budgetary reasons, tend to
price level index tends to be lower in poorer coun-
be conducted infrequently in developing countries,
tries and to rise with income. The market exchange
impairing comparability over time. Although useful for
rate (or alternative conversion factor) is the official
measuring consumer price inflation within a country,
exchange rate adjusted for some countries by World
consumer price indexes are of less value in compar-
Bank staff to reflect actual price changes. National
ing countries.
price levels vary systematically, rising with GNI per
Wholesale price indexes are based on the prices at
capita. The real effective exchange rate is a nominal
the first commercial transaction of commodities that
effective exchange rate index adjusted for relative
are important in a country’s output or consumption.
Data on official and real effective exchange rates
movements in national price or cost indicators of
Prices are farm-gate for agricultural commodities and
and consumer and wholesale price indexes are
the home country, selected countries, and the euro
ex-factory for industrial goods. Preference is given to
from the International Monetary Fund’s Interna-
area. A nominal effective exchange rate index is the
indexes with the broadest coverage of the economy.
tional Financial Statistics. PPP conversion factors
ratio (expressed on the base 2000 = 100) of an
The least squares method is used to calculate
and GDP deflators are from the World Bank’s data
index of a currency’s period-average exchange rate
growth rates of the GDP implicit deflator, consumer
to a weighted geometric average of exchange rates
price index, and wholesale price index.
Data sources
files.
2010 World Development Indicators
281
ECONOMY
Exchange rates and prices
4.15
Balance of payments current account Goods and services
Net income
Net current transfers
Current account balance
$ millions 1995 2008
$ millions 1995 2008
$ millions 1995 2008
Total reservesa
$ millions Exports
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China† Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras †Data for Taiwan, China
282
Imports
1995
2008
1995
2008
.. 304 .. 3,836 24,987 300 69,710 89,906 785 4,431 5,269 190,686b 614 1,234 .. 2,421 52,641 6,776 272 129 969 2,040 219,501 179 190 19,358 147,240 .. 12,294 .. 1,374 4,451 4,337 6,972 .. 28,202 65,655 5,731 5,196 13,260 2,040 135 2,573 768 47,973 362,717 2,945 177 575 600,347 1,582 15,523 2,823 700 30 192 1,635 128,369
.. 3,833 .. 64,243 82,101 1,757 234,298 241,307 32,133 17,372 37,063 459,890 1,348 6,947 6,856 5,585 228,393 30,589 .. 136 6,356 7,454 529,160 .. .. 77,210 1,581,713 457,554 42,579 .. 6,127 13,651 11,103 29,623 .. 167,927 187,208 11,888 20,460 54,761 6,121 .. 17,750 3,514 128,904 770,104 .. 271 3,688 1,744,963 7,071 79,635 9,637 1,449 .. 833 6,956 288,756
.. 836 .. 3,519 26,066 726 74,841 92,055 1,290 7,589 5,752 178,798 b 895 1,574 .. 2,050 63,293 6,502 483 259 1,375 1,608 200,991 244 411 18,301 135,282 .. 16,012 .. 1,346 4,717 3,806 9,152 .. 30,044 57,860 6,137 5,708 17,140 3,623 498 2,860 1,446 37,705 333,746 1,723 232 1,413 586,662 2,120 24,711 3,728 1,011 89 802 1,852 124,171
.. 7,287 .. 43,122 67,588 4,749 242,311 222,639 11,464 25,344 41,676 470,702 2,102 5,680 12,935 5,837 220,247 42,158 .. 529 7,594 8,349 486,728 .. .. 69,010 1,232,843 434,202 44,743 .. 6,386 16,433 9,377 35,007 .. 156,708 177,818 17,941 20,730 67,223 11,012 .. 18,757 9,617 117,521 835,249 .. 371 7,499 1,516,863 12,567 119,112 15,581 1,810 .. 2,871 11,603 271,117
2010 World Development Indicators
.. 44 .. –767 –4,636 40 –14,036 –1,597 –6 68 –51 6,808b –8 –207 .. –32 –11,105 –432 –29 –13 –57 –412 –22,721 –23 –7 –2,714 –11,774 .. –1,596 .. –695 –226 –787 –53 .. –104 –4,549 –769 –930 –405 –67 8 3 –19 –4,440 –8,964 –665 –5 127 –2,814 –129 –1,684 –159 –85 –21 –31 –226 4,188
.. .. 150 477 .. .. –14,504 156 –7,550 597 471 168 –39,399 –109 –2,867 –1,702 –5,266 111 –771 2,265 –788 76 6,966 –4,463 b –50 121 –536 244 603 .. –256 –39 –40,562 3,621 –1,798 132 .. 255 –4 153 –409 277 –205 69 –14,065 –117 .. 63 .. 191 –14,563 307 31,438 1,435 10,457 .. –10,063 799 .. .. –1,885 42 –389 134 –894 –237 –2,406 802 .. .. –17,276 572 3,892 –1,391 –1,815 992 –1,598 442 1,289 4,031 –536 1,389 .. 324 –1,512 126 2 736 –1,093 –597 36,057 –9,167 .. –42 –27 52 –166 197 64,513 –38,768 –259 523 –16,015 8,008 –930 491 –91 179 .. 46 6 553 –350 243 9,978 –2,912
.. 1,379 .. –210 115 1,138 –374 –2,647 1,050 9,774 192 –8,255 268 1,284 2,712 1,010 4,224 791 .. 186 594 590 –1,085 .. .. 2,924 45,799 –3,277 5,514 .. –38 442 –345 1,524 .. –575 –5,734 3,432 2,989 9,758 3,832 .. 273 4,295 –2,335 –35,141 .. 84 1,061 –48,738 2,212 4,180 5,011 18 .. 1,876 3,021 –2,979
.. –12 .. –295 –5,118 –218 –19,277 –5,448 –401 –824 –458 14,232b –167 –303 .. 300 –18,136 –26 15 10 –186 90 –4,328 –25 –38 –1,350 1,618 .. –4,516 .. –625 –358 –492 –1,431 .. –1,374 1,855 –183 –1,000 –254 –262 –31 –158 39 5,231 10,840 515 –8 –514 –27,897 –144 –2,864 –572 –216 –35 –87 –201 5,474
$ millions 1995 2008
.. .. .. –1,924 265 2,364 .. 4,164 148,099 6,408 213 17,869 7,078 15,979 46,385 –1,383 111 1,407 –47,786 14,952 32,924 13,154 23,369 16,741 16,454 121 6,467 1,032 2,376 5,787 –5,209 377 3,063 –12,101 24,120 15,681 –535 198 1,263 2,015 1,005 7,720 –2,764 80 3,516 502 4,695 9,119 –28,192 51,477 193,783 –12,577 1,635 17,930 .. 347 928 –212 216 267 –1,053 192 2,639 –510 15 3,112 27,281 16,369 43,872 .. 238 131 .. 147 1,355 –3,440 14,860 23,079 426,107 80,288 1,966,037 30,532 55,424 182,527 –6,713 8,452 23,671 .. 157 78 –2,181 64 3,881 –2,729 1,060 3,801 488 529 2,253 –6,267 1,896 12,957 .. .. .. –6,631 14,613 37,009 7,549 11,652 42,327 –4,437 373 2,288 1,120 1,788 4,473 –1,415 17,122 34,331 –1,596 940 2,646 .. 40 58 –2,245 583 3,972 –1,806 815 871 7,955 10,657 8,354 –64,229 58,510 103,306 .. 153 1,935 –43 106 117 –2,915 199 1,480 243,875 121,816 138,564 –3,543 804 2,269 –51,313 16,119 3,490 –1,863 783 4,654 –434 87 .. .. 20 124 –156 199 543 –1,977 270 2,492 24,638 95,559 303,553
Goods and services
4.15
Net income
Net current transfers
Current account balance
$ millions 1995 2008
$ millions 1995 2008
$ millions 1995 2008
ECONOMY
Balance of payments current account
Total reservesa
$ millions Exports 1995
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
19,765 38,013 52,923 18,953 .. 49,439 27,478 295,618 3,394 493,991 3,479 5,975 3,526 .. 147,761 .. 14,215 448 408 2,088 .. 199 .. 7,513 3,191 1,302 749 470 83,369 529 504 2,349 89,321 884 508 9,044 411 1,307 1,734 1,029 241,517 17,883 662 321 12,342 56,058 6,078 10,214 7,610 2,992 4,802 6,622 26,795 35,716 32,260 .. ..
Imports 2008
127,274 290,861 154,852 .. 40,455 221,383 81,245 666,484 5,294 895,228 12,353 76,354 8,291 .. 509,417 .. 98,335 2,743 1,201 14,172 24,041 950 635 62,158 28,594 4,982 .. .. 230,054 1,933 .. 4,944 309,822 2,483 2,031 33,746 3,208 4,834 3,671 1,710 638,348 40,320 2,937 748 80,160 219,417 39,693 25,454 16,149 .. 8,831 35,166 58,448 214,004 82,807 .. ..
1995
19,916 48,225 54,461 15,113 .. 42,169 35,287 250,319 3,729 419,556 4,903 6,102 5,922 .. 155,104 .. 12,615 726 748 2,193 .. 1,046 .. 5,755 3,902 1,773 987 660 86,851 991 510 2,454 82,168 1,006 521 11,243 1,055 2,020 2,100 1,624 216,558 17,248 1,150 457 12,841 46,848 5,035 14,185 7,768 1,905 5,200 9,597 33,317 33,825 39,545 .. ..
2008
126,041 –1,701 –11,190 203 371,616 –3,734 –3,539 8,382 144,935 –5,874 –15,155 981 .. –478 .. –4 21,488 .. –3,067 .. 194,363 –7,325 –39,430 1,776 84,309 –2,654 –3,298 5,673 677,886 –15,644 –43,548 –4,579 9,914 –371 –568 607 877,887 44,285 152,336 –7,676 19,228 –279 951 1,444 49,451 –146 –19,323 59 12,559 –219 –45 1,037 .. .. .. .. 520,157 –1,303 5,107 –19 .. .. .. .. 37,948 4,881 10,119 –1,465 4,747 –35 –103 79 1,141 –6 –50 110 18,838 19 –596 71 29,718 .. –77 .. 1,728 314 507 210 2,344 .. –653 .. 26,003 133 586 –220 33,759 –13 –1,539 109 7,532 –30 –108 213 .. –167 .. 129 .. –44 .. 157 178,741 –4,144 –7,137 –1,017 2,623 –41 –291 219 .. –48 .. 76 6,320 –19 178 101 333,838 –12,689 –17,250 3,960 5,691 –18 598 56 1,880 –25 –145 77 46,521 –1,318 –522 2,330 4,406 –140 –631 339 2,906 –110 –1,248 562 4,400 139 –40 403 4,371 9 151 230 568,373 7,247 –14,582 –6,434 42,482 –3,955 –9,831 255 5,357 –372 –161 138 1,284 –47 0 31 47,592 –2,878 –11,180 799 130,667 –1,919 2,915 –2,059 26,830 –374 –2,214 –1,469 47,586 –1,939 –4,294 2,562 17,490 –466 –1,574 153 .. –488 .. 75 9,393 110 –151 195 34,005 –2,482 –8,144 832 69,917 3,662 140 880 234,960 –1,995 –14,210 958 104,560 21 –11,495 7,132 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
$ millions 1995 2008
–982 –1,650 –10,939 12,017 33,874 48,206 –5,563 –36,088 22,865 257,423 5,364 –6,431 125 14,908 51,641 .. 3,358 .. .. .. –381 .. 15,519 8,347 50,207 –1,812 1,721 –14,222 8,770 1,024 8,482 –4,790 2,120 8,123 42,513 –23,194 25,076 –78,144 60,690 105,649 2,150 –99 –3,038 681 1,773 –13,043 111,044 156,634 192,620 1,030,763 3,532 –259 –2,393 2,279 8,918 –985 –213 6,596 1,660 19,883 2,336 –1,578 –1,978 384 2,879 .. .. .. .. .. –773 –8,665 –6,406 32,804 201,545 .. .. .. .. 892 –5,765 5,016 64,742 4,543 19,321 1,477 –235 –631 134 1,225 98 –237 107 99 875 769 –16 –4,492 602 5,244 2,698 .. –3,056 8,100 28,265 515 –323 244 457 658 1,175 .. –1,187 28 161 –1,040 1,672 35,702 7,415 96,335 1,077 –614 –5,627 829 6,442 1,448 –288 –1,210 275 2,110 .. –276 .. 109 982 .. –78 .. 115 254 –5,262 –8,644 38,914 24,699 92,166 400 –284 –581 323 1,072 .. 22 .. 90 207 224 –22 –974 887 1,796 25,461 –1,576 –15,805 17,046 95,300 1,623 –85 –987 257 1,672 215 39 222 158 1,396 8,768 –1,186 –4,528 3,874 22,720 854 –445 –975 195 1,661 122 –261 802 651 1,383 1,127 176 358 221 1,293 3,243 –356 733 646 .. –12,822 25,773 42,571 47,162 28,603 756 –3,065 –11,237 4,410 11,052 1,068 –722 –1,513 142 1,141 185 –152 –351 95 705 17,969 –2,578 39,357 1,709 53,599 –3,323 5,233 88,341 22,976 50,950 –5,181 –801 5,469 1,943 11,582 11,024 –3,349 –15,402 2,528 9,024 238 –471 –2,677 781 1,935 .. 674 .. 267 2,008 369 –92 –345 1,106 2,863 2,803 –4,625 –4,180 8,653 31,241 15,226 –1,980 3,897 7,781 37,498 8,257 854 –26,909 14,957 62,184 3,649 –132 –29,599 22,063 12,006 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 848 9,997
2010 World Development Indicators
283
4.15
Balance of payments current account Goods and services
Net income
Net current transfers
Current account balance
$ millions 1995 2008
$ millions 1995 2008
$ millions 1995 2008
Total reservesa
$ millions Exports 1995
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Imports 2008
9,404 62,616 92,987 522,909 75 665 53,450 323,071 1,506 2,875 .. 14,986 128 334 157,658 427,595 10,969 78,765 10,377 37,008 .. .. 34,402 98,923 133,910 429,488 4,617 10,140 681 12,163 1,020 2,199 95,525 258,075 123,320 319,253 5,757 15,617 .. 1,756 1,265 5,206 70,292 208,998 .. .. 465 913 2,799 14,315 7,979 25,197 36,581 175,978 1,774 .. 664 3,426 17,090 85,612 .. .. 322,114 756,476 794,397 1,826,595 3,507 9,334 .. .. 20,753 97,300 9,498 69,781 764 926 2,160 10,182 1,222 5,254 2,344 .. 6,393,697 t 19,557,280 t 207,241 45,519 1,110,795 5,731,256 497,910 3,110,947 612,966 2,636,805 1,152,982 5,938,347 397,583 2,334,814 231,676 1,366,736 272,861 1,001,523 .. .. 58,893 348,172 89,262 378,970 5,235,576 13,709,918 2,097,732 5,619,649
1995
2008
11,306 89,847 82,809 368,217 374 1,401 44,874 176,040 1,821 5,402 .. 26,631 260 597 144,520 392,690 10,658 80,348 10,749 38,505 .. .. 33,375 107,542 135,000 520,200 5,982 15,609 1,238 10,849 1,274 2,523 81,142 222,243 108,916 264,149 5,541 15,289 .. 4,155 2,139 8,038 82,246 203,874 .. .. 671 1,377 2,110 8,047 8,811 26,564 40,113 211,309 1,796 .. 1,490 5,224 18,280 99,962 .. .. 327,000 845,303 890,784 2,522,531 3,568 10,083 .. .. 16,905 59,998 12,334 83,398 2,789 4,430 2,471 11,681 1,338 5,466 2,515 .. 6,247,179 t 19,164,685 t 64,928 282,482 1,154,326 5,223,924 531,746 2,758,700 622,049 2,469,508 1,217,464 5,502,978 413,802 1,947,840 239,492 1,352,255 288,143 1,002,903 106,333 374,714 78,652 470,488 99,763 371,927 5,028,511 13,740,945 1,974,159 5,491,628
a. International reserves including gold valued at London gold price. b. Includes Luxembourg.
284
2010 World Development Indicators
–241 –3,372 7 2,800 –124 .. –30 2,133 –14 201 .. –2,875 –5,402 –137 –3 81 –6,473 10,708 –560 .. –110 –2,114 .. –34 –390 –716 –3,204 17 –96 –434 .. 3,393 20,899 –227 .. –1,943 –384 607 –561 –249 –294
–5,372 –49,196 –34 10,027 –74 –1,348 –75 –4,969 –3,344 –1,533 .. –9,132 –49,585 –972 –3,013 64 10,814 –37,311 –689 –52 –92 –10,003 .. –30 –964 –2,267 –7,964 .. –288 –1,540 .. 75,372 118,233 –627 .. 698 –4,400 734 –1,915 –1,398 ..
$ millions 1995 2008
369 8,884 –1,774 –23,719 2,624 157 –3,096 6,963 102,401 18,024 350 518 57 –252 99 –16,694 –23,012 –5,318 134,046 10,399 195 1,290 –244 –1,311 272 .. 4,138 .. –8,855 .. 43 111 –118 –227 35 –894 –2,756 14,377 27,181 68,816 93 –1,257 390 –6,185 3,863 95 –299 –75 –3,329 1,821 .. .. .. .. .. –645 –2,333 –2,493 –20,084 4,464 4,525 –13,832 –1,967 –154,129 40,531 732 2,666 –770 –3,775 2,112 60 385 –500 –1,314 163 144 194 –30 –66 298 –2,970 –6,330 4,940 40,317 25,870 –4,409 –12,699 20,703 5,094 68,620 607 821 263 459 .. .. 2,498 .. 48 39 395 617 –590 –2,307 270 487 4,766 –13,582 –113 36,939 .. .. .. .. .. 118 279 –122 –216 130 –4 60 294 5,364 379 774 1,922 –774 –1,711 1,689 4,398 2,006 –2,338 –41,289 13,891 5 .. 0 .. 1,168 639 1,240 –281 –845 459 472 3,127 –1,152 –12,763 1,069 .. .. .. .. 7,778 –11,943 –26,449 –13,436 –39,904 49,144 –38,073 –128,363 –113,561 –706,066 175,996 76 150 –213 –1,225 1,813 .. .. .. .. .. 109 –608 2,014 37,392 10,715 1,200 7,311 –2,020 –10,706 1,324 435 2,361 –984 –408 .. 1,056 2,163 184 –1,251 638 –1,046 223 182 565 –182 40 .. –425 .. 888
39,768 427,077 596 34,340 1,602 11,478 220 174,193 18,836 957 .. 34,070 20,288 2,617 1,399 752 29,727 74,146 .. 204 2,863 111,009 210 582 9,496 9,039 73,675 .. 2,301 31,543 31,694 53,024 294,046 6,360 .. 43,065 23,890 .. 8,155 1,096 ..
About the data
4.15
Definitions
The balance of payments records an economy’s trans-
system, external debt records, information provided
• Exports and imports of goods and services are all
actions with the rest of the world. Balance of payments
by enterprises, surveys to estimate service transac-
transactions between residents of an economy and
accounts are divided into two groups: the current
tions, and foreign exchange records. Differences in
the rest of the world involving a change in ownership
account, which records transactions in goods, ser-
collection methods—such as in timing, definitions
of general merchandise, goods sent for processing
vices, income, and current transfers, and the capital
of residence and ownership, and the exchange rate
and repairs, nonmonetary gold, and services. • Net
and financial account, which records capital transfers,
used to value transactions—contribute to net errors
income is receipts and payments of employee com-
acquisition or disposal of nonproduced, nonfinancial
and omissions. In addition, smuggling and other ille-
pensation for nonresident workers, and investment
assets, and transactions in financial assets and liabili-
gal or quasi-legal transactions may be unrecorded or
income (receipts and payments on direct investment,
ties. The table presents data from the current account
misrecorded. For further discussion of issues relat-
portfolio investment, and other investments and
plus gross international reserves.
ing to the recording of data on trade in goods and
receipts on reserve assets). Income derived from
services, see About the data for tables 4.4–4.7.
the use of intangible assets is recorded under busi-
The balance of payments is a double-entry accounting system that shows all flows of goods and services
The concepts and definitions underlying the data in
ness services. • Net current transfers are recorded
into and out of an economy; all transfers that are the
the table are based on the fifth edition of the Inter-
in the balance of payments whenever an economy
counterpart of real resources or financial claims pro-
national Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Balance of Payments
provides or receives goods, services, income, or
vided to or by the rest of the world without a quid pro
Manual (1993). That edition redefined as capital trans-
financial items without a quid pro quo. All transfers
quo, such as donations and grants; and all changes
fers some transactions previously included in the cur-
not considered to be capital are current. • Current
in residents’ claims on and liabilities to nonresidents
rent account, such as debt forgiveness, migrants’ cap-
account balance is the sum of net exports of goods
that arise from economic transactions. All transac-
ital transfers, and foreign aid to acquire capital goods.
and services, net income, and net current transfers.
tions are recorded twice—once as a credit and once
Thus the current account balance now reflects more
• Total reserves are holdings of monetary gold,
as a debit. In principle the net balance should be
accurately net current transfer receipts in addition to
special drawing rights, reserves of IMF members
zero, but in practice the accounts often do not bal-
transactions in goods, services (previously nonfac-
held by the IMF, and holdings of foreign exchange
ance, requiring inclusion of a balancing item, net
tor services), and income (previously factor income).
under the control of monetary authorities. The gold
errors and omissions.
Many countries maintain their data collection systems
component of these reserves is valued at year-end
Discrepancies may arise in the balance of pay-
according to the fourth edition of the Balance of Pay-
(December 31) London prices ($386.75 an ounce in
ments because there is no single source for balance
ments Manual (1977). Where necessary, the IMF con-
1995 and $871.70 an ounce in 2008).
of payments data and therefore no way to ensure
verts such reported data to conform to the fifth edition
that the data are fully consistent. Sources include
(see Primary data documentation). Values are in U.S.
customs data, monetary accounts of the banking
dollars converted at market exchange rates.
4.15a
Top 15 economies with the largest reserves in 2008 Total reserves ($ billions)
Share of world total (%) 2008
Annual change (%) 2007–08
Months of imports 2008
2007
2008
China
1,546
1,966
25.8
27.1
18.2
Japan
973
1,031
13.5
5.9
13.2
Russian Federation
479
427
5.6
–10.8
10.8
Data sources
United States
278
294
3.9
5.9
1.1
Data on the balance of payments are published in
India
277
257
3.4
–6.9
7.9
the IMF’s Balance of Payments Statistics Yearbook
Korea, Rep.
263
202
2.6
–23.2
4.5
and International Financial Statistics. The World
Brazil
180
194
2.5
7.5
8.5
Bank exchanges data with the IMF through elec-
Hong Kong, China
153
183
2.4
19.5
4.0
Singapore
163
174
2.3
6.9
4.6
Algeria
115
148
1.9
28.8
..
Germany
136
139
1.8
1.9
0.9
Thailand
87
111
1.5
26.9
6.0
Italy
94
106
1.4
12.3
1.5
115
103
1.4
–10.5
1.2
The IMF’s International Financial Statistics and
83
96
1.3
15.7
38.7
Balance of Payments databases are available on
France Libya
Source: International Monetary Fund, International Financial Statistics data files.
tronic files that in most cases are more timely and cover a longer period than the published sources. More information about the design and compilation of the balance of payments can be found in the IMF’s Balance of Payments Manual, fifth edition (1993), Balance of Payments Textbook (1996), and Balance of Payments Compilation Guide (1995).
CD-ROM.
2006 World Development Indicators
285
ECONOMY
Balance of payments current account
STATES AND MARKETS
Introduction
I
nfrastructure is the missing link of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Infrastructure—the basic framework for delivering energy, transport, water and sanitation, and information and communication technology services to people— directly or indirectly affects people’s lives everywhere. That relationship is reflected in the MDGs. Yet only two MDG targets touch on infrastructure services: water and sanitation (target 7.C) and telephones and the Internet (target 8.F); energy and transport are missing entirely. And no goal or target addresses the comprehensive role of infrastructure in achieving the MDGs.
Although income influences performance on the MDGs, it has long been recognized that growth in productivity and incomes and improvements in health and education outcomes require investment in infrastructure. The MDGs are designed to make economic growth more inclusive. Since a large share of people live in rural areas, often far from employment opportunities, policies to reduce poverty require investment in infrastructure and transport. By improving productivity, investments in infrastructure reduce poverty. Access to clean water and sanitation reduces infant mortality. Electricity powers hospitals and refrigerators for vaccines. Roads in rural areas boost school attendance and use of medical clinics. And information and communication technologies can improve teacher training and promote better health practices.
How infrastructure affects the Millennium Development Goals The results of infrastructure investments are reflected in progress toward the MDGs. Infrastructure that reaches poor people raises their income and welfare by increasing the value of their assets or lowering the costs of inputs and providing better access to markets for their products. Access to energy improves health and raises household and business productivity. Modern, clean, effi cient fuels and electricity power lights that extend livelihood activities beyond daylight hours and power manufacturing equipment that lowers unit costs and increases labor productivity. Modern energy also reduces the cost of home cooking, heating, and lighting, freeing resources for other essential needs, and relieves girls of the need to collect water and wood
for fuel, enabling them to attend school. A household energy and universal access project in Mali is extending electricity to semi-urban and rural areas, improving the quality and efficiency of health and education services and helping sustainably manage forest resources and biomass energy. The project has connected 40,000 homes, 1,080 enterprises, 1,025 rural schools, and 107 health clinics. Clean cooking fuels and efficient, ventilated stoves improve indoor air quality by reducing particulate matter, a risk factor for acute respiratory infections and other health problems. The World Health Organization estimates that the indoor air pollution created by the more than 3 billion people who use wood, dung, coal, and other traditional fuels inside their homes for cooking and heating is responsible for 1.5 million deaths a year. A rural energy project in Vietnam connected 976 communes with 555,327 households and 2.7 million people to the national power grid, providing some of the poorest rural areas with reliable electricity. However, some energy production, transformation, and transportation has detrimental effects on people and the environment; these can be mitigated by using cleaner, more efficient fuels.
5
Improved transport can boost income and improve health and education outcomes. Transport infrastructure and services—the roads, bridges, rails,
Improved infrastructure not only improves the living conditions of the poor, but also reduces the costs of business and further encourages business to invest in productive assets. It enlarges markets. It is not surprising that the poor of Africa perceive the isolation associated with the lack of infrastructure to be the cause of their poverty and marginalization. Too far from markets, too far from arable land, too far from hospitals and clinics. —Trevor Manuel, Finance Minister, South Africa
2010 World Development Indicators
287
Pakistani women without access to an all-weather road have fewer prenatal consultations and fewer births attended by skilled health staff, 2001–02 5a Women who had prenatal consultations (percent) 30
20
10
0 Villages with Villages without access to access to all-weather roads all-weather roads
Births assisted by a skilled attendant (percent) 60
40
20
0 Villages with Villages without access to access to all-weather roads all-weather roads Source: Babinard and Roberts 2006.
288
waterways, ports, and equipment and services they provide—can eliminate growth-constraining bottlenecks and shortages, increase agricultural productivity, improve poor rural farmers’ incomes and nutrition, and expand nonfarm employment. Lower transportation costs enable farmers to use fertilizers, mechanized equipment, and new seed varieties, boosting yields and lowering costs. A rural road project in Bangladesh reduced transport costs by 36–38 percent, lowered fertilizer prices, and increased output. Extreme poverty fell 5 percent. In Vietnam rehabilitating rural roads increased the availability of food, boosted wages for agricultural workers, raised completion rates of primary school students, and lifted more than 200,000 people out of poverty (Calderon and Servin 2008). Timely and affordable delivery of basic services for health, education, water, and sanitation depends on transportation systems. There is a clear association between infant, child, and maternal mortality rates and distance to health care services. Some 40–60 percent of people in developing countries live more than 8 kilometers from a health care facility. In Morocco the number of visits to primary health care facilities doubled in areas with an expanded rural road network compared with a control area. In Pakistan women in villages without an all-weather road have less access to health services (figure 5a). Improved and affordable transportation systems and safer roads raise school attendance by reducing travel time from home to school. Better accessibility also makes it easier to hire teachers who commute between rural and urban areas. In the Philippines school enrollment rose 10 percent and dropout rates fell 55 percent after rural roads were built. A similar project in Morocco raised girls’ enrollments from 28 percent to 68 percent in less than 10 years. Transportation services contribute strongly to growth and poverty reduction, but emissions from the transport sector have a deleterious impact on the health and environmental MDG targets. The transport sector generates about 13 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Transport policy measures can reduce emissions through greater use of railways and inland waterways for freight, better urban public transport services, management of urban road traffic demand to reduce congestion, support of nonmotorized transport, and management of vehicle emissions. Improving energy efficiency in
2010 World Development Indicators
transport has added benefits for development— more energy savings, less local air pollution, greater energy security, more employment in local industry, and greater competitiveness from higher productivity. Many countries are setting targets and policies for clean energy technologies. China has achieved a vehicle fuel economy standard of 35 miles per gallon of gas and plans to be the world leader in electric vehicles. Water and sanitation services promote health, increase productivity, and raise school enrollment. Water and sanitation are crucial for promoting health, enabling people to work productively, and contributing to human dignity and social development. Worldwide, more than 1.1 billion people lack clean water, and about 2.6 billion lack access to basic sanitation. About 90 percent of diarrhea cases are attributable to inadequate sanitation, hygiene, and water supply, causing 1.7 million deaths a year, mostly in children under age 5. Water and sanitation services at home and in schools increase learning capacity because students are healthier. School attendance also rises for girls if they can spend less time fetching water and if separate sanitation facilities are provided in schools. In a village in Morocco girls’ primary school attendance more than doubled a year after a new water supply system began operating, with separate sanitation facilities for girls. An improved water quality project for Uganda’s small towns reduced water-borne diseases and benefited women and children by saving time associated with collecting water (World Bank 2007b). The number of countries that are off track to meet the sanitation MDG target is second only to the number off track in reducing child mortality. Investment in water and sanitation with private participation remains low compared with other infrastructure sectors, accounting for about 2–3 percent of investment in infrastructure (figure 5b). Information and communication technologies reach into all sectors to improve living conditions. Information and communication technologies (ICTs) are enabling tools used in all sectors, ranging from telecommunication infrastructure (voice, data, and media services) to information applications in banking and finance, land management, education, health, and electronic government services. ICT use has grown
STATES AND MARKETS
dramatically since 2000—mobile cellular subscriptions in developing countries increased from 220 million to about 2.9 billion by the end of 2008. Worldwide, more than 1.5 billion people have access to the Internet. But even within the same region, access is uneven. In 2008 mobile phone penetration was about 60 percent in Equatorial Guinea, the Gambia, and Mauritania but just 4 percent in Eritrea and Ethiopia. There is a strong association between ICT adoption (such as mobile phones and Internet access) and GDP growth. Mobile communications have a particularly important impact in rural areas, home to half the world’s population and 75 percent of poor people. The mobility, ease of use, and relatively low and declining rollout costs of wireless technologies enable them to reach rural populations with low incomes and literacy rates. Farmers with mobile phones are more likely to have better information on market prices and therefore to get better prices from traders. For farmers in rural areas of the Philippines, having a mobile phone increased income 11–17 percent during 2003–06. India’s e-Choupal program, which expanded broadband to millions of small farmers through centers set up by a large agricultural exporter, enabled farmers to access information on local weather, crop prices, and farming techniques, increasing productivity and incomes (World Bank 2009l). Information and communication technologies also contribute to women’s economic opportunities. In the Philippines 65 percent of professional and technical workers in ICTenabled services are women. Information and communication technologies can improve health outcomes and combat diseases. In rural Niger the number of emergency evacuations from outlying health centers to the district hospital increased from 10 to 197 following the introduction of a radio-ambulance system. Good communications and information sharing help to deliver diagnostic information and drugs and to spread information on reproductive health and communicable diseases. Through the Global Media AIDS Initiative more than 50 broadcast networks are promoting AIDS prevention messages. In the fight against malaria satellite monitoring identifies and targets mosquito breeding areas for control. Information and communication technologies are also used for early disaster warning and for mitigation and relief following natural disasters. Remote sensing is used in managing resources
Private investment in water and sanitation is only about 2–3 percent of the total, 2005–08
5b Telecommunications Energy Transport Water and sanitation
Share of total (percent) 100
75 50 25 0 2005
2006
2007
2008
Source: World Bank Private Participation in Infrastructure database and World Development Indicators table 5.1.
and monitoring environmental risks. Telecommuting and attending virtual meetings through video conferencing can reduce travel and energy use, helping lower greenhouse gases. Smart grids and building construction using information and communication technologies lower energy consumption and greenhouse gases, leading to a more sustainable environment and way of life.
Bridging the infrastructure gap through public and private financing and better management of infrastructure services Meeting the world’s infrastructure needs involves enormous challenges. More than 1.1 billion people do not have safe water to drink and 2.6 billion lack access to adequate sanitation services. Some 1.6 billion have no electricity in their homes. And 1 billion rural residents live more than 2 kilometers from an all-weather road. World Bank Enterprise Surveys, completed in more than 100 countries, find that the three main deterrents to private investment are the regulatory environment, access to finance, and infrastructure. In many developing countries inadequate infrastructure constrains businesses as much as crime, red tape, corruption, and underdeveloped financial markets. In South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa more than half of firms report that lack of reliable electricity is a major constraint to doing business (figure 5c). Job creation and economic growth in the private sector require a supportive investment climate. Developing countries need about $900 billion (7–9 percent of GDP) to maintain existing infrastructure and to build new infrastructure, but only half that amount is available. The global financial and economic crisis is expected to severely curtail infrastructure services as 2010 World Development Indicators
289
governments face shrinking budgets and declining private financial flows. Capital market financing for developing country infrastructure has contracted from $200 billion in 2007 to $135 billion in 2008, with a further decline expected for 2009 (World Bank 2009j). As budgets shrink, priorities are to protect poor and vulnerable groups by strengthening social safety nets and supporting economic growth. But there is also a need to invest in infrastructure, which can create jobs and lay the groundwork for productivity and growth. Infrastructure spending can provide an important More than half of firms in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa say that lack of reliable electricity is a major constraint to business Share of firms (percent) 60
Transportation is a major constraint
5c
Electricity is a major constraint
40
20
0 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: World Bank Enterprise Surveys.
Regional collaboration in infrastructure— the Greater Mekong Subregion program
5d
In East Asia and Pacific, where countries are increasingly interconnected through land, sea, and air transportation networks, national economic development plans are often supplemented by regional and subregional programs. With support from the Asian Development Bank since 1992 and the World Bank since 2007, Greater Mekong Subregion countries (Cambodia, China, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam) have established priority transport corridors, laid the groundwork for power interconnection and trade, and developed an information superhighway network. These projects have improved market access, increased trade and investment, and enabled businesses to take advantage of regional and global production chains.
In 2008 investment in infrastructure with private participation grew in all but two developing country regions
5e
$ billions 50
Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Caribbean
40
South Asia
30 East Asia & Pacific
20
Sub-Saharan Africa
10 Middle East & North Africa
0 2005
2006
2007
2008
Source: World Bank Private Participation in Infrastructure database and World Development Indicators table 5.1.
290
2010 World Development Indicators
countercyclical stimulus by increasing demand and employment while supporting longer term growth. Over time, inadequate infrastructure slows economic development and poverty reduction. During a crisis countries under financial stress often cut infrastructure more than other government spending. In Latin America and the Caribbean during the fiscal austerity of the 1980s and 1990s, half the fiscal adjustment came from cuts in public infrastructure, reducing long-term growth by 1–3 percent (Schwartz, Andres, and Dragoiu 2009). The World Bank has focused its response to the crisis on protecting the most vulnerable groups, maintaining long-term infrastructure investment, and supporting private sector–led economic growth, microfinance, and employment creation, especially among small and medium-size enterprises. The World Bank Infrastructure Recovery and Assets platform mobilizes finance to support infrastructure spending critical for growth. The International Finance Corporation’s Infrastructure Crisis Facility supports and refinances public-private partnerships at risk; it is investing about $300 million to mobilize $1.5–$10 billion from other sources. Governments can leverage the benefits of private investment in infrastructure by introducing competition. Regional collaboration on infrastructure projects, by sharing scarce resources such as energy, capital, knowledge, and services, can lower unit costs, improve international competitiveness, and increase connectivity (box 5d). Private companies can better manage infrastructure services by operating efficiently (improving bill collection, reducing corruption and red tape, improving labor productivity, reducing transmission losses) and getting infrastructure prices right (prices should also cover basic operations and maintenance). If countries in Sub-Saharan Africa addressed these inefficiencies, the funding required to close the infrastructure gap might be halved. Despite the financial crisis, private sector investment in infrastructure remains strong. Commitments to infrastructure projects with private participation fell in 2008, but they were still at the second highest level since 1990. In 48 low- and middle-income economies, 216 projects reached financial or contractual closure. Infrastructure investments, including new commitments for projects implemented in previous years, totaled $154.4 billion in 2008. Investment grew in all developing country regions
STATES AND MARKETS
except East Asia and Pacific and the Middle East and North Africa. But there were large disparities. Five countries accounted for almost half the investment in infrastructure with private participation over 1990–2008— Brazil, India, China, Mexico, and the Russian Federation (figures 5e and 5f). Telecommunications was the only infrastructure sector with increasing investment in 2008, up 1 percent over 2007. Investment was down 7 percent in energy, 10 percent in transport, and 27 percent in water and sanitation. Over 1990–2008 water and sanitation had the lowest share of infrastructure investment with private participation, attracting only 4.4 percent (World Bank Private Participation in Infrastructure Project Database 2008) (figures 5g and 5h).
life (by farmers to receive crop price information and health workers to increase the effectiveness and reach of health programs), increased almost 20-fold on a per capita subscription basis over 2000–08. In 2008 almost a third of Sub-Saharan Africa’s people had mobile phone subscriptions. Despite this impressive expansion, a “digital divide” remains: Eritrea has 2 subscriptions per 100 people while South Africa has more than 90. Five countries accounted for almost half of investment in infrastructure with private participation, 1990–2008
Brazil 16%
All other developing countries 54%
Special focus on Africa’s infrastructure With 15 landlocked countries, transport costs in Sub-Saharan Africa are high, hampering trade and slowing growth. Sub-Saharan Africa also has the lowest population density and the second lowest urbanization rate of all developing country regions, raising the cost of infrastructure investments. Not surprisingly, Africa has a major infrastructure deficit—unreliable power supplies, only about 12 percent of roads paved, and the lowest rates of access to water and sanitation among developing country regions. Sub-Saharan Africa is farthest behind in achieving the MDGs and is expected to fall short of meeting most targets related to poverty, health, education, and water and sanitation— which all depend on infrastructure services. Inadequate infrastructure in Sub-Saharan Africa also contributes to the region’s poor economic performance and competitiveness. Business managers report that the main infrastructure deficiencies hampering business activity are electricity (48 percent), transportation (25 percent), and telecommunications (22 percent). Improvements in infrastructure sectors, such as rural roads in Guinea, have raised incomes and increased food supplies for farming families, reducing poverty and hunger. Expanding information and communications services in Sub-Saharan Africa is connecting the region to the rest of the world and is a key factor in fostering long-term growth. Many governments are beginning to provide affordable ICT services more broadly. Mobile phones, used in all walks of
5f
India 9% China 8% Mexico 7%
Russian Federation 6%
Source: World Bank Private Participation in Infrastructure database and World Development Indicators table 5.1.
Investment rose in energy, telecommunications, and transport, but remained flat in water and sanitation, 2005–08
5g
$ billions 100 Telecommunications
75 Energy
50
Transport
25 Water and sanitation
0 2005
2006
2007
2008
Source: World Bank Private Participation in Infrastructure database and World Development Indicators table 5.1.
Investment in water and sanitation with private participation accounted for only 4.4 percent of the total, 1990–2008
5h
Water and sanitation 4.4%
Transport 17.1%
Energy 48.8% Telecommunications 29.8%
Source: World Bank Private Participation in Infrastructure database and World Development Indicators table 5.1.
2010 World Development Indicators
291
Tables
5.1
Private sector in the economy Domestic credit to private sector
Investment commitments in infrastructure projects with private participationa
$ millions Telecommunications
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
292
Energy
Transport
Water and sanitation
2000–05
2006–08
2000–05
2006–08
2000–05
2006–08
2000–05
466.1 569.2 3,422.5 278.7 5,836.8 317.1 .. .. 355.6 1,294.3 735.4 .. 116.9 520.5 0.0 104.0 41,053.8 2,179.1 41.9 53.6 136.1 394.4 .. 0.0 11.0 3,561.6 8,548.0 .. 1,570.9 473.4 61.8 .. 134.9 1,205.7 60.0 .. .. 393.0 357.8 3,471.9 1,110.6 40.0 .. .. .. .. 26.6 6.6 173.8 .. 156.5 .. 560.1 50.6 21.9 18.0 135.0
980.4 331.0 1,527.0 775.0 3,714.2 214.6 .. .. 1,075.6 3,357.8 2,011.3 .. 272.7 247.3 916.0 97.9 21,365.2 1,526.8 487.6 0.0 205.9 423.4 .. 14.8 178.4 3,060.2 0.0 .. 4,395.0 729.0 220.7 .. 567.4 3,035.0 0.0 .. .. 110.1 1,505.6 7,073.0 822.1 0.0 .. .. .. .. 187.8 35.0 564.7 .. 2,069.0 .. 1,305.1 155.2 68.4 306.0 653.9
1.6 790.6 962.0 45.0 3,826.9 74.0 .. .. 375.2 501.5 .. .. 590.0 884.4 .. .. 25,625.6 3,062.1 .. .. 82.1 91.8 .. .. 0.0 1,590.5 10,970.9 .. 351.6 .. .. 80.0 0.0 7.1 116.0 .. .. 1,306.6 302.0 678.0 85.0 .. .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. 40.0 .. 590.0 .. 110.0 .. .. 5.5 358.8
.. .. .. 308.0 2,320.0 120.9 9.4 .. 3,126.5 203.6 57.0 63.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 48.8 0.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 137.3 16.6 800.0 .. .. .. 17,490.8 4,469.3 1,547.8 2.1 .. .. .. .. 695.8 125.3 440.0 0.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,370.8 4,821.2 4,075.5 15,350.1 .. .. 709.7 1,005.4 .. .. .. .. 80.0 465.2 0.0 176.4 85.0 451.0 60.0 0.0 .. .. .. .. 0.0 898.9 129.0 685.0 469.0 821.5 0.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.0 177.4 0.0 .. 607.3 .. .. .. 100.0 10.0 .. .. 263.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 120.0
.. .. 161.0 53.0 1,396.7 585.0 .. .. .. 0.0 4.0 .. .. .. .. .. 10,625.9 531.6 .. .. 200.0 .. .. .. .. 830.1 13,320.1 .. 2,344.4 .. 735.0 373.0 .. 492.0 .. .. .. 250.0 1,166.0 1,370.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 3.9 .. 573.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. 8.0 510.0 .. 791.6 0.0 .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,215.3 152.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,495.2 3,505.2 .. 314.3 .. 0.0 .. .. 298.7 600.0 .. .. .. 500.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. .. .. 207.9
2010 World Development Indicators
2006–08
.. 0.0 1,104.0 .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,507.5 .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. 3.1 3,904.8 .. 305.0 .. .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 435.0 .. .. .. 6.7 .. .. .. ..
Businesses registered
% of GDP
New
Total
2008
2007
2007
8.9 36.0 13.5 12.5 13.7 17.4 121.5 119.1 16.5 39.2 28.8 94.5 20.9 34.7 57.8 21.1 55.7 74.5 18.6 21.5 23.5 10.4 128.4 7.0 3.7 97.7 108.3 142.8 34.2 7.1 3.5 50.8 16.3 64.9 .. 52.8 218.0 20.9 26.1 42.9 41.3 18.4 97.4 18.0 85.8 107.8 8.5 17.6 33.3 107.8 17.8 93.5 27.2 .. 9.1 12.1 51.4
.. 2,176 10,662 .. 16,400 3,822 89,960 3,484 4,945 5,328 .. 28,016 .. 1,625 314 7,301 490,542 49,328 639 .. .. .. 207,000 .. .. 25,124 .. 80,935 28,801 .. 237 10,567 .. 11,055 .. 16,395 28,811 .. 3,196 9,595 1,802 .. .. .. 10,424 137,481 .. .. 5,260 66,747 .. .. 4,251 .. .. 9 ..
.. 16,110 105,128 .. 218,700 56,461 641,538 76,374 69,309 67,459 .. 354,489 .. 24,649 23,634 .. 5,668,003 315,037 .. .. .. .. 2,500,000 .. .. 223,345 .. 524,445 497,778 .. .. 102,311 .. 200,955 .. 244,417 200,060 20,808 37,434 367,559 .. .. .. .. 120,294 1,267,419 .. .. 59,641 573,985 .. .. .. .. .. 300 ..
Domestic credit to private sector
Investment commitments in infrastructure projects with private participationa
$ millions Telecommunications
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
2000–05
2006–08
5,172.8 20,642.0 6,557.2 695.0 984.0 .. .. .. 700.3 .. 1,589.0 1,153.7 1,434.0 .. .. .. .. 11.5 87.7 700.0 138.1 88.4 70.3 .. 993.0 706.6 12.6 36.3 3,777.0 82.6 92.1 413.0 18,191.4 46.1 22.1 6,139.5 123.0 .. 35.0 109.3 .. .. 218.5 85.5 6,949.7 .. .. 6,595.1 211.4 .. 199.0 2,241.4 4,616.4 16,800.1 .. .. ..
1,523.3 24,702.2 8,068.7 1,023.0 4,074.0 .. .. .. 241.2 .. 484.6 2,619.8 2,695.8 400.0 .. .. .. 115.9 10.0 428.1 0.0 19.6 49.8 .. 489.2 256.6 221.8 124.7 1,494.0 154.0 90.1 67.1 9,278.7 278.3 0.0 2,309.6 104.2 .. 8.5 26.0 .. .. 327.2 164.7 8,291.1 .. .. 7,868.4 1,141.5 150.0 498.5 1,959.4 3,353.0 6,158.7 .. .. ..
Energy 2000–05
851.6 8,369.2 1,828.5 650.0 .. .. .. .. 201.0 .. .. 300.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,250.0 71.1 .. 0.0 .. .. 514.3 .. 0.0 0.0 6,637.6 365.9 .. 0.0 6,749.3 127.2 .. 1,049.0 1,205.8 .. 1.0 15.1 .. .. 126.3 .. 1,920.0 .. .. 375.4 429.8 .. .. 2,498.9 3,428.4 2,555.5 .. .. ..
Transport
Water and sanitation
5.1
STATES AND MARKETS
Private sector in the economy
Businesses registered
% of GDP
New
Total
2006–08
2000–05
2006–08
2000–05
2006–08
2008
2007
2007
1,707.0 28,507.7 3,779.3 .. 590.0 .. .. .. 78.0 .. 524.0 0.0 306.7 .. .. .. .. .. 1,465.0 .. .. .. .. .. 350.6 391.0 .. .. 203.0 .. .. .. 1,883.0 434.0 .. .. .. 556.1 .. .. .. .. 95.0 .. 280.0 .. .. 2,578.7 495.7 .. .. 743.8 5,076.8 1,410.4 .. .. ..
3,297.5 4,281.3 159.2 .. .. .. .. .. 565.0 .. 0.0 231.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. 153.0 .. .. .. .. .. 61.0 .. 4,263.0 55.4 .. .. 2,970.4 0.0 .. 200.0 334.6 .. .. .. .. .. 104.0 .. 2,355.4 .. .. 153.8 51.4 .. .. 522.5 943.5 1,672.0 .. .. ..
1,588.0 19,009.2 1,433.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,380.0 31.0 404.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 135.0 .. .. .. .. .. 295.0 17.5 .. 1,379.0 .. .. .. 10,113.5 60.0 .. 200.0 0.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 644.1 .. .. 923.7 .. .. .. 2,329.8 515.3 1,439.3 .. .. ..
0.0 112.9 44.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 169.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6,502.2 .. .. .. 523.7 .. .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. .. 3.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 152.0 0.0 64.3 .. .. ..
0.0 218.2 20.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. .. 0.0 303.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 503.9 0.8 .. .. ..
69.6 51.4 26.5 49.2 .. 217.0 90.1 105.1 28.3 163.5 83.8 49.6 30.0 .. 109.1 34.3 66.4 15.1 9.5 90.2 75.9 10.9 12.5 6.8 62.7 43.8 11.1 11.4 100.6 17.1 .. 87.7 21.1 36.5 43.6 77.4 18.4 .. 45.6 40.8 193.2 150.4 36.4 11.0 33.9 .. 35.9 29.5 89.7 24.8 24.5 24.8 28.8 49.8 179.7 .. 46.7
28,153 20,000 18,960 .. .. 18,704 18,814 77,587 2,023 145,151 2,361 .. 7,371 .. .. .. .. 3,987 .. 12,017 1,030 .. .. .. 6,578 .. 1,234 420 43,279 .. .. .. 306,400 6,806 .. 24,811 .. .. .. .. 116,000 74,247 2,070 .. .. 18,082 6,362 4,840 .. .. .. .. 18,189 26,388 30,934 .. ..
273,549 732,000 271,255 .. .. 180,891 162,910 638,987 54,116 2,572,088 .. .. 125,102 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 67,095 .. 19,305 5,595 .. .. .. .. 4,290,000 73,532 .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,030,000 474,212 .. .. .. 132,788 38,864 .. .. .. .. .. .. 523,584 423,719 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
293
5.1
Private sector in the economy Investment commitments in infrastructure projects with private participationa
$ millions Telecommunications 2000–05
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
2006–08
Energy 2000–05
3,793.9 4,921.5 1,240.8 22,049.4 20,675.1 1,726.0 72.3 168.0 1.6 .. .. .. 593.1 1,077.0 93.3 563.5 3,107.4 .. 48.8 88.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 13.4 0.0 .. 10,519.5 5,327.0 1,251.3 .. .. .. 766.1 1,024.4 270.8 747.7 1,391.3 .. 27.7 23.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 583.0 199.7 .. 8.5 64.0 16.0 515.3 962.5 348.0 5,602.7 2,567.0 4,693.3 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 657.7 .. .. .. 751.0 2,518.0 30.0 12,788.6 8,160.7 6,754.8 20.0 106.1 .. 387.6 1,180.0 113.9 3,162.9 3,574.8 160.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 114.2 113.8 330.0 285.6 680.9 .. 3,337.0 2,074.0 39.5 430.0 1,326.7 2,360.6 279.8 0.0 150.0 376.8 342.2 .. 208.3 510.0 3.0 72.0 143.0 .. .. s .. s .. s 19,559.7 8,201.6 8,043.3 243,326.2 196,510.7 106,361.7 84,659.7 88,720.8 38,070.8 158,666.6 107,789.9 68,290.9 251,369.6 216,070.4 114,563.3 29,862.2 17,755.8 31,258.4 67,661.7 58,420.5 17,807.6 80,834.5 53,217.6 45,116.5 18,430.6 19,551.1 3,519.0 29,926.2 37,976.7 9,533.6 24,654.4 29,148.6 7,328.3 .. .. .. .. .. ..
2006–08
Transport 2000–05
4,090.5 .. 25,376.2 109.4 .. .. .. .. .. 55.4 .. .. 1.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 9.9 504.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 28.4 27.7 2,341.0 939.0 .. .. 190.0 .. .. .. .. .. 3,762.7 3,118.6 .. .. 964.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 251.1 .. .. .. 34.0 287.0 20.0 .. .. 15.8 .. .. 15.6 .. .. .. s .. s 4,659.3 705.4 116,921.3 53,504.4 50,571.3 26,894.4 66,350.1 26,610.0 121,580.7 54,209.9 18,479.5 21,800.1 38,827.4 5,504.1 26,889.7 17,221.2 3,918.8 1,475.4 31,135.2 4,435.1 2,330.2 3,774.1 .. .. .. ..
Domestic credit to private sector
Water and sanitation
2006–08
2000–05
2006–08
116.8 191.0 .. .. 134.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 3,483.0 .. .. 30.0 .. .. .. 37.0 .. 134.0 .. .. .. .. 840.0 4,441.0 .. 404.0 .. .. .. .. .. 25.0 .. 765.0 .. 220.0 .. .. .. s 2,303.5 83,650.3 43,175.4 40,474.9 85,953.8 17,613.3 8,427.7 29,429.3 4,508.0 19,932.9 6,042.5 .. ..
116.0 904.7 .. .. 0.0 0.0 .. .. .. .. .. 31.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 8.5 522.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.0 100.0 .. .. .. 368.0 0.0 15.0 174.0 .. .. 0.0 .. .. s 185.9 18,975.5 5,220.1 13,755.5 19,161.4 10,748.9 1,345.0 6,232.5 679.0 112.9 43.2 .. ..
41.0 1,212.3 .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. .. 120.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. 18.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. s 0.0 9,705.6 5,228.2 4,477.4 9,705.6 4,447.7 1,689.1 2,126.1 1,104.0 218.2 120.7 .. ..
% of GDP
New
Total
2008
2007
2007
103,733 489,955 .. .. 23 10,876 .. 25,904 16,025 4,957 .. 41,356 145,593 4,529 .. .. 27,994 18,284 216 794 3,933 25,184 .. .. .. 6,675 93,634 .. 8,906 41,809 .. 449,700 676,830 .. 10,264 .. .. .. 50 5,300 ..
870,195 3,267,325 455 .. 1,000 83,499 .. 133,235 135,330 47,312 .. 553,425 2,435,689 .. .. .. 326,052 162,326 2,268 .. 59,163 297,084 .. .. .. 63,584 764,240 .. 89,503 528,864 .. 2,546,200 5,156,000 .. 56,465 .. 52,506 .. .. .. ..
38.5 41.0 .. 55.4 24.2 38.4 7.1 107.9 44.7 85.6 .. 145.2 201.4 28.9 10.9 23.6 129.6 168.2 15.6 29.0 16.3 113.1 20.6 18.7 28.9 66.6 32.6 .. 13.9 73.7 72.7 211.1 187.1 26.3 .. 21.5 90.6 .. 7.8 15.3 .. 129.7 w 36.5 62.6 82.6 44.6 61.9 99.8 43.0 38.8 35.8 49.5 58.5 155.9 126.4
a. Data refer to total for the period shown. Includes infrastructure projects with private sector participation that reached financial closure in 1990–2008.
294
2010 World Development Indicators
Businesses registered
About the data
5.1
STATES AND MARKETS
Private sector in the economy Definitions
Private sector development and investment—tapping
and small-scale operators—may be omitted because
• Investment commitments in infrastructure
private sector initiative and investment for socially
they are not publicly reported. The database is a joint
projects with private participation refers to infra-
useful purposes—are critical for poverty reduction.
product of the World Bank’s Finance, Economics, and
structure projects in telecommunications, energy
In parallel with public sector efforts, private invest-
Urban Development Department and the Public-
(electricity and natural gas transmission and dis-
ment, especially in competitive markets, has tre-
Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility. Geographic
tribution), transport, and water and sanitation
mendous potential to contribute to growth. Private
and income aggregates are calculated by the World
that have reached financial closure and directly or
markets are the engine of productivity growth, creat-
Bank’s Development Data Group. For more informa-
indirectly serve the public. Incinerators, movable
ing productive jobs and higher incomes. And with gov-
tion, see http://ppi.worldbank.org/.
assets, standalone solid waste projects, and small
ernment playing a complementary role of regulation,
Credit is an important link in money transmission;
projects such as windmills are excluded. Included
funding, and service provision, private initiative and
it finances production, consumption, and capital for-
are operation and management contracts, opera-
investment can help provide the basic services and
mation, which in turn affect economic activity. The
tion and management contracts with major capital
conditions that empower poor people—by improving
data on domestic credit to the private sector are
expenditure, greenfield projects (new facilities built
health, education, and infrastructure.
taken from the banking survey of the International
and operated by a private entity or a public-private
Investment in infrastructure projects with private
Monetary Fund’s (IMF) International Financial Statis-
joint venture), and divestitures. Investment commit-
participation has made important contributions to
tics or, when unavailable, from its monetary survey.
ments are the sum of investments in facilities and
easing fiscal constraints, improving the efficiency
The monetary survey includes monetary authorities
investments in government assets. Investments in
of infrastructure services, and extending delivery
(the central bank), deposit money banks, and other
facilities are resources the project company com-
to poor people. Developing countries have been in
banking institutions, such as finance companies,
mits to invest during the contract period in new
the forefront, pioneering better approaches to infra-
development banks, and savings and loan institu-
facilities or in expansion and modernization of exist-
structure services and reaping the benefits of greater
tions. Credit to the private sector may sometimes
ing facilities. Investments in government assets
competition and customer focus.
include credit to state-owned or partially state-owned
are the resources the project company spends on
enterprises.
acquiring government assets such as state-owned
The data on investment in infrastructure projects with private participation refer to all investment (pub-
Entrepreneurship is essential to the dynamism of
enterprises, rights to provide services in a specific
lic and private) in projects in which a private com-
the modern market economy, and a greater entry rate
area, or use of specific radio spectrums. • Domestic
pany assumes operating risk during the operating
of new businesses can foster competition and eco-
credit to private sector is financial resources pro-
period or development and operating risk during the
nomic growth. The table includes data on business
vided to the private sector—such as through loans,
contract period. Investment refers to commitments
registrations from the 2008 World Bank Group Entre-
purchases of nonequity securities, and trade cred-
not disbursements. Foreign state-owned companies
preneurship Survey, which includes entrepreneurial
its and other accounts receivable—that establish
are considered private entities for the purposes of
activity in more than 100 countries for 2000–08.
a claim for repayment. For some countries these
this measure.
Survey data are used to analyze firm creation, its
claims include credit to public enterprises. • New
Investments are classified into two types: invest-
relationship to economic growth and poverty reduc-
businesses registered are the number of limited
ments in physical assets—the resources a com-
tion, and the impact of regulatory and institutional
liability firms registered in the calendar year. • Total
pany commits to invest in expanding and modern-
reforms. The 2008 survey improves on earlier sur-
businesses registered are the year-end stock of total
izing facilities—and payments to the government to
veys’ methodology and country coverage for better
registered limited liability firms.
acquire state-owned enterprises or rights to provide
cross-country comparability. Data on total and newly
services in a specific area or to use part of the radio
registered businesses were collected directly from
spectrum.
national registrars of companies. For cross-country
The data are from the World Bank’s Private Partici-
comparability, only limited liability corporations
pation in Infrastructure (PPI) Project database, which
that operate in the formal sector are included. For
tracks infrastructure projects with private participa-
additional information on sources, methodology,
tion in developing countries. It provides information
calculation of entrepreneurship rates, and data limi-
on more than 4,300 infrastructure projects in 137
tations see http://econ.worldbank.org/research/
developing economies from 1984 to 2008. The data-
entrepreneurship.
Data sources Data on investment commitments in infra-
base contains more than 30 fields per project record,
structure projects with private participation are
including country, financial closure year, infrastructure
from the World Bank’s PPI Project database
services provided, type of private participation,
(http://ppi.worldbank.org). Data on domestic
investment, technology, capacity, project location,
credit are from the IMF’s International Financial
contract duration, private sponsors, bidding process,
Statistics. Data on business registration and are
and development bank support. Data on the projects
from the World Bank’s Entrepreneurship Survey
are compiled from publicly available information. The
and
database aims to be as comprehensive as possible,
research/entrepreneurship).
database
(http://econ.worldbank.org/
but some projects—particularly those involving local
2010 World Development Indicators
295
5.2
Business environment: enterprise surveys Survey year
Regulations and tax
Time dealing with officials
Average number of times % of management meeting with tax officials time
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Ricaa Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republica Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
296
2008 2007 2007 2006 2006 2009
2009 2007 2008 2009 2006 2009 2006 2009 2009 2009 2006 2007 2009
2009 2006 2003 2006 2006 2009 2005 2009 2007 2009 2005 2006 2008 2006 2009 2009 2006
2009 2006 2008 2005 2007 2005 2006 2006 2006 2006
6.8 18.7 25.1 7.1 13.8 10.3 .. .. 3.0 3.2 13.6 .. 20.7 13.5 11.2 5.0 18.7 10.6 22.2 5.7 5.6 7.0 .. .. 20.8 9.0 18.3 .. 14.3 6.3 6.0 9.6 1.8 10.9 .. 10.4 .. 8.8 17.3 8.8 9.2 0.5 5.5 3.8 .. .. 2.8 7.3 2.1 1.2 4.0 1.8 9.2 2.7 2.9 .. 4.6
2010 World Development Indicators
1.2 3.9 2.3 3.3 2.5 2.1 .. .. 2.1 1.3 1.1 .. 1.2 1.7 1.0 0.9 1.2 2.2 1.5 1.8 1.0 4.4 .. .. 3.4 3.0 14.4 .. 0.6 8.4 2.7 0.5 3.6 0.7 .. 1.5 .. 0.5 0.6 3.4 2.7 0.2 0.4 1.1 .. .. 15.2 2.5 0.6 1.3 4.1 1.7 2.1 2.8 3.4 .. 1.5
Permits Corruption and licenses
Crime
Informality
Firms formally registered when operations started % of firms
% of firms
% of firms
% of sales
% of firms
88.0 89.4 98.3 .. 93.8 96.2 .. .. 85.1 .. 98.5 .. 87.9 90.5 98.6 .. 95.8 98.5 77.7 .. 87.5 82.1 .. .. 77.1 97.8 .. .. 85.6 .. 84.3 .. 56.4 98.1 .. 98.0 .. .. 91.1 14.3 79.5 100.0 97.4 .. .. .. 63.7 .. 99.6 .. 66.4 .. 91.3 .. .. .. 89.4
2.8 10.8 15.0 23.4 30.3 31.8 .. .. 10.8 16.1 52.9 .. 43.9 41.1 32.8 40.9 59.3 33.9 19.2 34.8 .. 15.7 .. .. 40.1 27.8 .. .. 43.0 21.2 31.8 65.3 61.9 33.5 .. 25.0 .. .. 32.7 34.0 39.6 4.2 36.3 30.9 .. .. 33.1 21.3 40.8 20.3 44.0 24.4 28.4 25.4 19.9 .. 39.9
1.4 12.4 8.9 2.1 6.9 31.9 .. .. 19.0 24.7 35.8 .. 4.2 22.2 59.7 11.3 48.4 34.7 25.6 12.3 11.3 31.4 .. .. 4.2 29.1 28.8 .. 30.6 3.3 7.7 14.9 13.9 60.0 .. 33.4 .. 12.5 24.0 5.6 17.3 11.9 41.5 11.0 .. .. 6.3 7.6 38.2 45.0 16.0 25.9 12.8 0.9 0.7 .. 8.5
6.5 13.7 4.0 3.7 1.4 1.8 .. .. 1.8 10.6 0.8 .. 7.5 4.4 1.9 1.4 3.0 1.6 5.8 10.7 2.4 4.9 .. .. 3.3 1.8 1.3 .. 2.3 5.6 16.4 1.9 5.0 0.8 .. 0.6 .. 15.2 2.7 3.4 2.9 0.2 0.5 0.9 .. .. 1.7 11.8 1.4 .. 6.0 .. 4.5 14.0 5.3 .. 3.8
8.5 24.6 5.0 5.1 26.9 26.9 .. .. 18.2 7.8 13.9 .. 7.3 13.8 30.1 12.7 25.7 19.9 14.4 7.1 2.8 20.4 .. .. 43.3 22.0 35.9 .. 5.9 4.3 19.6 10.5 4.3 16.5 .. 43.5 .. 9.6 18.2 21.1 11.0 15.1 21.2 4.2 .. .. 18.6 22.2 16.0 .. 6.8 11.7 8.0 5.2 8.4 .. 16.5
Time required to obtain operating license
Informal payments to public officials
Losses due to theft, robbery, vandalism, and arson
days
% of firms
% of sales
13.8 21.2 19.3 24.1 116.0 20.0 .. .. 15.8 6.0 38.2 .. 64.3 26.0 21.4 13.7 83.5 20.8 35.8 27.3 .. 30.0 .. .. 24.3 67.7 11.6 .. 28.2 17.8 .. .. 14.5 26.5 .. 19.9 .. .. 19.9 90.6 35.4 .. 8.3 11.4 .. .. 12.1 8.4 11.8 .. 6.4 .. 75.4 13.0 30.4 .. 31.6
41.5 57.7 64.7 46.8 18.7 11.6 .. .. 32.0 85.1 13.5 .. 54.5 32.4 8.1 27.6 9.7 8.5 8.5 56.5 61.2 50.8 .. .. 41.8 8.2 72.6 .. 8.2 83.8 49.2 33.8 30.6 14.5 .. 8.7 .. 26.3 21.5 98.3 34.3 0.0 1.6 12.4 .. .. 26.1 52.4 4.1 .. 38.8 21.6 15.7 84.8 62.7 .. 16.7
1.5 0.5 0.9 0.4 1.3 0.6 .. .. 0.3 0.1 0.4 .. 1.9 0.9 0.2 1.3 1.7 0.5 0.3 1.1 1.6 1.7 .. .. 2.5 0.6 0.1 .. 0.7 2.0 3.3 0.4 3.4 0.2 .. 0.4 .. 0.7 0.9 3.0 2.6 .. 0.9 1.4 .. .. 0.4 2.7 0.7 0.5 0.9 0.0 1.5 2.0 1.1 .. 2.2
Gender
Finance
Firms with Firms using banks to female finance participation in ownership investment
Infrastructure Innovation
Trade
Average Intertime to nationally recognized clear direct exports quality Value lost due to electrical certification through customs ownership outages days
14.6 1.9 14.1 16.5 5.5 3.3 .. .. 1.9 8.4 2.6 .. 9.6 15.3 1.4 1.4 15.9 4.2 7.4 .. 1.5 15.1 .. .. 11.9 5.8 6.6 .. 7.0 3.6 .. 3.5 16.6 1.3 .. 5.7 .. 11.4 7.0 6.2 2.5 9.6 1.8 4.3 .. .. 3.8 5.0 3.8 4.7 7.8 5.5 4.5 4.3 5.6 .. 6.0
Workforce
Firms offering formal training % of firms
14.6 19.9 17.3 19.4 52.2 30.4 .. .. 10.5 16.2 44.4 .. 32.4 53.9 66.5 37.7 52.9 30.7 24.8 22.1 48.4 25.5 .. .. 43.4 46.9 84.8 .. 39.5 11.4 37.5 46.4 19.1 28.0 .. 70.7 .. 53.3 61.6 21.7 49.6 26.1 69.3 38.2 .. .. 30.9 25.6 14.5 35.4 33.0 20.0 28.1 21.1 12.4 .. 33.3
Survey year
Regulations and tax
Time dealing with officials
Average number of times % of management meeting with tax officials time
Hungary India Indonesiaa Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaicaa Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep.a Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysiaa Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistana Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippinesa Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
2009 2006 2003
2005
2005 2006 2009 2007 2005 2009 2009 2009 2009 2006 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2007 2007 2006 2009 2006 2009 2009 2007 2007 2006 2009
2006 2009 2007
2007 2006 2006 2006 2003 2009 2005
13.5 6.7 4.0 .. .. 2.3 .. .. 6.3 .. 6.7 4.7 5.1 .. 0.1 9.8 .. 4.9 1.6 9.7 12.0 5.6 7.5 .. 9.3 14.5 17.1 3.5 7.8 2.4 5.8 9.4 20.5 7.0 12.1 11.4 3.3 .. 2.9 6.5 .. .. 9.3 21.1 6.1 .. .. 2.2 10.3 .. 7.9 13.5 6.9 12.8 1.1 .. ..
0.8 2.6 1.0 .. .. 1.3 .. .. 1.8 .. 1.7 2.6 6.7 .. 2.2 4.5 .. 2.1 4.4 1.5 3.2 1.8 6.5 .. 0.8 3.0 0.9 2.7 2.6 1.6 1.8 0.5 0.6 1.9 2.0 0.9 1.9 .. 0.3 1.3 .. .. 1.3 1.6 3.0 .. 4.4 1.6 1.4 .. 0.7 1.4 3.2 0.6 1.6 .. ..
Permits Corruption and licenses
Crime
Informality
Firms formally registered when operations started % of firms
% of firms
% of firms
% of sales
% of firms
100.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 97.4 .. .. .. 89.2 .. 95.9 93.5 98.5 .. 86.8 73.8 .. 97.1 99.2 97.5 78.6 53.0 85.4 .. 84.2 94.1 97.9 90.1 86.0 85.9 .. .. 94.0 .. .. 85.4 90.5 .. .. .. .. 98.0 .. 94.0 99.2 .. 99.3 .. .. ..
42.4 9.1 .. .. .. 41.6 .. .. 32.2 .. 13.1 34.4 37.1 .. 19.1 10.9 .. 60.4 39.4 46.3 27.9 18.4 53.0 .. 38.7 36.4 50.0 23.9 13.1 18.4 17.3 16.9 24.8 53.1 52.0 13.1 24.4 .. 33.4 27.4 .. .. 41.4 17.6 20.0 .. .. 6.7 37.1 .. 44.8 32.8 .. 47.9 50.8 .. ..
48.7 46.7 34.0 .. .. 37.4 .. .. 37.0 .. 8.6 31.0 22.9 .. 39.9 25.3 .. 17.9 0.0 37.3 53.5 32.7 10.1 .. 47.4 47.0 12.2 20.6 48.6 7.0 3.2 37.5 2.6 30.8 26.5 12.3 10.5 .. 8.1 17.5 .. .. 13.0 9.3 2.7 .. 31.0 9.7 19.2 .. 8.2 30.9 21.8 40.7 24.4 .. ..
0.9 6.6 3.3 .. .. 1.5 .. .. 11.8 .. 1.7 3.7 6.4 .. .. 17.1 .. 10.5 0.0 1.1 6.0 6.7 2.9 .. 0.7 5.9 7.7 17.0 3.0 1.8 1.6 2.2 2.4 2.0 0.8 1.3 2.4 .. 0.7 27.0 .. .. 8.7 1.9 8.9 .. 4.2 9.9 2.4 .. 2.5 3.2 5.9 1.9 .. .. ..
39.4 22.5 22.1 .. .. 17.2 .. .. 16.4 .. 15.5 10.8 9.8 .. 17.6 7.9 .. 16.2 7.2 18.2 20.9 24.7 2.4 .. 15.6 21.5 8.7 17.9 54.1 8.6 5.9 11.1 20.3 9.1 16.7 17.3 18.7 .. 17.6 3.1 .. .. 18.7 4.6 8.5 .. 10.8 9.6 14.7 .. 7.1 14.6 15.8 17.3 12.7 .. ..
Time required to obtain operating license
Informal payments to public officials
Losses due to theft, robbery, vandalism, and arson
days
% of firms
% of sales
35.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6.4 30.8 23.4 .. .. 18.8 .. 18.0 13.6 11.5 .. 16.4 16.0 .. 65.5 33.8 41.3 15.0 22.4 41.0 10.7 19.1 11.2 13.9 43.5 3.4 35.2 .. 9.6 14.5 .. .. 19.7 39.7 12.1 .. 11.8 16.4 41.2 .. 37.8 81.1 18.8 14.6 .. .. ..
4.0 47.5 44.2 .. .. 8.3 .. .. 17.7 .. 18.1 23.3 79.2 .. 14.1 2.2 .. 37.5 39.8 11.3 51.2 14.0 55.2 .. 8.5 11.5 19.2 10.8 .. 28.9 82.1 1.6 22.6 25.4 30.4 13.4 14.8 .. 11.4 15.2 .. .. 17.2 35.2 40.9 .. 33.2 27.2 25.4 .. 84.8 11.3 44.7 5.0 14.5 .. ..
0.1 0.1 0.2 .. .. 0.3 .. .. 1.1 .. 0.1 1.0 3.9 .. 0.0 0.3 .. 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.5 2.9 2.8 .. 0.4 0.7 1.2 5.7 1.0 0.6 0.6 1.4 0.7 0.4 0.6 0.0 1.8 .. 1.3 0.9 .. .. 0.9 0.9 4.1 .. .. 0.5 0.5 .. 0.9 0.4 0.9 0.5 0.2 .. ..
Gender
Finance
5.2
Firms with Firms using banks to female finance participation in ownership investment
Infrastructure Innovation
Trade
Average Intertime to nationally recognized clear direct exports quality Value lost due to electrical certification through customs ownership outages days
4.3 15.1 3.7 .. .. 2.6 .. .. 4.3 .. 3.8 8.5 5.6 .. 7.2 1.7 .. 15.8 7.5 1.9 6.7 5.4 0.0 .. 2.4 2.5 14.2 4.9 2.7 4.8 3.9 10.3 5.2 2.4 18.6 1.8 10.1 .. 1.4 5.6 .. .. 5.0 2.6 7.5 .. 3.4 4.8 5.7 .. 5.5 5.4 6.6 6.0 7.2 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
STATES AND MARKETS
Business environment: enterprise surveys
Workforce
Firms offering formal training % of firms
14.8 15.9 23.8 .. .. 73.2 .. .. 53.5 .. 23.9 40.9 40.7 .. 39.5 24.6 .. 29.7 11.1 43.4 67.8 42.5 17.0 .. 46.0 19.0 27.0 48.4 50.1 22.5 25.5 25.6 24.6 33.1 61.2 24.7 22.1 .. 44.5 8.8 .. .. 28.9 32.1 25.7 .. 20.9 6.7 43.9 .. 46.9 57.7 21.7 60.9 31.9 .. ..
297
5.2
Business environment: enterprise surveys Survey year
Regulations and tax
Time dealing with officials
Average number of times % of management meeting with tax officials time
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lankaa Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republica Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand a Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnama West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe
2009 2009 2006 2007 2009 2009 2009 2009 2007 2005 2004 2006
2003 2008 2006 2006 2009
2008 2006 2008
2006 2008 2006 2005 2006 2007
9.2 19.9 5.9 .. 2.9 12.2 7.4 .. 6.7 7.3 .. 6.0 0.8 3.5 .. 4.4 .. .. 10.3 11.7 4.0 0.4 .. 2.7 .. .. 27.1 .. 5.2 11.3 .. .. .. 7.0 11.1 33.6 0.8 5.7 .. 4.6 ..
2.3 1.6 3.3 .. 1.3 1.4 1.9 .. 0.9 0.3 .. 0.8 1.5 4.9 .. 1.4 .. .. 4.4 1.4 2.7 1.0 .. 1.2 .. .. 1.3 .. 2.4 2.1 .. .. .. 0.7 0.7 2.9 1.9 1.7 .. 1.9 ..
Permits Corruption and licenses
Crime
Informality
Firms formally registered when operations started % of firms
% of firms
% of firms
% of sales
% of firms
98.7 94.7 .. .. 78.9 95.0 89.2 .. 100.0 99.9 .. 91.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 92.7 .. .. .. 75.8 .. .. 94.1 .. .. 95.8 .. .. .. 97.8 100.0 97.3 .. .. .. 96.2 ..
47.9 33.1 41.0 .. 26.3 28.8 7.9 .. 30.9 42.2 .. 22.6 34.1 .. .. 28.6 .. .. .. 34.4 30.9 .. .. 31.8 .. .. 40.7 .. 34.7 47.1 .. .. .. 41.6 39.8 .. 27.4 18.0 .. 37.2 ..
37.3 30.6 15.9 .. 19.8 42.8 6.9 .. 31.5 52.2 .. 34.8 32.6 26.2 .. 7.7 .. .. 7.6 21.4 6.8 74.4 .. 16.9 .. .. 51.9 .. 7.7 32.1 .. .. .. 6.9 8.2 35.7 29.4 4.2 .. 10.2 ..
2.2 1.2 8.7 .. 5.0 1.3 6.6 .. 0.5 0.5 .. 1.6 3.0 .. .. 2.5 .. .. 8.6 15.1 9.6 1.5 .. 10.5 .. .. 2.8 .. 10.2 4.4 .. .. .. 0.9 5.4 4.4 .. 4.6 .. 3.7 ..
26.1 11.7 10.8 .. 6.1 21.8 13.8 .. 27.0 28.0 .. 26.4 21.3 .. .. 22.1 .. .. 7.4 16.7 14.7 39.0 .. 6.6 .. .. 30.0 .. 15.5 13.0 .. .. .. 6.8 1.3 12.5 11.4 18.2 .. 17.2 ..
Time required to obtain operating license
Informal payments to public officials
Losses due to theft, robbery, vandalism, and arson
days
% of firms
% of sales
23.7 57.4 6.5 .. 21.4 28.0 12.6 .. 36.2 56.1 .. 36.2 .. 49.5 .. 24.0 .. .. .. 22.6 15.9 32.1 .. 56.4 .. .. 36.0 .. 9.3 31.0 .. .. .. 133.8 9.1 41.6 .. 21.3 .. 48.3 ..
9.8 29.4 20.0 .. 18.1 18.0 18.8 .. 11.6 5.4 .. 15.1 4.4 16.3 .. 40.6 .. .. .. 40.5 49.5 .. .. 16.7 .. .. 17.7 .. 51.7 22.9 .. .. .. 7.3 56.2 .. 67.2 13.3 .. 14.3 ..
0.3 0.8 1.3 .. 0.5 0.6 0.8 .. 0.6 0.4 .. 1.0 0.2 0.5 .. 1.3 .. .. .. 0.3 1.2 0.1 .. 2.4 .. .. 0.4 .. 1.0 0.6 .. .. .. 0.7 0.7 1.4 0.1 1.2 .. 1.0 ..
Gender
Firms with Firms using banks to female finance participation in ownership investment
Note: Enterprise surveys are updated several times a year; see www.enterprisesurveys.org for the most recent updates. a. The sample was drawn from the manufacturing sector only.
298
2010 World Development Indicators
Finance
Infrastructure Innovation
Trade
Average Intertime to nationally recognized clear direct exports quality Value lost due to electrical certification through customs ownership outages days
2.0 4.6 6.7 .. 7.4 1.6 0.0 .. 2.3 2.2 .. 4.5 4.9 7.6 .. 2.1 .. .. 5.9 20.4 5.7 1.3 .. 6.7 .. .. 5.2 .. 3.2 3.4 .. .. .. 2.5 5.1 14.1 4.9 6.0 .. 2.3 ..
Workforce
Firms offering formal training % of firms
24.9 52.2 27.6 .. 16.3 36.5 18.6 .. 31.3 47.5 .. 36.8 51.3 32.6 .. 51.0 .. .. 21.0 21.1 36.5 75.3 .. 31.0 .. .. 28.8 .. 35.0 24.8 .. .. .. 24.6 9.6 42.3 44.0 26.5 .. 26.0 ..
About the data
5.2
STATES AND MARKETS
Business environment: enterprise surveys Definitions
The World Bank Group’s Enterprise Survey gath-
distortions limit access to credit and thus restrain
• Survey year is the year in which the underlying data
ers firm-level data on the business environment
growth.
were collected. • Time dealing with officials is the
to assess constraints to private sector growth and
The reliability and availability of infrastructure
average percentage of senior management’s time
enterprise performance. Standardized surveys are
benefit households and support development. Firms
that is spent in a typical week dealing with require-
conducted all over the world, and data are available
with access to modern and efficient infrastructure—
ments imposed by government regulations. • Aver-
on more than 100,000 firms in 118 countries. The
telecommunications, electricity, and transport—can
age number of times meeting with tax officials is
survey covers 11 dimensions of the business envi-
be more productive. Firm-level innovation and use of
the average number of visits or required meetings
ronment, including regulation, corruption, crime,
modern technology may help firms compete.
with tax officials. • Time required to obtain operat-
informality, finance, infrastructure, and trade. For
Delays in clearing customs can be costly, deterring
ing license is the average wait to obtain an operating
some countries, firm-level panel data are available,
firms from engaging in trade or making them uncom-
license from the day applied for to the day granted.
making it possible to track changes in the business
petitive globally. Ill-considered labor regulations dis-
• Informal payments to public offi cials are the
environment over time.
courage firms from creating jobs, and while employed
percentage of firms that answered positively to the
Firms evaluating investment options, governments
workers may benefit, unemployed, low-skilled, and
question “Was a gift or informal payment expected
interested in improving business conditions, and
informally employed workers will not. A trained labor
or requested during a meeting with tax officials?”
economists seeking to explain economic perfor-
force enables firms to thrive, compete, innovate, and
• Losses due to theft, robbery, vandalism, and
mance have all grappled with defining and measur-
adopt new technology.
arson are the estimated losses from those causes
ing the business environment. The firm-level data
The data in the table are from Enterprise Surveys
that occurred on establishments’ premises as a
from Enterprise Surveys provide a useful tool for
implemented by the World Bank’s Financial and Pri-
percentage of annual sales. • Firms formally regis-
benchmarking economies across a large number of
vate Sector Development Enterprise Analysis Unit. All
tered when operations started are the percentage
indicators measured at the firm level.
economies in East Asia and Pacific, Europe and Cen-
of firms formally registered when they started opera-
Most countries can improve regulation and taxa-
tral Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, Middle
tions in the country. Firms not formally registered (the
tion without compromising broader social interests.
East and North Africa, and Sub-Saharan Africa (for
residual) are in the informal sector of the economy.
Excessive regulation may harm business perfor-
2009) and Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and India draw
• Firms with female participation in ownership are
mance and growth. For example, time spent with
a sample of registered nonagricultural businesses,
the percentage of firms with a woman among the own-
tax officials is a burden firms may face in paying
excluding those in the financial and public sectors.
ers. • Firms using banks to finance investment are
taxes. The business environment suffers when gov-
Samples for other economies are drawn only from
the percentage of firms that invested in fixed assets
ernments increase uncertainty and risks or impose
the manufacturing sector and are footnoted in the
during the last fiscal year that used banks to finance
unnecessary costs and unsound regulation and taxa-
table. Typical Enterprise Survey sample sizes range
fixed assets. • Value lost due to electrical outages
tion. Time to obtain licenses and permits and the
from 150 to 1,800, depending on the size of the
is losses that resulted from power outages as a per-
associated red tape constrain firm operations.
economy. In each country samples are selected
centage of annual sales. • Internationally recognized
In some countries doing business requires informal
by stratifi ed random sampling, unless otherwise
quality certification ownership is the percentage of
payments to “get things done” in customs, taxes,
noted. Stratified random sampling allows indicators
firms that have an internationally recognized quality
licenses, regulations, services, and the like. Such
to be computed by sector, firm size, and region and
certification, such as International Organization for
corruption harms the business environment by dis-
increases the precision of economywide indicators
Standardization 9000, 9002, or 14000. • Average
torting policymaking, undermining government cred-
compared with alternative simple random sampling.
time to clear direct exports through customs is
ibility, and diverting public resources. Crime, theft,
Stratification by sector of activity divides the econ-
the average number of days to clear direct exports
and disorder also impose costs on businesses and
omy into manufacturing and retail and other services
through customs. • Firms offering formal training
society.
sectors. For medium-size and large economies the
are the percentage of firms offering formal training
In many developing countries informal businesses
manufacturing sector is further stratified by industry.
programs for their permanent, full-time employees.
operate without formal registration. These firms have
Firm size is stratified into small (5–19 employees),
less access to financial and public services and can
medium-size (20–100 employees), and large (more
engage in fewer types of contracts and investments,
than 100 employees). Geographic stratifi cation
constraining growth.
divides the national economy into the main centers
Equal opportunities for men and women contrib-
of economic activity.
ute to development. Female participation in firm ownership is a measure of women’s integration as decisionmakers. Financial markets connect firms to lenders and
Data sources
investors, allowing firms to grow their businesses:
Data on the business environment are from the
creditworthy firms can obtain credit from financial
World Bank Group’s Enterprise Surveys website
intermediaries at competitive prices. But too often
(www.enterprisesurveys.org).
market imperfections and government-induced
2010 World Development Indicators
299
5.3
Business environment: Doing Business indicators Starting a business
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
300
Number of procedures June 2009
Time required days June 2009
4 5 14 8 15 6 2 8 6 7 5 3 7 15 12 10 16 4 4 11 9 12 1 8 19 9 14 3 9 13 10 12 10 7 .. 8 4 8 13 6 8 13 5 5 3 5 9 8 3 9 8 15 11 13 16 13 13
7 5 24 68 27 15 2 28 10 44 6 4 31 50 60 61 120 18 14 32 85 34 5 22 75 27 37 6 20 149 37 60 40 22 .. 15 6 19 64 7 17 84 7 9 14 7 58 27 3 18 33 19 29 41 213 195 14
2010 World Development Indicators
Registering property
Cost % of per capita income June 2009
30.2 17.0 12.1 151.1 11.0 2.6 0.8 5.1 2.9 36.2 1.7 5.3 155.5 99.2 15.8 2.1 6.9 1.7 50.3 151.6 138.4 121.1 0.4 244.9 176.7 6.9 4.9 1.8 12.8 391.0 86.5 20.0 133.3 8.4 .. 9.2 0.0 17.3 37.7 16.1 38.7 76.5 1.7 18.9 0.9 0.9 17.8 215.1 3.7 4.7 26.4 10.9 45.4 139.2 323.0 227.9 47.3
Number of procedures June 2009
Time required days June 2009
9 6 11 7 6 3 5 3 4 8 3 7 4 7 7 5 14 8 4 5 7 5 6 5 6 6 4 5 7 8 7 6 6 5 .. 4 6 7 9 7 5 12 3 10 3 8 7 5 2 4 5 11 4 6 9 5 7
250 42 47 184 52 4 5 32 11 245 18 79 120 92 84 16 42 15 59 94 56 93 17 75 44 31 29 45 20 57 116 21 62 104 .. 78 42 60 16 72 31 101 18 41 14 98 39 371 3 40 34 22 27 104 211 405 23
Dealing with construction permits
Employing workers
Enforcing contracts
Rigidity of Time Number of required employment index procedures to build a to build a warehouse 0–100 (least Number of to most rigid) procedures warehouse days June June June June 2009 2009 2009 2009
13 24 22 12 28 20 16 14 31 14 15 14 15 17 16 24 18 24 15 22 23 15 14 21 9 18 37 7 11 14 14 23 22 14 .. 36 6 17 19 25 34 .. 14 12 18 13 16 17 10 12 18 15 22 32 15 11 17
340 331 240 328 338 137 221 194 207 231 161 169 410 249 255 167 411 139 132 212 709 426 75 239 181 155 336 67 51 322 169 191 629 420 .. 150 69 214 155 218 155 .. 118 128 38 137 210 146 98 100 220 169 178 255 167 1,179 106
20 25 41 66 21 21 0 24 10 28 11 17 40 77 33 13 46 19 21 28 36 39 4 50 33 18 31 0 10 63 63 39 33 50 .. 11 7 21 38 27 24 20 51 28 41 52 52 27 7 42 27 50 28 24 54 10 57
47 39 46 46 36 48 28 25 39 41 28 25 42 40 38 29 45 39 37 44 44 43 36 43 41 36 34 24 34 43 44 40 33 38 .. 27 34 34 39 41 30 39 36 37 32 29 38 32 36 30 36 39 31 50 41 35 45
Time required days June 2009
1,642 390 630 1,011 590 285 395 397 237 1,442 225 505 825 591 595 687 616 564 446 832 401 800 570 660 743 480 406 280 1,346 625 560 852 770 561 .. 611 380 460 588 1,010 786 405 425 620 375 331 1,070 434 285 394 487 819 1,459 276 1,140 508 900
Protecting investors
Closing a business
Disclosure index 0–10 (least to most disclosure) June 2009
Time to resolve insolvency years June 2009
0 8 6 5 6 5 8 3 7 6 5 8 6 1 3 7 6 10 6 4 5 6 8 6 6 7 10 10 8 3 6 2 6 1 .. 2 7 5 1 8 5 4 8 4 6 10 6 2 8 5 7 1 3 6 6 2 0
.. .. 2.5 6.2 2.8 1.9 1.0 1.1 2.7 4.0 5.8 0.9 4.0 1.8 3.3 1.7 4.0 3.3 4.0 .. .. 3.2 0.8 4.8 .. 4.5 1.7 1.1 3.0 5.2 3.0 3.5 2.2 3.1 .. 6.5 1.1 3.5 5.3 4.2 4.0 .. 3.0 3.0 0.9 1.9 5.0 3.0 3.3 1.2 1.9 2.0 3.0 3.8 .. 5.7 3.8
Starting a business
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Number of procedures June 2009
Time required days June 2009
4 13 9 7 11 4 5 6 6 8 8 7 12 .. 8 .. 13 3 7 5 5 7 5 .. 7 4 2 10 9 7 9 5 8 8 7 6 10 .. 10 7 6 1 6 9 8 5 5 10 6 8 7 9 15 6 6 7 19
4 30 60 9 77 13 34 10 8 23 13 20 34 .. 14 .. 35 11 100 16 9 40 20 .. 26 4 7 39 11 15 19 6 13 10 13 12 26 .. 66 31 10 1 39 17 31 7 12 20 12 56 35 41 52 32 6 7 76
Registering property
Cost % of per capita income June 2009
8.0 66.1 26.0 3.9 75.9 0.3 4.2 17.9 5.3 7.5 49.5 4.8 36.5 .. 14.7 .. 1.0 5.2 12.3 2.1 78.2 27.0 52.9 .. 2.4 2.5 7.1 108.0 11.9 89.2 34.7 4.1 11.7 7.0 3.0 16.1 19.3 .. 20.4 53.6 5.6 0.4 111.7 118.7 76.7 1.9 2.2 5.8 10.3 20.5 56.7 24.5 28.2 17.9 6.4 0.7 0.6
Number of procedures June 2009
Time required days June 2009
4 5 6 9 5 5 7 8 6 6 7 5 8 .. 7 .. 8 4 9 6 8 6 10 .. 2 5 7 6 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 8 8 .. 9 3 2 2 8 4 13 1 2 6 7 4 6 4 8 6 5 8 10
17 44 22 36 8 38 144 27 55 14 21 40 64 .. 11 .. 55 5 135 45 25 101 50 .. 3 58 74 88 144 29 49 26 74 5 11 47 42 .. 23 5 5 2 124 35 82 3 16 50 32 72 46 14 33 197 12 194 16
Dealing with construction permits
Employing workers
Enforcing contracts
Rigidity of Time Number of required employment index procedures to build a to build a warehouse 0–100 (least Number of to most rigid) procedures warehouse days June June June June 2009 2009 2009 2009
31 37 14 17 14 11 20 14 10 15 19 37 11 .. 13 .. 25 12 24 25 20 15 24 .. 17 21 16 21 25 14 25 18 12 30 21 19 17 .. 12 15 18 7 17 17 18 14 16 12 20 24 13 21 24 30 19 22 19
204 195 160 322 215 185 235 257 156 187 87 211 120 .. 34 .. 104 137 172 187 211 601 77 .. 162 146 178 213 261 185 201 107 138 292 215 163 381 .. 139 424 230 65 219 265 350 252 242 223 116 217 291 205 203 308 287 209 76
22 30 40 29 24 10 17 38 4 16 24 17 17 .. 38 .. 0 18 20 43 25 14 27 .. 38 14 56 21 10 31 39 18 41 41 17 60 40 .. 13 46 42 7 27 68 7 44 13 43 66 4 56 39 29 25 43 14 13
33 46 39 39 51 20 35 40 35 30 38 38 40 .. 35 .. 50 39 42 27 37 41 41 .. 30 37 38 42 30 36 46 36 38 31 32 40 30 .. 33 39 25 30 35 39 39 33 51 47 31 42 38 41 37 38 31 39 43
Time required days June 2009
395 1,420 570 520 520 515 890 1,210 655 360 689 390 465 .. 230 .. 566 260 443 309 721 695 1,280 .. 275 370 871 432 585 626 370 720 415 365 314 615 730 .. 270 735 514 216 540 545 457 280 598 976 686 591 591 428 842 830 547 620 570
5.3
STATES AND MARKETS
Business environment: Doing Business indicators
Protecting investors
Closing a business
Disclosure index 0–10 (least to most disclosure) June 2009
Time to resolve insolvency years June 2009
2 7 10 5 4 10 7 7 4 7 5 7 3 .. 7 .. 7 8 0 5 9 2 4 .. 5 9 5 4 10 6 5 6 8 7 5 6 5 .. 5 6 4 10 4 6 5 7 8 6 1 5 6 8 2 7 6 7 5
2.0 7.0 5.5 4.5 .. 0.4 4.0 1.8 1.1 0.6 4.3 1.5 4.5 .. 1.5 .. 4.2 4.0 .. 3.0 4.0 2.6 3.0 .. 1.5 2.9 .. 2.6 2.3 3.6 8.0 1.7 1.8 2.8 4.0 1.8 5.0 .. 1.5 5.0 1.1 1.3 2.2 5.0 2.0 0.9 4.0 2.8 2.5 3.0 3.9 3.1 5.7 3.0 2.0 3.8 2.8
2010 World Development Indicators
301
5.3
Business environment: Doing Business indicators Starting a business
Number of procedures June 2009
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
302
6 9 2 4 4 7 6 3 6 3 .. 6 10 4 10 13 3 6 7 12 12 7 10 7 9 10 6 .. 18 10 8 6 6 11 7 16 11 11 6 6 10 8u 9 8 9 8 9 8 7 10 9 7 9 6 6
Time required days June 2009
10 30 3 5 8 13 12 3 16 6 .. 22 47 38 36 61 15 20 17 25 29 32 83 75 43 11 6 .. 25 27 15 13 6 65 15 141 50 49 12 18 96 36 u 44 40 34 47 41 42 19 67 23 28 44 19 15
2010 World Development Indicators
Registering property
Cost % of per capita income June 2009
2.9 2.7 10.1 7.7 63.7 7.1 118.8 0.7 2.0 0.0 .. 5.9 15.0 5.9 36.0 33.9 0.6 2.0 27.8 24.3 36.8 6.3 4.1 205.0 0.7 5.7 14.2 .. 84.4 5.8 6.2 0.7 0.7 40.0 11.2 24.0 13.3 55.0 83.0 28.4 499.5 41.5 u 107.5 31.0 42.7 16.0 53.5 30.1 8.8 41.2 51.5 27.0 99.7 6.7 6.0
Number of procedures June 2009
8 6 4 2 6 6 7 3 3 6 .. 6 4 8 6 11 2 4 4 6 9 2 .. 5 8 4 6 .. 13 10 1 2 4 9 12 8 4 7 6 6 5 6u 7 6 6 6 6 5 6 7 7 6 7 5 5
Time required days June 2009
48 43 60 2 124 111 236 5 17 391 .. 24 18 83 9 46 15 16 19 37 73 2 .. 295 162 39 6 .. 77 93 2 8 12 66 78 47 57 47 19 39 31 65 u 100 61 69 52 73 112 46 65 35 106 82 43 57
Dealing with construction permits
Employing workers
Enforcing contracts
Rigidity of Time Number of required employment index procedures to build a to build a warehouse 0–100 (least Number of to most rigid) procedures warehouse days June June June June 2009 2009 2009 2009
17 54 14 17 16 20 25 11 13 14 .. 17 11 22 19 13 8 14 26 32 22 11 22 15 20 20 25 .. 16 30 17 11 19 30 26 11 13 21 15 17 19 18 u 18 19 19 20 19 18 24 17 19 18 17 16 14
243 704 210 94 220 279 283 25 287 197 .. 174 233 214 271 93 116 154 128 250 328 156 208 277 261 84 188 .. 143 476 64 95 40 234 260 395 194 199 107 254 1,426 216 u 291 209 209 209 232 182 249 228 181 241 262 169 225
46 38 7 13 59 35 41 0 22 54 .. 35 49 20 36 10 38 7 20 49 54 11 32 54 7 40 35 .. 0 31 7 10 0 18 32 69 21 31 24 21 33 27 u 33 27 28 26 29 17 27 29 33 27 35 24 38
31 37 24 43 44 36 40 21 30 32 .. 30 39 40 53 40 30 31 55 34 38 35 51 41 42 39 35 .. 38 30 49 30 32 40 42 29 34 44 36 35 38 38 u 39 39 40 37 39 37 37 39 42 44 39 35 31
Protecting investors
Closing a business
Time required days June 2009
Disclosure index 0–10 (least to most disclosure) June 2009
Time to resolve insolvency years June 2009
512 281 260 635 780 635 515 150 565 1,290 .. 600 515 1,318 810 972 508 417 872 430 462 479 1,435 588 1,340 565 420 .. 510 345 537 399 300 720 195 510 295 600 520 471 410 607 u 605 649 678 612 636 572 398 710 707 1,053 646 526 602
9 6 7 9 6 7 6 10 3 3 .. 8 5 4 0 0 6 0 6 6 3 10 3 6 4 5 9 .. 2 5 4 10 7 3 4 3 6 6 6 3 8 5u 5 5 5 6 5 5 6 4 6 4 5 6 5
3.3 3.8 .. 1.5 3.0 2.7 2.6 0.8 4.0 2.0 .. 2.0 1.0 1.7 .. 2.0 2.0 3.0 4.1 3.0 3.0 2.7 .. 3.0 .. 1.3 3.3 .. 2.2 2.9 5.1 1.0 1.5 2.1 4.0 4.0 5.0 .. 3.0 2.7 3.3 3.0 u 3.8 3.1 3.3 2.9 3.3 3.1 3.0 3.2 3.5 4.5 3.4 2.1 1.6
About the data
5.3
STATES AND MARKETS
Business environment: Doing Business indicators Definitions
The economic health of a country is measured not only
The Doing Business project encompasses two
• Number of procedures for starting a business is the
in macroeconomic terms but also by other factors that
types of data: data from readings of laws and regu-
number of procedures required to start a business,
shape daily economic activity such as laws, regula-
lations and data on time and motion indicators that
including interactions to obtain necessary permits and
tions, and institutional arrangements. The Doing Busi-
measure efficiency in achieving a regulatory goal.
licenses and to complete all inscriptions, verifications,
ness indicators measure business regulation, gauge
Within the time and motion indicators cost estimates
and notifications to start operations for businesses
regulatory outcomes, and measure the extent of legal
are recorded from official fee schedules where appli-
with specific characteristics of ownership, size, and
protection of property, the flexibility of employment
cable. The data from surveys are subjected to numer-
type of production. • Time required for starting a busi-
regulation, and the tax burden on businesses.
ous tests for robustness, which lead to revision or
ness is the number of calendar days to complete the
expansion of the information collected.
procedures for legally operating a business using the
The table presents a subset of Doing Business indicators covering 7 of the 10 sets of indicators:
The Doing Business methodology has limitations
fastest procedure, independent of cost. • Cost for
starting a business, registering property, dealing with
that should be considered when interpreting the
starting a business is normalized as a percentage of
construction permits, employing workers, enforcing
data. First, the data collected refer to businesses
gross national income (GNI) per capita. It includes all
contracts, protecting investors, and closing a busi-
in the economy’s largest city and may not represent
official fees for professional or legal services if they are
ness. Table 5.5 includes Doing Business measures
regulations in other locations of the economy. To
required by law. • Number of procedures for register-
of getting credit, and table 5.6 presents data on
address this limitation, subnational indicators are
ing property is the number of procedures required for
paying taxes.
being collected for selected economies. These sub-
a business to legally transfer property. • Time required
The fundamental premise of the Doing Business
national studies point to significant differences in
for registering property is the number of calendar days
project is that economic activity requires good rules
the speed of reform and the ease of doing business
for a business to legally transfer property. • Number of
and regulations that are efficient, accessible to all
across cities in the same economy. Second, the data
procedures for dealing with licenses to build a ware-
who need to use them, and simple to implement.
often focus on a specific business form—generally
house is the number of interactions of a company’s
Thus some Doing Business indicators give a higher
a limited liability company of a specified size—and
employees or managers with external parties, includ-
score for more regulation, such as stricter disclosure
may not represent regulation for other types of busi-
ing government staff, public inspectors, notaries, land
requirements in related-party transactions, and oth-
nesses such as sole proprietorships. Third, transac-
registry and cadastre staff, and technical experts apart
ers give a higher score for simplified regulations,
tions described in a standardized business case refer
from architects and engineers. • Time required for
such as a one-stop shop for completing business
to a specific set of issues and may not represent the
dealing with construction permits to build a ware-
startup formalities.
full set of issues a business encounters. Fourth, the
house is the number of calendar days to complete the
In constructing the indicators, it is assumed that
time measures involve an element of judgment by the
required procedures for building a warehouse using the
entrepreneurs know about all regulations and comply
expert respondents. When sources indicate different
fastest procedure, independent of cost. • Rigidity of
with them; in practice, entrepreneurs may not be
estimates, the Doing Business time indicators repre-
employment index, a measure of employment regula-
aware of all required procedures or may avoid legally
sent the median values of several responses given
tion, is the average of three subindexes: a difficulty of
required procedures altogether. But where regula-
under the assumptions of the standardized case.
hiring index, a rigidity of hours index, and a difficulty of
tion is particularly onerous, levels of informality are
Fifth, the methodology assumes that a business has
firing index. Higher values indicate more rigid regula-
higher, which comes at a cost: firms in the informal
full information on what is required and does not
tions. • Number of procedures for enforcing contracts
sector usually grow more slowly, have less access
waste time when completing procedures.
is the number of independent actions, mandated
to credit, and employ fewer workers—and those
by law or court regulation, that demand interaction
workers remain outside the protections of labor law.
between the parties to a contract or between them and
The indicators in the table can help policymakers
the judge or court officer. • Time required for enforc-
understand the business environment in a country
ing contracts is the number of calendar days from
and—along with information from other sources such
the time of the filing of a lawsuit in court to the final
as the World Bank’s Enterprise Surveys—provide
determination and payment. • Extent of disclosure
insights into potential areas of reform.
index measures the degree to which investors are pro-
Doing Business data are collected with a stan-
tected through disclosure of ownership and financial
dardized survey that uses a simple business case
information. Higher values indicate more disclosure.
to ensure comparability across economies and over
• Time to resolve insolvency is the number of years
time—with assumptions about the legal form of the
from time of filing for insolvency in court until resolu-
business, its size, its location, and nature of its oper-
tion of distressed assets and payment of creditors.
ation. Surveys in 183 countries are administered through more than 8,000 local experts, including
Data sources
lawyers, business consultants, accountants, freight
Data on the business environment are from
forwarders, government officials, and other profes-
the World Bank’s Doing Business project (www.
sionals who routinely administer or advise on legal
doingbusiness.org).
and regulatory requirements.
2010 World Development Indicators
303
5.4
Stock markets Market capitalization
$ millions
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
304
% of GDP
2000
2009
.. .. .. .. 166,068 2 372,794 29,935 3 1,186 .. 182,481 .. 1,742 .. 978 226,152 617 .. .. .. .. 841,385 .. .. 60,401 580,991 623,398 9,560 .. .. 2,924 1,185 2,742 .. 11,002 107,666 .. 704 28,741 2,041 .. 1,846 .. 293,635 1,446,634 .. .. 24 1,270,243 502 110,839 172 .. .. .. 458
.. .. .. .. 48,033 176 675,619 72,300 .. 7,068 .. 167,447 .. 2,672 .. 4,283 1,337,723 7,330 .. .. .. .. 1,002,215 .. .. 230,732 5,010,656 468,595 140,520 .. .. 1,887 6,141 26,619 .. 54,477 131,526 .. 4,248 91,091 4,656 .. 170 .. 154,367 1,492,327 .. .. 327 1,107,957 2,507 90,396 .. .. .. .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
Market liquidity
Turnover ratio
Value of shares traded % of GDP
Value of shares traded % of market capitalization
2000
2008
2000
2008
2000
2009
.. .. .. .. 58.4 0.1 92.0 15.7 0.1 2.5 .. 78.7 .. 20.7 .. 15.8 35.1 4.9 .. .. .. .. 116.1 .. .. 80.3 48.5 368.6 10.2 .. .. 18.3 11.4 12.8 .. 19.4 67.3 .. 4.4 28.8 15.5 .. 32.5 .. 241.1 108.9 .. .. 0.8 66.8 10.1 88.3 0.9 .. .. .. 8.8
.. .. .. .. 15.9 1.5 66.5 17.5 .. 8.4 .. 33.2 .. 16.0 .. 26.5 37.4 17.8 .. .. .. .. 66.8 .. .. 78.1 64.6 217.6 35.7 .. .. 6.4 30.2 38.6 .. 22.7 38.5 .. 8.3 52.9 21.1 .. 8.3 .. 56.6 52.2 .. .. 2.6 30.4 20.4 25.4 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 2.1 0.0 55.9 4.9 .. 1.6 .. 16.4 .. 0.8 .. 0.8 15.7 0.5 .. .. .. .. 87.6 .. .. 8.1 60.2 223.4 0.4 .. .. 0.7 0.3 0.9 .. 11.6 57.2 .. 0.1 11.1 0.2 .. 5.7 .. 169.7 81.6 .. .. 0.1 56.3 0.2 75.7 0.1 .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 4.1 0.0 99.9 25.3 .. 11.6 .. 41.9 .. 0.0 .. 1.1 46.2 3.3 .. .. .. .. 117.3 .. .. 21.6 126.4 288.7 5.1 .. .. 0.2 1.3 5.0 .. 20.0 62.1 .. 0.3 42.9 0.9 .. 3.3 .. 143.2 114.0 .. .. 0.1 84.8 0.9 29.7 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 4.8 4.6 56.5 29.8 .. 74.4 .. 20.7 .. 0.1 .. 4.8 43.5 9.2 .. .. .. .. 77.3 .. .. 9.4 158.3 61.3 3.8 .. .. 12.0 2.6 7.4 .. 60.3 86.0 .. 5.5 34.7 1.3 .. 18.9 .. 64.3 74.1 .. .. .. 79.1 1.5 63.7 0.0 .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 5.4 0.6 103.1 69.0 .. 212.6 .. 76.1 .. .. .. 2.6 67.4 4.9 .. .. .. .. 123.7 .. .. 20.7 229.5 81.8 11.4 .. .. 3.0 2.0 5.3 .. 39.9 104.8 .. 30.7 59.7 .. .. 0.8 .. 155.1 152.4 .. .. 4.4 191.5 2.0 59.2 .. .. .. .. ..
Listed domestic companies
number
S&P/Global Equity Indices
% change
2000
2009
2008
2009
.. .. .. .. 127 105 1,330 97 2 221 .. 174 .. 26 .. 16 459 503 .. .. .. .. 1,418 .. .. 258 1,086 779 126 .. .. 21 41 64 .. 131 225 .. 30 1,076 40 .. 23 .. 154 808 .. .. 269 1,022 22 329 7 .. .. .. 94
.. .. .. .. 107 26 1,924 85 .. 295 .. 167 .. 37 .. 20 425 337 .. .. .. .. 3,755 .. .. 232 1,700 1,017 96 .. .. 11 38 368 .. 25 216 .. 39 306 51 .. 16 .. 126 966 .. .. 161 638 35 280 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. –56.2a .. .. .. .. 4.3a .. .. .. .. .. –38.4 a –57.2 –70.2a .. .. .. .. .. .. .. –41.2 –52.7 .. .. .. .. .. –16.9 a –59.3a .. –45.9 .. .. –8.8a –55.8 .. .. –65.5 a .. .. .. .. .. .. .. –10.4 a .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. 97.8a .. .. .. .. 38.6a .. .. .. .. .. 24.3a 125.1 17.2a .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 84.0 66.3 .. 75.7a .. .. .. –10.7a 31.1a .. 23.0 .. .. –13.1a 35.6 .. .. 32.9a .. .. 22.0b .. .. .. 18.0c –42.7a .. .. .. .. .. ..
Market capitalization
$ millions
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
% of GDP
2000
2009
12,021 148,064 26,834 7,350 .. 81,882 64,081 768,364 3,582 3,157,222 4,943 1,342 1,283 .. 171,587 .. 20,772 4 .. 563 1,583 .. .. .. 1,588 7 .. .. 116,935 .. .. 1,331 125,204 392 37 10,899 .. .. 311 790 640,456 18,866 .. .. 4,237 65,034 3,463 6,581 2,794 1,520 224 10,562 25,957 31,279 60,681 .. 5,152
30,332 1,226,676 196,661 49,040 .. 49,401 188,734 520,855 6,127 3,220,485 31,891 57,273 10,967 .. 836,462 .. 96,317 94 .. 1,872 12,885 .. .. .. 4,619 823 .. 1,771 263,362 .. .. 4,982 352,045 .. 407 64,479 .. .. 968 4,894 387,906 24,166 .. .. 33,374 125,920 17,304 32,206 8,048 .. .. 69,753 82,546 147,178 68,713 .. 87,843
Market liquidity
Turnover ratio
Value of shares traded % of GDP
Value of shares traded % of market capitalization
2000
2008
2000
2008
2000
2009
25.1 32.2 16.3 7.3 .. 84.8 51.4 70.0 39.8 67.6 58.4 7.3 10.1 .. 32.2 .. 55.1 0.3 .. 7.2 9.2 .. .. .. 13.9 0.2 .. .. 124.7 .. .. 29.0 21.5 30.4 3.4 29.4 .. .. 8.0 14.4 166.3 37.1 .. .. 9.2 38.6 17.4 8.9 24.0 49.3 3.5 19.8 34.2 18.3 53.9 .. 29.0
12.0 55.7 19.3 15.9 .. 18.5 66.5 22.6 51.4 65.6 168.8 23.3 36.0 .. 53.2 .. 72.4 1.9 .. 4.8 32.9 .. .. .. 7.7 8.6 .. 41.5 84.4 .. .. 36.9 21.4 .. 7.7 74.0 .. .. 7.0 38.8 44.5 18.6 .. .. 24.0 27.9 55.4 14.3 28.4 118.3 4.4 43.1 31.2 17.1 28.2 .. 134.4
25.4 110.8 8.7 1.1 .. 14.9 18.8 70.9 0.8 57.7 4.9 0.5 0.4 .. 200.2 .. 11.2 1.7 .. 2.9 0.7 .. .. .. 1.8 3.3 .. .. 62.4 .. .. 1.6 7.8 1.9 0.7 3.0 .. .. 0.6 0.6 175.9 21.2 .. .. 0.6 35.7 2.8 44.6 1.3 0.0 0.1 2.9 10.8 8.5 48.3 .. 1.3
19.9 90.6 21.7 2.9 .. 30.8 54.0 64.2 2.5 119.5 131.9 2.6 4.7 .. 157.8 .. 82.9 2.2 .. 0.1 2.4 .. .. .. 1.0 1.6 .. 1.4 38.4 .. .. 4.3 9.9 2.6 1.0 24.7 .. .. 0.2 2.9 130.9 12.7 .. .. 9.6 81.4 13.0 33.0 1.1 0.4 0.0 4.0 10.3 12.9 33.9 .. 42.1
90.7 133.6 32.9 12.7 .. 19.2 36.3 104.0 2.5 69.9 7.7 25.1 3.6 .. 233.2 .. 21.3 .. .. 48.6 6.7 .. .. .. 14.8 6.6 .. 13.8 44.6 .. .. 5.0 32.3 5.8 7.3 9.2 .. .. 4.5 6.9 101.4 45.9 .. .. 7.3 93.4 14.2 475.5 1.7 .. 3.5 12.6 15.8 49.9 85.5 .. 4.5
106.1 116.3 78.1 33.6 .. 85.0 54.6 284.2 1.8 153.2 40.3 9.1 4.5 .. 238.2 .. 23.7 131.2 .. 0.0 14.4 .. .. .. 4.3 8.9 .. 3.9 54.7 .. .. 0.3 43.4 .. 14.7 12.0 .. .. 0.1 7.5 169.2 46.1 .. .. 26.9 152.2 17.4 99.9 0.3 .. .. 8.2 24.9 56.0 81.8 .. 28.7
Listed domestic companies
number
5.4
STATES AND MARKETS
Stock markets
S&P/Global Equity Indices
% change
2000
2009
2008
2009
60 5,937 290 304 .. 76 654 291 46 2,561 163 23 57 .. 1,308 .. 77 80 .. 64 12 .. .. .. 54 1 .. .. 795 .. .. 40 179 36 410 53 .. .. 13 110 234 142 .. .. 195 191 131 762 29 7 56 230 228 225 109 .. 22
45 4,946 401 356 .. 58 622 294 38 3,299 272 72 53 .. 1,798 .. 207 8 .. 34 11 .. .. .. 40 38 .. 14 957 .. .. 40 125 .. 420 78 .. .. 7 149 110 149 .. .. 216 209 125 650 30 15 50 201 245 354 49 .. 44
–62.5 –64.1 –61.1 .. .. .. –33.1 .. –38.2a –40.0 d .. –47.0 a –40.3a .. –55.6 .. .. .. .. –58.7a –25.3a .. .. .. –73.0a .. .. .. –43.7 .. .. –49.2a –45.1 .. .. –17.0 .. .. –9.9a .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. –15.7a .. .. –41.1 –53.7 –57.8 .. .. ..
73.0 94.1 130.1 .. .. .. 56.8 .. –15.8a 6.0d –13.9 1.5a 0.6a .. 67.2 .. –10.4a .. .. 2.2a 43.4a .. .. .. 36.7a .. .. .. 46.7 .. .. 44.2a 55.8 .. .. –1.7 .. .. 22.6a .. .. .. .. .. –35.4 .. 22.0 a 56.7 15.4a .. .. 79.3 71.5 41.9 .. .. 5.1a
2010 World Development Indicators
305
5.4
Stock markets Market capitalization
$ millions 2000
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
% of GDP 2009
1,069 31,318 38,922 861,424 .. .. 67,171 318,737 .. .. 734 12,165 .. .. 152,827 180,021 1,217 4,672 2,547 12,141 .. .. 204,952 805,169 504,219 946,113 1,074 8,172 .. .. 73 203 328,339 252,542 792,316 862,663 .. .. .. .. 233 1,293 29,489 142,247 .. .. .. .. 4,330 11,145 2,828 9,309 69,659 234,004 .. .. 35 .. 1,881 16,859 5,727 109,613 2,576,992 1,851,954 15,104,037 11,737,646 161 159 32 .. 8,128 .. .. 21,529 765 2,123 .. .. 236 2,346 2,432 5,333 32,187,516 s ..g s .. .. 1,973,751 11,586,208 886,833 6,956,558 1,086,918 4,629,650 1,980,449 11,628,278 780,487 5,717,001 147,380 1,635,890 620,023 1,178,104 57,110 209,656 157,695 1,274,122 217,754 868,391 30,207,068 27,380,501 5,433,547 5,152,619
2000
2008
2.9 10.0 15.0 78.7 .. .. 35.6 52.5 .. .. 4.6 24.3 .. .. 164.8 98.9 4.2 5.2 12.8 21.6 .. .. 154.2 177.7 86.8 59.0 6.6 10.7 .. .. 4.9 6.9 133.7 52.7 317.0 175.4 .. .. .. .. 2.6 6.3 24.0 37.7 .. .. .. .. 53.1 50.4 14.5 15.8 26.1 16.0 .. .. 0.6 1.2 6.0 13.5 8.1 113.1 174.4 69.3 154.7 80.4 0.7 0.7 0.2 4.2 6.9 4.5 .. 10.6 18.6 .. .. .. 7.3 20.6 32.9 .. 102.2 w 59.2 w .. .. 36.1 49.5 35.3 53.5 36.7 45.5 35.5 48.9 47.1 58.0 17.6 44.4 31.8 31.9 19.9 55.9 26.1 47.0 89.7 148.5 116.6 62.9 86.9 37.9
Market liquidity
Turnover ratio
Value of shares traded % of GDP
Value of shares traded % of market capitalization
2000
2008
0.6 7.8 .. 9.2 .. 0.1 .. 98.7 3.1 2.3 .. 58.3 169.8 0.9 .. 0.0 158.8 243.7 .. .. 0.4 19.0 .. .. 1.7 3.2 67.1 .. 0.0 0.9 0.2 124.2 326.3 0.0 0.1 0.6 .. 4.6 .. 0.2 3.8 152.2 w .. 33.8 52.7 17.5 33.2 49.8 25.4 8.5 5.1 90.2 32.3 177.7 80.3
1.8 33.5 .. 111.9 .. 2.5 .. 148.9 0.0 2.6 .. 145.2 152.1 2.5 .. 0.0 133.4 307.1 .. .. 0.1 42.9 .. .. 1.5 3.7 32.6 .. 0.1 1.4 75.7 242.5 249.9 0.1 0.3 0.4 4.6 .. .. 0.6 .. 136.9 w .. 61.3 93.4 29.9 60.4 103.7 23.8 24.9 18.8 76.5 101.3 164.0 91.3
2000
23.1 36.9 .. 27.1 .. 0.0 .. 52.1 129.8 20.7 .. 33.9 210.7 11.0 .. 9.8 111.2 82.0 .. .. 2.4 53.2 .. .. 3.1 23.3 206.2 .. .. 19.6 3.9 66.6 200.8 0.5 .. 8.9 .. 10.0 .. 20.8 10.8 122.3 w .. 83.5 128.1 46.7 83.1 125.0 94.4 27.2 12.4 167.9 22.1 130.4 90.7
2009
3.5 154.9 .. 41.1 .. 14.6 .. 101.3 0.1 11.9 .. 83.8 177.6 14.2 .. .. 157.0 145.6 .. .. .. 110.2 .. .. 2.0 16.0 138.4 .. .. 2.9 63.3 226.9 232.3 12.0 .. 1.3 42.7 31.3 .. 4.1 5.1 ..g w .. 213.8 228.5 59.3 213.8 229.5 68.0 46.1 28.7 88.9 76.5 187.1 176.8
Listed domestic companies
number 2000
2009
5,555 1,571 249 333 .. .. 75 135 .. .. 6 1,771 .. .. 418 455 493 111 38 80 .. .. 616 411 1,019 3,536 239 232 .. .. 6 7 292 341 252 253 .. .. .. .. 4 7 381 497 .. .. .. .. 27 37 44 50 315 315 .. .. 2 6 139 149 54 101 1,904 2,415 7,524 5,603 16 8 5 114 85 60 .. 162 24 35 .. .. 9 15 69 81 47,787 s ..g s .. .. 21,842 15,575 11,779 9,819 10,063 5,756 22,419 16,120 3,190 3,962 7,524 3,610 1,672 1,471 1,676 717 7,269 6,123 1,088 820 25,368 31,198 5,028 6,700
S&P/Global Equity Indices
% change 2008
2009
–72.2a –73.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. –36.0 a –66.9a .. –41.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. –50.5 .. .. –9.9 a –3.1a –62.4 .. .. –82.2a .. –40.0e –39.0 f .. .. .. –68.2a .. .. ..
26.1a 106.6 .. 28.5 .. .. .. .. –23.1a 16.1a .. 53.7 .. 118.0a .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 72.8 .. .. –10.2a 40.6a 99.6 .. .. 31.1a 24.6a 22.0e 23.0f .. .. .. 46.9a .. .. 16.7a
a. Refers to the S&P Frontier BMI index. b. Refers to the CAC 40 index. c. Refers to the DAX index. d. Refers to the Nikkei 225 index. e. Refers to the FT 100 index. f. Refers to the S&P 500 index. g. Aggregates not preserved because data for high-income economies are not available for 2008.
306
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
5.4
STATES AND MARKETS
Stock markets Definitions
The development of an economy’s financial markets
countries. Market capitalization shows the overall
• Market capitalization (also known as market
is closely related to its overall development. Well
size of the stock market in U.S. dollars and as a
value) is the share price times the number of shares
functioning financial systems provide good and eas-
percentage of GDP. The number of listed domestic
outstanding. • Market liquidity is the total value
ily accessible information. That lowers transaction
companies is another measure of market size. Mar-
of shares traded during the period divided by gross
costs, which in turn improves resource allocation and
ket size is positively correlated with the ability to
domestic product (GDP). This indicator complements
boosts economic growth. Both banking systems and
mobilize capital and diversify risk.
the market capitalization ratio by showing whether
stock markets enhance growth, the main factor in
Market liquidity, the ability to easily buy and sell
market size is matched by trading. • Turnover ratio
poverty reduction. At low levels of economic develop-
securities, is measured by dividing the total value
is the total value of shares traded during the period
ment commercial banks tend to dominate the finan-
of shares traded by GDP. The turnover ratio—the
divided by the average market capitalization for the
cial system, while at higher levels domestic stock
value of shares traded as a percentage of market
period. Average market capitalization is calculated as
markets tend to become more active and efficient
capitalization—is also a measure of liquidity as well
the average of the end-of-period values for the cur-
relative to domestic banks.
as of transaction costs. (High turnover indicates low
rent period and the previous period. • Listed domes-
Open economies with sound macroeconomic poli-
transaction costs.) The turnover ratio complements
tic companies are the domestically incorporated
cies, good legal systems, and shareholder protection
the ratio of value traded to GDP, because the turn-
companies listed on the country’s stock exchanges
attract capital and therefore have larger financial mar-
over ratio is related to the size of the market and the
at the end of the year. This indicator does not include
kets. Recent research on stock market development
value traded ratio to the size of the economy. A small,
investment companies, mutual funds, or other col-
shows that modern communications technology and
liquid market will have a high turnover ratio but a low
lective investment vehicles. • S&P/Global Equity
increased financial integration have resulted in more
value of shares traded ratio. Liquidity is an impor-
Indices measure the U.S. dollar price change in the
cross-border capital flows, a stronger presence of
tant attribute of stock markets because, in theory,
stock markets.
financial firms around the world, and the migration of
liquid markets improve the allocation of capital and
stock exchange activities to international exchanges.
enhance prospects for long-term economic growth.
Many firms in emerging markets now cross-list on inter-
A more comprehensive measure of liquidity would
national exchanges, which provides them with lower
include trading costs and the time and uncertainty
cost capital and more liquidity-traded shares. However,
in finding a counterpart in settling trades.
this also means that exchanges in emerging markets
Standard & Poor’s Index Services, the source for
may not have enough financial activity to sustain them,
all the data in the table, provides regular updates on
putting pressure on them to rethink their operations.
22 emerging stock markets and 36 frontier markets.
The indicators in the table are from Standard &
Standard & Poor’s maintains a series of indexes for
Poor’s Emerging Markets Data Base. They include
investors interested in investing in stock markets in
measures of size (market capitalization, number of
developing countries. The S&P/IFCI index, Standard
listed domestic companies) and liquidity (value of
& Poor’s leading emerging markets index, is designed
shares traded as a percentage of gross domestic
to be sufficiently investable to support index tracking
product, value of shares traded as a percentage of
portfolios in emerging market stocks that are legally
market capitalization). The comparability of such indi-
and practically open to foreign portfolio investment.
cators across countries may be limited by concep-
The S&P/Frontier BMI measures the performance of
tual and statistical weaknesses, such as inaccurate
36 smaller and less liquid markets. The individual
reporting and differences in accounting standards.
country indexes include all publicly listed equities
The percentage change in stock market prices in U.S.
representing an aggregate of at least 80 percent or
dollars for developing economies is from Standard &
more of market capitalization in each market. These
Poor’s Global Equity Indices (S&P IFCI) and Standard &
indexes are widely used benchmarks for international
Poor’s Frontier Broad Market Index (BMI). The percent-
portfolio management. See www.standardandpoors.
age change for France, Germany, Japan, the United
com for further information on the indexes.
Data sources
Kingdom, and the United States is from local stock
Because markets included in Standard & Poor’s
Data on stock markets are from Standard & Poor’s
market prices. The indicator is an important measure
emerging markets category vary widely in level of
Global Stock Markets Factbook 2009, which draws
of overall performance. Regulatory and institutional
development, it is best to look at the entire category
on the Emerging Markets Data Base, supple-
factors that can affect investor confidence, such as
to identify the most significant market trends. And it
mented by other data from Standard & Poor’s.
entry and exit restrictions, the existence of a securi-
is useful to remember that stock market trends may
The firm collects data through an annual survey
ties and exchange commission, and the quality of laws
be distorted by currency conversions, especially when
of the world’s stock exchanges, supplemented by
to protect investors, may influence the functioning of
a currency has registered a significant devaluation.
information provided by its network of correspon-
stock markets but are not included in the table. Stock market size can be measured in various ways, and each may produce a different ranking of
About the data is based on Demirgüç-Kunt and Levine (1996), Beck and Levine (2001), and Claes-
dents and by Reuters. Data on GDP are from the World Bank’s national accounts data files.
sens, Klingebiel, and Schmukler (2002).
2010 World Development Indicators
307
5.5
Financial access, stability, and efficiency Getting credit
Strength of legal rights index 0–10 (weak to strong)
Depth of % of adult population credit Private Public information credit bureau credit registry index coverage coverage 0–6 (low to high)
June 2009
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
308
Bank capital to asset ratio
6 9 3 4 4 6 9 7 8 7 2 7 3 1 5 7 3 8 3 2 8 3 6 3 3 4 6 10 5 3 3 5 3 6 .. 6 9 3 3 3 5 2 6 4 7 7 3 5 6 7 7 3 8 3 3 3 6
2010 World Development Indicators
June 2009
0 4 2 4 6 5 5 6 5 2 5 4 1 6 5 4 5 6 1 1 0 2 6 2 1 5 4 4 5 0 2 5 1 4 .. 5 4 6 5 6 6 0 5 2 5 4 2 0 6 6 0 5 6 0 1 2 6
June 2009
0.0 9.9 0.2 2.5 34.3 4.4 0.0 1.4 6.9 0.9 23.4 56.5 10.9 11.6 23.2 0.0 23.7 34.8 1.9 0.2 0.0 1.8 0.0 2.1 0.2 32.9 62.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 24.3 2.7 0.0 .. 4.9 0.0 29.7 37.2 2.5 21.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 32.5 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 16.9 0.0 1.1 0.7 21.7
June 2009
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 34.5 100.0 39.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.9 64.3 51.9 59.2 6.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 33.9 0.0 71.9 60.5 0.0 0.0 56.0 0.0 77.0 .. 73.1 5.2 46.1 46.0 8.2 94.6 0.0 20.6 0.0 14.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.2 98.3 0.0 46.9 28.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 58.7
Ratio of bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans
Domestic credit provided by banking sector
Interest rate spread
Risk premium on lending
Prime lending rate minus treasury bill rate percentage points
%
%
% of GDP
Lending rate minus deposit rate percentage points
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
.. 6.7 .. .. 12.9 23.0 4.2 6.3 .. 6.5 17.4 3.3 .. 9.3 13.1 .. 9.1 8.5 .. .. .. .. 5.1 .. .. 6.9 6.1 12.0 12.2 .. .. 13.3 .. 13.5 .. 5.7 5.7 9.7 8.8 5.3 12.7 .. 9.3 .. 7.4 4.2 10.7 .. 17.1 4.5 12.8 4.5 10.3 .. .. .. ..
.. 6.6 .. .. 2.7 4.4 0.5 2.0 .. 11.2 0.6 1.7 .. 4.3 3.1 .. 3.1 2.4 .. .. .. .. 1.1 .. .. 1.0 2.4 0.9 4.0 .. .. 1.5 .. 4.9 .. 3.3 0.3 3.5 2.5 14.8 2.8 .. 1.9 .. 0.4 2.8 8.5 .. 4.1 2.7 7.7 5.0 2.4 .. .. .. ..
3.5 67.6 –13.0 9.3 24.4 16.7 137.8 129.7 17.1 59.4 31.5 113.8 14.8 48.4 58.5 –11.2 101.7 66.7 15.5 34.9 16.2 5.8 177.8 18.0 –2.7 98.3 126.2 124.6 43.1 9.1 –18.5 53.9 20.1 75.1 .. 58.0 211.2 39.1 17.3 78.0 44.9 112.7 97.3 37.6 87.7 126.1 6.1 34.3 32.9 125.7 32.9 109.0 36.8 .. 13.5 24.6 50.4
.. 6.2 6.3 6.3 8.4 10.4 3.7 .. 7.5 6.7 0.0 .. .. 9.2 3.5 7.9 35.6 6.4 .. .. 14.6 10.8 3.2 10.8 10.8 5.8 3.1 4.6 7.4 .. 10.8 11.7 .. 7.2 .. 4.6 .. 9.6 7.1 5.7 .. .. 2.8 3.4 .. .. 10.8 15.0 10.9 .. .. .. 8.3 .. .. 15.7 8.4
.. 6.8 7.7 .. .. 9.4 .. .. 8.5 .. .. 4.8 .. 5.6 .. .. 33.6 6.2 .. 8.2 .. .. 2.3 .. .. .. .. 5.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.6 .. .. .. 1.0 .. .. .. 7.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
Getting credit
Strength of legal rights index 0–10 (weak to strong) June 2009
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
7 8 3 4 3 8 9 3 8 7 4 5 10 .. 7 8 4 10 4 9 3 7 4 .. 5 7 2 8 10 3 3 5 4 8 6 3 2 .. 8 5 6 9 3 3 8 7 4 6 6 5 3 7 3 9 3 7 3
Bank capital to asset ratio
Depth of % of adult population credit Private Public information credit bureau credit registry index coverage coverage 0–6 (low to high) June 2009
5 4 4 3 0 5 5 5 0 6 2 6 4 .. 6 3 4 3 0 5 5 0 1 .. 6 4 1 0 6 1 1 3 6 0 3 5 4 .. 5 2 5 5 5 1 0 4 2 4 6 0 6 6 3 4 5 5 2
June 2009
0.0 0.0 22.0 31.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.2 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 18.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 46.5 8.3 0.0 0.3 .. 12.1 28.1 0.1 0.0 48.5 4.0 0.2 36.8 0.0 0.0 22.2 0.0 2.3 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 17.0 5.6 0.0 0.0 10.9 23.0 0.0 0.0 81.3 0.0 0.0
June 2009
10.3 10.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 89.8 77.5 0.0 76.2 0.0 29.5 2.3 .. 93.8 0.0 30.4 5.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 18.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 82.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 77.5 0.0 0.0 14.0 0.0 .. 57.7 0.3 83.5 100.0 28.4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 1.5 45.9 0.0 47.4 31.8 6.1 68.3 16.4 73.8 0.0
Ratio of bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans
Domestic credit provided by banking sector
5.5
STATES AND MARKETS
Financial access, stability, and efficiency
Interest rate spread
Risk premium on lending
Prime lending rate minus treasury bill rate percentage points
%
%
% of GDP
Lending rate minus deposit rate percentage points
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
8.0 6.4 9.2 .. .. 4.7 5.7 6.6 .. 3.6 10.4 12.2 11.4 .. 8.8 .. 11.6 .. .. 7.3 7.8 7.9 .. .. 7.6 .. .. .. 8.0 .. .. .. 9.6 17.0 .. 7.3 6.7 .. 8.0 .. 3.2 .. .. .. 18.0 4.2 15.5 10.4 13.4 .. 11.2 8.3 11.1 7.9 6.1 .. ..
3.0 2.3 3.2 .. .. 2.6 1.5 4.9 .. 1.7 4.2 5.1 9.0 .. 1.1 3.7 3.1 .. .. 3.6 7.5 3.5 .. .. 4.6 6.8 .. .. 4.8 .. .. .. 3.2 5.2 .. 6.0 2.8 .. 3.1 .. 0.8 .. .. .. 6.3 0.8 2.4 9.1 1.7 .. 1.2 2.2 4.5 4.4 2.0 .. ..
80.7 71.6 36.7 50.5 .. 204.3 79.9 132.4 54.1 293.0 114.9 33.5 40.1 .. 112.6 10.9 68.1 14.0 10.5 89.1 172.9 –18.4 144.5 –50.0 64.2 42.7 9.3 26.2 115.2 13.2 .. 111.7 37.5 39.8 34.4 95.5 14.2 .. 43.8 52.7 196.0 156.3 66.2 6.2 26.7 .. 32.9 45.9 85.8 24.9 22.0 18.5 46.0 60.1 183.8 .. 56.9
0.3 .. 5.1 0.4 8.4 .. 2.8 .. 9.3 1.3 3.6 .. 8.7 .. 1.3 .. 2.8 15.9 23.5 5.5 2.3 8.5 11.3 3.5 0.8 3.8 33.5 21.7 3.0 .. 15.5 11.4 5.7 3.1 9.4 .. 7.3 5.0 5.4 5.8 0.2 4.7 6.6 .. 3.5 1.8 2.6 6.0 4.6 8.0 22.7 20.2 4.3 3.3 .. .. 3.9
1.3 .. .. .. –1.3 .. 2.2 3.1 0.9 1.6 .. .. 6.3 .. .. .. .. 6.7 11.5 4.9 4.8 6.4 .. .. 2.6 .. 36.2 14.0 2.7 .. 13.1 .. 1.0 3.0 20.4 .. 4.6 .. 4.1 4.4 .. 5.2 .. .. 7.3 .. .. 1.6 .. 3.1 .. .. 5.3 1.3 .. .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
309
5.5
Financial access, stability, and efficiency Getting credit
Strength of legal rights index 0–10 (weak to strong)
Depth of % of adult population credit Private Public information credit bureau credit registry index coverage coverage 0–6 (low to high)
June 2009
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
310
Bank capital to asset ratio
8 3 8 4 3 8 6 10 9 6 .. 9 6 4 5 6 5 8 1 3 8 4 1 3 8 3 4 .. 7 9 4 9 8 5 2 2 8 0 2 9 7 5.4 u 4.7 5.2 4.7 5.8 5.0 5.3 6.6 5.2 2.5 5.3 4.7 6.6 6.3
2010 World Development Indicators
June 2009
5 5 2 6 1 6 0 4 4 2 .. 6 5 5 0 5 4 5 0 0 0 5 0 1 4 5 5 .. 0 3 5 6 6 6 3 0 4 3 2 3 0 2.9 u 1.2 3.1 2.6 3.7 2.5 1.7 4.2 3.5 2.8 2.1 1.4 4.1 4.1
June 2009
June 2009
5.7 0.0 0.4 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 2.7 .. 0.0 45.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 19.9 15.9 .. 0.0 0.0 7.3 0.0 0.0 17.8 2.6 0.0 19.0 6.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 6.6 u 1.4 9.2 7.1 11.9 6.9 8.7 11.3 11.5 5.8 0.8 2.3 5.7 15.6
30.2 14.3 0.0 17.9 0.0 94.2 0.0 40.3 44.0 0.0 .. 54.7 7.6 14.3 0.0 42.3 100.0 22.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.9 0.0 0.0 41.7 0.0 42.9 .. 0.0 3.0 12.6 100.0 100.0 97.2 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 21.8 u 0.3 18.6 9.6 30.3 13.2 8.5 18.5 33.8 1.9 3.3 4.7 46.5 35.2
Ratio of bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans
Domestic credit provided by banking sector
Interest rate spread
Risk premium on lending
Prime lending rate minus treasury bill rate percentage points 2008
%
%
% of GDP
Lending rate minus deposit rate percentage points
2008
2008
2008
2008
7.0 13.6 12.3 10.0 9.1 20.5 18.7 8.5 9.8 8.4 .. 7.9 6.4 .. .. 20.7 4.7 4.6 .. .. .. 9.5 .. .. .. .. 11.7 .. 13.8 14.0 10.6 4.4 9.3 8.9 .. 9.4 .. .. .. .. .. 9.0 m .. 9.7 10.2 9.4 .. .. 12.2 9.7 .. 6.4 .. 6.3 6.1
13.8 3.8 12.6 1.4 19.1 5.3 23.3 1.4 3.2 1.6 .. 3.9 3.4 .. .. 8.4 1.0 0.5 .. .. .. 5.7 .. .. .. 15.5 3.6 .. 2.2 17.4 2.5 1.6 3.0 1.0 .. 1.9 .. .. .. .. .. 3.2 m .. 3.9 4.4 3.6 4.1 .. 4.4 2.5 .. 9.1 .. 1.9 2.6
40.9 25.9 .. 9.5 24.7 38.4 7.4 84.1 53.8 87.5 .. 172.2 212.9 42.8 17.1 2.0 135.8 183.6 36.9 27.5 17.2 130.6 –25.5 24.8 12.8 73.0 52.6 .. 11.4 81.9 78.1 212.3 216.1 32.5 .. 20.3 95.0 .. 11.4 19.3 .. 156.8 w 43.7 76.1 98.7 55.7 75.2 116.4 41.5 62.0 39.7 69.3 65.5 188.4 142.7
5.5 6.5 9.3 .. .. 10.8 14.8 5.0 4.3 2.6 .. 3.5 .. 8.0 .. 6.7 .. 3.2 1.8 14.4 6.9 4.6 12.3 .. 5.1 .. .. .. 9.8 7.5 .. .. .. 9.2 .. 6.2 3.1 4.8 5.0 12.5 457.5 6.0 m 10.8 6.4 6.6 6.2 6.5 5.1 6.2 7.9 4.3 6.6 10.0 .. ..
4.6 .. 8.9 .. .. 8.5 9.0 4.5 .. 2.8 .. 4.3 .. 0.0 .. 4.1 .. 2.0 .. .. 6.9 3.9 .. .. 5.4 .. .. .. 11.9 .. .. 0.3 3.6 1.8 .. .. 7.0 .. 2.8 5.6 330.2
About the data
5.5
STATES AND MARKETS
Financial access, stability, and efficiency Definitions
Financial sector development has positive impacts
financial activity and impose widespread costs on
• Strength of legal rights index measures the degree
on economic growth and poverty. The size of the
the economy. The ratio of bank capital to assets,
to which collateral and bankruptcy laws protect the
sector determines the resources mobilized for invest-
a measure of bank solvency and resiliency, shows
rights of borrowers and lenders and thus facilitate
ment. Access to finance can expand opportunities for
the extent to which banks can deal with unexpected
lending. Higher values indicate that the laws are bet-
all with higher levels of access and use of banking
losses. Capital includes tier 1 capital (paid-up shares
ter designed to expand access to credit. • Depth of
services associated with lower financing obstacles
and common stock), a common feature in all coun-
credit information index measures rules affecting the
for people and businesses. A stable financial sys-
tries’ banking systems, and total regulatory capital,
scope, accessibility, and quality of information avail-
tem that promotes efficient savings and investment
which includes several types of subordinated debt
able through public or private credit registries. Higher
is also crucial for a thriving democracy and market
instruments that need not be repaid if the funds
values indicate the availability of more credit informa-
economy. The banking system is the largest sector
are required to maintain minimum capital levels
tion. • Public credit registry coverage is the number
in the financial system in most countries, so most
(tier 2 and tier 3 capital). Total assets include all
of individuals and firms listed in a public credit reg-
indicators in the table cover the banking system.
nonfinancial and financial assets. Data are from
istry with current information on repayment history,
internally consistent financial statements.
unpaid debts, or credit outstanding as a percentage
There are several aspects of access to financial services: availability, cost, and quality of services.
The ratio of bank nonperforming loans to total
of the adult population. • Private credit bureau cov-
The development and growth of credit markets
gross loans, a measure of bank health and efficiency,
erage is the number of individuals or firms listed by
depend on access to timely, reliable, and accurate
helps to identify problems with asset quality in the
a private credit bureau with current information on
data on borrowers’ credit experiences. For secured
loan portfolio. A high ratio may signal deterioration
repayment history, unpaid debts, or credit outstand-
transactions, such as mortgages or vehicle loans,
of the credit portfolio. International guidelines rec-
ing as a percentage of the adult population. • Bank
rapid access to information in property registries is
ommend that loans be classified as nonperforming
capital to asset ratio is the ratio of bank capital and
also vital, and for small business loans corporate
when payments of principal and interest are 90
reserves to total assets. Capital and reserves include
registry data are needed. Access to credit can be
days or more past due or when future payments are
funds contributed by owners, retained earnings, gen-
improved by increasing information about potential
not expected to be received in full. See the Interna-
eral and special reserves, provisions, and valuation
borrowers’ creditworthiness and making it easy to
tional Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Global Financial Stability
adjustments. • Ratio of bank nonperforming loans to
create and enforce collateral agreements. Lenders
Report for details.
total gross loans is the value of nonperforming loans
look at a borrower’s credit history and collateral.
Domestic credit by the banking sector as a share
divided by the total value of the loan portfolio (includ-
Where credit registries and effective collateral laws
of GDP is a measure of banking sector depth and
ing nonperforming loans before the deduction of loan
are absent—as in many developing countries—
financial sector development in terms of size. In a
loss provisions). The amount recorded as nonperform-
banks make fewer loans. Indicators that cover finan-
few countries governments may hold international
ing should be the gross value of the loan as recorded
cial access, or getting credit, include the strength
reserves as deposits in the banking system rather
on the balance sheet, not just the amount overdue.
of legal rights index (ranges from 0, weak, to 10,
than in the central bank. Since the claims on the
• Domestic credit provided by banking sector is all
strong), depth of credit information index (ranges
central government are a net item (claims on the
credit to various sectors on a gross basis, except to
from 0, low, to 6, high), public registry coverage, and
central government minus central government depos-
the central government, which is net. The banking
private bureau coverage.
its), this net figure may be negative, resulting in a
sector includes monetary authorities, deposit money
negative figure of domestic credit provided by the
banks, and other banking institutions for which data
banking sector.
are available. • Interest rate spread is the interest
The strength of legal rights index is based on eight aspects related to legal rights in collateral law and two aspects in bankruptcy law. It is based on a stan-
The interest rate spread—the margin between
rate charged by banks on loans to prime customers
dardized case scenario and measures the degree
the cost of mobilizing liabilities and the earnings on
minus the interest rate paid by commercial or similar
to which collateral and bankruptcy laws protect the
assets—is a measure of financial sector efficiency in
banks for demand, time, or savings deposits. • Risk
rights of borrowers and lenders and thus facilitate
intermediation. A narrow interest rate spread means
premium on lending is the interest rate charged by
lending. The indicator focuses on revolving movable
low transaction costs, which lowers the cost of funds
banks on loans to prime private sector customers
collateral, such as accounts receivable and inven-
for investment, crucial to economic growth.
minus the “risk-free” treasury bill interest rate at
tory, rather than tangible movable collateral, such
The risk premium on lending is the spread between
as equipment. The depth of credit information index
the lending rate to the private sector and the “risk-
assesses six features of the public registry or the
free” government rate. Spreads are expressed as
private credit bureau (or both). For more information
annual averages. A small spread indicates that the
on these indexes, see www.doingbusiness.org/
market considers its best corporate customers to be
Data on getting credit are from the World Bank’s
MethodologySurveys/.
low risk. A negative rate indicates that the market
Doing Business project (www.doingbusiness.org).
considers its best corporate clients to be lower risk
Data on bank capital and nonperforming loans are
than the government.
from the IMF’s Global Financial Stability Report.
The size and mobility of international capital flows make it increasingly important to monitor the
which short-term government securities are issued or traded in the market. Data sources
strength of financial systems. Robust financial sys-
Data on credit and interest rates are from the
tems can increase economic activity and welfare,
IMF’s International Financial Statistics.
but instability in the financial system can disrupt
2010 World Development Indicators
311
5.6
Tax policies Tax revenue collected by central government
% of GDP
Afghanistanb Albaniab Algeriab Angola Argentina Armeniab Australia Austria Azerbaijanb Bangladeshb Belarusb Belgium Beninb Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswanab Brazilb Bulgariab Burkina Faso Burundib Cambodia Cameroonb Canadab Central African Republicb Chad Chile Chinab Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep.b Congo, Rep. Costa Ricab Côte d’Ivoireb Croatiab Cuba Czech Republicb Denmark Dominican Republicb Ecuador b Egypt, Arab Rep.b El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopiab Finland France Gabon Gambia, Theb Georgiab Germany Ghana b Greece Guatemalab Guineab Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
312
Taxes payable by businesses
Number of payments
Time to prepare, file, and pay taxes hours
Total tax rate % of profi t
%
June 2009
June 2009
2009
2000
2008
June 2009
.. 16.1 .. .. 9.8 .. 22.1 19.9 .. 7.6 16.6 27.4 15.5 13.2 .. .. .. 18.3 .. 13.6 8.2 11.2 15.0 .. .. 16.7 6.8 .. 11.7 3.5 9.2 .. .. 22.6 .. 15.4 31.0 .. .. 13.4 10.7 .. 15.8 10.2 24.6 23.2 .. .. 7.7 11.9 17.2 23.3 10.1 11.1 .. .. ..
5.8 .. 46.5 .. .. 17.0 23.1 20.1 0.0 8.8 25.5 25.6 17.3 17.0 21.0 .. 16.4 24.2 12.5 .. 8.2 .. 14.2 .. .. 19.8 9.4 .. 12.6 .. .. 15.8 15.6 20.4 .. 14.8 35.6 15.9 .. 15.4 13.9 .. 16.8 .. 21.7 21.8 .. .. 23.8 11.8 22.9 19.9 11.3 .. .. .. 15.8
8 44 34 31 9 50 12 22 22 21 107 11 55 42 51 19 10 17 46 32 39 41 9 54 54 10 7 4 20 32 61 42 66 17 .. 12 9 9 8 29 53 18 10 19 8 7 26 50 18 16 33 10 24 56 46 42 47
2010 World Development Indicators
Highest marginal tax ratea
275 244 451 272 453 958 107 170 376 302 900 156 270 1,080 422 140 2,600 616 270 140 173 1,400 119 504 122 316 504 80 208 308 606 282 270 196 .. 613 135 324 600 480 320 216 81 198 243 132 272 376 387 196 224 224 344 416 208 160 224
36.4 44.9 72.0 53.2 108.1 36.2 48.0 55.5 40.9 35.0 99.7 57.3 73.3 80.0 27.1 17.1 69.2 31.4 44.9 278.6 22.7 50.5 43.6 203.8 60.9 25.3 78.5 24.2 78.7 322.0 65.5 54.8 44.7 32.5 .. 47.2 29.2 39.0 34.9 43.0 35.0 84.5 49.1 31.1 47.7 65.8 44.7 292.4 15.3 44.9 32.7 47.4 40.9 49.9 45.9 40.1 48.3
.. .. .. .. 35 20 45 50 .. .. .. 50 .. .. .. 25c 28 10 .. .. .. .. 29 .. .. 40 45 15 33 50c .. 15 10 c 45 .. 15 62 .. 35 20 .. .. 21 35 31 40 .. .. .. 45 25c 40 31 .. .. .. ..
Individual On income over $ 2009
.. .. .. .. 32,434 2,577 133,560 80,268 .. .. .. 45,926 .. .. .. 17,647c 20,218 .. .. .. .. .. 107,542 .. .. 109,484 175,716 .. 43,467 14,304c .. 1,526 5,360c 54,696 .. .. 62,286 .. 62,000 7,146 .. .. .. .. 86,288 92,983 .. .. .. 334,448 10,213c 100,334 37,389 .. .. .. ..
Corporate % 2009
20 10 .. 35 35 20 30 25 .. 28 24 34 .. 25 10 25c 34 10 .. .. .. .. 33 .. .. 17 25 17 33 38c .. 30 25c 20 .. 20 25 25 25 20 .. .. 21 30 26 33 .. .. .. 29 25c 25 31 .. .. .. 30
Tax revenue collected by central government
% of GDP
Hungary Indiab Indonesiab Iran, Islamic Rep.b Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaicab Japan Jordanb Kazakhstanb Kenya b Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep.b Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republicb Lao PDR Latviab Lebanon Lesothob Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYRb Madagascar Malawi Malaysiab Mali Mauritania Mauritiusb Mexicob Moldovab Mongolia Moroccob Mozambique Myanmar Namibiab Nepalb Netherlands New Zealand Nicaraguab Niger Nigeria Norway Omanb Pakistanb Panamab Papua New Guineab Paraguay b Perub Philippinesb Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Taxes payable by businesses
STATES AND MARKETS
5.6
Tax policies
Highest marginal tax ratea
Number of payments
Time to prepare, file, and pay taxes hours
Total tax rate % of profi t
% 2009
2000
2008
June 2009
June 2009
June 2009
21.9 9.0 11.6 6.3 .. 26.0 28.7 23.2 .. .. .. 10.2 16.8 .. 15.4 .. 1.3 11.7 .. 14.2 11.9 35.6 .. .. 14.6 .. 11.3 .. 13.8 13.2 .. 17.3 11.7 14.7 14.5 19.9 .. 3.0 27.5 8.7 22.3 29.5 13.8 .. .. 27.4 7.2 10.1 10.2 19.0 .. 12.2 13.7 16.0 21.3 .. ..
23.6 12.9 .. 7.3 .. 25.4 25.3 22.6 25.4 .. 18.3 12.7 18.9 .. 16.6 25.5 0.9 16.8 10.1 15.0 16.3 58.9 .. .. 17.4 19.7 11.4 .. .. 15.6 .. 18.2 .. 20.5 23.2 27.5 .. .. 27.2 10.4 23.6 31.7 17.0 11.5 .. 28.1 .. 9.8 .. .. 12.5 15.4 14.1 18.4 22.2 .. 23.1
14 59 51 22 13 9 33 15 72 13 26 9 41 .. 14 33 15 75 34 7 19 21 32 .. 12 40 23 19 12 58 38 7 6 48 43 28 37 .. 37 34 9 8 64 41 35 4 14 47 59 33 35 9 47 40 8 16 1
330 271 266 344 312 76 230 334 414 355 101 271 417 .. 250 163 118 202 362 279 180 324 158 .. 166 75 201 157 145 270 696 161 517 228 192 358 230 .. 375 338 164 70 240 270 938 87 62 560 482 194 328 380 195 395 328 218 36
57.5 64.7 37.6 44.2 28.4 26.5 32.6 68.4 51.3 55.7 31.1 35.9 49.7 .. 31.9 28.3 15.5 59.4 33.7 33.0 30.2 18.5 43.7 .. 42.7 16.4 39.2 25.8 34.2 52.1 86.1 22.9 51.0 31.1 22.8 41.7 34.3 .. 9.6 38.8 39.3 32.8 63.2 46.5 32.2 41.6 21.6 31.6 50.1 42.3 35.0 40.3 49.4 42.5 42.9 64.7 11.3
36 30 30 .. .. 46 46 43 25 50 .. 10 .. .. 35 .. 0 .. .. 23 .. .. .. .. 15 .. .. .. 27 .. .. 15c 28 .. .. .. 32c .. 37c .. 52 38 .. .. .. 40 0 20 27 42 10 30 32 32 42 .. 0
Individual On income over $
Corporate %
2009
2009
8,014 10,115 47,500 .. .. 48,697 110,230 100,334 .. 182,062 .. .. .. .. 69,379 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 28,470 .. .. .. 29,591 .. .. .. 58,514c .. 90,361c .. 73,279 40,498 .. .. .. 110,229 .. 107,838 29,294 92,996 31,600 63,033 10,474 26,116 85,766 .. ..
16 34 28 25 .. 13 26 31 33 41 25 20 .. .. 24 .. 15 .. .. 15 .. .. .. 40 20 10 .. .. 25 .. .. 15c 28 .. .. .. 32c .. 35c .. 26 30 .. .. 30 28 12 35 30 30 10 30 30 19 25 .. 35
2010 World Development Indicators
313
5.6
Tax policies Tax revenue collected by central government
% of GDP
Romania Russian Federation Rwandab Saudi Arabia Senegalb Serbiab Sierra Leoneb Singaporeb Slovak Republic Sloveniab Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lankab Sudanb Swazilandb Sweden Switzerlandb Syrian Arab Republicb Tajikistanb Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togob Trinidad and Tobagob Tunisiab Turkeyb Turkmenistan Ugandab Ukraineb United Arab Emiratesb United Kingdom United States Uruguayb Uzbekistan Venezuela, RBb Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep.b Zambiab Zimbabweb World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
2000
2008
11.7 13.6 .. .. 16.1 .. 10.2 15.4 .. 20.6 .. 24.0 16.2 14.5 6.4 .. 20.6 11.1 17.4 7.7 .. .. .. .. 22.1 21.3 .. .. 10.4 14.1 1.7 28.4 12.7 14.7 .. 13.3 .. .. 9.4 18.6 .. 15.6 w .. 11.2 8.1 .. 11.2 7.7 14.5 .. 11.8 9.3 .. 16.4 19.1
17.9 15.7 .. .. .. 22.0 .. 14.6 13.4 83.5 .. 27.7 10.6 14.2 .. .. .. 10.2 .. .. .. 16.5 .. 16.3 25.9 22.8 18.6 .. 12.8 17.8 .. 28.6 9.9 17.2 .. .. .. .. .. 17.1 .. 17.5 w .. 14.2 10.9 18.1 14.1 10.1 17.0 .. 28.4 12.3 .. 17.8 21.4
Taxes payable by businesses
Highest marginal tax ratea
Number of payments
Time to prepare, file, and pay taxes hours
Total tax rate % of profi t
%
June 2009
June 2009
June 2009
2009
113 11 34 14 59 66 29 5 31 22 .. 9 8 62 42 33 2 24 20 54 48 23 6 53 40 22 15 .. 32 147 14 8 10 53 106 71 32 27 44 37 51 31 u 41 34 36 32 36 27 51 33 27 31 38 16 15
202 320 160 79 666 279 357 84 257 260 .. 200 213 256 180 104 122 63 336 224 172 264 276 270 114 228 223 .. 161 736 12 110 187 336 356 864 1,050 154 248 132 270 286 u 291 341 332 352 326 243 365 419 276 285 306 170 197
44.6 48.3 31.3 14.5 46.0 34.0 235.6 27.8 48.6 37.5 .. 30.2 56.9 63.7 36.1 36.6 54.6 29.7 42.9 85.9 45.2 37.2 0.2 52.7 33.1 62.8 44.5 .. 35.7 57.2 14.1 35.9 46.3 46.7 94.9 61.1 40.1 16.8 47.8 16.1 39.4 48.3 u 74.4 42.0 40.1 44.3 51.5 38.0 44.5 48.5 41.6 40.0 67.6 39.2 45.9
16 13 .. 0 .. 15 .. 20 19 41 .. 40 c 43 35 .. 33c 57 40 .. .. 30 c 37 .. .. .. .. 35 .. 30c 15 0 40 35 25 .. 34 35 .. .. .. .. ..
Individual On income over $ 2009
.. .. .. .. .. 46,146 .. 217,317 .. 19,827 .. 63,253c 71,447 13,346 .. 12,048 c 66,419 630,312 .. .. 7,222c 113,147 .. .. .. .. 28,564 .. 2,855c .. .. 66,047 372,950 96,076 .. 156,000 4,447 .. .. .. .. ..
Corporate % 2009
16 20 .. 20 .. 10 .. 18 19 21 .. 35c 30 35 35 30 c 26 21 28 .. 30 c 30 .. .. .. 30 20 .. 45c 25 55 28 40 25 .. 34 25 16 35 35 31 ..
a. Data are from KPMG’s Individual Income and Corporate Tax Rate Surveys 2009, unless otherwise noted. b. Data on central government taxes were reported on a cash basis and have been adjusted to the accrual framework of the International Monetary Fund’s Government Finance Statistics Manual 2001. c. Data are from PriceWaterhouseCooper’s Worldwide Tax Summaries online.
314
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
5.6
STATES AND MARKETS
Tax policies Definitions
Taxes are the main source of revenue for most
they have certain levels of start-up capital, employ-
• Tax revenue collected by central government is
governments. The sources of tax revenue and their
ees, and turnover. For details about the assump-
compulsory transfers to the central government for
relative contributions are determined by government
tions, see the World Bank’s Doing Business 2010.
public purposes. Certain compulsory transfers such
policy choices about where and how to impose taxes
A potentially important influence on both domestic
as fines, penalties, and most social security contribu-
and by changes in the structure of the economy. Tax
and international investors is a tax system’s progres-
tions are excluded. Refunds and corrections of erro-
policy may refl ect concerns about distributional
sivity, as reflected in the highest marginal tax rate
neously collected tax revenue are treated as negative
effects, economic efficiency (including corrections
levied at the national level on individual and corpo-
revenue. The analytic framework of the International
for externalities), and the practical problems of
rate income. Data for individual marginal tax rates
Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Government Finance Statis-
administering a tax system. There is no ideal level
generally refer to employment income. In some coun-
tics Manual 2001 (GFSM 2001) is based on accrual
of taxation. But taxes influence incentives and thus
tries the highest marginal tax rate is also the basic
accounting and balance sheets. For countries still
the behavior of economic actors and the economy’s
or flat rate, and other surtaxes, deductions, and the
reporting government finance data on a cash basis,
competitiveness.
like may apply. And in many countries several differ-
the IMF adjusts reported data to the GFSM 2001
The level of taxation is typically measured by tax
ent corporate tax rates may be levied, depending on
accrual framework. These countries are footnoted in
revenue as a share of gross domestic product (GDP).
the type of business (mining, banking, insurance,
the table. • Number of tax payments by businesses
Comparing levels of taxation across countries pro-
agriculture, manufacturing), ownership (domestic or
is the total number of taxes paid by businesses dur-
vides a quick overview of the fiscal obligations and
foreign), volume of sales, and whether surtaxes or
ing one year. When electronic filing is available, the
incentives facing the private sector. The table shows
exemptions are included. The corporate tax rates
tax is counted as paid once a year even if payments
only central government data, which may significantly
in the table are general headline rates applied to
are more frequent. • Time to prepare, file, and pay
understate the total tax burden, particularly in coun-
domestic companies. For more detailed information,
taxes is the time, in hours per year, it takes to pre-
tries where provincial and municipal governments are
see the country’s laws, regulations, and tax treaties;
pare, file, and pay (or withhold) three major types of
large or have considerable tax authority.
KPMG’s Corporate and Indirect Tax Rate Survey 2009
taxes: the corporate income tax, the value-added or
Low ratios of tax revenue to GDP may reflect weak
and Individual Income Tax and Social Security Rate
sales tax, and labor taxes, including payroll taxes
administration and large-scale tax avoidance or eva-
Survey 2009 (www.kpmg.com); and Pricewaterhouse-
and social security contributions. • Total tax rate is
sion. Low ratios may also reflect a sizable parallel
Coopers’s Worldwide Tax Summaries Online (www.
the total amount of taxes payable by a standard busi-
economy with unrecorded and undisclosed incomes.
pwc.com).
ness in the second year of operation after account-
Tax revenue ratios tend to rise with income, with
ing for deductions and exemptions as a percentage
higher income countries relying on taxes to finance
of profit. Taxes withheld (such as personal income
a much broader range of social services and social
tax) or collected by the company and remitted to
security than lower income countries are able to.
tax authorities but not borne by the company (such
The indicators covering taxes payable by busi-
as value added tax, sales tax on goods, and taxes
nesses measure all taxes and contributions that
on services) are excluded. For further details on the
are government mandated (at any level—federal,
method used for assessing the total tax payable, see
state, or local), apply to standardized businesses,
the World Bank’s Doing Business 2010. • Highest
and have an impact in their income statements. The
marginal tax rate is the highest rate shown on the
taxes covered go beyond the definition of a tax for
national schedule of tax rates applied to the annual
government national accounts (compulsory, unre-
taxable income of individuals and corporations. Also
quited payments to general government) and also
presented are the income levels for individuals above
measure any imposts that affect business accounts.
which the highest marginal tax rates levied at the
The main differences are in labor contributions
national level apply.
and value added taxes. The indicators account for government-mandated contributions paid by the
Data sources
employer to a requited private pension fund or work-
Data on central government tax revenue are from
ers insurance fund but exclude value added taxes
print and electronic editions of the IMF’s Govern-
because they do not affect the accounting profits of
ment Finance Statistics Yearbook. Data on taxes
the business—that is, they are not reflected in the
payable by businesses are from Doing Business
income statement.
2010 (www.doingbusiness.org). Data on individual
To make the data comparable across countries,
and corporate tax rates are from KPMG’s Corporate
several assumptions are made about businesses.
and Indirect Tax Rate Survey 2009 and Individual
The main assumptions are that they are limited liabil-
Income Tax and Social Security Rate Survey 2009
ity companies, they operate in the country’s most
(www.kpmg.com), and PricewaterhouseCoopers’s
populous city, they are domestically owned, they per-
Worldwide Tax Summaries Online (www.pwc.com).
form general industrial or commercial activities, and
2010 World Development Indicators
315
5.7
Military expenditures and arms transfers Military expenditures
% of central government expenditure
% of GDP
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
316
Armed forces personnel
thousands
Arms transfers
% of labor force
1990 $ millions Exports
Imports
2000
2008
2000
2008
2000
2008
2000
2008
2000
2008
2000
2008
.. 1.2 3.4 6.4 1.3 3.6 1.8 1.0 2.3 1.4 1.3 1.4 0.6 1.9 3.6 3.0 1.8 2.8 1.2 6.0 2.2 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.9 3.7 1.8 a .. 3.0 1.0 1.4 .. .. 3.1 .. 2.0 1.5 0.7 1.7 3.2 0.9 36.4 1.4 7.6 1.3 2.5 1.8 0.8 0.6 1.5 1.0 4.3 0.8 1.5 4.4 .. 0.5
2.2 2.0 3.1 2.9 0.8 3.2 1.8 0.9 2.7 1.1 1.4 1.1 1.0 1.5 1.4 3.4 1.5 2.2 1.8 3.8 1.1 1.5 1.3 1.6 1.0 3.5 2.0 a .. 3.7 1.4 1.3 .. 1.5 1.8 .. 1.5 1.3 0.6 2.8 2.3 0.5 .. 2.2 1.5 1.3 2.3 1.1 0.7 8.1 1.3 0.7 3.5 0.5 .. .. .. 0.7
.. 5.4 .. .. 6.2 .. 7.8 2.5 .. 14.9 5.3 3.2 4.7 7.6 .. .. .. 8.6 .. 30.3 16.8 12.0 6.0 .. .. 17.7 19.8a .. 15.6 11.4 5.9 .. .. 7.8 .. 6.1 4.2 .. .. 12.3 4.3 .. 4.7 18.0 3.7 5.7 .. .. 5.3 4.7 3.3 9.8 7.5 11.8 .. .. ..
9.7 .. 13.0 .. .. 15.4 7.7 2.2 17.4 10.4 4.0 2.6 6.8 8.0 3.6 .. 5.9 7.1 14.0 .. 12.8 .. 6.9 .. .. 17.9 18.0a .. 15.7 .. .. .. 8.2 4.7 .. 4.3 3.7 3.8 .. 7.6 2.9 .. 8.0 .. 3.6 5.3 .. .. 27.9 4.4 2.9 7.9 4.1 .. .. .. 3.1
400 68 305 118 102 42 52 41 87 137 91 39 7 70 76 10 673 114 11 46 360 22 69 5 35 117 3,910 .. 247 93 15 15 15 101 85 63 22 40 58 679 29 200 8 353 35 389 7 1 33 221 8 163 53 19 9 5 14
53 15 334 117 107 42 55 35 82 221 183 39 8 83 9 11 721 75 11 51 191 23 64 3 35 103 2,885 .. 411 151 12 10 19 22 76 27 30 65 58 866 33 202 7 138 32 353 7 1 33 244 14 161 35 19 6 0 20
5.4 5.2 2.7 1.9 0.6 2.9 0.5 1.0 2.5 0.2 1.9 0.9 0.3 2.0 4.1 1.3 0.8 3.2 0.2 1.4 6.1 0.4 0.4 0.3 1.1 1.9 0.5 .. 1.6 0.5 1.2 1.0 0.2 5.1 1.8 1.2 0.8 1.1 1.2 3.1 1.3 14.5 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.2 0.1 1.4 0.5 0.1 3.3 1.3 0.5 1.7 0.1 0.6
0.6 1.0 2.3 1.5 0.6 2.6 0.5 0.8 2.0 0.3 3.7 0.8 0.2 1.9 0.5 1.1 0.7 2.0 0.2 1.2 2.5 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.8 1.3 0.4 .. 2.2 0.6 0.8 0.5 0.2 1.1 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 1.0 3.3 1.3 9.8 1.0 0.4 1.2 1.2 1.0 0.1 1.5 0.6 0.1 3.1 0.7 0.4 0.9 0.0 0.7
.. .. .. 1 2 .. 43 21 .. .. 295 24 .. .. 4 .. 26 2 .. .. .. .. 110 .. .. 1 268 .. .. .. .. .. .. 2 .. 78 20 .. .. 38 .. 0 .. .. 9 1,052 .. .. 22 .. .. 2 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. 6 30 .. .. 72 408 .. .. .. .. 48 5 .. .. .. .. 215 .. .. 133 428 .. .. .. .. 0 .. .. .. 20 12 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 76 1,585 .. .. .. .. .. 23 .. .. .. .. ..
33 .. 418 180 228 2 364 25 3 205 41 39 6 19 25 52 124 7 .. 1 .. 1 557 .. 15 176 1,960 .. 62 41 0 .. 32 70 .. 16 64 13 12 810 16 4 27 125 516 106 .. .. 6 135 1 710 1 19 .. .. ..
134 13 1,590 37 32 1 344 434 1 10 254 171 2 5 .. .. 156 127 4 .. 40 0 434 9 36 543 1,241 .. 131 17 0 .. .. 99 .. 17 90 .. 133 119 4 10 50 .. 142 68 21 .. 63 104 13 518 12 .. .. 1 0
2010 World Development Indicators
Military expenditures
% of GDP
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Armed forces personnel
% of central government expenditure
thousands
5.7
STATES AND MARKETS
Military expenditures and arms transfers
Arms transfers
% of labor force
1990 $ millions Exports
Imports
2000
2008
2000
2008
2000
2008
2000
2008
2000
2008
2000
2008
1.7 3.1 1.0 3.8 .. 0.7 7.8 2.0 0.5 1.0 6.2 0.8 1.3 .. 2.4 .. 7.1 2.9 0.8 0.9 5.4 3.9 .. 3.2 1.7 1.9 1.2 0.7 1.6 2.4 3.5 0.2 0.5 0.4 2.2 2.3 1.3 2.3 2.4 1.0 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.7 10.6 4.0 1.0 0.9 1.1 1.7 1.1 1.8 2.0 .. ..
1.2 2.5 1.0 2.9 .. 0.6 8.0 1.8 0.5 0.9 5.9 1.0 2.0 .. 2.6 .. 3.2 2.4 0.3 1.9 4.4 2.6 0.5 1.2 1.6 2.0 1.1 1.2 2.0 2.0 3.8 0.2 0.4 0.4 1.4 3.3 0.9 .. 3.0 1.5 1.4 1.1 0.6 .. 0.0 1.3 10.4 3.3 .. 0.4 0.8 1.2 0.8 2.0 2.0 .. ..
4.1 19.5 5.7 22.5 .. 2.6 17.6 5.2 .. .. .. 5.7 7.8 .. 14.4 .. 18.9 18.0 .. 3.2 17.7 7.8 .. .. 6.5 .. 11.5 .. 10.5 20.7 .. 1.0 3.4 1.4 9.5 12.0 .. .. 8.3 .. 4.0 3.5 4.7 .. .. 5.3 40.4 23.4 4.6 2.9 .. 9.7 6.2 5.4 5.1 .. ..
2.7 15.2 .. 12.6 .. 1.6 19.7 4.4 1.7 .. 16.1 6.7 9.1 .. 13.1 .. 13.2 14.2 3.3 6.4 14.6 5.0 .. .. 5.0 6.5 10.0 .. .. 15.1 .. 0.8 .. 1.4 5.8 11.0 .. .. 10.7 .. 3.7 3.1 3.2 .. .. 4.2 .. 17.6 .. .. 5.0 7.5 4.8 5.8 4.6 .. ..
58 2,372 492 753 479 12 181 503 3 249 149 99 27 1,244 688 .. 20 14 129 9 77 2 15 77 17 24 29 6 116 15 21 2 208 13 16 241 6 429 9 90 57 9 16 11 107 27 48 900 12 4 35 193 149 239 91 .. 12
37 2,582 582 563 577 10 185 436 3 242 111 81 29 1,295 692 .. 23 21 129 16 76 2 2 76 24 19 22 7 134 12 21 2 286 8 17 246 11 513 15 131 47 9 12 10 162 19 47 921 12 3 26 191 147 143 91 .. 12
1.4 0.6 0.5 3.4 8.0 0.7 7.2 2.2 0.3 0.4 10.4 1.3 0.2 11.2 3.0 .. 1.8 0.7 5.2 0.8 6.5 0.2 1.3 4.2 1.0 2.8 0.4 0.1 1.2 0.5 2.0 0.3 0.5 0.7 1.4 2.4 0.1 1.7 1.5 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.9 0.3 0.3 1.1 5.4 2.2 0.9 0.2 1.5 1.7 0.5 1.4 1.7 .. 3.6
0.9 0.6 0.5 2.0 7.7 0.5 5.9 1.7 0.2 0.4 5.8 1.0 0.2 10.6 2.8 .. 1.6 0.8 4.3 1.3 5.4 0.2 0.1 3.3 1.5 2.1 0.2 0.1 1.1 0.3 1.6 0.3 0.6 0.5 1.2 2.1 0.1 1.9 2.0 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.7 4.5 1.6 0.8 0.1 0.9 1.4 0.4 0.8 1.6 .. 1.3
34 16 16 0 .. .. 354 176 .. .. .. 16 .. 13 8 .. 99 .. .. .. 45 .. .. 11 3 .. .. 1 8 .. .. .. .. 6 .. .. .. .. .. .. 258 1 .. .. .. 3 .. 3 .. .. .. 10 .. 45 .. .. 9
6 21 8 2 .. .. 410 484 .. .. 20 12 .. .. 141 .. .. 16 .. .. .. .. .. 9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 37 .. .. .. .. .. .. 554 .. .. .. .. 14 .. .. .. .. .. .. 4 96 87 .. 6
14 822 171 411 .. 0 350 241 5 431 130 147 9 19 1,262 .. 238 .. 7 3 4 6 8 145 5 11 .. .. 30 7 31 .. 227 .. .. 123 0 3 18 11 141 45 .. .. 39 263 120 158 0 .. 6 24 9 159 2 .. 11
5 1,847 290 87 351 16 524 270 2 578 336 3 8 5 1,898 .. 276 2 .. 44 3 1 .. 3 26 0 .. .. 529 8 .. 4 11 .. 14 32 .. 1 66 .. 152 4 .. 7 17 590 66 1,094 .. .. .. 172 11 611 183 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
317
5.7
Military expenditures and arms transfers Military expenditures
% of GDP 2000
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
2.5 3.7 3.5 10.6 1.3 5.4 3.7 4.7 1.7 1.1 .. 1.6 1.2 4.5 4.7 1.6 2.0 1.1 5.3 1.2 1.5 1.4 .. .. .. 1.7 3.7 2.9 2.5 3.6 3.4 2.4 3.1 1.3 0.8 1.5 .. .. 5.0 1.8 4.7 2.3 w 2.3 2.1 2.2 2.0 2.1 1.7 3.1 1.4 3.5 3.1 1.9 2.3 1.8
2008
1.5 3.5 1.5 8.2 1.6 2.3 2.3 4.1 1.6 1.6 .. 1.4 1.2 3.0 4.2 2.1 1.3 0.8 3.4 .. 0.9 1.5 .. 2.0 .. 1.3 2.2 .. 2.3 2.7 .. 2.4 4.2 1.2 .. 1.1 2.0 .. 4.5 1.8 .. 2.4 w 1.7 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.8 2.7 1.3 2.8 2.5 1.3 2.6 1.6
Armed forces personnel
% of central government expenditure
thousands
2000
2008
2000
2008
8.9 19.3 .. .. 10.4 .. 12.8 28.7 .. 2.9 .. 5.6 3.9 19.7 53.0 .. 5.5 4.2 .. 13.4 .. .. .. .. .. 6.2 .. .. 16.0 13.5 45.7 6.6 15.6 5.0 .. 7.1 .. .. 23.9 10.3 .. 10.2 w .. 15.6 17.8 .. .. 18.6 12.8 .. 12.3 19.9 .. 10.1 4.8
4.4 283 153 16.4 1,427 1,476 .. 76 35 .. 217 238 .. 15 19 6.1 136 24 .. 4 11 26.7 169 167 5.0 41 17 4.4 14 12 .. 50 .. 4.4 72 62 4.6 242 223 14.2 204 213 .. 120 127 .. 3 .. .. 88 18 4.6 28 23 .. 425 401 .. 7 17 .. 35 28 8.3 417 421 .. .. 1 13.0 8 10 .. 8 4 4.3 47 48 9.5 828 613 .. 15 22 13.7 51 47 7.2 420 215 .. 66 51 5.7 213 160 18.4 1,455 1,540 5.1 25 26 .. 79 87 .. 79 115 .. 524 495 .. .. 56 .. 136 138 5.7 23 16 .. 62 51 10.2 w 29,353 s 27,469 s .. 4,795 4,261 12.9 18,417 17,484 16.1 12,599 11,804 9.7 5,817 5,680 12.9 23,212 21,745 17.0 7,794 6,817 11.4 4,119 3,373 .. 2,084 2,399 10.8 3,379 3,505 15.3 4,114 4,121 .. 1,724 1,530 10.2 6,141 5,724 4.5 1,862 1,714
Arms transfers
% of labor force 2000
2.4 2.0 2.0 3.1 0.4 .. 0.2 8.2 1.6 1.4 1.7 0.5 1.3 2.6 1.1 0.8 2.0 0.7 8.6 0.4 0.2 1.2 .. 0.4 1.3 1.5 3.6 0.8 0.5 1.8 3.5 0.7 1.0 1.6 0.9 0.8 1.4 .. 3.2 0.6 1.2 1.1 w 1.3 1.0 0.8 1.5 1.0 0.8 2.0 0.9 3.8 0.8 0.7 1.2 1.3
2008
1.5 1.9 0.7 2.6 0.4 .. 0.5 6.4 0.6 1.2 .. 0.3 1.0 2.6 1.0 .. 0.4 0.5 6.0 0.6 0.1 1.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.3 2.4 0.9 0.3 0.9 1.8 0.5 1.0 1.6 0.7 0.9 1.1 5.9 2.3 0.3 1.0 0.9 w 1.0 0.8 0.7 1.3 0.8 0.6 1.6 0.9 3.2 0.7 0.5 1.0 1.1
1990 $ millions Exports 2000
3 4,302 .. .. .. .. .. 10 92 .. .. 18 46 .. .. .. 306 111 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 15 .. .. 288 .. 1,474 7,526 1 .. .. .. .. .. .. 3 .. s .. .. 1,282 .. .. 367 4,994 .. .. 19 .. 11,681 ..
2008
Imports 2000
2008
32 23 37 5,953 .. 100 .. 14 15 .. 80 56 .. .. 19 6 .. .. .. 13 10 1 612 1,014 3 2 1 .. 1 8 .. 1 .. 95 16 312 623 334 363 .. 274 75 .. 146 94 .. 1 .. 380 210 21 378 14 32 3 439 81 .. .. 13 .. .. 0 .. 90 12 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 10 .. .. 11 7 29 1,148 723 .. .. .. .. 6 3 233 .. .. 3 310 671 1,075 824 590 6,159 301 904 .. 4 63 .. 6 .. 1 85 733 14 5 250 .. .. 2 .. 158 44 .. 27 3 .. 2 20 .. s 18,556 s 22,681 s .. 691 480 .. 8,598 11,720 1,231 5,639 5,971 .. 2,959 6,157 .. 9,289 12,224 428 2,285 2,352 6,441 .. 2,565 .. 963 2,067 .. 2,494 2,647 21 1,459 3,160 .. 583 608 .. 9,267 10,457 .. 2,254 2,429
Note: For some countries data are partial or uncertain or based on rough estimates; see SIPRI (2009). a. Estimates differ from official statistics of the government of China, which has published the following estimates: military expenditure as 1.2 percent of GDP in 2000 and 1.4 percent in 2007 and 7.6 percent of central government expenditure in 2000 and 7.1 percent in 2007 (see National Bureau of Statistics of China, www.stats.gov.cn).
318
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
5.7
STATES AND MARKETS
Military expenditures and arms transfers Definitions
Although national defense is an important function of
completeness of data, data on military expenditures
• Military expenditures are SIPRI data derived from
government and security from external threats that
are not strictly comparable across countries. More
the NATO definition, which includes all current and
contributes to economic development, high levels of
information on SIPRI’s military expenditure project
capital expenditures on the armed forces, including
military expenditures for defense or civil conflicts bur-
can be found at www.sipri.org/contents/milap/.
peacekeeping forces; defense ministries and other
den the economy and may impede growth. Data on
Data on armed forces refer to military personnel on
government agencies engaged in defense projects;
military expenditures as a share of gross domestic
active duty, including paramilitary forces. Because
paramilitary forces, if judged to be trained and
product (GDP) are a rough indicator of the portion of
data exclude personnel not on active duty, they
equipped for military operations; and military space
national resources used for military activities and of
underestimate the share of the labor force working
activities. Such expenditures include military and civil
the burden on the national economy. As an “input”
for the defense establishment. Governments rarely
personnel, including retirement pensions and social
measure military expenditures are not directly related
report the size of their armed forces, so such data
services for military personnel; operation and main-
to the “output” of military activities, capabilities, or
typically come from intelligence sources.
tenance; procurement; military research and develop-
security. Comparisons of military spending between
SIPRI’s Arms Transfers Project collects data on
ment; and military aid (in the military expenditures
countries should take into account the many fac-
arms transfers from open sources. Since publicly
of the donor country). Excluded are civil defense and
tors that influence perceptions of vulnerability and
available information is inadequate for tracking all
current expenditures for previous military activities,
risk, including historical and cultural traditions, the
weapons and other military equipment, SIPRI covers
such as for veterans benefits, demobilization, and
length of borders that need defending, the quality of
only what it terms major conventional weapons. Data
weapons conversion and destruction. This definition
relations with neighbors, and the role of the armed
cover the supply of weapons through sales, aid, gifts,
cannot be applied for all countries, however, since
forces in the body politic.
and manufacturing licenses; therefore the term arms
that would require more detailed information than is
Data on military spending reported by governments
transfers rather than arms trade is used. SIPRI data
available about military budgets and off-budget mili-
are not compiled using standard definitions. They are
also cover weapons supplied to or from rebel forces
tary expenditures (for example, whether military bud-
often incomplete and unreliable. Even in countries
in an armed conflict as well as arms deliveries for
gets cover civil defense, reserves and auxiliary forces,
where the parliament vigilantly reviews budgets and
which neither the supplier nor the recipient can be
police and paramilitary forces, and military pensions).
spending, military expenditures and arms transfers
identified with acceptable certainty; these data are
• Armed forces personnel are active duty military per-
rarely receive close scrutiny or full, public disclosure
available in SIPRI’s database.
sonnel, including paramilitary forces if the training,
(see Ball 1984 and Happe and Wakeman-Linn 1994).
SIPRI’s estimates of arms transfers are designed
organization, equipment, and control suggest they
Therefore, SIPRI has adopted a definition of military
as a trend-measuring device in which similar weap-
may be used to support or replace regular military
expenditure derived from the North Atlantic Treaty
ons have similar values, reflecting both the value and
forces. Reserve forces, which are not fully staffed or
Organization (NATO) definition (see Definitions). The
quality of weapons transferred. SIPRI cautions that
operational in peace time, are not included. The data
data on military expenditures as a share of GDP and
the estimated values do not reflect financial value
also exclude civilians in the defense establishment
as a share of central government expenditure are
(payments for weapons transferred) because reliable
and so are not consistent with the data on military
estimated by the Stockholm International Peace
data on the value of the transfer are not available,
expenditures on personnel. • Arms transfers cover
Research Institute (SIPRI). Central government
and even when values are known, the transfer usually
the supply of military weapons through sales, aid,
expenditures are from the International Monetary
includes more than the actual conventional weapons,
gifts, and manufacturing licenses. Weapons must be
Fund (IMF). Therefore the data in the table may
such as spares, support systems, and training, and
transferred voluntarily by the supplier, have a military
differ from comparable data published by national
details of the financial arrangements (such as credit
purpose, and be destined for the armed forces, para-
governments.
and loan conditions and discounts) are usually not
military forces, or intelligence agencies of another
known.
country. The trends shown in the table are based on
SIPRI’s primary source of military expenditure data is official data provided by national governments.
Given these measurement issues, SIPRI’s method
actual deliveries only. Data cover major conventional
These data are derived from national budget docu-
of estimating the transfer of military resources
weapons such as aircraft, armored vehicles, artil-
ments, defense white papers, and other public docu-
includes an evaluation of the technical parameters
lery, radar systems, missiles, and ships designed for
ments from official government agencies, including
of the weapons. Weapons for which a price is not
military use. Excluded are transfers of other military
governments’ responses to questionnaires sent by
known are compared with the same weapons for
equipment such as small arms and light weapons,
SIPRI, the United Nations, or the Organization for
which actual acquisition prices are available (core
trucks, small artillery, ammunition, support equip-
Security and Co-operation in Europe. Secondary
weapons) or for the closest match. These weapons
ment, technology transfers, and other services.
sources include international statistics, such as
are assigned a value in an index that reflects their
those of NATO and the IMF’s Government Finance
military resource value in relation to the core weap-
Statistics Yearbook. Other secondary sources include
ons. These matches are based on such characteris-
Data on military expenditures are from SIPRI’s
country reports of the Economist Intelligence Unit,
tics as size, performance, and type of electronics,
Yearbook 2009: Armaments, Disarmament, and
country reports by IMF staff, and specialist journals
and adjustments are made for secondhand weapons.
International Security. Data on armed forces per-
and newspapers.
More information on SIPRI’s Arms Transfers Project
sonnel are from the International Institute for Stra-
is available at www.sipri.org/contents/armstrad/.
tegic Studies’ The Military Balance 2010. Data on
In the many cases where SIPRI cannot make
Data sources
independent estimates, it uses the national data
arms transfers are from SIPRI’s Arms Transfer
provided. Because of the differences in defi ni-
Project (www.sipri.org/contents/armstrad/).
tions and the difficulty in verifying the accuracy and
2010 World Development Indicators
319
5.8
Fragile situations International Development Association Resource Allocation Index
Peacebuilding and peacekeeping
2008
Afghanistan Angola Bosnia and Herzegovina Burundi Cameroon Central African Republic Chad Comoros Congo, Rep. Côte d’Ivoire Congo, Dem. Rep. Djibouti Eritrea Gambia, The Georgia Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Kiribati Kosovo Liberia Myanmar Nepal Papua New Guinea São Tomé and Príncipe Sierra Leone Solomon Islands Somalia Sudan Tajikistan Timor-Leste Togo Tonga West Bank and Gaza Western Saharan Yemen, Rep. Zimbabwe Fragile situations Low income
2.6 2.7 3.7 3.0 3.2 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.7 2.7 2.7 3.1 2.3 3.2 4.4 3.0 2.6 2.9 3.0 .. .. .. 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.1 2.8 .. 2.5 3.2 2.8 2.7 3.2 .. .. 3.2 1.4
Troops, police, and military observers
Intentional homicides
number
WHO
December 2009
December 2009
2000–08 b
2004
2004
UNAMA
20 .. .. 15 .. 2,777 .. .. .. 8,536 20,509 .. .. .. .. .. .. 9,057 .. 17 10,947 .. 72 .. .. .. 572 .. 10,262 .. 1,552 .. .. .. 232 .. .. .. ..
26,589 3,534 0 4,937 0 350 4,328 0 116 1,265 75,118 0 57 0 648 1,174 0 244 0 0 2,487 2,833 11,520 0 0 212 0 3,983 12,363 0 0 0 0 0 .. 0 0 151,759 s 147,275
3.4 36.0 1.9 35.4 16.1 29.1 19.0 9.3 18.8 45.7 35.2 3.5 15.9 13.5 3.7 17.3 16.3 5.3 6.5 .. 16.8 15.7 8.0 15.2 5.4 34.0 1.5 3.3 28.6 2.2 11.7 13.7 1.0 .. .. 2.5 32.9 .. ..
.. 5.2e 1.8f .. 5.8g .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6.2i .. .. 33.9j .. .. .. .. 2.1f .. .. 2.1k .. .. .. 2.4i .. .. .. 4.0 .. 3.2o 8.4 i .. ..
BINUB MINURCATh MINURCAT
UNOCI MONUC
MINUSTAH UNMIK UNMIL UNMIN
RAMSIl UNMIS m UNMIT
MINURSO
number
Military expenditures
Business environment
per 100,000 people CTS and national sources
Operation namea
1–6 (low to high)
Battlerelated deaths
% of GDP 2008
2.2 2.9 1.4 3.8 1.5 1.6 1.0 .. 1.3 1.5 1.4 4.1 .. 0.7 8.1 .. .. .. .. .. 0.5 .. 1.5 0.4 .. 2.3 .. .. 4.2 .. .. 2.0 1.5 .. .. 4.5 .. 3.0 w 1.7
Survey year
2008 2006 2009 2006 2009 2009 2009 2009 2006 2009 2006 2008 2006 2006
2009 2009 2009
2009
2008 2009 2006
Losses due to Firms formally theft, robbery, registered when operations vandalism, started and arson % of sales
1.5 0.4 0.2 1.1 1.3 .. 2.5 .. 3.3 3.4 2.0 .. .. 2.7 0.7 2.0 1.1 .. .. 0.3 2.8 .. 0.9 .. .. 0.8 .. .. .. 0.3 .. 2.4 .. 1.2 .. .. ..
% of firms
88.0 .. 98.6 .. 82.1 .. 77.1 .. 84.3 56.4 .. .. 100.0 .. 99.6 .. .. .. .. 89.2 73.8 .. 94.0 .. .. 89.2 .. .. .. 92.7 .. 75.8 .. .. .. .. ..
Note: The countries with fragile situations in the table are International Development Association–eligible countries with a 3.2 or lower harmonized average of the World Bank’s Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (CPIA) rating and the corresponding rating by a regional development bank or that have had a UN or regional peacebuilding mission (for example, by the African Union, European Union, or Organization of American States) or peacekeeping mission (for example, by the African Union, European Union, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or Organization of American States) during the last three years. Because fragility is an evolving concept, this definition will be updated as understanding changes. a. UNAMA is United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, BINUB is Bureau Intégré des Nations Unies au Burundi (United Nations Integrated Office in Burundi), MINURCAT is United Nations Mission in the Central African Republic and Chad, UNOCI is United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire, MONUC is United Nations Organization Mission in DR Congo, MINUSTAH is United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti, UNMIK is Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo, UNMIL is United Nations Mission in Liberia, UNMIN is United Nations Mission in Nepal, RAMSI is Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands, UNMIS is United Nations Missions in Sudan, UNMIT is United Nations Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste, and MINURSO is United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara. b. Total over the period. c. Data are for the most recent year available. d. Average over the period. e. Data are from Interpol. f. Data are from UNODC’s 10th UN Survey of Crime Trends and are for 2005. g. National Statistical Office of Cameroon. h. Includes peacekeepers in Chad. i. Data are from UNODC’s 9th UN Survey of Crime Trends. j. Data are for 2001. k. National Statistical Office of Sierra Leone. l. Data are for 2007. m. Does not include 19,949 troops, police, and military observers from the African Union-UN Hybrid Operation in Darfur. n. The designation Western Sahara is used instead of Former Spanish Sahara (the designation used on the maps on the front and back cover flaps) because it is the designation used by the UN operation established there by Security Council resolution 690/1991. Neither designation expresses any World Bank view on the status of the territory so-identified. o. National Statistical Office of Yemen.
320
2010 World Development Indicators
Children in employment
Refugees
Internally Access to Access to displaced an improved improved persons water sanitation source facilities
5.8
Maternal mortality Under-five Depth of Primary ratio mortality hunger gross rate enrollment ratio per 100,000 live births
% of Survey children year ages 7–14
Afghanistan Angola Bosnia and Herzegovina Burundi Cameroon Central African Republic Chad Comoros Congo, Rep. Côte d’Ivoire Congo, Dem. Rep. Djibouti Eritrea Gambia, The Georgia Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Kiribati Kosovo Liberia Myanmar Nepal Papua New Guinea São Tomé and Príncipe Sierra Leone Solomon Islands Somalia Sudan Tajikistan Timor-Leste Togo Tonga West Bank and Gaza Western Sahara n Yemen, Rep. Zimbabwe Fragile situations Low income
2001 2005 2000 2001 2000 2004 2005 2006 2000
2005
2000 2005
2007 1999
2005 2006 2005 2006
.. 30.1 10.6 37.0 15.9 67.0 60.4 .. 30.1 45.7 39.8 .. .. 43.5 .. .. 67.5 33.4 .. .. 37.4 .. 47.2 .. .. 62.7 .. 43.5 .. 8.9 .. 39.6 .. .. .. .. ..
By country of origin
By country of asylum
2008
2008
number
% of population
% of population
National estimates
Modeled estimates
per 1,000
2008
2006
2006
2000–08 c
2005
2008
37 2,833,128 230,670 12,710 171,393 .. 7,257 74,366 124,529 21,093 281,592 100,000 81,037 13,870 .. 7,429 125,106 197,000 330,510 55,105 166,718 1 378 .. 24,779 19,925 3,492 24,811 22,227 683,956 155,162 367,995 1,460,102 9,228 650 .. 4,862 186,398 .. 14,836 1,352 .. 996 12,598 293,048 21,488 9,495 .. 7,884 1,065 .. 3 23,066 .. .. 38 .. .. .. .. 10,224 75,213 .. .. 184,413 67,290 124,832 4,189 50,000 10,006 46 .. .. 35 .. 7,826 32,536 .. .. 52 .. 1,842 561,155 1,277,200 181,605 419,248 1,201,040 1,799 544 .. 1 7 15,860 9,377 16,750 .. .. 7 .. 1,836,123 340,026 .. .. .. .. 140,169 1,777 100,000 3,468 16,841 .. 3,051,394 s 5,852,585 s .. .. 2,024,889 5,386,084
22 51 99 71 70 66 48 85 71 81 46 92 60 86 99 70 57 58 65 .. 64 80 89 40 86 53 70 29 70 67 62 59 100 89 .. 66 81 63 w 67
30 50 95 41 51 31 9 35 20 24 31 67 5 52 93 19 33 19 33 .. 32 82 27 45 24 11 32 23 35 92 41 12 96 80 .. 46 46 41 w 38
STATES AND MARKETS
Fragile situations
1,600 .. 23 615 669 543 1,099 380 781 543 1,838 546 .. 730 98 980 405 1,150 56 .. 994 316 281 .. 248 2,657 .. 1,044 1,107 179 .. .. 214 .. .. 365 1,655 .. ..
1,800 1,400 3 1,100 1,000 980 1,500 400 740 810 1,100 650 450 690 66 910 1,100 670 .. .. 1,200 380 830 470 .. 2,100 220 1,400 450 170 380 510 .. .. .. 430 880 958 w 790
kilocalories per person % of relevant per day age group 2004–06d
257 220 15 168 131 173 209 105 127 114 199 95 58 106 30 146 195 72 48 .. 145 98 51 69 98 194 36 200 109 64 93 98 19 27 .. 69 96 148 w 118
.. 290 140 360 160 280 290 340 250 190 430 220 350 240 180 130 240 430 140 .. 310 300 190 .. 110 390 130 .. 240 190 230 280 .. 180 .. 270 310 285 w 277
2008
106 .. 111 136 111 77 83 .. 114 74 90 55 52 86 107 90 120 .. .. .. 91 115 124 55 130 158 107 .. 69 102 107 105 112 80 .. 85 104 .. w 101
About the data The table focuses on countries with fragile situa-
make slower progress toward the Millennium Devel-
and is linked to building peace and creating the condi-
tions and highlights the links among weak institu-
opment Goals.
tions that lead to sustained poverty reduction. The
tions, poor development outcomes, fragility, and
According to the Geneva Declaration on Armed Vio-
World Bank and other international development
risk of conflict. These countries often have weak
lence and Development, more than 740,000 people
agencies can help, but countries with fragile situa-
institutions that are ill-equipped to handle eco-
die each year because of the violence associated with
tions have to build their own institutions tailored to
nomic shocks, natural disasters, and illegal trade
armed conflict and large- and small-scale criminal-
their own needs. Peacekeeping operations in post-
or to resist conflict, which increasingly spills across
ity. Recovery and rebuilding can take years, and the
conflict situations have been effective in reducing
borders. Organized violence, including violent crime,
challenges are numerous: infrastructure to be rebuilt,
the risks of reversion to conflict.
interrupts economic and social development through
persistently high crime, widespread health problems,
The countries with fragile situations in the table are
lost human and social capital, disrupted services,
education systems in disrepair, and landmines to be
International Development Association–eligible coun-
displaced populations and reduced confidence for
cleared. Most countries emerging from conflict lack
tries with a 3.2 or lower harmonized average of the
future investment. As a result, countries with fragile
the capacity to rebuild the economy. Thus, capacity
World Bank’s Country Policy and Institutional Assess-
situations achieve lower development outcomes and
building is one of the first tasks for restoring growth
ment (CPIA) rating and the corresponding rating by a
2010 World Development Indicators
321
5.8
Fragile situations
About the data (continued)
regional development bank or that have had a UN
impose costs on businesses and society. And in
Department of Field Support. The UN Charter gives
or regional peacebuilding mission (for example, by
many developing countries informal businesses oper-
the Security Council primary responsibility for main-
the African Union, European Union, or Organization
ate without licenses. These firms have less access
taining international peace and security, including
of American States) or peacekeeping mission (for
to financial and public services and can engage in
the establishment of a UN peacekeeping operation.
example, by the African Union, European Union,
fewer types of contracts and investments, constrain-
• Troops, police, and military observers in peace-
North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or Organization of
ing growth. The table presents data on the loss of
building and peacekeeping refer to people active in
American States) during the last three years. Peace-
sales due to theft, robbery, vandalism, and arson and
peacebuilding and peacekeeping as part of an official
building and peacekeeping involve many elements—
on the percentage of firms operating informally. For
operation. Peacekeepers deploy to war-torn regions
military, police, and civilian—working together to lay
further information on enterprise surveys, see About
where no one else is willing or able to go to prevent
the foundations for sustainable peace. Because
the data for table 5.2.
conflict from returning or escalating. • Battle-related
As the table shows, the human toll of armed vio-
deaths are deaths of members of warring parties in
lence across various contexts is severe. Additionally,
battle-related confl icts. Typically, battle-related
An armed conflict is a contested incompatibility that
in countries with fragile situations weak institutional
deaths occur in warfare involving the armed forces
concerns a government or territory where the use
capacity often results in poor performance and fail-
of the warring parties (battlefield fighting, guerrilla
of armed force between two parties (one of them
ure to meet expectations of effective service deliv-
activities, and all kinds of bombardments of military
the government) results in at least 25 battle-related
ery. Failure to deliver water, health, and education
units, cities, and villages). The targets are usually
deaths in a calendar year. There were 36 active armed
services can weaken struggling governments. The
the military and its installations or state institutions
conflicts in 26 locations in 2008. Separate measures
table includes several indicators related to living con-
and state representatives, but there is often sub-
are presented for intentional homicides—unlawful
ditions in fragile situations: children in employment,
stantial collateral damage of civilians killed in cross-
deaths purposefully inflicted on a person by another
refugees, internally displaced persons, access to
fire, indiscriminate bombings, and other military
person—which exclude deaths arising from armed
water and sanitation, maternal and under-five mortal-
activities. All deaths—civilian as well as military—
conflict. One measure draws from public health data
ity, depth of hunger, and primary school enrollment.
incurred in such situations are counted as battle-
sources, while the other draws from estimates by
For more detailed information on these indicators,
related deaths. • Intentional homicides are esti-
the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, which
see About the data for table 2.6 (children in employ-
mates of unlawful homicides purposely inflicted as
obtains data from criminal justice sources. Data from
ment), table 6.18 (refugees), table 2.18 (access to
a result of domestic disputes, interpersonal violence,
these two sources measure different phenomena and
improved water and sanitation), table 2.19 (maternal
violent conflicts over land resources, intergang vio-
are therefore unlikely to provide identical numbers.
mortality), table 2.22 (under-five mortality), and table
lence over turf or control, and predatory violence and
2.12 (primary school enrollment).
killing by armed groups. Intentional homicide does
fragility is an evolving concept, this definition will be updated as understanding changes.
Data on military expenditures reported by governments are not compiled using standard definitions and are often incomplete and unreliable. Even in
not include all intentional killing; the difference is Definitions
usually in the organization of the killing. Individuals
countries where the parliament vigilantly reviews
• International Development Association Resource
or small groups usually commit homicide, whereas
budgets and spending, military expenditures and
Allocation Index is from the Country Policy and Insti-
killing in armed conflict is usually committed by fairly
arms transfers rarely receive close scrutiny or full
tutional Assessment rating, which is the average
cohesive groups of up to several hundred members
public disclosure. Data in the table are from the
score of four clusters of indicators designed to mea-
and is thus usually excluded. Data from the World
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
sure macroeconomic, governance, social, and struc-
Health Organization (WHO) are from public health
(SIPRI), which has adopted a definition of military
tural dimensions of development: economic manage-
sources; data from the United Nations Survey of
expenditure derived from the North Atlantic Treaty
ment, structural policies, policies for social inclusion
Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Sys-
Organization (NATO) defi nition (see Definitions).
and equity, and public sector management and insti-
tems (CTS) and national sources are based on crimi-
Therefore, the data in the table may differ from com-
tutions (see table 5.9). Countries are rated on a
nal justice sources. • Military expenditures are
parable data published by national governments. For
scale of 1 (low) to 6 (high). • Peacebuilding and
SIPRI data derived from the NATO definition, which
a more detailed discussion of military expenditures,
peacekeeping refer to operations that engage in
includes all current and capital expenditures on the
see About the data for table 5.7.
peacebuilding (reducing the risk of lapsing or relaps-
armed forces, including peacekeeping forces;
Along with public sector efforts, private sector
ing into conflict by strengthening national capacities
defense ministries and other government agencies
development and investment, especially in competi-
for conflict management and laying the foundation
engaged in defense projects; paramilitary forces, if
tive markets, has tremendous potential to contribute
for sustainable peace and development) or peace-
judged to be trained and equipped for military opera-
to growth and poverty reduction. The World Bank’s
keeping (providing essential security to preserve the
tions; and military space activities. Such expendi-
Enterprise Surveys review the business environment,
peace where fighting has been halted and to assist
tures include military and civil personnel, including
assessing constraints to private sector growth and
in implementing agreements achieved by the peace-
retirement pensions and social services for military
enterprise performance. In some countries doing
makers). UN peacekeeping operations are authorized
personnel; operation and maintenance; procure-
business requires informal payments to “get things
by the UN Secretary-General and planned, managed,
ment; military research and development; and mili-
done” in customs, taxes, licenses, regulations, ser-
directed, and supported by the United Nations
tary aid (in the military expenditures of the donor
vices, and the like. Crime, theft, and disorder also
Department of Peacekeeping Operations and the
country). Excluded are civil defense and current
322
2010 World Development Indicators
5.8
STATES AND MARKETS
Fragile situations expenditures for previous military activities, such as
improved source, such as piped water into a dwelling,
from the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (www.
for veterans benefits, demobilization, and weapons
public tap, tubewell, protected dug well, and rainwa-
pcr.uu.se/research/UCDP/index.htm). Data on
conversion and destruction. This definition cannot
ter collection. Reasonable access is the availability
intentional homicides are from the UN Office on
be applied to all countries, however, since the neces-
of at least 20 liters a person a day from a source
Drugs and Crime’s International Homicide Statis-
sary detailed information is missing in some cases
within 1 kilometer of the dwelling. • Access to
tics database. Data on military expenditures are
for military budgets and off-budget military expendi-
improved sanitation facilities refers to people with
from SIPRI’s Yearbook 2009: Armaments, Disar-
tures (for example, whether military budgets cover
at least adequate access to excreta disposal facili-
mament, and International Security and database
civil defense, reserves and auxiliary forces, police
ties that can effectively prevent human, animal, and
(www.sipri.org/databases/milex). Data on the
and paramilitary forces, and military pensions).
insect contact with excreta. Improved facilities range
business environment are from the World Bank’s
• Survey year is the year in which the underlying data
from protected pit latrines to flush toilets. • Mater-
Enterprise Surveys (www.enterprisesurveys.org).
were collected. • Losses due to theft, robbery, van-
nal mortality ratio is the number of women who die
Data on children in employment are estimates pro-
dalism, and arson are the estimated losses from
from pregnancy-related causes during pregnancy and
duced by the Understanding Children’s Work proj-
those causes that occurred on business establish-
childbirth per 100,000 live births. National estimates
ect based on household survey data sets made
ment premises calculated as a percentage of annual
are based on national surveys, vital registration
available by the International Labour Organiza-
sales. • Firms formally registered when operations
records, and surveillance data or are derived from
tion’s International Programme on the Elimination
started are the percentage of firms formally regis-
community and hospital records. Modeled estimates
of Child Labour under its Statistical Monitoring
tered when they started operations in the country.
are based on an exercise by the WHO, United Nations
Programme on Child Labour, UNICEF under its Mul-
• Children in employment are children involved in
Children’s Fund (UNICEF), United Nations Population
tiple Indicator Cluster Survey program, the World
any economic activity for at least one hour in the
Fund (UNFPA), and the World Bank. See About the
Bank under its Living Standards Measurement
reference week of the survey. • Refugees are people
data for table 2.19 for further details. • Under-five
Study program, and national statistical offi ces
who are recognized as refugees under the 1951 Con-
mortality rate is the probability per 1,000 that a
(see table 2.6). Data on refugees and internally
vention Relating to the Status of Refugees or its
newborn baby will die before reaching age 5, if sub-
displaced persons are from the UNHCR’s Statisti-
1967 Protocol, the 1969 Organization of African
ject to current age-specific mortality rates • Depth
cal Yearbook 2008, complemented by statistics
Unity Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of
of hunger, or the intensity of food deprivation, indi-
on Palestinian refugees under the mandate of the
Refugee Problems in Africa, people recognized as
cates how much people who are food-deprived fall
United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Pales-
refugees in accordance with the UN Refugee Agency
short of minimum food needs in terms of dietary
tine Refugees in the Near East as published on its
(UNHCR) statute, people granted refugee-like human-
energy. It is measured by comparing the average
website (www.unrwa.org). Data on access to water
itarian status, and people provided temporary protec-
amount of dietary energy that undernourished people
and sanitation are from the WHO and UNICEF’s
tion. Asylum seekers—people who have applied for
get from the foods they eat with the minimum amount
Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation (2008).
asylum or refugee status and who have not yet
of dietary energy they need to maintain body weight
National estimates of maternal mortality are from
received a decision, or who are registered as asylum
and undertake light activity. Depth of hunger is low
UNICEF’s The State of the World’s Children 2009
seekers —are excluded. Palestinian refugees are
when it is less than 200 kilocalories per person per
and Childinfo and Demographic and Health Sur-
people (and their descendants) whose residence was
day and high when it is above 300. • Primary gross
veys by Macro International. Modeled estimates
Palestine between June 1946 and May 1948 and
enrollment ratio is the ratio of total enrollment,
for maternal mortality are from WHO, UNICEF,
who lost their homes and means of livelihood as a
regardless of age, to the population of the age group
UNFPA, and the World Bank’s Maternal Mortality
result of the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict. • Country of
that officially corresponds to the primary level of edu-
in 2005 (2007). Data on under-five mortality esti-
origin refers to the nationality or country of citizen-
cation. Primary education provides children with
mates by the Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality
ship of a claimant. • Country of asylum is the country
basic reading, writing, and mathematics skills along
Estimation (which comprises UNICEF, WHO, the
where an asylum claim was filed and granted. • Inter-
with an elementary understanding of such subjects
World Bank, United Nations Population Division,
nally displaced persons are people or groups of
as history, geography, natural science, social sci-
and other universities and research institutes)
people who have been forced to leave their homes
ence, art, and music.
and are based mainly on household surveys, censuses, and vital registration data, supplemented
or places of habitual residence, in particular as a result of armed conflict, or to avoid the effects of armed conflict, situations of generalized violence,
by the World Bank’s Human Development Network Data sources
estimates based on vital registration and sample
violations of human rights, or natural or human-made
Data on the International Development Associa-
registration data (see table 2.22). Data on depth
disasters and who have not crossed an international
tion Resource Allocation Index are from the World
of hunger are from the Food and Agriculture Orga-
border. UNHCR statistics for this population include
Bank Group’s International Development Asso-
nization’s Food Security Statistics (www.fao.org/
conflict-generated internally displaced persons to
ciation database (www.worldbank.org/ida). Data
economic/ess/food-security-statistics/en/). Data
whom UNHCR extends protection or assistance and
on peacebuilding and peacekeeping operations
on primary gross enrollment are from the United
people in an internally displaced person–like situa-
are from the UN Department of Peacekeeping
Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Orga-
tion. • Access to an improved water source refers
Operations. Data on battle-related deaths are
nization’s Institute for Statistics.
to people with reasonable access to water from an
2010 World Development Indicators
323
5.9
Public policies and institutions International Development Association Resource Allocation Index 1–6 (low to high)
Afghanistan Angola Armenia Azerbaijan Bangladesh Benin Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Comoros Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Côte d’Ivoire Djibouti Dominica Eritrea Ethiopia Gambia, The Georgia Ghana Grenada Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras India Kenya Kiribati Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR
Economic management
Structural policies
1–6 (low to high)
1–6 (low to high)
Macroeconomic management
Fiscal policy
Debt policy
Average
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2.6 2.7 4.4 3.8 3.5 3.6 3.9 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.0 3.3 3.2 4.2 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.7 2.7 2.7 3.1 3.9 2.3 3.4 3.2 4.4 3.9 3.7 3.0 2.6 3.4 2.9 3.7 3.8 3.6 3.0 3.7 3.3
3.5 3.0 5.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 3.5 2.5 2.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 2.0 2.5 4.0 4.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 2.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.0 2.5 4.5 4.5
3.0 3.0 5.0 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 4.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.5 3.0 2.5 1.5 3.5 2.5 2.5 3.0 4.5 2.0 4.0 3.5 4.5 3.5 2.5 3.5 2.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
3.0 3.0 6.0 5.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 4.5 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 2.5 3.5 3.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.5 1.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.5 4.0 5.0 4.0 3.5
3.2 3.0 5.5 4.5 4.2 4.0 4.5 4.2 3.8 4.3 3.3 3.8 3.7 4.5 2.8 2.7 2.0 3.2 2.8 2.5 3.0 3.8 2.2 3.3 3.5 4.7 3.7 3.0 3.0 1.8 3.7 3.2 3.7 4.2 4.0 3.2 4.2 4.0
Trade
Financial sector
Business regulatory environment
Average
2008
2008
2008
2008
2.5 4.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.5 3.0 3.5 6.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 3.5 4.0 3.0 5.0 3.5
2.5 2.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 2.5 2.5 3.0 4.0 2.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 2.0
2.5 2.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.5 4.0 3.5 2.5 3.5 3.0 3.5 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.5 2.0 3.5 3.5 5.5 4.0 4.0 3.0 2.5 3.0 2.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0
2.5 2.8 4.2 3.8 3.3 3.7 3.2 3.8 4.0 3.5 2.8 3.3 3.2 3.8 2.7 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.8 3.3 3.7 4.2 1.5 3.2 3.3 5.0 4.0 4.2 3.3 3.2 3.5 3.2 3.8 3.7 3.8 3.0 4.2 2.8
About the data The International Development Association (IDA) is the
IDA eligible. Country assessments have been car-
higher IDA allocation in per capita terms. The IRAI is a
part of the World Bank Group that helps the poorest
ried out annually since the mid-1970s by World Bank
key element in the country performance rating.
countries reduce poverty by providing concessional loans
staff. Over time the criteria have been revised from a
The CPIA exercise is intended to capture the quality
and grants for programs aimed at boosting economic
largely macroeconomic focus to include governance
of a country’s policies and institutional arrangements,
growth and improving living conditions. IDA funding helps
aspects and a broader coverage of social and struc-
focusing on key elements that are within the country’s
these countries deal with the complex challenges they
tural dimensions. Country performance is assessed
control, rather than on outcomes (such as economic
face in meeting the Millennium Development Goals.
against a set of 16 criteria grouped into four clus-
growth rates) that are influenced by events beyond
The World Bank’s IDA Resource Allocation Index
ters: economic management, structural policies,
the country’s control. More specifically, the CPIA
(IRAI), presented in the table, is based on the results
policies for social inclusion and equity, and public
measures the extent to which a country’s policy and
of the annual Country Policy and Institutional Assess-
sector management and institutions. IDA resources
institutional framework supports sustainable growth
ment (CPIA) exercise, which covers the IDA-eligible
are allocated to a country on per capita terms based
and poverty reduction and, consequently, the effective
countries. The table does not include Kosovo, Libe-
on its IDA country performance rating and, to a lim-
use of development assistance.
ria, Myanmar, and Somalia because they were not
ited extent, based on its per capita gross national
All criteria within each cluster receive equal weight,
rated in the 2008 exercise even though they are
income. This ensures that good performers receive a
and each cluster has a 25 percent weight in the over-
324
2010 World Development Indicators
International Development Association Resource Allocation Index 1–6 (low to high)
Lesotho Madagascar Malawi Maldives Mali Mauritania Moldova Mongolia Mozambique Nepal Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Pakistan Papua New Guinea Rwanda Samoa São Tomé and Príncipe Senegal Sierra Leone Solomon Islands Sri Lanka St. Lucia St. Vincent & Grenadines Sudan Tajikistan Tanzania Timor-Leste Togo Tonga Uganda Uzbekistan Vanuatu Vietnam Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe
Economic management
Structural policies
1–6 (low to high)
1–6 (low to high)
Macroeconomic management
Fiscal policy
Debt policy
Average
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
3.5 3.7 3.4 3.4 3.7 3.3 3.8 3.3 3.7 3.3 3.8 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.7 4.0 3.0 3.6 3.1 2.8 3.4 3.9 3.8 2.5 3.2 3.8 2.8 2.7 3.2 3.9 3.3 3.3 3.8 3.2 3.5 1.4
4.0 4.0 3.5 2.5 4.5 3.5 4.0 3.0 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 3.5 4.0 1.0
4.0 3.5 3.5 2.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.5 2.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 2.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.5 4.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 4.5 3.0 3.5 1.0
4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.5 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 2.5 4.0 3.5 2.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 1.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 2.0 3.0 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 1.0
4.0 3.8 3.3 2.5 4.3 3.5 4.0 2.8 4.3 3.7 4.2 3.7 4.3 3.0 4.0 3.8 4.2 2.8 3.8 3.7 2.8 3.0 3.7 3.7 2.7 3.5 4.3 3.0 2.7 3.0 4.5 4.0 3.8 4.3 3.5 3.7 1.0
STATES AND MARKETS
5.9
Public policies and institutions
Trade
Financial sector
Business regulatory environment
Average
2008
2008
2008
2008
3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 2.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 2.0
3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 3.5 2.5 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 2.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 2.5 2.5 4.0 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.5 1.0
3.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 1.5 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 1.5
3.3 3.5 3.5 3.8 3.5 3.3 3.8 3.5 3.7 3.2 3.8 3.3 3.3 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.2 3.8 3.2 3.0 3.7 4.2 4.2 2.7 3.2 3.8 2.8 3.2 3.2 3.8 2.8 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.7 1.5
all score, which is obtained by averaging the aver-
should be noted that the criteria are designed in a
consistent across countries, the process involves
age scores of the four clusters. For each of the 16
developmentally neutral manner. Accordingly, higher
two key phases. In the benchmarking phase a small
criteria countries are rated on a scale of 1 (low) to
scores can be attained by a country that, given its
representative sample of countries drawn from all
6 (high). The scores depend on the level of perfor-
stage of develop ment, has a policy and institutional
regions is rated. Country teams prepare proposals
mance in a given year assessed against the criteria,
framework that more strongly fosters growth and
that are reviewed first at the regional level and then
rather than on changes in performance compared
poverty reduction.
in a Bankwide review process. A similar process is
with the previous year. All 16 CPIA criteria contain a
The country teams that prepare the ratings are very
followed to assess the performance of the remaining
detailed description of each rating level. In assess-
familiar with the country, and their assessments are
countries, using the benchmark countries’ scores as
ing country performance, World Bank staff evaluate
based on country diagnostic studies prepared by the
guideposts. The final ratings are determined following
the country’s performance on each of the criteria
World Bank or other development organizations and
a Bankwide review. The overall numerical IRAI score
and assign a rating. The ratings reflect a variety of
on their own professional judgment. An early con-
and the separate criteria scores were first publicly
indicators, observations, and judgments based on
sultation is conducted with country authorities to
disclosed in June 2006.
country knowledge and on relevant publicly available
make sure that the assessments are informed by
indicators. In interpreting the assessment scores, it
up-to-date information. To ensure that scores are
See IDA’s website at www.worldbank.org/ida for more information.
2010 World Development Indicators
325
5.9 Afghanistan Angola Armenia Azerbaijan Bangladesh Benin Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Comoros Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Côte d’Ivoire Djibouti Dominica Eritrea Ethiopia Gambia, The Georgia Ghana Grenada Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras India Kenya Kiribati Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR
Public policies and institutions Policies for social inclusion and equity
Public sector management and institutions
1–6 (low to high)
1–6 (low to high)
Policies and institutions for Social protection environmental and labor sustainability Average
Quality of budgetary and Property financial rights and rule-based management governance
Transparency, accountability, and corruption Quality Efficiency in the public of public of revenue sector Average mobilization administration
Gender equality
Equity of public resource use
Building human resources
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2.0 3.0 4.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.5 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.5 4.5 4.0 5.0 3.5 2.5 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 4.5 3.5
2.5 2.5 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 4.5 2.0 2.5 2.5 3.0 2.5 1.5 3.0 3.5 3.0 4.5 3.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.0
3.0 2.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 4.5 2.0 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 2.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.0 3.0 2.5 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 2.5 3.5 3.0
2.5 2.5 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.5 2.0 2.5 2.5 3.0 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 2.5 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 3.0 2.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 2.5
2.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.5 2.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 2.5 2.5 3.0 2.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 4.0
2.5 2.7 4.1 3.8 3.6 3.3 4.0 3.8 3.6 3.6 3.3 3.3 3.1 4.3 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.9 2.7 2.3 3.0 3.6 3.0 3.6 3.2 4.2 4.0 4.0 3.0 2.6 3.5 2.7 3.8 3.7 3.2 2.8 3.6 3.4
1.5 2.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 2.5 3.0 3.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.0 2.5 2.0 2.5 4.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.5 2.5 3.5 2.5 3.0
3.0 2.5 4.5 4.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 1.5 2.5 2.5 2.0 3.0 3.5 2.5 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 2.5 3.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5
2.5 2.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 3.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.5 3.0
2.0 2.5 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 2.5 2.5 3.0 4.0 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.0 2.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0
2.0 2.5 3.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.5 2.5 4.5 2.5 2.0 2.5 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.5 4.0 2.0 2.5 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.0
2.2 2.4 3.7 3.2 3.0 3.3 3.8 3.3 3.3 3.5 2.6 2.7 2.9 4.0 2.3 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.6 2.5 2.8 3.8 2.7 3.3 2.9 3.8 3.9 3.7 2.6 2.6 3.1 2.4 3.4 3.7 3.3 3.1 3.0 2.9
Definitions • International Development Association Resource
long-term debt sustainability. • Structural policies
protection under law. • Equity of public resource use
Allocation Index is obtained by calculating the aver-
cluster: Trade assesses how the policy framework
assesses the extent to which the pattern of public
age score for each cluster and then by averaging
fosters trade in goods. • Financial sector assesses
expenditures and revenue collection affects the poor
those scores. For each of 16 criteria countries are
the structure of the financial sector and the poli-
and is consistent with national poverty reduction
rated on a scale of 1 (low) to 6 (high) • Economic
cies and regulations that affect it. • Business regu-
priorities. • Building human resources assesses
management cluster: Macro economic manage-
latory environment assesses the extent to which
the national policies and public and private sec-
ment assesses the monetary, exchange rate, and
the legal, regulatory, and policy environments help
tor service delivery that affect the access to and
aggregate demand policy framework. • Fiscal policy
or hinder private businesses in investing, creating
quality of health and education services, including
assesses the short- and medium-term sustainability
jobs, and becoming more productive. • Policies for
prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis,
of fiscal policy (taking into account monetary and
social inclusion and equity cluster: Gender equal-
and malaria. • Social protection and labor assess
exchange rate policy and the sustainability of the
ity assesses the extent to which the country has
government policies in social protection and labor
public debt) and its impact on growth. • Debt policy
installed institutions and programs to enforce laws
market regulations that reduce the risk of becoming
assesses whether the debt management strategy is
and policies that promote equal access for men
poor, assist those who are poor to better manage
conducive to minimizing budgetary risks and ensuring
and women in education, health, the economy, and
further risks, and ensure a minimal level of welfare
326
2010 World Development Indicators
Lesotho Madagascar Malawi Maldives Mali Mauritania Moldova Mongolia Mozambique Nepal Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Pakistan Papua New Guinea Rwanda Samoa São Tomé and Príncipe Senegal Sierra Leone Solomon Islands Sri Lanka St. Lucia St. Vincent & Grenadines Sudan Tajikistan Tanzania Timor-Leste Togo Tonga Uganda Uzbekistan Vanuatu Vietnam Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe
5.9
Policies for social inclusion and equity
Public sector management and institutions
1–6 (low to high)
1–6 (low to high)
Policies and institutions for Social protection environmental and labor sustainability Average
Quality of budgetary and Property financial rights and rule-based management governance
STATES AND MARKETS
Public policies and institutions
Transparency, accountability, and corruption Quality Efficiency in the public of public of revenue sector Average mobilization administration
Gender equality
Equity of public resource use
Building human resources
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 5.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.5 3.0 2.0 2.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 2.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.5 2.0 3.5 2.5
3.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 4.5 4.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 2.5 3.5 4.0 3.0 2.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.5 3.5 3.5 1.0
3.5 3.5 3.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 2.5 4.5 4.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 4.5 4.0 4.0 2.5 3.0 4.0 2.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 3.0 4.0 1.0
3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 2.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 2.5 3.5 3.5 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 2.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 1.0
3.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.5 4.0 2.5 3.5 2.0 2.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.0 3.0 3.5 2.5 2.5 3.0 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.0
3.3 3.7 3.4 3.9 3.4 3.5 3.9 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.6 3.0 3.2 3.0 2.6 3.9 3.9 2.8 3.4 2.9 2.6 3.8 3.8 3.7 2.3 3.4 3.7 2.7 2.7 3.3 3.8 3.7 2.9 4.0 3.1 3.5 1.5
3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.5 2.0 3.0 4.0 2.5 3.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.5 3.5 2.0 2.5 3.5 3.5 2.5 3.5 3.5 2.5 3.0 1.0
3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.0 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 2.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 2.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 1.5
4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 2.5 2.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.0 3.5 3.5
3.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 2.5 3.5 4.0 3.0 3.5 2.5 2.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 2.5 2.5 3.5 2.5 2.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 1.0
3.5 3.5 3.0 2.5 3.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 4.5 4.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.5 3.0 1.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.0
3.4 3.6 3.4 3.5 3.4 3.0 3.5 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.4 3.2 2.9 3.0 2.9 3.5 3.9 3.1 3.4 2.7 2.6 3.3 3.9 3.8 2.3 2.6 3.5 2.7 2.2 3.3 3.4 2.7 3.3 3.6 3.0 3.2 1.6
to all people. • Policies and institutions for envi-
and timely and accurate accounting and fiscal report-
extent to which public employees within the executive
ronmental sustainability assess the extent to which
ing, including timely and audited public accounts.
are required to account for administrative decisions,
environmental policies foster the protection and sus-
• Efficiency of revenue mobilization assesses the
use of resources, and results obtained. The three
tainable use of natural resources and the manage-
overall pat tern of revenue mobilization—not only
main dimensions assessed are the accountability
ment of pollution. • Public sector management and
the de facto tax structure, but also revenue from
of the executive to oversight institutions and of pub-
institutions cluster: Property rights and rule-based
all sources as actually collected. • Quality of public
lic employees for their performance, access of civil
governance assess the extent to which private eco-
administration assesses the extent to which civilian
society to information on public affairs, and state
nomic activity is facilitated by an effective legal sys-
central government staff is structured to design and
capture by narrow vested interests.
tem and rule-based governance structure in which
implement government policy and deliver services
property and contract rights are reliably respected
effectively. • Transparency, accountability, and cor-
and enforced. • Quality of budgetary and financial
ruption in the public sector assess the extent to
management assesses the extent to which there is
which the executive can be held accountable for its
a comprehensive and credible budget linked to policy
use of funds and for the results of its actions by the
priorities, effective financial management systems,
electorate, the legislature, and the judiciary and the
Data sources Data on public policies and institutions are from the World Bank Group’s CPIA database available at www.worldbank.org/ida.
2010 World Development Indicators
327
5.10
Transport services Roads
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
328
Total road network km
Paved roads %
Passengers carried million passengerkm
2000–07a
2000–07a
2000–07a
42,150 18,000 108,302 51,429 231,374 7,515 815,074 107,206 59,141 239,226 94,797 153,070 19,000 62,479 21,846 25,798 1,751,868 40,231 92,495 12,322 38,257 51,346 1,409,000 24,307 40,000 79,814 3,583,715 2,009 164,278 153,497 17,289 36,654 80,000 29,038 60,856 128,511 72,412 12,600 43,670 92,370 10,029 4,010 58,034 42,429 78,889 951,125 9,170 3,742 20,329 644,471 57,614 117,533 14,095 44,348 3,455 4,160 13,600
29.3 39.0 70.2 10.4 30.0 89.8 .. 100.0 49.4 9.5 88.6 78.2 9.5 7.0 52.3 32.6 5.5 98.4 4.2 10.4 6.3 8.4 39.9 .. 0.8 20.2 70.7 100.0 .. 1.8 5.0 25.5 8.1 89.1 49.0 100.0 100.0 49.4 14.8 81.0 19.8 21.8 28.8 12.8 65.4 100.0 10.2 19.3 38.6 100.0 14.9 91.8 34.5 9.8 27.9 24.3 20.4
2010 World Development Indicators
.. 197 .. 166,045 .. 2,693 301,550 69,000 11,786 .. 9,353 130,868 .. .. .. .. .. 13,688 .. .. 201 .. 493,814 .. .. .. 1,150,677 .. 157 .. .. 27 .. 3,277 5,266 90,055 70,635 .. 11,819 .. .. .. 3,190 219,113 71,300 775,000 .. 16 5,269 966,692 .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
Railways
Goods hauled million ton-km 2000–07a
.. 2,200 .. 4,709 .. 434 173,000 26,411 8,222 .. 15,779 51,572 .. .. 300 .. .. 11,843 .. .. 3 .. 184,774 .. .. .. 975,420 .. 39,726 .. .. .. .. 10,175 2,133 46,600 11,495 .. 5,453 .. .. .. 7,641 2,456 26,400 313,000 .. .. 586 461,900 .. 18,360 .. .. .. .. ..
Passengers carried million Rail lines total route- passengerkm km 2000–08a
.. 423 3,572 .. 35,753 845 9,661 5,755 2,099 2,835 5,491 3,513 758 2,866 1,016 888 29,817 4,159 622 .. .. 977 57,216 .. .. 5,898 60,809 .. 1,663 4,007 795 .. 639 2,722 5,076 9,487 2,133 .. .. 5,063 .. .. 816 .. 5,919 29,901 810 .. 1,513 33,862 953 2,552 .. .. .. .. ..
2000–08a
.. 51 937 .. .. 27 1,526 10,275 1,047 5,609 8,188 10,403 .. 313 78 94 .. 2,335 .. .. .. 379 3,056 .. .. 759 772,834 .. .. 95 211 .. .. 1,810 1,285 6,759 5,843 .. .. 40,830 .. .. 274 .. 4,052 88,283 99 .. 774 76,997 85 2,003 .. .. .. .. ..
Ports
Air
Goods hauled million ton-km
Port container traffic thousand TEU
Registered carrier departures worldwide thousands
Passengers carried thousands
Air freight million ton-km
2000–08a
2008
2008
2008
2008
.. .. 31 3 75 .. 393 151 12 11 6 179 .. 21 .. 6 648 16 1 .. 4 9 1,200 .. .. 109 1,853 .. 187 .. .. 37 .. 25 12 78 .. .. 49 58 21 .. 11 40 114 828 6 .. .. 1,154 .. 128 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. 2,885 284 6,147 .. 51,488 9,141 756 1,224 500 5,879 .. 1,718 .. 236 58,763 1,073 81 .. 211 471 53,719 .. .. 8,022 191,001 .. 12,339 .. .. 1,024 .. 1,753 861 4,975 .. .. 2,927 6,689 2,280 .. 686 2,715 7,916 61,215 546 .. .. 107,942 .. 9,443 .. .. .. .. ..
.. 0 17 71 132 7 2,212 421 12 84 66 982 .. 9 .. 0 1,807 2 0 .. 1 26 1,389 .. .. 1,308 11,386 8,326 1,100 .. .. 11 .. 2 32 27 1 .. 5 195 18 .. 1 228 543 6,188 68 .. 3 8,353 .. 78 .. .. .. .. ..
.. 53 1,562 .. 12,871 354 61,019 18,710 10,021 870 47,933 7,882 36 1,060 1,237 674 267,700 4,673 .. .. .. 978 358,154 .. .. 4,296 2,511,804 .. 9,049 352 234 .. 675 3,312 1,351 15,961 .. .. .. 4,188 .. .. 5,683 .. 10,777 41,530 2,502 .. 6,928 91,178 181 786 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. 311 .. 1,997 .. 6,143 .. .. 1,070 .. 10,938 .. .. .. .. 6,879 .. .. .. .. .. 4,721 .. .. 3,123 115,061 24,494 1,955 .. .. 1,005 710 113 .. .. 680 1,092 671 6,115 .. .. .. .. 1,605 4,619 .. .. .. 17,177 .. 1,769 910 .. .. .. 553
Roads
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Total road network km
Paved roads %
Passengers carried million passengerkm
2000–07a
2000–07a
2000–07a
195,719 3,316,452 391,009 172,927 45,550 96,602 17,870 487,700 22,121 1,196,999 7,768 93,123 63,265 25,554 102,061 .. 5,749 34,000 29,811 69,687 6,970 5,940 10,600 83,200 80,715 13,840 49,827 15,451 93,109 18,709 11,066 2,028 360,075 12,755 49,250 57,799 30,400 27,000 42,237 17,280 126,100 93,748 18,669 18,951 193,200 92,920 48,874 260,420 11,643 19,600 29,500 78,986 200,037 258,910 82,900 25,645 7,790
37.7 47.4 55.4 72.8 84.3 100.0 100.0 100.0 73.3 79.3 100.0 90.3 14.1 2.8 77.6 .. 85.0 91.1 13.4 100.0 .. 18.3 6.2 57.2 28.6 .. 11.6 45.0 79.8 18.0 26.8 98.0 38.2 85.7 3.5 62.0 18.7 11.9 12.8 56.9 90.0 65.4 11.4 20.7 15.0 79.6 41.3 65.4 34.6 3.5 50.8 13.9 9.9 90.3 86.0 95.0 90.0
11,784 .. .. .. .. .. .. 97,560 .. 947,562 .. 103,381 .. .. 97,854 .. .. 6,468 .. 2,664 .. .. .. .. 42,739 1,027 .. .. .. .. .. .. 449,917 1,640 557 .. .. .. 47 .. .. .. .. .. .. 60,597 .. 263,788 .. .. .. .. .. 27,359 .. .. ..
Railways
Goods hauled million ton-km 2000–07a
30,495 .. .. .. .. 15,900 .. 192,700 .. 327,632 .. 53,816 22 .. 12,545 .. .. 819 .. 2,729 .. .. .. .. 18,134 8,299 .. .. .. .. .. .. 209,392 1,577 242 1,212 .. .. 591 .. 77,100 .. .. .. .. 14,966 .. 129,249 .. .. .. .. .. 136,490 45,032 10 ..
Passengers carried million Rail lines total route- passengerkm km 2000–08a
7,942 63,327 3,370 7,335 2,032 1,919 1,005 16,862 .. 20,048 251 14,205 1,917 .. 3,381 .. .. 417 .. 2,263 .. .. .. .. 1,765 699 854 797 1,665 .. 728 .. 26,677 1,156 1,810 1,989 3,116 .. .. .. 2,896 .. .. .. 3,528 4,114 .. 7,791 .. .. .. 2,020 479 19,627 2,842 .. ..
2000–08a
5,927 769,956 14,344 13,900 61 1,976 1,968 46,998 .. 255,865 .. 14,450 250 .. 32,025 .. .. 60 .. 951 .. .. .. .. 398 148 10 44 2,268 .. 47 .. 84 485 1,400 3,836 114 4,163 .. .. 15,313 .. .. .. 174 2,705 .. 24,731 .. .. .. 55 83 17,958 3,814 .. ..
Ports
5.10
STATES AND MARKETS
Transport services
Air
Goods hauled million ton-km
Port container traffic thousand TEU
Registered carrier departures worldwide thousands
Passengers carried thousands
Air freight million ton-km
2000–08a
2008
2008
2008
2008
7,786 521,371 4,390 21,829 640 103 1,055 19,918 .. 23,032 789 214,907 1,399 .. 11,566 .. .. 849 .. 17,704 .. .. .. .. 14,748 743 1 33 1,350 .. 7,622 .. 71,136 3,092 8,261 4,959 695 885 .. .. .. .. .. .. 77 .. .. 6,187 .. .. .. 627 .. 39,200 2,550 .. ..
.. 6,623 6,788 2,000 .. 1,044 2,090 10,520 1,916 18,795 .. .. .. .. 17,774 .. 750 .. .. .. 945 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 15,742 .. .. 381 3,161 .. .. 561 .. .. .. .. 11,362 2,296 .. .. 513 .. 3,428 1,938 5,127 .. .. 1,396 4,466 859 1,238 1,685 ..
.. 592 345 122 .. .. 45 383 .. 655 31 19 32 .. 250 .. .. 4 10 .. .. .. .. 10 12 .. 12 4 177 .. 1 12 266 .. 6 61 11 30 5 7 263 220 .. .. 18 .. .. 52 .. 22 11 68 72 90 159 .. ..
.. 49,878 29,766 12,029 .. .. 4,563 30,672 .. 97,022 2,355 1,276 2,881 .. 36,078 .. .. 205 323 .. .. .. .. 1,214 610 .. 559 160 22,421 .. 154 1,257 18,826 .. 364 4,927 461 1,638 452 520 29,601 12,951 .. .. 1,461 .. .. 5,606 .. 905 466 6,184 9,508 4,635 11,171 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
20 1,234 395 97 .. 131 902 1,279 15 8,173 141 16 295 2 8,727 .. 239 2 3 13 74 .. .. 0 1 0 12 2 2,444 .. 0 191 483 1 6 55 7 3 0 7 4,903 921 .. .. 10 .. .. 320 36 22 0 230 277 79 347 .. 888
329
5.10
Transport services Roads
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Total road network km
Paved roads %
Passengers carried million passengerkm
2000–07a
2000–07a
2000–07a
198,817 933,000 14,008 221,372 13,576 39,184 11,300 3,297 43,761 38,708 22,100 362,099 666,292 97,286 11,900 3,594 427,045 71,354 40,032 27,767 78,891 180,053 .. 7,520 8,320 19,232 426,951 24,000 70,746 169,422 4,030 420,009 6,544,257 77,732 81,600 96,155 160,089 5,147 71,300 66,781 97,267
30.2 80.9 19.0 21.5 29.3 62.7 8.0 100.0 87.0 100.0 11.8 17.3 99.0 81.0 36.3 30.0 31.7 100.0 100.0 .. 8.6 98.5 .. 31.6 51.1 65.8 .. 81.2 23.0 97.8 100.0 100.0 65.3 10.0 87.3 33.6 47.6 100.0 8.7 22.0 19.0 37.6 m 12.1 37.6 37.6 41.8 24.3 34.3 .. 22.0 75.6 56.9 11.9 87.0 100.0
Railways
Goods hauled million ton-km 2000–07a
Passengers carried million Rail lines passengertotal routekm km 2000–08a
2000–08a
Ports
Goods hauled million ton-km 2000–08a
7,985 51,531 10,784 6,880 12,861 78,000 199,000 84,158 175,800 2,400,000 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2,758 337 1,748 .. .. .. 129 384 3,865 452 4,058 749 4,214 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 7,816 22,114 3,592 2,279 9,004 817 12,112 1,228 834 3,520 .. .. .. .. .. .. 434 24,487 13,865 106,014 397,117 132,868 15,046 23,344 10,224 21,067 .. 1,463 4,767 135 .. .. 4,578 34 766 .. .. 300 0 2 109,300 40,123 9,830 7,156 11,500 94,250 16,337 3,499 18,367 16,227 589 .. 2,139 1,120 2,370 150 14,572 616 53 1,274 475b 728b .. .. 2,600b .. .. 4,429 8,037 3,161 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 16,611 2,218 1,487 2,197 209,115 177,399 8,699 5,097 10,104 .. .. 3,181 1,570 10,973 .. .. .. .. .. 55,446 26,625 21,676 53,056 257,006 .. .. .. .. .. 736,000 166,728 16,321 51,759 12,512 7,940,003 1,889,923 227,058 9,935 2,788,230c 2,032 .. 2,993 15 284 .. 1,200 4,230 2,264 21,594 .. .. 336 .. 81 49,372 20,537 3,147 4,659 3,910 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2,583 .. 1,580 .. m .. m .. s 2,003 m 4,343 m .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,120 4,296 .. .. .. 1,400 3,127 .. .. .. 944 9,049 .. .. .. 937 3,127 .. .. .. 4,248 3,447 11,786 15,779 193,080 999 10,063 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,487 2,284 .. .. .. 15,170 3,529 .. .. .. .. .. .. 41,824 .. 6,343 10,777 97,840 45,032 126,162 10,275 9,614
Air
Port container traffic thousand TEU
Registered carrier departures worldwide thousands
Passengers carried thousands
Air freight million ton-km
2008
2008
2008
2008
1,381 3,303 .. 4,652 .. .. .. 29,918 .. .. .. 3,797 13,248 3,687 .. .. 1,312 .. .. .. .. 6,586 .. .. 440 .. 5,218 .. .. 1,112 12,254 7,081 40,345 302 .. 1,325 4,394 .. 377 .. .. 486,792 s .. 215,508 155,286 60,222 220,972 153,036 11,874 29,887 .. 13,319 .. 265,820 74,159
55 3,253 6 523 37,940 2,400 .. .. .. 148 16,708 1,383 0 567 0 .. .. 4 .. .. 10 .. .. 7,981 24 2,690 46 .. .. 2 .. .. .. 157 13,135 761 617 55,214 1,306 .. .. 325 7 618 47 .. .. .. .. .. .. 159 14,353 1,182 19 1,358 14 8 683 5 5 203 1 126 19,993 2,289 .. .. .. .. .. .. 15 1,103 49 .. .. 19 215 25,505 481 16 1,823 11 .. .. 34 53 3,456 63 .. .. .. 1,056 104,714 6,284 9,054 d 701,780 d 39,314 d .. .. 4 22 2,034 72 138 5,767 2 75 9,991 296 .. .. .. 14 1,065 33 4 62 0 6 264 7 24,225 s 2,049,275 s 124,557 s 302 26,002 1,057 6,565 588,155 28,431 3,622 351,921 16,708 2,942 236,233 11,723 6,867 614,156 29,488 2,795 287,490 17,220 1,051 83,250 3,151 1,646 125,654 5,163 346 32,523 554 663 57,228 1,645 366 28,012 1,754 17,358 1,435,119 95,069 4,000 330,883 24,446
a. Data are for the latest year available in the period shown. b. Includes Tazara railway. c. Refers to class 1 railways only. d. Covers only carriers designated by the U.S. Department of Transportation as major and national air carriers.
330
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
5.10
Definitions
Transport infrastructure—highways, railways, ports
some indication of economic growth in a country.
• Total road network covers motorways, highways,
and waterways, and airports and air traffic control
But when traffic is merely transshipment, much of
main or national roads, secondary or regional roads,
systems—and the services that fl ow from it are
the economic benefit goes to the terminal operator
and all other roads in a country. • Paved roads are
crucial to the activities of households, producers,
and ancillary services for ships and containers rather
roads surfaced with crushed stone (macadam) and
and governments. Because performance indicators
than to the country more broadly. In transshipment
hydrocarbon binder or bituminized agents, with con-
vary widely by transport mode and focus (whether
centers empty containers may account for as much
crete, or with cobblestones. • Passengers carried
physical infrastructure or the services flowing from
as 40 percent of traffic.
by road are the number of passengers transported
that infrastructure), highly specialized and carefully
The air transport data represent the total (interna-
by road times kilometers traveled. • Goods hauled
specified indicators are required. The table provides
tional and domestic) scheduled traffic carried by the
by road are the volume of goods transported by road
selected indicators of the size, extent, and produc-
air carriers registered in a country. Countries submit
vehicles, measured in millions of metric tons times
tivity of roads, railways, and air transport systems
air transport data to ICAO on the basis of standard
kilometers traveled. • Rail lines are the length of rail-
and of the volume of traffic in these modes as well
instructions and definitions issued by ICAO. In many
way route available for train service, irrespective of
as in ports.
cases, however, the data include estimates by ICAO
the number of parallel tracks. • Passengers carried
Data for transport sectors are not always inter-
for nonreporting carriers. Where possible, these esti-
by railway are the number of passengers transported
nationally comparable. Unlike for demographic sta-
mates are based on previous submissions supple-
by rail times kilometers traveled. • Goods hauled
tistics, national income accounts, and international
mented by information published by the air carriers,
by railway are the volume of goods transported by
trade data, the collection of infrastructure data has
such as flight schedules.
railway, measured in metric tons times kilometers
not been “internationalized.” But data on roads are
The data cover the air traffic carried on scheduled
traveled. • Port container traffic measures the flow
collected by the International Road Federation (IRF),
services, but changes in air transport regulations
of containers from land to sea transport modes and
and data on air transport by the International Civil
in Europe have made it more diffi cult to classify
vice versa in twenty-foot-equivalent units (TEUs), a
Aviation Organization (ICAO).
traffic as scheduled or nonscheduled. Thus recent
standard-size container. Data cover coastal shipping
National road associations are the primary source
increases shown for some European countries may
as well as international journeys. Transshipment traf-
of IRF data. In countries where a national road asso-
be due to changes in the classification of air traffic
fic is counted as two lifts at the intermediate port
ciation is lacking or does not respond, other agencies
rather than actual growth. For countries with few air
(once to off-load and again as an outbound lift) and
are contacted, such as road directorates, ministries
carriers or only one, the addition or discontinuation
includes empty units. • Registered carrier depar-
of transport or public works, or central statistical
of a home-based air carrier may cause significant
tures worldwide are domestic takeoffs and takeoffs
offices. As a result, definitions and data collection
changes in air traffic.
abroad of air carriers registered in the country. • Pas-
methods and quality differ, and the compiled data
sengers carried by air include both domestic and
are of uneven quality. Moreover, the quality of trans-
international passengers of air carriers registered
port service (reliability, transit time, and condition of
in the country. • Air freight is the volume of freight,
goods delivered) is rarely measured, though it may be
express, and diplomatic bags carried on each flight
as important as quantity in assessing an economy’s
stage (operation of an aircraft from takeoff to its next
transport system.
landing), measured in metric tons times kilometers
Unlike the road sector, where numerous qualified
traveled.
motor vehicle operators can operate anywhere on the road network, railways are a restricted transport system with vehicles confined to a fixed guideway. Considering the cost and service characteristics, railways generally are best suited to carry—and can effectively compete for—bulk commodities and con-
Data sources
tainerized freight for distances of 500–5,000 kilo-
Data on roads are from the IRF’s World Road
meters, and passengers for distances of 50–1,000
Statistics, supplemented by World Bank staff
kilometers. Below these limits road transport
estimates. Data on railways are from a database
tends to be more competitive, while above these
maintained by the World Bank’s Transport and
limits air transport for passengers and freight and
Urban Development Department, Transport Divi-
sea transport for freight tend to be more competi-
sion, based on data from the International Union
tive. The railways indicators in the table focus on
of Railways. Data on port container traffic are from
scale and output measures: total route-kilometers,
Containerisation International’s Containerisation
passenger- kilometers, and goods (freight) hauled in
International Yearbook. Data on air transport are
ton-kilometers.
from the ICAO’s Civil Aviation Statistics of the World
Measures of port container traffi c, much of it
and ICAO staff estimates.
commodities of medium to high value added, give
2010 World Development Indicators
331
STATES AND MARKETS
Transport services
5.11
Power and communications Electric power
Telephones Affordability and efficiency Access and use
Transmission Consumption and distribution losses per capita % of output kWh 2007
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
332
.. 1,186 902 185 2,659 1,692 11,249 8,033 2,394 144 3,345 8,614 72 515 2,381 1,435 2,171 4,456 .. .. 94 265 16,995 .. .. 3,318 2,332 5,899 977 97 135 1,863 178 3,738 1,309 6,496 6,670 1,378 788 1,384 939 .. 6,273 40 17,162 7,772 1,066 .. 1,620 7,184 259 5,628 558 .. .. 30 692
2010 World Development Indicators
Quality
Population Inter national covered by voice traffic a mobile cellular per 100 people networka Fixed Mobile cellular minutes per person lines a subscriptionsa %
$ per month TelecomMobile cellular Residential Mobile cellular munications and fixed-line revenuea subscribers fi xed-line prepaid per employee a tariff a tariffa % of GDP
2007
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
.. 69 18 14 16 13 7 6 14 7 12 5 87 14 19 15 16 11 .. .. 12 14 8 .. .. 8 6 13 20 4 93 10 23 17 17 6 5 9 44 11 2 .. 11 9 4 6 18 .. 13 5 18 8 14 .. .. 37 22
0 11 10 1 24 20 44 39 15 1 38 42 2 7 27 7 21 29 1 0 0 1 55 0 0 21 26 59 18 .. 1 32 2 42 10 22 45 10 14 15 18 1 37 1 31 56 2 3 14 63 1 53 11 0 0 1 11
27 100 93 38 117 100 103 130 75 28 84 110 40 50 84 77 78 138 17 6 29 32 66 4 17 88 48 166 92 .. 50 42 51 133 3 132 125 72 86 51 113 2 188 2 129 93 90 70 64 129 50 123 109 39 32 32 85
1 127 18 .. 42 .. .. .. .. 6 .. .. 12 80 109 115 .. 27 11 .. .. 4 .. .. .. 35 9 1,435 142 .. .. 120 .. 229 .. 136 210 .. 3 27 578 17 .. 2 .. 242 .. .. 44 .. 6 .. .. .. .. .. 39
75 99 82 40 94 88 99 99 99 90 99 100 80 46 99 99 91 100 61 80 87 58 98 19 24 100 97 100 83 .. 53 69 59 100 77 100 114 .. 84 95 95 80 100 10 100 99 79 85 98 99 73 100 76 80 65 .. 90
.. 4.3 4.6 20.2 4.8 5.1 27.5 28.7 2.4 1.3 .. 36.4 7.5 22.7 9.5 16.9 29.1 9.2 10.3 .. 8.0 14.8 32.8 10.6 .. 27.0 3.7 11.3 7.6 .. .. 4.6 22.8 16.4 13.2 30.9 28.5 14.4 1.1 3.0 10.4 .. 13.7 1.5 19.3 30.9 .. 4.0 7.3 28.8 4.7 26.7 8.7 3.4 .. .. ..
.. 22.7 8.2 11.8 12.5 8.4 26.5 24.3 15.2 1.3 .. 21.9 15.5 5.9 9.9 8.3 37.0 18.6 16.9 .. 5.0 17.8 19.2 12.6 .. 13.7 3.6 2.6 9.6 .. .. 4.5 14.8 18.7 22.7 18.6 5.8 9.1 9.0 4.7 10.5 .. 13.6 3.1 14.1 35.7 .. 6.0 8.5 10.1 5.9 25.1 4.5 3.5 .. .. ..
.. 6.0 2.7 .. 3.1 .. 3.3 1.7 2.4 .. 2.1 2.8 1.0 6.8 5.5 3.0 4.6 5.3 4.0 3.1 .. 3.1 2.5 .. .. .. 2.9 3.6 3.7 .. .. 1.8 5.5 4.6 .. 3.8 2.4 .. 4.1 3.7 4.8 3.0 4.5 1.3 2.3 2.0 2.0 .. 6.9 2.5 .. 3.7 .. .. .. .. 7.1
58 871 285 .. 1,929 .. 346 843 484 .. .. 732 1,539 376 567 1,018 358 565 .. 492 1,712 1,050 .. 293 .. 592 1,310 980 .. .. .. 497 1,445 892 .. 812 543 .. 513 856 2,275 117 742 233 708 695 .. 466 355 789 1,780 813 .. .. .. .. 391
Electric power
5.11
STATES AND MARKETS
Power and communications Telephones
Affordability and efficiency Access and use Transmission Consumption and distribution losses per capita % of output kWh 2007
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
3,977 542 566 2,325 1,080 6,263 7,002 5,713 2,542 8,474 1,956 4,448 151 764 8,502 .. 16,198 1,772 .. 3,064 2,154 .. .. 3,871 3,414 3,780 .. .. 3,667 .. .. .. 2,036 1,319 1,369 707 472 94 1,541 80 7,097 9,622 446 .. 137 24,980 4,484 474 1,592 .. 958 961 586 3,662 4,860 .. 12,915
Quality
Population Inter national covered by voice traffic a mobile cellular per 100 people networka Fixed Mobile cellular minutes per person lines a subscriptionsa %
$ per month TelecomMobile cellular Residential Mobile cellular munications and fixed-line revenuea subscribers fi xed-line prepaid per employee a tariff a tariffa % of GDP
2007
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
10 25 11 19 7 8 3 7 13 5 14 10 15 16 4 .. 12 28 .. 17 17 .. .. 7 8 22 .. .. 2 .. .. .. 16 50 12 19 14 29 28 22 4 7 24 .. 12 7 15 19 16 .. 5 8 13 9 7 .. 9
31 3 13 34 4 50 44 36 12 38 9 22 1 5 44 .. 20 9 2 28 18 3 0 16 23 22 1 1 16 1 2 29 19 31 8 9 0 2 7 3 44 41 6 0 1 40 10 3 15 1 8 10 5 25 39 26 21
122 30 62 60 57 121 123 151 101 86 90 95 42 0 94 .. 107 64 33 99 34 28 19 77 150 123 25 12 103 27 65 81 71 67 67 72 20 1 49 15 125 108 55 13 42 110 116 53 115 9 95 73 75 115 140 .. 131
120 .. .. .. 0 .. 413 .. 39 .. 66 47 3 .. 33 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 65 57 159 1 .. .. 2 4 100 174 155 5 21 .. .. .. .. .. 310 39 .. 1 .. 30 .. 61 .. 35 .. .. .. .. .. ..
99 61 90 95 72 99 100 100 101 100 99 94 83 0 94 .. 100 24 .. 99 100 55 .. 71 100 100 23 93 92 22 62 99 100 98 66 98 44 10 95 10 98 97 .. 45 83 .. 96 90 83 .. .. 95 99 99 99 .. 100
30.2 3.5 4.5 0.2 .. 42.2 .. 27.4 10.8 18.3 8.3 .. 11.6 .. 6.4 .. 9.3 .. 3.9 11.9 10.9 12.5 .. .. 15.0 8.7 18.3 3.3 5.1 9.9 12.9 5.5 22.3 3.1 .. 27.4 17.7 .. 14.5 3.4 31.2 34.4 5.1 13.6 10.3 37.6 32.6 3.6 9.1 4.0 7.2 15.4 14.2 28.0 25.7 .. ..
16.1 1.6 5.3 3.8 .. 18.7 .. 17.1 7.0 32.2 4.5 .. 13.4 .. 14.6 .. 7.9 .. 3.0 7.3 22.2 12.6 .. .. 8.7 13.2 12.4 12.0 5.9 10.0 9.9 4.4 15.0 8.9 .. 22.2 10.1 .. 11.5 2.9 17.7 23.1 13.8 13.8 12.1 9.7 5.5 1.9 5.1 12.8 5.7 8.0 5.7 12.5 26.4 .. ..
3.8 2.0 .. .. .. 2.5 1.1 2.9 1.4 3.0 6.7 2.9 6.3 .. 4.7 .. .. 4.8 .. 4.0 .. .. 8.2 .. 2.8 6.3 3.9 3.4 .. 4.3 7.7 3.6 2.7 10.1 6.0 5.1 1.2 .. .. 1.0 0.7 2.9 .. .. 3.4 1.2 3.4 2.7 3.2 .. 4.8 3.1 .. 3.9 4.6 .. 1.8
1,127 .. .. 913 1,098 .. .. 1,657 .. 12 1,105 253 2,298 .. 657 .. .. 311 748 697 .. .. .. 1,717 402 1,065 2,427 .. .. 2,059 2,842 .. 840 294 393 .. .. 90 .. 565 .. 605 .. .. .. .. 967 50 380 .. 799 624 .. 396 1,534 .. 597
2010 World Development Indicators
333
5.11
Power and communications Electric power
Telephones Affordability and efficiency Access and use
Transmission Consumption and distribution losses per capita % of output kWh 2007
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
2,452 6,317 .. 7,247 128 4,155 .. 8,514 5,250 7,138 .. 4,986 6,296 417 90 .. 15,238 8,164 1,469 2,176 82 2,055 .. 96 5,642 1,248 2,238 2,279 .. 3,529 16,165 6,120 13,652 2,197 1,658 3,077 728 .. 202 720 898 2,846 w 324 1,666 1,310 3,052 1,478 1,883 3,958 1,866 1,435 482 550 9,753 6,963
2007
11 10 .. 7 25 16 .. 5 5 6 .. 8 5 16 20 .. 7 6 24 17 19 6 .. 53 2 13 14 14 .. 12 7 7 6 20 9 27 11 .. 25 7 7 8w 13 11 11 13 11 6 11 17 16 24 10 6 5
Quality
Population Inter national covered by voice traffic a mobile cellular per 100 people networka Fixed Mobile cellular minutes per person lines a subscriptionsa % 2008
23 32 0 17 2 42 1 38 20 50 1 9 44 17 1 4 58 63 18 4 0 10 .. 2 23 12 24 9 1 28 34 54 51 29 7 23 34 9 5 1 3 19 w 5 15 14 22 13 22 26 19 16 3 2 47 49
2008
114 141 14 146 44 131 18 132 102 102 7 92 109 55 29 46 118 116 34 54 31 92 .. 24 113 83 89 23 27 120 209 126 89 105 47 97 81 29 16 28 13 61 w 28 57 47 95 52 53 110 80 58 33 33 106 122
2008
41 .. 11 .. 27 142 .. 1,531 123 96 .. .. .. 34 6 .. .. .. 78 .. 0 .. .. 6 .. 79 39 .. 7 0 .. .. .. 0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 22 .. w .. .. .. .. .. 9 .. .. 27 .. .. .. ..
2008
98 95 92 98 85 93 70 100 100 100 .. 100 99 95 66 91 98 100 96 .. 65 38 .. 85 100 100 100 14 100 100 100 100 100 100 93 90 70 95 68 50 75 80 w 56 80 77 94 76 93 92 92 93 61 56 99 99
$ per month TelecomMobile cellular Residential Mobile cellular munications and fixed-line revenuea subscribers fi xed-line prepaid per employee a tariff a tariffa % of GDP 2008
2008
12.2 11.7 7.3 9.2 17.4 4.9 .. 7.1 24.5 20.5 .. 22.4 30.8 4.8 4.4 4.8 22.8 29.0 1.2 .. 10.9 5.8 .. 13.1 19.7 3.0 .. .. 12.6 4.2 5.0 27.3 17.2 13.0 .. 7.0 2.3 .. 0.8 27.7 .. 10.9 m 9.0 8.5 4.8 11.7 8.5 4.5 8.7 10.4 3.0 3.5 11.6 27.0 28.7
11.9 8.6 10.0 8.8 8.4 4.9 .. 4.0 16.1 12.4 .. 12.3 33.3 2.4 4.8 12.1 7.5 35.5 9.1 .. 11.1 3.9 .. 18.0 7.9 7.2 .. .. 10.4 8.2 4.1 20.5 15.3 13.8 .. 24.7 4.2 .. 4.9 12.3 .. 10.1 m 10.0 9.0 8.4 9.9 9.1 5.0 8.9 9.6 7.2 1.9 11.8 16.1 18.7
2008
3.4 2.6 3.1 2.7 9.8 5.3 .. 2.8 3.3 3.3 .. 7.4 4.0 .. 3.3 4.5 2.7 3.3 3.0 .. .. 4.0 7.9 7.4 2.5 4.3 2.3 .. .. 5.7 3.1 4.3 .. 3.1 2.5 3.5 .. .. .. 2.6 .. .. w .. 3.2 3.0 3.3 3.2 3.0 2.8 3.8 .. 2.1 .. .. 2.6
2008
561 .. 1,952 1,618 1,859 872 .. .. 665 644 .. .. 855 919 2,168 1,118 894 601 409 .. .. 1,957 .. 1,059 .. 1,004 2,145 .. .. .. 924 .. .. 692 758 914 .. 880 .. .. 711 651 m .. 595 685 559 559 .. 462 550 880 565 .. 801 789
a. Data are from the International Telecommunication Union’s (ITU) World Telecommunication Development Report database. Please cite the ITU for third-party use of these data.
334
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
5.11
Definitions
The quality of an economy’s infrastructure, includ-
Access to telephone services rose on an unprec-
ing power and communications, is an important ele-
edented scale over the past 15 years. This growth
the production of power plants and combined heat
ment in investment decisions for both domestic and
was driven primarily by wireless technologies and
and power plants less transmission, distribution,
foreign investors. Government effort alone is not
liberalization of telecommunications markets, which
and transformation losses and own use by heat and
enough to meet the need for investments in modern
have enabled faster and less costly network rollout.
power plants divided by midyear population. • Elec-
infrastructure; public-private partnerships, especially
In 2002 the number of mobile phones in the world
tric power transmission and distribution losses are
those involving local providers and financiers, are
surpassed the number of fixed telephones; by the
losses in transmission between sources of supply
critical for lowering costs and delivering value for
end of 2008 there were an estimated 4 billion mobile
and points of distribution and in distribution to con-
money. In telecommunications, competition in the
phones globally. No technology has ever spread
sumers, including pilferage. • Fixed telephone lines
marketplace, along with sound regulation, is lower-
faster around the world. Mobile communications
are telephone lines connecting a subscriber to the
ing costs, improving quality, and easing access to
have had a particularly important impact in rural
telephone exchange equipment. • Mobile cellular
services around the globe.
areas. The mobility, ease of use, flexible deployment,
telephone subscriptions are subscriptions to a pub-
An economy’s production and consumption of elec-
and relatively low and declining rollout costs of wire-
lic mobile telephone service using cellular technol-
tricity are basic indicators of its size and level of
less technologies enable them to reach rural popu-
ogy, which provide access to the public switched
development. Although a few countries export elec-
lations with low levels of income and literacy. The
telephone network. Post-paid and prepaid subscrip-
tric power, most production is for domestic consump-
next billion mobile subscribers will consist mainly
tions are included. • International voice traffic is
tion. Expanding the supply of electricity to meet the
of the rural poor.
the sum of international incoming and outgoing tele-
• Electric power consumption per capita measures
growing demand of increasingly urbanized and indus-
Access is the key to delivering telecommunications
phone traffic (in minutes) divided by total population.
trialized economies without incurring unacceptable
services to people. If the service is not affordable
• Population covered by mobile cellular network is
social, economic, and environmental costs is one of
to most people, goals of universal usage will not be
the percentage of people that live in areas served by
the great challenges facing developing countries.
met. Two indicators of telecommunications afford-
a mobile cellular signal regardless of whether they
Data on electric power production and consump-
ability are presented in the table: fixed-line telephone
use it. • Residential fixed-line tariff is the monthly
tion are collected from national energy agencies by
service tariff and prepaid mobile cellular service tar-
subscription charge plus the cost of 30 three-minute
the International Energy Agency (IEA) and adjusted
iff. Telecommunications efficiency is measured by
local calls (15 peak and 15 off-peak). • Mobile cel-
by the IEA to meet international definitions (for data
total telecommunications revenue divided by GDP
lular prepaid tariff is based on the Organisation for
on electricity production, see table 3.10). Electricity
and by mobile cellular and fixed-line telephone sub-
Economic Co-operation and Development’s low-user
consumption is equivalent to production less power
scribers per employee.
definition, which includes the cost of monthly mobile
plants’ own use and transmission, distribution, and
Operators have traditionally been the main source
use for 25 outgoing calls per month spread over the
transformation losses less exports plus imports. It
of telecommunications data, so information on sub-
same mobile network, other mobile networks, and
includes consumption by auxiliary stations, losses
scribers has been widely available for most coun-
mobile to fixed-line calls and during peak, off-peak,
in transformers that are considered integral parts
tries. This gives a general idea of access, but a
and weekend times as well as 30 text messages
of those stations, and electricity produced by pump-
more precise measure is the penetration rate—the
per month. • Telecommunications revenue is the
ing installations. Where data are available, it covers
share of households with access to telecommunica-
revenue from the provision of telecommunications
electricity generated by primary sources of energy—
tions. During the past few years more information
services such as fixed-line, mobile, and data divided
coal, oil, gas, nuclear, hydro, geothermal, wind, tide
on information and communication technology use
by GDP. • Mobile cellular and fixed-line subscribers
and wave, and combustible renewables. Neither pro-
has become available from household and business
per employee are telephone subscribers (fixed-line
duction nor consumption data capture the reliability
surveys. Also important are data on actual use of
plus mobile) divided by the total number of telecom-
of supplies, including breakdowns, load factors, and
telecommunications equipment. Ideally, statistics
munications employees.
frequency of outages.
on telecommunications (and other information and
Over the past decade new financing and technol-
communications technologies) should be compiled
ogy, along with privatization and liberalization, have
for all three measures: subscription and possession,
spurred dramatic growth in telecommunications
access, and use. The quality of data varies among
in many countries. With the rapid development of
reporting countries as a result of differences in regu-
Data on electricity consumption and losses are
mobile telephony and the global expansion of the
lations covering data provision and availability.
from the IEA’s Energy Statistics and Balances of
Data sources
Internet, information and communication technolo-
Non-OECD Countries 2009, the IEA’s Energy Sta-
gies are increasingly recognized as essential tools of
tistics of OECD Countries 2009, and the United
development, contributing to global integration and
Nations Statistics Division’s Energy Statistics
enhancing public sector effectiveness, efficiency,
Yearbook. Data on telecommunications are from
and transparency. The table presents telecommuni-
the International Telecommunication Union’s
cations indicators covering access and use, quality,
World Telecommunication Development Report
and affordability and efficiency.
database and World Bank estimates.
2010 World Development Indicators
335
STATES AND MARKETS
Power and communications
5.12
The information age Daily Households newspapers with televisiona
Personal computers and the Internet Access and use
per 100 people
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
336
per 1,000 people
%
2000–07b
2007
2008
2008
2008
.. 24 .. 2 36 8 155 311 16 .. 81 165 0 .. .. 41 36 79 .. .. .. .. 175 .. .. 51 74 222 23 .. .. 65 .. .. 65 183 353 39 99 .. 38 .. 191 5 431 164 .. .. 4 267 .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. 34 .. 85 .. 97 99 .. 93 99 23 63 .. .. 97 98 .. .. 63 .. 99 .. .. 100 .. 99 85 .. 25 94 38 .. 88 .. 98 77 90 97 .. .. 98 5 93 97 .. .. .. 95 .. 100 .. 11 .. 25 64
0.4 4.6 .. 0.6 .. .. .. .. 8.0 2.3 .. .. 0.7 .. 6.4 6.2 .. 11.0 0.6 0.9 0.4 .. 94.3 .. .. .. 5.7 69.3 11.2 .. .. .. .. .. 5.6 .. 54.9 .. 13.0 3.9 .. 1.0 25.5 0.7 .. 65.2 3.4 3.5 27.2 65.6 1.1 9.4 .. .. .. 5.1 2.5
1.7 23.9 11.9 3.1 28.1 6.2 70.8 71.2 28.2 0.3 32.1 68.1 1.8 10.8 34.7 6.2 37.5 34.7 0.9 0.8 0.5 3.8 75.3 0.4 1.2 32.5 22.5 67.0 38.5 .. 4.3 32.3 3.2 50.5 12.9 57.8 83.3 21.6 28.8 16.6 10.6 4.1 66.2 0.4 82.5 67.9 6.2 6.9 23.8 75.5 4.3 43.1 14.3 0.9 2.4 10.1 13.1
0.00 2.04 1.41 0.09 7.99 0.16 23.98 20.74 0.69 0.03 4.94 27.66 0.03 0.68 4.99 0.46 5.26 11.07 0.03 0.00 0.11 0.00 29.55 0.00 0.00 8.49 6.29 28.13 4.23 .. 0.00 2.38 0.05 11.83 0.02 16.88 36.88 2.27 0.26 0.94 2.01 0.00 23.71 0.00 30.45 28.41 0.15 0.02 2.23 27.52 0.10 13.41 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2010 World Development Indicators
Personal Internet computersa usersa
Quality Affordability Fixed International Fixed broadband Internet broadband a Internet bandwidth Internet access subscribersa bits per tariffa second per per 100 capita people $ per month 2008
1 220 .. 17 2,320 .. 5,457 20,323 1,180 4 748 24,945 18 225 529 220 2,108 37,657 15 2 19 8 16,193 .. 1 4,076 483 548,318 2,233 .. 0 857 40 15,892 27 7,075 34,506 1,407 443 332 33 5 126,802 3 17,221 29,356 141 38 752 25,654 86 4,537 186 0 1 16 241
Information and communications technology trade
Application Information and comSecure Goods munications Exports Internet Imports technology % of total % of total servers expenditures per million goods goods % of GDP people imports exports
Services Exports % of total service exports
2008
December 2009
2008
2008
2008
2008
.. 31 17 164 38 39 28 61 85 54 .. 31 105 34 15 30 47 16 1,861 .. 91 184 20 1,396 .. 53 19 25 36 .. .. 17 47 21 1,630 29 30 28 40 8 18 .. 39 644 38 38 .. 384 48 38 64 25 34 800 .. .. ..
0 7 1 2 20 7 1,212 553 2 0 3 310 0 4 8 4 26 35 0 0 1 1 984 0 .. 39 1 350 12 0 1 98 1 117 0 185 1,167 14 12 1 12 .. 315 0 802 210 7 3 9 641 1 79 9 0 .. 1 7
.. .. 2.3 .. 4.8 .. 4.9 5.5 .. 9.0 .. 5.2 .. 4.9 .. .. 5.3 6.3 .. .. .. 4.6 6.6 .. .. 5.1 6.0 9.2 4.7 .. .. 6.2 .. .. .. 7.6 5.0 .. 5.3 5.7 .. .. .. .. 6.5 5.2 .. .. .. 5.4 .. 4.5 .. .. .. .. 8.6
.. 0.8 0.0 .. 0.5 1.3 1.5 5.8 0.0 0.6 0.6 2.9 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.2 1.8 2.6 .. 0.8 .. 0.0 3.8 .. .. 0.2 27.5 42.6 0.2 .. .. 23.8 0.3 5.0 1.9 15.2 5.0 6.0 0.2 1.8 2.5 .. 6.5 0.5 16.5 5.4 0.1 2.9 0.4 6.9 0.1 3.2 0.5 0.0 .. .. 0.2
0.4 4.0 5.8 .. 9.4 5.9 10.0 6.9 5.0 5.7 2.7 4.0 3.5 4.2 4.1 4.3 10.9 6.1 .. 8.3 .. 3.2 8.8 .. .. 6.4 23.2 40.8 11.2 .. .. 19.0 3.9 6.1 2.9 15.2 8.1 5.2 8.2 4.4 5.3 .. 7.2 7.9 12.0 7.2 6.6 3.8 7.8 8.8 7.3 5.6 6.3 5.8 .. .. 6.4
.. 6.8 .. .. 9.1 17.4 4.9 6.3 3.6 6.2 7.2 8.7 0.8 12.4 .. 3.1 2.2 5.5 .. 0.0 2.8 6.4 10.4 .. .. 2.5 5.3 1.3 7.3 .. .. 17.9 11.0 3.1 .. 8.6 .. 3.5 8.1 7.3 10.2 .. 7.1 3.9 27.4 3.7 .. 10.4 2.2 8.3 0.0 1.7 16.1 11.2 .. 5.1 14.4
Daily Households newspapers with televisiona
Personal computers and the Internet Access and use
per 100 people
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Personal Internet computersa usersa
Quality Affordability Fixed International Fixed broadband Internet broadband a Internet bandwidth Internet access subscribersa bits per tariffa second per per 100 capita people $ per month
per 1,000 people
%
2000–07b
2007
2008
2008
2008
217 71 .. .. .. 182 .. 137 .. 551 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 3 154 54 .. .. .. 108 89 .. .. 109 .. .. 77 93 .. 20 12 3 .. 28 .. 307 182 .. 0 .. 516 .. 50 65 9 .. .. 79 114 .. .. ..
99 46 .. .. .. 98 .. 94 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 99 .. .. 7 .. 98 99 .. .. .. 22 .. 96 93 .. 86 77 .. .. .. 28 98 99 .. 6 .. 95 .. 56 83 .. 79 69 .. 98 99 .. ..
25.6 3.3 2.0 10.6 .. 58.2 .. .. .. .. 7.5 .. .. .. 57.6 .. .. .. .. 32.7 10.2 .. .. .. 24.2 36.8 .. .. 23.1 0.8 4.5 17.6 14.4 11.4 24.6 5.7 .. 0.9 23.9 .. 91.2 52.6 .. .. .. 62.9 16.9 .. 2.8 .. .. .. 7.2 16.9 18.2 .. 15.7
58.5 4.5 7.9 32.0 1.0 62.7 47.9 41.8 57.3 75.2 27.0 10.9 8.7 0.0 75.8 .. 36.7 16.1 8.5 60.4 22.5 3.6 0.5 5.1 54.4 41.5 1.7 2.1 55.8 1.6 1.9 22.2 22.2 23.4 12.5 33.0 1.6 0.2 5.3 1.7 87.0 71.4 3.3 0.5 15.9 82.5 20.0 11.1 27.5 1.8 14.3 24.7 6.2 49.0 42.1 25.3 34.0
17.43 0.46 0.18 0.42 0.00 20.14 23.04 18.86 3.62 23.58 2.32 4.22 0.01 0.00 31.84 .. 1.47 0.09 0.10 8.83 5.03 0.01 .. 0.16 17.57 8.87 0.02 0.02 4.93 0.04 0.18 7.23 7.14 3.17 1.37 1.53 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.03 35.31 21.43 0.64 0.00 0.04 33.26 1.15 0.10 5.76 0.00 1.43 2.52 1.16 12.57 15.39 5.42 8.07
2008
5,977 32 120 151 1 15,261 2,003 12,989 744 5,770 781 702 21 0 4,528 .. 871 113 129 3,537 223 5 .. 50 9,751 17 8 5 2,374 51 76 364 285 966 947 795 3 20 27 5 78,156 4,544 144 11 5 26,904 894 43 15,964 2 481 2,646 113 2,748 4,790 .. 2,044
2008
25 6 22 43 .. 38 .. 26 30 32 31 .. 168 .. 20 .. 46 .. 268 26 23 49 .. .. 16 15 120 900 20 58 62 51 37 23 .. 20 100 .. 46 23 38 31 30 58 690 57 31 18 15 144 35 36 23 27 30 .. ..
Information and communications technology trade
Application Information and comSecure Goods munications Exports Internet Imports technology % of total % of total servers expenditures per million goods goods % of GDP people imports exports
Services Exports % of total service exports
December 2009
2008
2008
2008
2008
113 2 1 0 0 737 291 109 36 519 12 3 1 0 927 .. 85 1 0 114 15 0 0 1 121 17 0 0 34 1 2 62 17 10 8 2 0 0 9 1 1,416 1,059 6 0 1 1,011 11 1 86 1 6 10 5 123 136 61 64
8.9 4.5 3.3 3.5 .. 4.6 5.4 4.9 3.3 6.7 7.3 .. 5.8 .. 9.1 .. 3.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 9.7 .. .. .. 4.6 .. .. 12.5 .. .. .. .. 6.3 5.5 .. .. 3.1 3.7 .. 4.4 5.5 .. .. 3.4 6.1 5.5 6.0 .. ..
24.6 1.3 4.6 0.1 .. 16.3 13.5 2.8 0.3 14.3 5.5 0.1 1.3 .. 26.2 .. 0.3 0.8 .. 5.1 .. .. .. .. 3.2 0.4 0.3 0.2 26.2 0.2 .. 4.0 20.9 6.8 0.1 5.7 0.2 .. 0.6 .. 11.8 1.8 0.2 0.7 0.0 2.0 1.6 0.5 0.0 .. 0.2 0.1 54.1 7.5 7.4 .. 0.0
18.8 5.0 9.8 1.9 .. 17.5 9.1 5.7 3.9 10.3 7.2 3.3 6.2 .. 15.2 .. 6.0 5.1 .. 6.6 .. .. .. .. 5.1 5.0 4.2 3.4 25.3 3.6 1.6 5.9 17.2 3.4 5.1 6.7 3.9 .. 4.9 .. 12.6 8.4 6.2 3.6 10.2 8.2 3.2 5.7 6.9 .. 21.3 5.3 34.7 8.9 7.9 .. 8.2
8.3 50.3 8.4 .. 3.3 34.4 29.6 3.0 5.9 1.1 0.0 2.4 13.5 .. 1.3 .. 45.9 2.0 .. 5.2 1.9 .. .. 2.5 3.1 12.9 .. .. 5.4 .. .. 3.6 2.3 16.8 3.7 5.9 6.1 .. 2.3 .. 10.6 4.9 8.2 32.8 .. 5.7 .. 6.7 4.5 .. 1.3 3.9 7.9 4.5 5.0 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
337
STATES AND MARKETS
5.12
The information age
5.12
The information age Daily Households newspapers with televisiona
Personal computers and the Internet Access and use
per 100 people
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
per 1,000 people
%
2000–07b
2007
2008
2008
97 .. 2 .. 43 .. .. .. 99 99 .. .. 100 .. 16 35 94 .. .. .. 6 .. .. .. .. .. 98 .. 6 .. .. 99 98 91 .. 92 .. 95 .. .. 31 .. m .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 88 .. 46 .. 98 98
19.2 13.3 0.3 69.8 .. 25.8 .. 74.3 58.1 42.5 .. .. 39.3 .. 10.7 3.7 88.1 96.2 9.0 .. .. .. .. .. 13.2 9.7 6.1 .. 1.7 4.5 33.1 80.2 80.6 .. 3.1 .. 9.6 .. 2.8 .. 7.6 15.3 w .. 5.6 4.5 .. 5.2 5.6 10.7 .. 5.7 3.3 .. 67.8 56.1
28.8 11.65 31.9 6.54 3.1 0.04 31.5 4.25 8.4 0.39 44.9 6.14 0.3 .. 69.6 20.73 66.0 11.18 55.7 21.11 1.1 0.00 8.6 0.87 55.4 19.75 5.8 0.51 10.2 0.11 6.9 0.07 87.7 41.12 75.9 33.68 17.3 0.05 8.8 0.05 1.2 0.02 23.9 1.41 .. .. 5.4 0.03 17.0 4.58 27.1 2.20 34.4 7.78 1.5 0.05 7.9 0.02 10.5 3.46 12.43 65.2 76.0 28.13 75.9 24.05 40.2 7.33 9.0 0.24 25.7 4.76 24.2 2.38 9.0 2.54 1.6 0.00 5.5 0.04 11.4 0.14 23.9 w 6.21 w 4.6 0.26 17.3 3.26 13.9 2.59 30.6 5.88 15.3 2.78 19.4 4.63 28.6 6.34 28.9 4.88 18.9 0.84 4.7 0.36 6.5 0.11 69.1 24.05 62.6 23.96
70 92 .. .. 9 .. .. 361 126 173 .. 30 144 26 .. 24 481 420 .. .. 2 .. .. 2 149 23 .. 9 .. 131 .. 290 193 .. .. 93 .. 10 4 5 .. 105 w .. 70 72 61 59 74 94 64 .. 68 .. 261 201
Personal Internet computersa usersa
Quality Affordability Fixed International Fixed broadband Internet broadband a Internet bandwidth Internet access subscribersa bits per tariffa second per per 100 capita people $ per month 2008
2008
9,111 573 27 1,224 237 4,506 .. 22,783 5,555 6,720 .. 71 11,008 190 322 31 49,828 29,413 102 37 2 818 .. 8 678 1,115 2,794 48 12 206 8,686 39,648 11,289 903 30 628 581 313 28 8 10 3,546 w 24 377 153 1,281 320 470 1,244 1,391 323 31 34 20,143 32,540
2008
23 14 92 40 29 9 .. 22 28 27 .. 26 29 21 29 1,877 32 32 51 .. 68 18 .. 106 13 13 .. .. 170 21 22 29 15 24 .. 31 17 .. 226 91 .. 31.4 m 102.4 29.4 31.4 26.3 36.4 21.7 22.7 34.0 23.0 21.0 100.1 29.8 30.5
Information and communications technology trade
Application Information and comSecure Goods munications Exports Internet Imports technology % of total % of total servers expenditures per million goods goods % of GDP people imports exports December 2009
21 11 1 11 1 2 0 421 79 210 0 40 192 4 0 4 858 1,118 0 0 0 10 .. 2 46 12 66 0 0 6 165 905 1,234 36 0 7 2 2 0 1 1 114 w 1 7 2 28 6 2 30 20 2 1 3 715 380
Services Exports % of total service exports
2008
2008
2008
2008
4.9 3.5 .. 5.2 10.8 .. .. 7.1 6.4 4.7 .. 10.1 4.8 4.3 .. .. 5.7 7.2 .. .. .. 6.2 .. .. .. 5.4 4.1 .. .. 5.9 4.9 6.3 7.1 4.3 .. 3.5 4.9 .. .. .. .. 6.0 w .. 5.1 5.5 4.8 5.2 5.9 4.2 4.8 5.8 4.7 8.5 6.3 5.3
5.3 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.6 2.2 .. 35.9 17.5 3.5 .. 1.6 3.2 1.8 0.0 0.1 9.5 3.5 0.6 .. 0.4 19.4 .. 0.1 0.1 5.0 2.1 .. 4.9 1.3 2.0 7.7 12.8 0.1 .. 0.0 5.6 .. 0.3 0.1 0.3 12.2 w 2.5 14.4 19.7 10.1 14.3 25.5 2.1 10.9 .. 1.2 0.9 11.7 7.0
7.5 8.9 12.5 8.0 3.4 5.4 .. 28.2 14.7 5.1 .. 8.8 7.9 4.6 2.3 3.6 10.1 6.6 2.0 .. 6.2 15.4 .. 4.2 3.4 5.6 4.7 .. 9.3 2.6 5.3 10.1 12.5 6.2 .. 11.6 8.2 .. 1.8 3.4 2.1 12.5 w 6.3 14.6 17.0 12.7 14.4 22.4 6.5 13.5 .. 5.1 7.5 12.0 8.2
15.8 6.1 1.9 .. 15.5 6.7 0.2 3.5 7.2 6.7 .. 3.2 5.8 15.5 1.2 1.4 13.6 .. 4.5 21.6 2.0 .. .. .. .. 2.4 2.1 .. 7.2 3.3 .. 8.0 4.0 9.0 .. 7.4 .. 7.6 18.9 8.1 .. 8.3 w .. 12.6 18.6 5.2 12.4 5.6 5.4 4.8 .. 47.3 .. 7.3 9.1
a. Data are from the International Telecommunication Union’s (ITU) World Telecommunication Development Report database. Please cite the ITU for third-party use of these data. b. Data are for the most recent year available.
338
2010 World Development Indicators
5.12
About the data
The digital and information revolution has changed the
particularly in developing countries, where many com-
minicomputers intended primarily for shared use and
way the world learns, communicates, does business,
mercial subscribers rent out computers connected
devices such as smart phones and personal digital
and treats illnesses. New information and communi-
to the Internet or prepaid cards are used to access
assistants. • Internet users are people with access
cations technologies (ICT) offer vast opportunities for
the Internet.
to the worldwide network. • Fixed broadband Internet
progress in all walks of life in all countries—opportu-
Broadband refers to technologies that provide
subscribers are the number of broadband subscrib-
nities for economic growth, improved health, better
Internet speeds of at least 256 kilobits a second of
ers with a digital subscriber line, cable modem, or
service delivery, learning through distance education,
upstream and downstream capacity and includes digi-
other high-speed technology. • International Internet
and social and cultural advances.
tal subscriber lines, cable modems, satellite broad-
bandwidth is the contracted capacity of international
Comparable statistics on access, use, quality,
band Internet, fiber-to-home Internet access, ethernet
connections between countries for transmitting Inter-
and affordability of ICT are needed to formulate
local access networks, and wireless area networks.
net traffic. • Fixed broadband Internet access tariff
growth-enabling policies for the sector and to moni-
Bandwidth refers to the range of frequencies available
is the lowest sampled cost per 100 kilobits a second
tor and evaluate the sector’s impact on development.
for signals. The higher the bandwidth, the more infor-
per month and are calculated from low- and high-speed
Although basic access data are available for many
mation that can be transmitted at one time. Reporting
monthly service charges. Monthly charges do not
countries, in most developing countries little is known
countries may have different definitions of broadband,
include installation fees or modem rentals. • Secure
about who uses ICT; what they are used for (school,
so data are not strictly comparable.
Internet servers are servers using encryption tech-
work, business, research, government); and how they
The number of secure Internet servers, from the
nology in Internet transactions. • Information and
affect people and businesses. The global Partner-
Netcraft Secure Server Survey, indicates how many
communications technology expenditures include
ship on Measuring ICT for Development is helping to
companies conduct encrypted transactions over the
computer hardware (computers, storage devices,
set standards, harmonize information and commu-
Internet. The survey examines the use of encrypted
printers, and other peripherals); computer software
nications technology statistics, and build statistical
transactions through extensive automated explora-
(operating systems, programming tools, utilities, appli-
capacity in developing countries. For more informa-
tion, tallying the number of Web sites using a secure
cations, and internal software development); computer
tion see www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/partnership/.
socket layer (SSL). The country of origin of about a
services (information technology consulting, computer
Data on daily newspapers in circulation are from
third of the 1.2 million distinct valid third-party cer-
and network systems integration, Web hosting, data
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
tifi cates is unknown. Some countries, such as the
processing services, and other services); and com-
Organization (UNESCO) Institute for Statistics surveys
Republic of Korea, use application layers to establish
munications services (voice and data communications
on circulation, online newspapers, journalists, com-
the encryption channel, which is SSL equivalent.
services) and wired and wireless communications
munity newspapers, and news agencies.
According to the World Information Technology
equipment. • Information and communication tech-
Estimates of households with television are derived
and Services Alliance’s (WITSA) Digital Planet 2009,
nology goods exports and imports include telecom-
from household surveys. Some countries report only
the global marketplace for information and commu-
munications, audio and video, computer and related
the number of households with a color television set,
nications technologies was estimated to be about
equipment; electronic components; and other informa-
and so the true number may be higher than reported.
$3.4 trillion in 2009 and to rise to about $3.6 trillion
tion and communication technology goods. Software is
Estimates of personal computers are from an
in 2010. The data on information and communica-
excluded. • Information and communication technol-
annual International Telecommunication Union (ITU)
tions technology expenditures cover the world’s 75
ogy service exports include computer and communica-
questionnaire sent to member states, supplemented
largest buyers among countries and regions.
tions services (telecommunications and postal and
by other sources. Many governments lack the capac-
Information and communication technology goods
ity to survey all places where personal computers
exports and imports are defi ned by the Working
are used (homes, schools, businesses, government
Party on Indicators for the Information Society and
offices, libraries, Internet cafes) so most estimates
are reported in the Organisation for Economic Co-
Data sources
are derived from the number of personal computers
operation and Development’s Guide to Measuring the
Data on newspapers are compiled by the UNESCO
sold each year. Annual shipment data can also be mul-
Information Society (2005). Information and commu-
Institute for Statistics. Data on televisions, per-
tiplied by an estimated average useful lifespan before
nication technology service exports data are based
sonal computers, Internet users, Internet broad-
replacement to approximate the number of personal
on the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Balance of
band users and cost, and Internet bandwidth are
computers. There is no precise method for determin-
Payments Statistics Yearbook classification.
from the ITU’s World Telecommunication Develop-
ing replacement rates, but in general personal computers are replaced every three to five years.
courier services) and information services (computer data and news-related service transactions).
ment Report database. Data on secure Internet Definitions
servers are from Netcraft (www.netcraft.com/)
Data on Internet users and related indicators
• Daily newspapers are newspapers issued at least
and official government sources. Data on informa-
(broadband and bandwidth) are based on nationally
four times a week that report mainly on events in the
tion and communication technology goods trade
reported data to the ITU. Some countries derive these
24-hour period before going to press. The indicator is
are from the United Nations Statistics Division’s
data from surveys, but since survey questions and
average circulation (or copies printed) per 1,000 peo-
Commodity Trade (Comtrade) database. Data on
definitions differ, the estimates may not be strictly
ple. • Households with television are the percentage
information and communication technology expen-
comparable. Countries without surveys generally
of households with a television set. • Personal com-
ditures are from WITSA’s Digital Planet 2009 and
derive their estimates by multiplying subscriber
puters are self-contained computers designed for use
Global Insight, Inc. Data on information and com-
counts reported by Internet service providers by a
by a single individual, including laptops and notebooks
munication technology service exports are from the
multiplier. This method may undercount actual users,
and excluding terminals connected to mainframe and
IMF’s Balance of Payments Statistics database.
2010 World Development Indicators
339
STATES AND MARKETS
The information age
5.13
Science and technology Researchers Technicians Scientific Expenditures in R&D in R&D and for R&D technical journal articles
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
340
per million people
per million people
2000–07d
2000–07d
.. .. 170 .. 980 .. 4,231 3,774 .. .. .. 3,413 .. 120 197 .. 629 1,466 .. .. 17 .. 4,157 .. .. 833 1,071 2,650 151 .. 34 122 66 1,384 .. 2,715 5,431 .. 69 617 49 .. 2,748 21 7,382 3,440 .. .. .. 3,453 .. 1,873 25 .. .. .. ..
.. .. 35 .. 196 .. 993 1,792 .. .. .. 1,445 .. .. 71 .. .. 500 .. .. 13 .. 1,595 .. .. 302 .. 459 .. .. 37 .. .. 643 .. 1,503 2,006 .. 20 378 .. .. 599 12 .. 1,768 .. .. .. 1,200 .. 764 12 .. .. .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
High-technology exports
Royalty and license fees
% of GDP
$ millions
% of manufactured exports
2005
2000–07d
2008
2008
2008
2008
.. .. 350 .. 3,058 180 15,957 4,566 116 193 490 6,841 .. .. .. .. 9,889 764 .. .. .. 131 25,836 .. .. 1,559 41,596 .. 400 .. .. 105 .. 953 261 3,169 5,040 .. .. 1,658 .. .. 439 88 4,811 30,309 .. .. 145 44,145 81 4,291 .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. 0.07 .. 0.51 0.21 2.17 2.52 0.18 .. 0.97 1.91 .. 0.28 0.03 0.38 1.02 0.48 0.11 .. 0.05 .. 2.03 .. .. 0.67 1.49 0.81 0.18 0.48 .. 0.37 .. 0.93 0.44 1.59 2.57 .. 0.15 0.23 .. .. 1.12 0.17 3.47 2.10 .. .. 0.18 2.55 .. 0.50 0.05 .. .. .. 0.04
.. 7 7 .. 1,949 11 4,154 15,230 6 97 405 29,163 0 17 125 21 10,572 755 .. 1 .. 3 29,388 .. .. 515 381,345 2,164 445 .. .. 2,378 180 898 248 18,200 11,850 315 71 85 146 .. 950 8 16,664 93,209 71 0 21 162,421 6 1,380 150 0 .. .. 8
.. 4 1 .. 9 2 12 11 1 1 2 8 0 4 4 1 12 7 .. 8 .. 3 14 .. .. 6 29 22 4 .. .. 39 16 9 35 14 16 8 5 1 4 .. 10 6 21 20 32 14 3 14 1 10 4 0 .. .. 1
.. 39 .. 12 94 .. 703 905 0 0 5 1,188 0 2 5 1 465 11 .. 0 1 0 3,432 .. .. 64 571 358 30 .. .. 1 0 44 .. 55 .. 0 0 122 1 .. 27 0 1,495 10,269 .. .. 6 8,792 0 44 12 0 .. .. ..
.. 12 .. 0 1,274 .. 3,026 1,598 5 19 75 2,133 2 18 11 13 2,697 95 .. .. 6 17 8,766 .. .. 526 10,319 1,504 263 .. .. 62 22 257 .. 726 .. 33 47 322 34 .. 50 2 2,047 4,916 .. .. 8 11,958 .. 713 80 0 .. 0 18
Patent applications fileda,b
$ millions
Trademark applications fileda,c
Receipts
Payments
Residents
Nonresidents
Total
2008
2008
2008
.. .. 84 .. .. 226 2,718 2,298 222 29 1,188 575 .. .. 59 .. 3,810 249 .. .. .. .. 5,061 .. .. 291 194,579 173 121 .. .. .. .. 330 69 712 1,634 .. .. 516 .. .. 62 12 1,799 14,743 .. 0 221 49,240 .. 803 5 .. .. .. ..
.. .. 765 .. .. 4 24,122 329 5 270 337 133 .. .. 12 .. 20,264 22 .. .. .. .. 37,028 .. .. 2,924 95,259 13,489 1,860 .. .. .. .. 71 189 142 195 .. 794 1,589 .. .. 10 25 147 1,962 .. 0 26 13,177 .. 3,675 306 .. .. .. ..
.. 4,596 2,489 .. 73,717 4,735 59,370 5,216 5,609 8,232 11,454 28,897e .. 6,081 5,538 920 119,841 10,853 .. .. 2,866 .. 45,619 .. .. 44,320 669,088 24,230 23,994 .. .. 11,754 .. 10,324 3,041 13,106 8,015 5,208 12,605 3,340 .. .. 4,652 719 7,328 79,206 .. 327 5,441 80,865 61 10,598 11,003 .. 6 .. 7,403
Researchers Technicians Scientific Expenditures in R&D in R&D and for R&D technical journal articles
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
per million people
per million people
2000–07d
2000–07d
1,733 137 205 706 .. 2,849 .. 1,499 .. 5,573 .. .. .. .. 4,627 .. 166 .. 16 1,861 .. 10 .. .. 2,529 521 50 .. 372 42 .. .. 460 724 .. 647 .. 18 .. 59 2,680 4,365 .. 8 .. 5,247 .. 152 62 .. 71 .. 81 1,610 2,630 .. ..
512 86 .. .. .. 734 .. .. .. 589 .. .. .. .. 720 .. 33 .. .. 496 .. 11 .. .. 530 75 15 .. 44 13 .. .. 257 116 .. 48 .. 137 .. 137 1,677 894 .. 10 .. .. .. 64 20 .. .. .. 10 226 389 .. ..
High-technology exports
Royalty and license fees
% of GDP
$ millions
% of manufactured exports
2005
2000–07d
2008
2008
2008
2008
2,614 14,608 205 2,635 .. 2,120 6,309 24,645 .. 55,471 275 96 226 .. 16,396 .. 233 .. .. 134 234 .. .. .. 406 .. .. .. 615 .. .. .. 3,902 89 .. 443 .. .. .. .. 13,885 2,983 .. .. 362 3,644 111 492 .. .. .. 133 178 6,844 2,910 .. ..
0.97 0.80 0.05 0.67 .. 1.34 4.74 1.14 0.07 3.45 0.34 0.21 .. .. 3.47 .. 0.09 0.25 0.04 0.63 .. 0.06 .. .. 0.83 0.21 0.14 .. 0.64 .. .. 0.38 0.50 0.55 0.23 0.64 0.50 0.16 .. .. 1.75 1.26 0.05 .. .. 1.67 .. 0.67 0.25 .. 0.09 0.15 0.12 0.57 1.19 .. ..
20,990 6,497 5,625 375 0 28,606 9,239 29,814 6 123,733 41 2,250 78 .. 110,633 .. 9 8 .. 419 4 .. .. .. 1,493 21 7 2 42,764 3 .. 99 41,201 13 7 858 6 .. 21 .. 67,056 616 5 2 15 5,729 18 275 0 .. 32 92 26,875 7,172 3,355 .. 0
24 6 11 6 0 26 16 7 0 18 1 22 5 .. 33 .. 0 2 .. 7 0 .. .. .. 11 1 1 2 40 3 .. 7 19 4 8 9 4 .. 1 .. 22 9 4 8 0 20 1 2 0 .. 9 2 66 5 8 .. 0
803 148 27 .. 0 1,321 804 864 17 25,701 0 .. 33 .. 2,403 .. 0 3 .. 13 .. 20 .. .. 1 6 .. .. 199 0 .. 0 440 4 .. 0 0 .. .. .. 4,870 178 0 0 .. 642 .. 38 0 .. 282 3 5 204 80 .. ..
2,007 1,578 1,328 .. 204 30,082 1,107 1,811 48 18,312 0 87 28 .. 5,543 .. 0 15 .. 36 .. .. .. 0 34 25 .. .. 1,268 1 .. 6 503 15 .. 15 2 .. 15 .. 3,529 573 .. 0 178 712 .. 117 38 .. 2 140 382 1,770 496 .. ..
5.13
Patent applications fileda,b
$ millions
Trademark applications fileda,c
Receipts
Payments
Residents
Nonresidents
Total
2008
2008
2008
89 23,626 4,324 .. .. 76 6,214 870 132 60,892 507 162 33 76 43,518 .. .. 3 .. 37 .. .. .. .. 18 406 63 .. 4,485 .. .. .. 15,896 22 110 834 22 .. .. .. 311 4,468 .. .. .. 5,431 .. 1,647 371 45 .. 1,504 3,095 290 24 .. ..
7,903 103,419 52,649 3,468 .. 5,183 13,801 6,181 1,708 119,448 .. 8,407 1,729 2,007 137,461 .. .. 3,966 .. 5,101 .. 910 781 .. 6,332 4,890 1,318 804 26,027 .. .. .. 84,287 6,643 1,936 4,367 1,240 .. 1,139 1,132 .. 17,582 5,975 .. .. 16,324 1,847 14,872 10,716 612 .. 24,825 15,834 20,609 20,325 .. ..
683 5,314 282 .. .. 931 1,528 9,255 21 330,110 59 11 38 6,846 127,114 .. .. 135 .. 114 .. .. .. .. 87 34 14 .. 818 .. .. .. 685 273 103 177 18 .. .. .. 2,421 1,256 .. .. .. 1,223 .. 91 .. 1 .. 31 216 2,488 381 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
STATES AND MARKETS
Science and technology
341
5.13
Science and technology Researchers Technicians Scientific Expenditures in R&D in R&D and for R&D technical journal articles
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
per million people
per million people
2000–07d
2000–07d
877 3,305 .. .. 276 1,190 .. 6,088 2,290 3,109 .. 382 2,784 93 .. .. 5,215 3,436 .. .. .. 311 .. 34 .. 1,588 680 .. .. 1,458 .. 2,881 4,663 373 .. .. 115 .. .. .. .. 1,270 w .. 613 479 1,252 595 1,071 2,013 495 .. 129 .. 3,948 2,872
203 516 .. .. .. 298 .. 529 415 1,537 .. 130 1,029 65 .. .. .. 2,317 .. .. .. 160 .. 17 .. 43 102 .. .. 325 .. 879 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. 336 .. .. 86 .. .. 1,313
2005
887 14,412 .. 575 83 849 .. 3,609 919 1,035 .. 2,392 18,336 136 .. .. 10,012 8,749 77 .. 107 1,249 .. .. .. 571 7,815 .. 93 2,105 229 45,572 205,320 204 157 534 221 .. .. .. .. 708,086 s .. 123,584 67,251 56,333 124,833 44,064 35,489 20,045 6,243 15,429 .. 583,253 158,985
High-technology exports
% of GDP
$ millions
% of manufactured exports
2000–07d
2008
2008
0.54 2,744 1.12 5,107 .. 1 0.05 121 0.09 46 0.34 .. .. .. 2.61 120,345 0.46 3,171 1.48 1,558 .. .. 0.96 2,011 1.28 9,916 0.17 101 0.29 0 .. 0 3.68 21,778 2.93 41,111 .. 51 0.06 .. .. 5 0.25 32,370 .. .. .. 0 0.10 36 1.02 674 0.71 1,807 .. .. 0.41 5 0.87 1,519 .. 207 1.84 61,767 2.67 231,126 0.36 72 .. .. .. 122 0.19 2,376 .. .. .. 0 0.03 8 .. 48 2.21 w 1,856,930 s .. .. 0.96 540,759 1.23 339,779 0.81 124,869 0.96 467,925 1.49 .. 0.83 23,854 0.66 58,093 0.48 1,528 0.79 .. .. 3,260 2.47 1,313,457 2.04 454,048
Royalty and license fees
Patent applications fileda,b
$ millions
Trademark applications fileda,c
Receipts
Payments
Residents
Nonresidents
Total
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
995 27,712 .. 128 .. 386 .. 793 167 301 .. .. 3,632 201 3 .. 2,527 1,594 124 26 .. 802 .. .. .. .. 2,221 .. 6 2,825 .. 16,523 231,588 33 262 .. .. .. 11 .. .. 988,514 s .. 175,013 134,138 40,875 181,806 196,416 38,406 .. .. 5,580 .. 796,585 77,364
36 14,137 .. 642 .. 237 .. 8,899 75 6 .. 5,781 252 264 13 .. 398 439 133 .. .. 5,939 .. .. 551 .. 176 .. 1 2,872 .. 6,856 224,733 706 186 .. .. .. 24 .. .. 633,066 s .. 192,993 130,987 62,006 193,656 108,823 18,614 .. .. 25,831 .. 427,519 20,234
15,578 57,165 238 .. .. 9,479 1,017 18,263 7,267 5,192 .. 29,833 55,586 5,916 1,075 1,004 14,998 31,514 2,757 2,284 556 35,422 .. .. .. .. 76,333 2,819 .. 33,019 .. 35,705 294,070 11,501 5,007 .. 4,971 .. 4,375 1,159 .. 2,963,306 s .. 1,750,931 1,096,947 558,047 1,815,399 755,285 317,547 440,687 16,421 132,894 .. 1,223,790 316,397
7 240 346 7 453 4,595 7 62 1 1 0 0 5 1 8 .. 27 192 .. .. 1 51 839 9,148 5 164 182 6 41 250 .. .. .. 5 54 1,676 5 801 3,251 2 0 0 0 .. 0 0 0 121 16 4,938 2,005 23 .. .. 1 0 25 .. 1 0 1 0 0 25 101 2,559 .. .. .. 0 0 5 1 .. .. 5 32 12 2 .. 729 .. .. .. 1 3 2 3 72 754 3 .. .. 19 13,904 10,615 27 91,600 26,615 4 0 8 .. .. .. 4 0 349 9 .. .. .. 0 1 0 9 –5 2 0 1 3 .. .. 17 w 181,285 s 187,563 s 6 111 73 16 3,751 34,266 22 1,420 17,845 9 2,331 16,421 16 3,862 34,339 28 898 15,864 6 1,090 8,805 12 1,453 5,669 4 41 345 5 196 1,714 3 184 1,942 18 177,423 153,224 14 31,349 63,603
a. Original information was provided by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The International Bureau of WIPO assumes no responsibility with respect to the transformation of these data. b. Excludes applications filed under the auspices of the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (11 by residents, 424 by nonresidents), the European Patent Office (146,150 by nonresidents), and the Eurasian Patent Organization (3,066 by nonresidents). c. Excludes applications filed under the auspices of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (87,640). d. Data are for the most recent year available. e. Includes Luxembourg and the Netherlands.
342
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
5.13
STATES AND MARKETS
Science and technology Definitions
Science and technology is too broad and complex to
A patent is an exclusive right granted for a specified
• Researchers in R&D are professionals engaged in
quantify with a single set of indicators, but those in the
period (generally 20 years) for a new way of doing
conceiving of or creating new knowledge, products,
table shed light on countries’ technology base. Tech-
something or a new technical solution to a problem—
processes, methods, and systems and in managing the
nological innovation, often fueled by government-led
an invention. The invention must be of practical use
projects concerned. Postgraduate doctoral students
research and development (R&D), has been the driving
and display a characteristic unknown in the existing
(ISCED97 level 6) engaged in R&D are considered
force for industrial growth. The best opportunities to
body of knowledge in its field.
researchers. • Technicians in R&D and equivalent
improve living standards come from science and tech-
Most countries have systems to protect patentable
staff are people whose main tasks require technical
nology. Countries able to access, generate, and apply
inventions. The Patent Cooperation Treaty provides a
knowledge and experience in engineering, physical and
scientific knowledge have a competitive edge. And
two-phase system for filing patent applications. An appli-
life sciences (technicians), and social sciences and
high-quality scientific input improves public policy.
cant files an international application and designates
humanities (equivalent staff). They engage in R&D by
The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cul-
the countries in which protection is sought (all eligible
performing scientific and technical tasks involving the
tural Organization (UNESCO) Institute for Statistics col-
countries are automatically designated in every applica-
application of concepts and operational methods, nor-
lects data on researchers, technicians, and expenditure
tion under the treaty). The application is searched and
mally under researcher supervision. • Scientific and
on R&D through surveys and from other international
published, and, optionally, an international preliminary
technical journal articles are published articles in
sources. R&D covers basic research, applied research,
examination is conducted. In the national (or regional)
physics, biology, chemistry, mathematics, clinical med-
and experimental development. Data on researchers
phase the applicant requests national processing of the
icine, biomedical research, engineering and technol-
and technicians are calculated as full-time equivalents.
application and initiates the national search and granting
ogy, and earth and space sciences. • Expenditures for
Scientific and technical article counts are from jour-
procedure. International applications under the treaty
R&D are current and capital expenditures on creative
nals classified by the Institute for Scientific Informa-
provide for a national patent grant only—there is no inter-
work undertaken to increase the stock of knowledge,
tion’s Science Citation Index (SCI) and Social Sciences
national patent. The national filing represents the appli-
including on humanity, culture, and society, and the
Citation Index (SSCI). Counts are based on fractional
cant’s seeking of patent protection for a given territory,
use of knowledge to devise new applications. • High-
assignments; articles with authors from different
whereas international filings, while representing a legal
technology exports are products with high R&D inten-
countries are allocated proportionally to each country
right, do not accurately reflect where patent protection
sity, such as in aerospace, computers, pharmaceuti-
(see Definitions for fields covered). The SCI and SSCI
is sought. Resident filings are those from residents of
cals, scientific instruments, and electrical machinery.
databases cover the core set of scientific journals but
the country or region concerned. Nonresident filings are
• Royalty and license fees are payments and receipts
may exclude some of local importance and may reflect
from outside applicants. For regional offices such as the
between residents and nonresidents for authorized
some bias toward English-language journals.
European Patent Office, applications from residents of
use of intangible, nonproduced, nonfinancial assets
R&D expenditures include all expenditures for R&D
any member state of the regional patent convention are
and proprietary rights (such as patents, copyrights,
performed within a country, including capital costs
considered a resident filing. Some offices (notably the
trademarks, and industrial processes) and for the use,
and current costs (wages and associated costs of
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office) use the residence of
through licensing, of produced originals of prototypes
researchers, technicians, and supporting staff and
the inventor rather than the applicant to classify filings.
(such as films and manuscripts). • Patent applications
other current costs, including noncapital purchases
A trademark is a distinctive sign identifying goods or
filed are worldwide patent applications filed through
of materials, supplies, and R&D equipment such as
services as produced or provided by a specific person or
the Patent Cooperation Treaty procedure or with a
utilities, reference materials, subscriptions to librar-
enterprise. A trademark protects the owner of the mark
national patent office. • Trademark applications filed
ies and scientific societies, and lab materials).
by ensuring exclusive right to use it to identify goods or
are annual applications to register a trademark with a
The method for determining high- technology exports
services or to authorize another to use it. The period
national or regional IP office.
was developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-
of protection varies, but a trademark can be renewed
operation and Development in collaboration with Euro-
indefinitely for an additional fee. Detailed components
stat. It takes a “product approach” (as distinguished
of trademark filings, available on the World Develop-
Data on R&D are provided by the UNESCO Insti-
from a “sectoral approach”) based on R&D intensity
ment Indicators CD-ROM and WDI Online, include appli-
tute for Statistics. Data on scientific and technical
(R&D expenditure divided by total sales) for groups of
cations filed by direct residents (domestic applicants
journal articles are from the U.S. National Science
products from Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands,
filing directly at a given national intellectual property
Board’s Science and Engineering Indicators 2008.
Sweden, and the United States. Because industrial
[IP] office); direct nonresident (foreign applicants filing
Data on high-technology exports are from the
sectors specializing in a few high-technology prod-
directly at a given national IP office); aggregate direct
United Nations Statistics Division’s Commodity
ucts may also produce low-technology products, the
(applicants not identified as direct resident or direct
Trade (Comtrade) database. Data on royalty and
product approach is more appropriate for analyzing
nonresident by the national office); and Madrid (interna-
license fees are from the International Monetary
international trade. This method takes only R&D inten-
tional applications filed via the World Intellectual Prop-
Fund’s Balance of Payments Statistics Yearbook.
sity into account, but other characteristics of high
erty Organization (WIPO)–administered Madrid System
Data on patents and trademarks are from the
technology are also important, such as know-how,
to the national or regional IP office). Data are based on
World Intellectual Property Organization’s WIPO Pat-
scientific personnel, and technology embodied in pat-
information supplied to WIPO by IP offices in annual sur-
ent Report: Statistics on Worldwide Patent Activity
ents. Considering these characteristics would yield a
veys, supplemented by data in national IP office reports.
(2009) and www.wipo.int.
different list (see Hatzichronoglou 1997).
Data may be missing for some offices or periods.
Data sources
2010 World Development Indicators
343 Text figures, tables, and boxes
GLOBAL LINKS
Introduction
T
he Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) recognize that expanding international trade can help developing economies achieve the MDGs by fostering economic growth and increasing job opportunities. At the 2000 Millennium Summit developed countries agreed to increase market access for developing countries by lowering tariffs and granting tariff-free access to all goods (except weapons). They also agreed to increase aid for promoting trade and to decrease domestic agricultural subsidies that harm imports from developing economies. The world today is a more integrated place than in 1990—the MDGs benchmark year. World exports of goods and services nearly tripled between 1990 and 2007—a 7 percent annual average growth rate—and foreign direct investment increased ninefold between 1990 and 2008. More people are moving abroad (temporarily or permanently), more investors are buying foreign stocks, and more companies are expanding to overseas markets. And developing economies’ trade has expanded from 17.3 percent of world exports and 17.0 percent of world imports in 1990 to 28.1 percent of exports and 25.9 percent of imports in 2007. Though all economies may benefit from international integration, the benefits may not be shared equally among them. Successful integration depends partly on geography and natural resources: economies with substantial coastal areas or located near large economic centers may increase their share of the global market much faster than landlocked or isolated economies. And economies with abundant natural resources and cheap labor may attract foreign investors and grow faster than economies with fewer resources. The question remains: can trade expansion and economic integration promote human development? Trade expansion provides developing economies with a larger market in which to sell goods and services, boosting production. But trade liberalization can also harm domestic industries by exposing them to fierce international competition. Trade expansion can promote rapid economic growth, potentially furthering human development. But greater engagement with international markets is sometimes accompanied by increased income inequality. Developing economies must consider how integration affects the most vulnerable segments of the population. Increased trade can accelerate progress toward the MDGs only if it both fosters economic growth and improves living standards for the poorest and most vulnerable.
6
Four MDG indicators track developed economies’ commitments to increase market access for developing economies and support their programs to promote trade: the proportion of total developed country imports (by value and excluding arms) admitted free of duty from developing economies and least developed countries; average tariffs imposed by developed economies on agricultural products, textiles, and clothing from developing economies; agricultural support in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) economies as a percentage of their gross domestic product (GDP); and the share of official development assistance provided to build trade capacity. But these indicators are not enough to describe the many instruments of trade policy, the changing patterns of trade, and their impact on human development. This introduction looks beyond the MDG indicators to the characteristics of economies and their trade policies that may ultimately affect their success in achieving the MDGs.
Trade expansion and development How does trade expansion affect human development and poverty? In theory, trade expansion should contribute directly to poverty reduction by increasing
2010 World Development Indicators
345
the returns on the most abundant factor of production, which in developing economies tends to be low-skilled labor. But empirical studies disagree on the causal relationship between trade expansion and poverty reduction. Some studies find an increase in inequality after trade liberalization (World Bank and others 2005; UNDP 2005; Kremer and Maskin 2006). Others find that trade has a beneficial effect on poverty reduction—but may not be the most important factor (Billmeier and Nannicini 2007). Despite the lack of agreement on the effects of trade expansion on poverty, economic theory and empirical evidence offer no reason to restrict trade. An increase in trade, especially exports, is associated with economic growth (figure 6a). This simple association between GDP growth and export growth overlooks differences between countries and other factors that affect economic growth. For example, small island economies may have to be more open in order to generate economic growth, while economies with sufficient domestic markets may require less export expansion to achieve economic growth. Analysis in World Development Indicators 2007 showed that for countries starting from similar positions, countries that opened their economy (as measured by the ratio of imports and exports of goods and services to GDP) less rapidly recorded much lower per capita GDP growth. In recent years many economies, especially in East Asia, experienced rapid growth in GDP and exports. But did export expansion trigger this economic growth or are increasing exports an outcome of growth? Although economists do not agree on causality, most empirical evidence indicates that greater openness to trade is an important element explaining growth performance—and has been a central feature Growth of exports and growth of GDP go hand in hand
6a
Average annual growth of GDP, 2000–08 (percent) 20
of successful economic development (OECD 2009b; Commission on Growth and Development 2008). Economies benefit from increased international trade because it allows them to produce commodities for which they have a comparative advantage, sell those goods in a larger world market, and import goods and services that are more costly to produce domestically. Export expansion increases output, generates jobs, and raises household income, which may in turn improve health and other living conditions. Trade expansion can also raise education standards by giving people greater incentives to improve their skills. Foreign direct investors that are initially attracted by developing economies’ cheap and abundant labor supply may also introduce new technology and know-how, and foreign competition may spur productivity and efficiency gains. Exports generate the foreign exchange needed to finance critical imports and may increase government revenue through taxes that can be used to finance social protection programs. Economies with small domestic markets likely have lower welfare and growth rates if they isolate themselves from the international movement of goods, factors, people, and ideas. But trade liberalization brings additional challenges for developing economies in managing their external accounts. Economies that import more than they export are vulnerable to trade imbalance. Eighty of 111 developing economies for which data are available had a negative trade balance in 2008. For 67 of them the trade balance to GDP ratio has deteriorated since 1990. The ratio has worsened by more than 5 percentage points for 44 economies and by more than 10 percentage points for 26 economies. Dependence on imports may put poor countries at risk for currency crises, especially if they have limited access to foreign capital. Many developing economies are sensitive to opening their economies to trade because they worry that liberalization might merely increase cheap imports and harm local businesses instead of creating new export enterprises.
10
Developing economies have increased their share of world trade
0
–10 –10
0 10 20 Average annual growth of exports of goods and services, 2000–08 (percent)
Source: World Development Indicators data files.
346
2010 World Development Indicators
30
Developing economies have become more open, as measured by the ratio of trade (imports plus exports) to GDP, which rose from 34 percent in 1990 to 62 percent in 2008. Export revenues, constituting 30 percent of
GLOBAL LINKS
developing economies’ outputs in 2008 (up from 18 percent in 1990), are especially important for low-income economies (figure 6b). Developing economies increased their share of world trade from 16 percent of merchandise exports in 1990 to 33 percent in 2008 and from 12 percent of services exports in 1990 to 21 percent in 2008 (figure 6c). But the benefits were not shared equally. Low-income economies accounted for only 1 percent of world merchandise exports and less than 1 percent of world service exports in 2008.
economies cannot match. Under the MDG framework, OECD members promised to lower subsidies to agricultural producers, exporters, and consumers. Total agricultural supports as a share of GDP have fallen for most OECD members, but in nominal dollar terms support actually increased 3.2 percent between 2007 and 2008, to $376 billion. In the last decade some developing economies, especially the least developed countries, became net food importers. In the mid-1970s 6b
Export revenues are increasingly larger portions of low-income economies’ GDP
Low-income exporters specialize in labor-intensive goods Export-led growth can improve human development outcomes and reduce poverty if it fosters employment in labor-intensive sectors where the poor have a stake. As the share of agriculture and labor-intensive manufacturing —such as textiles, clothing, and footwear—in world exports has fallen, both developing and high-income economies have adjusted by moving to capital-intensive manufacturing. But lowincome economies, following their comparative advantage, still specialize in labor-intensive exports (figure 6d), which face higher tariffs than do other products (figure 6e). Transitioning from labor-intensive exports to capital-intensive exports may be difficult. Ideally, increased trade should mean more jobs, lower unemployment, and higher wages. But trade liberalization has often failed to improve employment because new export industries have been capital- intensive manufactures, unable to create suffi cient employment to absorb all of the workers transitioning from the agriculture sector. The poorest of the world’s population live in rural areas and work in agriculture or fisheries. Boosting agricultural exports could increase agricultural employment and wages, thereby reducing poverty. Most world trade in agriculture occurs between high-income economies, with low-income economies providing only about 2 percent of global agricultural exports (figure 6f). Developing economies have limited representation in global agricultural markets partly because their exports face higher tariffs from both highincome and developing economy partners. High-income economies also provide subsidies to their farmers, enabling them to sell agricultural products at very low prices that developing
Share of GDP (percent) 50 Low-income economies
40
China
Middle-income economies (excluding China and India)
30
High-income economies India
20 10 0 1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
Source: World Development Indicators data files.
Developing economies’ share in world exports has increased, especially for large middle-income economies
6c
Low-income economies China India Middle-income economies (excluding China and India)
Share of world exports (percent) 40 30 20 10 0 1990
2000 2005 Exports of goods
2008
1990
2000 2005 Exports of services
2008
Source: World Bank staff estimates, based on data from International Monetary Fund’s Balance of Payments database.
6d
Low-income economies specialize in labor-intensive exports Agricultural products Footwear and leather
Share of group nonoil merchandise exports (percent) 40
Clothing Textiles
60 40 20 0 1990
2007
Least developed
1990 2007 Low income
1990 2007 Lower middle income
1990 2007 Upper middle income
1990 2007 High income
Source: World Bank staff estimates, based on data from the United Nations Statistics Division’s Comtrade database.
2010 World Development Indicators
347
6e
Labor-intensive products face higher tariffs than other commodities Simple applied tariff rates (percent)
1998
2008
10 8 6 4
18 of 28 least developed countries were net food exporters; by the mid-1990s 7 of them had become net food importers; and by the mid-2000s 10 of them had become net food importers. Vulnerable to increasing food prices, net food importers can suffer food insecurity and malnutrition.
Trade diversification has improved—but unevenly
2 0 Food
Agricultural raw materials
Fuels
Ores and Machinery Textiles nonferrous and and clothing metals transport equipment
Food
On imports from low-income economies
Agricultural raw materials
Fuels
Ores and Machinery Textiles nonferrous and and clothing metals transport equipment
On imports from middle-income economies
Source: World Bank staff estimates, based on data from the United Nations Statistics Division’s Comtrade database and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development’s Trade Analysis and Information System database.
6f
Low-income economies have a small share in the global agricultural market
From low-income economies From lower middle-income economies From upper middle-income economies
Share of world exports (percent) 75
50
25
0 1990 2007
1990 2007
1990 2007
1990 2007
1990 2007
1990 2007
Agricultural products
Manufactures
Textiles
Fuels
Clothing
Footwear and leather
Source: World Bank staff estimates, based on data from the United Nations Statistics Division’s Comtrade database.
6g
Developing economies are trading more with other developing economies Low-income economies Share of exports (percent) 100 Exports to high-income economies
75 50 Exports to developing economies within region
25
Exports to developing economies outside region
0 1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
Middle-income economies 100 Exports to high-income economies
75 50 25
Exports to developing economies within region Exports to developing economies outside region
0 1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
Source: World Bank staff estimates, based on data from the International Monetary Fund Direction of Trade database.
348
2010 World Development Indicators
Trade diversifi cation—in both partners and products—affects developing economies’ ability to cope with external shocks such as commodity price changes and demand fluctuations. Compared with two decades ago, developing economies are trading more with other developing economies, especially with economies in the same region (figure 6g). Developing economies’ exports to other developing economies increased from 16 percent of merchandise exports in 1990 to 31 percent in 2008. Expansion of East Asia and Pacific and SubSaharan African economies’ trade with other developing economies has been remarkable. East Asia and Pacific’s exports to other developing economies rose from 13 percent of the region’s total merchandise exports in 1990 to 29 percent in 2008. Sub-Saharan Africa’s exports to other developing economies rose from 12 percent in 1990 to 37 percent in 2008. Still, more than 60 percent of developing economies’ merchandise exports in 2008 were directed to high-income economies. The economic crisis that began in 2008 lowered developed economies’ demand for imports, hurting the export revenues of developing economies that depended on high-income markets. Some economies, especially the poorest, depend on just a few partner economies. For example, more than 95 percent of the merchandise exports from Chad, Guinea-Bissau, and Niger in 2008 were directed to their five largest trading partners. Many developing economies have improved their product diversification, but some remain dependent on only a few products. The top-five export commodities (which differ by country) made up around 75 percent of Sub-Saharan African economies’ merchandise exports. And for some developing economies the top-fi ve share exceeds 90 percent of total merchandise exports (figure 6h). On average, the share of the top-five export commodities in total exports tends to be higher for low-income economies
GLOBAL LINKS
(71 percent) than for middle-income (59 percent) and high-income (50 percent) economies.
For some developing economies only five products make up more than 90 percent of total merchandise exports Nigeria
Developed economies have lowered trade barriers, but not enough Trade barriers encompass tariffs, quotas, antidumping duties, export subsidies, monopolistic measures, and technical regulations. Measuring overall trade restrictiveness involves aggregating these different forms of trade barriers across goods with different economic importance. The World Bank’s Tariff Trade Restrictiveness Index (TTRI) and Overall Trade Restrictiveness Index (OTRI) measure the impact of a country’s trade policy on its imports. The TTRI is the estimated uniform tariff equivalent to the effectively applied tariffs currently imposed on various import products. The OTRI is the uniform tariff equivalent to current tariff and nontariff barriers to imports. A comparison of the TTRI and the OTRI implies that nontariff barriers are much higher than tariffs (figure 6i). On average, low-income economies impose higher tariffs and nontariff barriers than do other income groups to protect domestic production and raise revenue through taxes on imports. Although the average tariff and nontariff barriers imposed by high-income economies are low, their restrictions on agricultural products tend to be high. Because most of the world’s poor earn their living through agriculture and other labor-intensive activities, substantial trade restrictions on these commodities block market access by the poor. Because high-income economies have the largest consumer markets, their trade policies have the most impact on developing economies’ exports. Exports from most economies face tariff and nontariff barriers in other economies. But low-income economies tend to face higher overall restrictions, especially for agricultural products (figure 6j). Market access by developing economies may also be affected by strict rules of origin that restrict preferential treatment of commodities not wholly produced in the exporting country. As tariffs are the most widely known trade barrier, the MDG framework monitors the average tariffs imposed by OECD members on imports from developing economies. When examined in isolation, this indicator appears to show that developed economies have significantly lowered tariff barriers. But the actual situation is more complex. Averaging tariff rates
6h
Comoros Maldives Algeria Azerbaijan Bhutan Sudan São Tomé and Príncipe Tonga Mali Venezuela, RB Seychelles Yemen, Rep. Belize Botswana Jamaica Rwanda Niger St. Kitts and Nevis Zambia Sub-Saharan Africa average Low-income economy average Middle-income economy average High-income economy average
40
50 60 70 80 90 Share of top-five export products in total merchandise exports (percent) Source: World Bank’s World Trade Indicators 2009/10 database.
100
6i
Nontariff barriers on imports may be higher than tariff barriers Percent
All imports
Agricultural imports
Nonagricultural imports
40 30 20 10 0 Low income
Lower middle income
Upper middle income
High income
Low income
Tariff Trade Restrictiveness Index, 2007
Lower middle income
Upper middle income
High income
Overall Trade Restrictiveness Index, 2007
Source: World Bank and IMF 2009b.
6j
Agricultural exports from low-income economies face the highest overall restrictions Percent
All exports
Agricultural exports
Nonagricultural exports
40 30 20 10 0 Low income
Lower middle income
Upper middle income
High income
Tariff Trade Restrictiveness Index, 2007
Low income
Lower middle income
Upper middle income
High income
Overall Trade Restrictiveness Index, 2007
Source: World Bank and IMF 2009b.
2010 World Development Indicators
349
across thousands of products can mask high tariffs on certain commodities that are particularly important to developing economies. For some OECD members the maximum applied tariff rate can be as high as 887 percent (table 6k). Among the most commonly used nontariff barriers are antidumping actions. Many highincome economies—and recently developing economies as well—initiate antidumping investigations. Whether for shiitake mushrooms entering Japan, steel entering the United 6k
Some OECD members apply very high tariffs selectively (percent)
Year
Simple average tariff rate
Australia
2008
4
2
18
5
Canada
2008
4
1
95
7
Iceland
2008
2
1
76
6
Japan
2008
3
1
50
7
Korea, Rep.
2007
8
7
887
5
New Zealand
2008
3
2
13
0
Norway
2008
1
0
555
1
United States
2008
3
1
350
4
European Union
2008
2
1
75
2
Weighted average tariff rate
Maximum tariff rate
Share of tariff lines with rate of 15 percent or more
Note: Based on effectively applied tariffs across all imports. Source: World Bank staff estimates, based on data from the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development’s Trade Analysis and Information System database.
6l
Growth of trade in services peaked in the last three years
Europe & Central Asia
South Asia
East Asia & Pacific
Sub-Saharan Africa
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa a
High income
1990–2000 2000–05 2005–08 0
10
20
Average annual nominal growth in trade in services (percent) a. Data for 2000–05 and 2005–08 are unavailable. Source: World Development Indicators data files.
350
2010 World Development Indicators
30
States, or shoes entering the European Union, antidumping initiations have a chilling effect on imports—even when they do not result in imposition of antidumping duties. Only about half of antidumping initiations are later imposed.
Trade in services has grown rapidly, but total value remains small Growth in developing economies’ trade in services averaged 21 percent a year between 2005 and 2008, surpassing their previous performances and those of high-income economies (figure 6l). Europe and Central Asia experienced the highest growth, while Sub-Saharan Africa lagged behind. But trade in services still made up less than 20 percent of world trade in 2008. The World Trade Organization recognizes four modes of trade in services: cross-border exchange of services (such as the purchase of services from a foreign supplier and outsourcing), consumption abroad (such as tourism, education, and health services), commercial presence of foreign companies in a country (involving foreign direct investments), and movement of people. Trade in services usually faces tighter regulation and higher barriers than trade in merchandise. Large middle-income economies recently increased their market shares in the outsourcing of services. For example, China is a key product development center for General Electric, Intel, Microsoft, Philips, and other large electronic firms focused on hardware and software design. India is the largest offshore provider of information technology services, technical help desks, and web support. But few developing economies have benefited from the recent expansion of outsourcing. Poorer countries tend to lack the necessary infrastructure—such as robust telecommunication networks and a reliable power supply—and skilled and educated workers. Outsourcing companies also require strong legal systems that ensure data security and privacy, which many developing economies lack. Tourism is one of the largest segments of trade in services, generating employment, providing valuable foreign currency exchange, and increasing government revenues through taxation. The tourism industry employs people with various skill sets, including cleaners, drivers, beauticians, managers, and chefs. Developing economies’ receipts from tourism
GLOBAL LINKS
have increased considerably, from $92 billion (19 percent of the world total) in 1995 to $324 billion (28 percent) in 2008 (figure 6m). East Asia and Pacific and Europe and Central Asia are the biggest benefiters. Residents of developing economies are also increasing their spending on tourism to other countries. Human migration brings many benefi ts, such as remittances, improved skills and experience, and the transfer of technology during return migration. Workers’ remittances— including employee compensation and migrant transfers—have become a large source of foreign exchange for many developing economies, increasing consumption and investment as well as the income of recipient families (figure 6n). For low-income economies with a negative trade balance, remittances provide an important source of external financing. Yet migration may have negative effects, siphoning off skilled workers and increasing inequality between remittance recipients and other families. Some economies have increased restrictions on labor services, including restrictions on the temporary cross-border movement of construction workers.
Trade facilitation is improving slowly—but lower income economies lag behind Trade facilitation may boost trade as effectively as tariff reduction (Hertel, Walmsley, and Itakura 2001; Wilson, Mann, and Otsuki 2004). The MDG framework recognizes the importance of trade facilitation by including an indicator to monitor aid for building trade capacity. Aid for trade aims to help developing economies—especially low-income ones— overcome structural and capacity limitations that undermine their ability to produce, compete, and fully benefit from global integration. One of many ways aid for trade can help developing economies is by identifying infrastructure bottlenecks, improving logistics efficiency, and smoothing the supply chain. But how should the impact of aid for trade on the performance of developing economies be measured? Outcome indicators such as value and growth of exports and imports are important; so are indicators that measure trade logistics performance and trade-related infrastructure. Better logistics performance is associated with trade expansion, export diversification, and the ability to attract foreign direct investment.
Developing economies expanded their share in the world tourism industry Share of world tourism receipts (percent)
6m
East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Middle East & North Africa South Asia
Latin America & Caribbean Sub-Saharan Africa
30
20
10
0 1995
2000
2005
2008
2000
2005
2008
Share of world tourism expenditures (percent) 30
20
10
0 1995
Source: World Development Indicators data files.
Remittances have become an important source of external financing for low- and middle-income economies
6n
Low-income economies Share of GDP (percent) 15 10
Net aid received Remittances received
5
Foreign direct investment net inflows
0 –5
Net exports of goods and services
–10 –15 1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
Middle-income economies 15 10 Foreign direct investment net inflows
Net exports of goods and services
5 0
Remittances received
Net aid received
–5 –10 –15
1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
Source: World Development Indicators data files.
2010 World Development Indicators
351
6o
Logistics performance is lowest for low-income economies Overall Logistics Performance Index (1 = low, 5 = high), 2007 and 2009 surveys 5
2007
2009
4 3 2 1 East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
South Asia
SubSaharan Africa
Low income
Lower middle income
Upper middle income
High income
Source: Arvis and others 2007 and 2010.
Until recently, data on trade facilitation and logistics performance have been scarce. But in 2007 and 2009 the World Bank surveyed logistics professionals and created a Logistics Performance Index that summarizes a country’s performance in six areas of trade logistics: effi ciency of customs clearance processes, quality of trade- and transport-related infrastructure, ease of arranging competitively priced shipments, competence and quality of logistics services, ability to track and trace consignments, and frequency with which shipments reach the consignee within the scheduled or expected time. The surveys suggest that transportation costs, the time to import and export, and customs efficiency are all key but that the most important determinant of export competitiveness and volume is the overall reliability and predictability of the supply chain (Arvis and others 2007, 2010). In essence, traders need to be able to move goods and services across borders quickly and cheaply. And in economies with poor logistics performance, importers and exporters incur additional expenses to mitigate the effects of unreliable supply chains. High-income economies dominate the top ratings for logistics performance, while the 10 lowest performing economies are all low- and lower middle-income economies, mostly in Africa. Between 2006 and 2009 the overall logistics performance of economies improved, but low-income economies tend to perform worse than middle- and high-income economies (figure 6o).
Higher transport costs impede trade in developing economies The costs of international transport services are a crucial determinant of developing economies’
352
2010 World Development Indicators
export competitiveness. For example, a 2001 study found that a 1 percent reduction in the cost of maritime and air transport services could increase Asian GDP by $3.3 billion (UNCTAD 2001). Transport costs are asymmetric worldwide and are especially high for landlocked developing economies. In Central Asia the cost of transporting a 40 ton container by road between Central Asia and Europe varies depending on the direction traveled: moving goods west to east costs $6,000 but moving them east to west costs only $4,000 (Arvis, Raballand, and Marteau 2007). Comprehensive data on transport costs for all developing economies are not available. One proxy indicator for transport costs is the shipping rates of companies that operate globally in the international freight moving business. For example, the median DHL rate for sending a 1 kilogram package to the United States was 1.6 times higher from low-income economies than from high-income economies. Transport costs depend on a mixture of geographic and economic circumstances. Freight costs tend to be higher for low-income economies. Landlocked countries or countries without access to large economic centers face much higher transportation costs than do coastal countries and countries located near business centers (box 6p). These economies tend to have poor infrastructure and thin traffi c densities, further impeding their export competitiveness.
Improving trade infrastructure to facilitate trade Infrastructure, especially transport services infrastructure, is vital for trade facilitation. Port quality and accessibility, road quality,
GLOBAL LINKS
and access to global shipping and air freight networks influence the overall logistics performance of international traders. For example, a 2006 study concluded that investment in upgrading and maintaining a trans-African highway network linking 83 major African cities could increase intra-African trade from $10 billion a year to $30 billion (Buys, Deichmann, and Wheeler 2006). Similarly, improving road networks in 27 European and Central Asian economies could increase their trade by as much as 50 percent (Shepherd and Wilson 2007). Infrastructure quality may be just as important as its availability. According to a survey of logistics professionals, poor infrastructure quality is a widespread constraint on the logistics performance of developing economies. Moreover, satisfaction with infrastructure quality was much higher for economies ranked highest in overall logistics performance (Arvis and others 2010). Port infrastructure is important for economies that rely heavily on sea transport. According to a survey of business executives, 62 of 69 economies ranked below average in port quality were developing economies, 22 of them low-income (World Economic Forum 2009).
6p
Challenges for landlocked economies
Millennium Development Goal 8 focuses on landlocked countries. Like other small, lowincome economies, landlocked developing economies have unpredictable supply chains, reflecting uncertainty in shipment delivery time, low demand levels, greater inventory costs, and low private sector capacities. Rent-seeking activities are higher when shipments transit through other economies and international corridors, contributing to higher trading costs (Arvis, Raballand, and Marteau 2007). On average, landlocked economies trade 30 percent less than coastal economies (Limao and Venables 2001). Access to global shipping and freight networks is an important determinant of a country’s export competitiveness. Because landlocked economies lack direct access to liner shipping networks, access to air cargo networks is especially important to them. Though faster and more reliable than road transport, air freight typically costs 4–5 times more than road transport and 12–16 times more than sea transport (World Bank 2009a). Consequently, demand for air freight is limited in landlocked developing economies that ship small volumes of low-value-per-unit goods. Establishing and improving the efficiency of international trade corridors could significantly benefit landlocked economies. Source: World Bank staff.
6q
Lead time to import and export is longest for low-income economies Average lead time, 2009 (days)
To export
To import
10 8 6 4 2 0
Time delays add to trading costs Traders also face indirect transport costs: the time required to import and export goods, border inefficiency, and the risk of freight loss or damage. Indirect costs can be higher than direct costs. For example, World Bank research suggests that one additional day of shipping delays cuts trade by at least 1 percent (Djankov, Freund, and Pham 2010). In Europe and Central Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa tariff equivalents of time to export were more than twice the average applied tariff (USAID 2007). According to the 2009 Logistics Performance
East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Latin Central America & Asia Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
South Asia
SubSaharan Africa
Low income
Middle income
High income
Source: Arvis and others 2010.
Survey, for 50 percent of shipments, import and export lead times are three times longer for low- income economies than for high-income economies (figure 6q). And lead time to export from or import to Sub-Saharan African economies averages 7–8 days—much longer than for other developing regions such as Europe and Central Asia and South Asia.
2010 World Development Indicators
353
Tables
6.1
Integration with the global economy Trade
International finance
Financing through international capital markets % of GDP Gross Merchandise Services inflows
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
354
Movement of people
Communication
% of GDP
Emigration of people with tertiary Workers’ International International education to remittances Internet Foreign direct voice OECD countries International and bandwidth a investment traffic a migrant stock % of population age compensation bits per 25 and older with % of total Net Net of employees Net migration second minutes tertiary education population thousands inflows outflows received per capita per person
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2000–05
2005
2000
2008
37.9 53.5 70.5 102.9 39.0 46.0 38.2 88.0 83.9 49.3 120.0 190.3 45.5 68.1 93.7 76.2 24.2 123.0 30.4 39.5 104.3 37.2 62.5 24.9 77.4 76.5 59.2 354.4 31.7 69.0 111.0 84.4 73.7 64.7 .. 134.0 67.0 51.2 68.0 45.5 64.7 33.3 121.1 35.6 69.2 46.1 75.0 42.3 59.1 73.1 96.4 28.9 57.2 76.3 60.1 36.6 120.8
.. 39.5 .. 26.5 7.6 13.6 9.2 25.2 11.8 7.2 11.4 33.9 14.5 9.2 12.5 16.6 4.9 29.5 .. 22.1 26.2 19.1 11.0 .. .. 13.1 7.1 64.2 4.6 .. 50.3 20.1 15.5 28.5 .. 18.4 39.4 14.9 7.8 26.2 15.9 .. 36.8 17.1 22.6 10.8 .. 26.0 19.5 14.6 24.6 21.1 10.1 14.5 .. 15.4 15.9
0.0 0.0 1.0 4.6 0.5 0.0 .. .. 2.8 0.1 0.5 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 .. 0.1 0.0 4.0 0.7 .. 0.6 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.2 .. .. .. .. 1.3 0.0 5.1 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 .. .. 4.1 0.0 4.7 .. 8.0 .. 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 1.6
2.8 7.6 1.6 2.0 3.0 7.8 4.7 3.5 0.0 1.2 3.6 19.8 1.8 3.1 5.7 0.8 2.9 18.4 1.7 0.3 7.9 0.2 3.0 6.1 9.9 9.9 3.4 29.3 4.3 8.6 24.5 6.8 1.7 6.9 .. 5.0 0.9 6.3 1.8 5.9 3.5 2.2 8.3 0.4 –2.8 3.5 0.1 8.9 12.2 0.6 12.7 1.5 2.1 10.1 3.5 0.4 6.6
.. 0.8 .. 3.0 0.4 0.1 3.8 7.4 1.2 .. 0.0 23.6 –0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 1.3 1.5 .. 0.0 0.2 –0.2 5.3 .. .. 4.1 1.2 27.8 0.9 .. .. 0.0 .. 0.3 .. 0.9 4.4 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.3 .. 4.6 0.0 1.1 7.2 .. .. 0.3 4.3 0.0 0.8 0.0 3.3 .. .. 0.0
.. 12.2 1.3 b 0.1 0.2 8.9 0.5 0.8 3.4 11.3 0.7 2.1 4.1b 6.9 14.8 0.9 0.3 5.3 0.6 b 0.3 3.1 0.6 .. .. .. 0.0 1.1b 0.2 2.0 .. 0.1 b 2.0 0.8 2.3 .. 0.7 0.3 7.8 5.2 5.4 17.2 .. 1.7 1.5 0.3 0.6 0.1b 8.2 5.7 0.3 0.8 0.8 11.4 1.9 7.0 b 19.6 21.5
805 –100 –140 175 –100 –100 641 220 –100 –700 20 196 99 –100 62 20 –229 –41 100 192 10 –12 1,089 –45 219 30 –2,058c 113 –120 –237 4 84 –339 –13 –163 67 46 –148 –400 –291 –340 229 1 –340 33 761 10 31 –309 930 12 154 –300 –425 1 –140 –150
0.3 2.7 0.7 0.3 3.9 16.1 21.3 14.0 3.0 0.7 11.3 8.4 2.4 1.2 0.9 4.4 0.4 1.3 5.6 1.1 2.2 1.2 19.5 1.8 3.6 1.4 0.0 39.9 0.3 0.8 3.8 10.2 12.3 14.9 0.1 4.4 7.8 4.1 0.9 0.3 0.6 0.3 15.0 0.7 3.3 10.6 17.9 15.2 4.3 12.9 7.6 8.8 0.4 4.4 1.3 0.3 0.4
22.6 17.4 9.4 3.6 2.8 8.9 2.7 13.5 1.8 4.4 3.2 5.5 8.6 5.8 20.3 5.1 2.0 9.6 2.5 7.3 21.4 17.1 4.7 7.2 9.0 6.0 3.8 29.6 10.4 9.0 22.9 7.1 6.1 24.6 28.8 8.5 7.8 22.4 9.5 4.7 31.7 35.2 9.9 9.8 7.2 3.4 14.4 67.8 2.8 5.7 44.6 12.1 23.9 4.6 27.7 83.4 24.8
1 127 18 .. 42 .. .. .. .. 6 .. .. 12 80 109 115 .. 27 11 .. .. 4 .. .. .. 35 9 1,435 142 .. .. 120 .. 229 .. 136 210 .. 3 27 578 17 .. 2 .. 242 .. .. 44 .. 6 .. .. .. .. .. 39
2010 World Development Indicators
2008
1 220 .. 17 2,320 .. 5,457 20,323 1,180 4 748 24,945 18 225 529 220 2,108 37,657 15 2 19 8 16,193 .. 1 4,076 483 548,318 2,233 .. 0 857 40 15,892 27 7,075 34,506 1,407 443 332 33 5 126,802 3 17,221 29,356 141 38 752 25,654 86 4,537 186 0 1 16 241
Trade
International finance
Financing through international capital markets % of GDP Gross Merchandise Services inflows
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
2008
2008
139.5 40.6 52.0 46.7 .. 73.4 63.5 47.8 70.3 31.5 116.2 81.7 52.9 .. 92.3 .. 79.9 112.7 44.6 77.2 72.5 180.6 133.8 80.0 115.2 113.7 56.9 58.3 160.7 48.1 122.5 75.1 56.5 107.4 117.1 69.5 68.1 .. 84.6 37.0 140.4 49.7 87.6 42.4 59.7 57.1 97.8 38.1 44.3 112.3 91.5 47.6 64.8 70.4 60.0 .. 90.1
25.1 13.8 8.5 .. .. 74.9 21.8 10.9 35.3 6.5 40.2 11.5 16.9 .. 18.2 .. 17.8 37.4 8.2 22.9 110.6 10.9 209.9 4.9 19.2 21.2 .. .. 27.3 16.8 .. 47.9 4.0 27.5 32.2 22.6 15.3 .. 12.7 12.5 23.0 14.4 15.3 10.7 7.3 20.1 15.6 8.3 36.6 .. 10.3 7.1 11.4 12.5 17.8 .. ..
2008
.. 2.7 4.1 0.0 .. .. .. .. 3.1 .. 8.2 15.3 0.8 .. .. 0.0 .. 0.0 10.9 4.2 5.2 0.0 117.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.2 1.3 0.0 0.1 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.8 .. 0.0 0.0 .. .. 0.0 0.0 1.1 .. .. 0.4 11.0 5.3 0.0 2.2 1.7 1.7 .. .. ..
Movement of people
6.1
GLOBAL LINKS
Integration with the global economy
Communication
% of GDP
Emigration of people with tertiary Workers’ International International education to remittances Internet Foreign direct voice OECD countries International and bandwidth a investment traffic a migrant stock % of population age compensation bits per 25 and older with % of total Net Net of employees Net migration second minutes tertiary education population thousands inflows outflows received per capita per person 2008
2008
2008
2000–05
2005
2000
2008
40.6 3.6 1.8 0.6 .. –7.4 4.8 0.7 9.8 0.5 9.3 11.0 0.3 .. 0.2 .. 0.0 4.6 4.1 4.0 12.3 13.4 17.1 4.4 3.7 6.3 15.6 0.9 3.3 1.5 3.6 4.1 2.1 11.7 13.0 2.8 6.0 .. 6.1 0.0 –0.3 4.2 9.5 2.7 1.8 –0.3 7.5 3.3 10.4 –0.4 2.0 3.2 0.8 2.8 1.5 .. ..
39.5 1.6 1.2 .. .. 5.0 3.9 1.9 0.5 2.7 0.1 2.9 0.1 .. 1.4 .. 5.9 0.0 .. 0.8 3.4 .. 0.0 6.3 0.8 –0.1 .. .. 6.9 0.1 .. 0.6 0.1 0.3 .. 0.4 0.0 .. 0.1 .. 2.2 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.2 5.9 0.6 0.0 0.0 .. 0.1 .. 0.2 0.6 0.9 .. ..
1.7 4.3 1.3 0.4b .. 0.2 0.7 0.1 14.9 0.0 17.9 0.1 5.6 b .. 0.3 .. .. 24.4 0.0 b 1.8 24.5 27.0 6.9 0.0 b 3.1 4.3 0.1b 0.0b 0.9 b 3.9 b 0.1b 2.3 2.4 31.4 3.8b 7.8 1.2 .. 0.2 21.6 0.4 0.5 12.4 1.5b 4.8 b 0.2 0.1 4.3 0.9 0.2b 3.1 1.9 11.2 2.0 1.7 .. ..
70 –1,540 –1,000 –993 –224 230 115 1,750 –76 82 104 –200 25 0 –65 .. 264 –75 –115 –20 100 –36 62 14 –36 –10 –5 –30 150 –134 30 0 –2,702 –320 17 –550 –20 –1,000 –1 –100 110 103 –206 –28 –170 84 –50 –1,239 8 0 –45 –525 –900 –200 291 –27 219
3.3 0.5 0.1 3.0 0.4 14.8 38.4 5.2 1.0 1.6 43.3 19.6 2.2 0.2 1.1 .. 73.7 5.6 0.3 16.5 17.7 0.3 2.9 10.4 4.8 5.9 0.2 2.0 7.9 1.4 2.2 3.3 0.6 11.7 0.4 0.2 1.9 0.2 6.6 3.0 10.6 20.7 0.6 1.4 0.7 8.0 25.5 2.3 3.2 0.4 2.8 0.1 0.4 2.2 7.2 9.0 80.5
12.8 4.3 2.9 14.3 10.9 33.7 7.8 9.6 84.7 1.2 7.4 1.2 38.5 .. 7.5 .. 7.1 0.9 37.2 8.5 43.8 4.1 44.3 4.3 8.3 29.4 7.7 20.9 10.5 14.7 8.5 55.8 15.5 4.1 7.4 18.0 22.5 3.9 3.4 4.0 9.5 21.8 30.2 5.4 10.5 6.2 0.4 12.7 16.7 27.8 3.8 5.8 13.5 14.2 18.9 .. 2.1
120 .. .. .. 0 .. 413 .. 39 .. 66 47 3 .. 33 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 65 57 159 1 .. .. 2 4 100 174 155 5 21 .. .. .. .. .. 310 39 .. 1 .. 30 .. 61 .. 35 .. .. .. .. .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
2008
5,977 32 120 151 1 15,261 2,003 12,989 744 5,770 781 702 21 0 4,528 .. 871 113 129 3,537 223 5 .. 50 9,751 17 8 5 2,374 51 76 364 285 966 947 795 3 20 27 5 78,156 4,544 144 11 5 26,904 894 43 15,964 2 481 2,646 113 2,748 4,790 .. 2,044
355
6.1
Integration with the global economy Trade
International finance
Financing through international capital markets % of GDP Gross Merchandise Services inflows 2008
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
66.1 45.5 30.5 94.0 61.0 67.9 39.9 361.6 152.0 130.4 .. 65.2 41.8 55.2 38.7 140.6 73.1 78.6 59.1 91.1 47.9 130.9 .. 80.4 114.7 109.0 45.4 100.9 48.7 83.8 157.7 41.2 24.4 46.2 55.9 45.6 158.1 .. 69.9 71.0 .. 53.0 w 74.9 56.2 60.0 52.5 56.7 68.0 58.1 41.9 68.6 41.3 64.9 51.5 67.9
2008
12.4 7.6 20.9 18.0 21.6 16.6 9.5 89.3 18.6 22.8 .. 10.8 15.5 12.3 5.6 32.6 26.4 23.5 17.0 12.4 18.4 29.5 .. 21.7 6.0 23.3 7.1 .. 13.7 18.9 .. 18.6 6.7 11.3 .. 4.0 16.6 .. 13.4 8.4 .. 12.3 w 15.2 9.6 10.6 8.6 9.7 9.4 10.2 6.1 26.3 12.8 13.3 13.3 17.4
Movement of people
Communication
% of GDP
Emigration of people with tertiary Workers’ International International education to remittances Internet Foreign direct voice OECD countries International and bandwidth a investment traffic a migrant stock % of population age compensation bits per 25 and older with % of total Net Net of employees Net migration second minutes tertiary education population thousands inflows outflows received per capita per person
2008
2008
2008
2008
1.2 5.2 0.0 .. 0.0 0.8 0.0 .. .. .. .. 2.5 .. 1.0 0.0 0.0 .. .. 0.7 0.0 4.1 1.5 0.0 0.0 .. 0.4 2.9 0.0 0.0 2.9 .. .. .. 10.9 0.0 1.9 3.1 .. 10.5 1.9 .. .. w 2.0 2.2 1.5 2.9 2.2 1.2 3.9 1.9 2.7 2.2 1.8 .. ..
6.9 4.3 2.3 4.8 5.3 6.0 –0.2 12.5 3.3 3.5 .. 3.5 4.4 1.9 4.6 0.4 8.7 1.3 3.1 7.3 3.6 3.6 .. 2.3 3.8 6.5 2.5 5.3 5.5 6.1 .. 3.5 2.2 6.9 3.3 0.1 10.6 .. 5.8 6.6 .. 3.0 w 5.1 3.5 3.4 3.6 3.6 3.3 4.4 3.0 4.6 3.3 3.5 2.8 3.1
0.1 3.1 –0.4 0.7 0.2 0.6 .. 4.9 0.3 2.6 .. –0.8 5.0 0.2 0.2 0.8 8.4 10.2 0.0 0.0 .. 1.0 .. 0.0 2.0 0.1 0.3 .. 0.0 0.6 .. 6.1 2.3 0.0 .. 0.4 0.3 .. 0.0 0.0 .. 3.5 w .. 1.3 1.1 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.7 0.8 .. 1.4 0.1 4.4 6.1
4.7 0.4 1.5 0.0 9.7b 11.1b,d 7.7b .. 2.0 0.6 .. 0.3 0.7 7.3 5.5 3.5 b 0.2 0.4 1.5b 49.6 0.1 0.7 .. 9.8b 0.5 b 4.9 0.2 .. 5.1 3.2 .. 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 7.9 b .. 5.3 0.5 .. 0.8 s 7.1 1.9 2.6 1.2 2.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 4.8 4.9 2.3 0.3 0.5
2000–05
–270 964 6 285 –100 –339 336 139 10 23 –200 700 2,504 –442 –532 –46 186 200 300 –345 –345 1,411 41 –4 –20 –81 –71 –25 –5 –173 577 948 5,676 –104 –400 40 –200 11 –100 –82 –700 ..e s –3,728 –14,512 –11,119 –3,393 –18,240 –3,722 –2,138 –5,738 –1,850 –3,181 –1,611 18,091 7,269
2005
2000
0.6 8.4 4.8 27.4 2.0 9.1 3.0 35.0 2.3 8.4 0.3 2.7 10.6 1.9 1.7 3.4 12.3 22.3 6.9 4.7 2.0 1.5 1.2 3.1 2.9 0.3 1.9 4.6 2.3 11.4 70.0 9.7 13.3 2.5 4.8 3.8 0.1 46.5 2.2 2.4 3.1 3.0 w 1.6 1.4 0.9 3.3 1.4 0.3 6.6 1.1 3.2 0.8 2.1 11.4 9.9
11.2 1.4 26.3 0.9 17.1 .. 49.2 14.5 14.3 10.9 34.5 7.4 4.2 28.2 6.8 5.3 4.5 9.5 6.1 0.6 12.1 2.2 16.5 16.3 78.9 12.4 5.8 0.4 36.0 4.3 0.7 17.1 0.5 9.0 0.8 3.8 26.9 12.0 6.0 16.4 13.1 5.4 w 13.2 6.7 6.4 7.1 7.2 7.0 4.2 10.6 10.4 5.3 12.3 4.0 7.0
2008
2008
41 .. 11 .. 27 142 .. 1,531 123 96 .. .. .. 34 6 .. .. .. 78 .. 0 .. .. 6 .. 79 39 .. 7 0 .. .. .. 0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 22 .. .. .. .. .. .. 9 .. .. 27 .. .. .. ..
9,111 573 27 1,224 237 4,506 .. 22,783 5,555 6,720 .. 71 11,008 190 322 31 49,828 29,413 102 37 2 818 .. 8 678 1,115 2,794 48 12 206 8,686 39,648 11,289 903 30 628 581 313 28 8 10 3,546 w 24 377 153 1,281 320 470 1,244 1,391 323 31 34 20,143 32,540
a. Data are from the International Telecommunication Union’s (ITU) World Telecommunication Development Report database. Please cite the ITU for third-party use of these data. b. World Bank estimates. c. Includes Taiwan, China. d. Includes Montenegro. e. World totals computed by the United Nations sum to zero, but because the aggregates shown here refer to World Bank definitions, regional and income group totals do not equal zero.
356
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
6.1
GLOBAL LINKS
Integration with the global economy Definitions
Globalization—the integration of the world
investment, FDI establishes a lasting interest in or
• Trade in merchandise is the sum of merchandise
economy—has been a persistent theme of the past
effective management control over an enterprise in
exports and imports. • Trade in services is the
25 years. Growth of cross-border economic activity
another country. FDI may be understated in develop-
sum of services exports and imports. • Financ-
has changed countries’ economic structure and polit-
ing countries because some fail to report reinvested
ing through international capital markets is the sum
ical and social organization. Not all effects of glo-
earnings and because the definition of long-term
of the absolute values of new bond issuance, syndi-
balization can be measured directly. But the scope
loans differs by country. However, data quality and
cated bank lending, and new equity placements. • For-
and pace of change can be monitored along four key
coverage are improving as a result of continuous
eign direct investment net inflows and outflows are
dimensions: trade in goods and services, financial
efforts by international and national statistics agen-
net inflows and outflows of FDI (equity capital, rein-
flows, movement of people, and communication.
cies (see About the data for table 6.12).
vestment of earnings, and other short- and long-term
Trade data are based on gross flows that capture
Workers’ remittances are current private transfers
capital). • Workers’ remittances and compensation
the two-way flow of goods and services. In conven-
from migrant workers resident in the host country for
of employees received are current transfers by migrant
tional balance of payments accounting, exports are
more than a year, irrespective of their immigration
workers and wages and salaries of nonresident work-
recorded as a credit and imports as a debit. See
status, to recipients in their country of origin. Com-
ers. • Net migration is the number of immigrants
tables 4.4 and 4.5 for data on the main trade com-
pensation of employees is the income of migrants
minus the number of emigrants, including citizens and
ponents of merchandise trade and tables 4.6 and
resident in the host country for less than a year.
noncitizens, for the five-year period. • International
4.7 for the same data on services trade.
Migration has increased in importance, accounting
migrant stock is the number of people born in a coun-
Financing through international capital markets
for a substantial part of global integration. The esti-
try other than that in which they live, including refu-
includes gross bond issuance, bank lending, and
mates of the international migrant stock are derived
gees. • Emigration of people with tertiary education
new equity placement as reported by Dealogic, a
from data on people who reside in one country but
to OECD countries is adults ages 25 and older, resid-
company specializing in the investment banking
were born in another, mainly from population cen-
ing in an OECD country other than that in which they
industry. In financial accounting inward investment
suses (see About the data and Definitions for table
were born, with at least one year of tertiary education.
is a credit and outward investment a debit. Gross
6.18). One negative effect of migration is “brain
• International voice traffic is the sum of international
fl ow is a better measure of integration than net
drain”—emigration of highly educated people. The
incoming and outgoing telephone traffic divided by
fl ow because gross fl ow shows the total value of
table shows data on emigration of people with ter-
total population. • International Internet bandwidth
financial transactions over a period, while net flow
tiary education, drawn from Docquier, Marfouk, and
is the contracted capacity of international connections
is the sum of credits and debits and represents a
Lowell (2007), who analyzed skilled migration using
between countries for transmitting Internet traffic.
balance in which many transactions are canceled
data from censuses and registers of Organisation
out. Components of financing through international
for Economic Development and Co-operation (OECD)
capital markets are reported in U.S. dollars by mar-
countries and provide data disaggregated by gender
Data on merchandise trade are from the World
ket sources.
for 1990 and 2000.
Trade Organization’s Annual Report. Data on trade in
Data sources
Foreign direct investment (FDI) includes equity
Well developed communications infrastructure
services are from the International Monetary Fund’s
investment, reinvested earnings, and short- and long-
attracts investments and allows investors to capital-
(IMF) Balance of Payments database. Data on inter-
term loans between parent firms and foreign affili-
ize on benefits of the digital age. See About the data
national capital market financing are based on data
ates. Distinguished from other kinds of international
for tables 5.11 and 5.12 for more information.
from Dealogic. Data on FDI are based on balance of payments data from the IMF, supplemented by
6.1a
Services trade has not grown as rapidly as merchandise trade
staff estimates using data from the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development and official
Merchandise trade
Trade as a share of GDP (percent) 80
Services trade
70
Middle income
60
national sources. Data on workers’ remittances are World Bank staff estimates based on IMF balance of
Low income
payments data. Data on net migration are from the United Nations Population Division’s World Popula-
50 High income
40
tion Prospects: The 2008 Revision. Data on international migrant stock are from the United Nations
30 High income
20
Middle income
Low income
Population Division’s Trends in Total Migrant Stock: The 2008 Revision. Data on emigration of people
10
with tertiary education are from Docquier, Marfouk,
0 1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
and Lowell’s “A Gendered Assessment of the Brain
Merchandise trade in low-income economies grew from 34 percent of GDP in 1990 to 75 percent in
Drain” (2007). Data on international voice traffic
2008 and in middle-income economies from 32 percent to 56 percent. The shares of services trade in
and international Internet bandwidth are from the
GDP also rose but not as much.
International Telecommunication Union’s Interna-
Source: World Development Indicators data files.
tional Development Report database.
2010 World Development Indicators
357
6.2 Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australiaa Austriaa Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgiuma Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canadaa Central African Republic Chad Chile China† Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark a Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland Francea Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germanya Ghana Greecea Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras †Data for Taiwan, China
358
Growth of merchandise trade Export volume
Import volume
Export value
Import value
average annual % growth
average annual % growth
average annual % growth
average annual % growth
1990–2000
2000–08
.. .. 2.8 6.2 8.4 .. 7.3 6.2 .. 12.9 .. 6.0 1.0 2.8 .. 4.8 5.1 .. 13.2 8.6 .. 0.3 9.1 20.0 .. 11.1 13.8 8.4 4.5 –1.8 6.6 14.0 5.0 .. .. .. 5.4 3.9 6.3 –0.2 2.9 –28.3 .. 10.5 .. 8.3 5.2 –11.6 .. .. 7.7 8.9 8.5 5.0 .. 12.6 2.5 3.1
.. .. 1.8 13.4 6.6 .. 7.7 6.6 .. 11.8 .. 4.1 9.8 11.3 .. 4.6 9.5 .. 12.7 –5.9 14.1 –1.9 0.6 0.5 .. 6.2 25.0 8.9 6.1 8.4 1.4 8.5 0.7 .. 1.9 .. 3.3 0.5 9.3 9.7 3.2 –11.3 .. 7.7 .. 4.9 –0.6 –4.6 .. .. 4.7 .. 10.3 –8.2 .. 5.8 8.0 7.4
2010 World Development Indicators
1990–2000
.. .. –0.8 7.1 17.7 .. 9.2 5.6 .. 5.9 .. 5.7 8.2 9.1 .. 4.0 16.7 .. 3.6 4.0 .. 5.0 9.0 4.3 .. 10.7 12.8 8.9 8.5 4.6 4.9 14.9 –0.3 .. .. .. 5.8 11.6 5.9 1.8 7.6 –3.2 .. 7.3 .. 6.6 2.5 0.1 .. .. 8.6 9.3 10.0 –1.4 .. 13.3 12.7 4.8
2000–08
.. .. 12.2 20.4 12.6 .. 8.1 5.6 .. 5.0 .. 4.7 5.2 7.2 .. 5.0 7.7 .. 6.6 10.8 10.5 3.8 4.6 5.3 .. 13.1 17.4 8.3 12.6 17.1 19.2 9.0 7.6 .. 6.6 .. 4.8 3.1 13.7 7.2 5.5 –4.9 .. 18.0 .. 6.4 8.5 2.6 .. .. 11.4 .. 8.0 4.3 .. 2.5 9.6 3.6
1990–2000
.. .. 2.1 6.1 10.1 .. 5.7 .. .. 15.7 .. 4.8 3.3 4.3 .. 4.7 5.9 .. 12.9 –4.3 26.8 –3.6 9.4 3.5 .. 9.4 14.5 8.3 7.3 –7.2 7.5 17.0 6.0 .. –1.7 .. 4.1 4.2 6.8 0.7 8.9 –31.1 .. 10.7 .. 4.9 0.8 –12.3 .. .. 9.0 8.2 10.1 0.6 .. 12.2 7.2 7.2
2000–08
.. .. 21.8 34.9 13.6 .. 21.1 .. .. 12.8 .. 13.3 15.2 24.4 .. 10.2 18.7 .. 17.4 5.2 16.6 13.0 7.8 4.1 .. 21.9 26.9 9.3 15.8 20.8 20.1 8.5 13.1 .. 13.2 .. 11.6 3.9 19.9 25.6 5.6 –5.7 .. 18.2 .. 10.5 16.8 0.7 .. .. 15.7 .. 14.7 8.2 .. 8.6 10.8 9.9
1990–2000
.. .. –1.3 7.8 17.0 .. 8.7 .. .. 10.4 .. 5.3 9.7 9.7 .. 2.7 12.5 .. 3.6 –6.9 25.2 2.1 8.9 0.2 .. 10.3 13.0 8.8 9.7 –0.5 8.7 13.9 2.4 .. 2.5 .. 4.9 12.0 7.9 4.7 10.9 –0.2 .. 7.3 .. 3.7 2.2 0.2 .. .. 8.3 8.2 10.4 –2.6 .. 14.4 13.8 8.5
Net barter terms of trade index
2000–08
.. .. 18.6 25.0 16.3 .. 13.4 .. .. 13.6 .. 14.1 14.8 13.2 .. 11.5 15.3 .. 15.6 17.0 17.0 13.7 9.5 13.2 .. 18.1 24.2 9.5 17.4 24.6 26.1 11.9 17.2 .. 15.6 .. 13.1 7.5 20.0 15.9 9.2 1.7 .. 26.4 .. 12.2 14.0 10.7 .. .. 18.3 .. 14.1 11.9 .. 9.9 15.2 10.3
2000 = 100 1995
2008
.. .. 57.9 80.8 91.6 .. 99.4 .. .. 111.8 .. 104.3 106.6 89.4 .. 89.3 110.4 .. 131.0 163.6 .. 90.4 103.2 193.0 .. 135.6 101.9 99.1 86.8 79.8 52.0 104.6 122.0 .. .. .. 102.1 98.1 80.6 116.3 121.1 101.7 .. 151.0 110.6 106.4 125.4 100.0 .. 107.5 106.7 89.6 117.9 89.6 .. 113.2 96.3 89.9
.. .. 238.8 253.9 132.7 .. 174.6 .. .. 57.7 .. 98.3 68.6 144.0 .. 90.0 110.4 .. 71.5 140.3 78.5 138.2 120.7 72.9 .. 164.9 73.8 96.4 138.1 147.2 212.3 81.7 138.8 .. 111.1 .. 100.2 93.6 124.0 144.4 91.0 90.1 .. 111.5 81.0 99.8 215.3 83.4 .. 100.1 151.3 94.9 87.1 168.9 .. 62.4 80.9 73.8
Export volume
Import volume
Export value
Import value
average annual % growth
average annual % growth
average annual % growth
average annual % growth
1990–2000
Hungarya India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Irelanda Israela Italya Jamaica Japana Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latviaa Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands a New Zealanda Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norwaya Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Polanda Portugala Puerto Rico Qatar
10.1 6.9 10.0 .. .. 15.2 9.7 4.8 2.2 2.6 4.7 .. 3.9 .. 15.8 .. .. .. .. 7.2 .. 13.3 .. .. .. .. 4.1 2.7 13.6 10.3 1.9 2.7 15.5 .. .. 7.5 15.2 15.5 2.4 .. 8.0 4.6 10.4 3.1 3.3 6.6 4.0 2.5 6.0 –7.7 –0.2 9.4 16.0 9.8 0.3 .. ..
2000–08
12.3 11.6 .. 3.2 .. 2.5 4.9 1.6 2.2 4.5 6.3 .. 6.1 .. 13.2 .. 10.6 .. 9.5 .. 14.8 18.7 .. 5.8 .. .. 5.7 6.8 7.4 2.5 7.8 4.3 3.7 .. 5.3 3.6 15.9 5.6 6.7 –1.4 5.4 3.0 9.3 –7.1 0.8 0.4 –3.2 8.5 2.5 –2.5 15.7 9.1 4.1 13.4 .. .. 5.5
1990–2000
11.6 9.0 2.9 .. .. 11.4 8.9 4.2 .. 5.3 3.8 .. 7.4 .. 10.0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 3.1 .. 0.0 .. .. 4.5 –2.4 10.6 6.4 4.2 3.4 13.2 .. .. 7.2 1.0 13.8 7.7 .. 8.4 5.9 9.3 –2.1 2.5 7.8 .. 2.4 7.8 .. 5.4 10.6 11.3 19.0 0.5 .. ..
2000–08
9.7 18.5 .. 12.1 .. 2.5 2.7 1.6 2.1 3.0 7.6 .. 8.9 .. 7.9 .. 13.0 .. 7.6 .. 1.8 8.6 .. 19.9 .. .. 10.5 9.9 7.2 8.3 13.3 8.2 4.4 .. 13.9 8.8 9.6 –2.0 10.0 –6.0 5.4 7.6 6.1 9.1 13.6 6.8 8.5 9.8 9.5 6.9 18.9 9.6 1.9 10.9 .. .. 26.7
1990–2000
10.1 5.3 7.8 1.2 .. 14.3 10.0 4.6 2.2 2.1 6.6 .. 6.3 .. 10.1 .. 16.5 .. 15.4 11.8 4.1 12.8 .. –2.6 .. .. 9.0 0.9 12.2 6.3 –1.9 2.2 16.1 .. 0.7 7.2 10.2 14.4 0.9 10.7 5.7 3.9 10.3 0.0 1.1 5.7 5.7 4.3 9.4 3.7 1.7 9.0 18.8 9.5 –3.0 .. 10.1
2000–08
19.1 21.4 .. 21.5 .. 6.1 10.1 11.6 9.7 5.2 18.1 .. 13.7 .. 14.4 .. 25.0 .. 19.3 .. 23.7 18.8 .. 26.0 .. .. 8.9 11.0 11.5 15.7 25.5 4.6 8.7 .. 23.8 12.1 27.6 18.0 15.4 4.9 13.5 11.2 12.4 15.7 19.9 15.4 16.1 11.6 4.4 16.4 20.8 24.3 4.7 24.9 .. .. 25.0
1990–2000
11.8 7.9 0.1 –4.8 .. 10.9 8.2 3.2 6.9 5.2 5.1 .. 6.0 .. 7.1 .. 5.5 .. 12.7 .. 8.7 1.9 .. –1.4 .. .. 6.3 –0.6 9.5 4.7 –1.6 3.3 14.2 .. 0.5 5.5 1.1 22.6 3.9 9.3 5.5 5.7 11.6 0.8 3.1 4.4 6.1 3.1 8.7 –0.8 7.0 10.8 12.5 17.0 –2.6 .. 7.4
6.2
GLOBAL LINKS
Growth of merchandise trade
Net barter terms of trade index
2000–08
17.4 26.8 .. 20.9 .. 7.8 8.9 12.6 11.2 10.2 19.1 .. 18.8 .. 15.4 .. 18.1 .. 15.0 .. 10.9 13.5 .. 27.4 .. .. 18.1 17.7 10.8 17.4 20.6 11.1 8.3 .. 23.4 17.8 17.4 4.8 14.8 3.4 13.1 13.5 12.3 18.3 21.1 14.8 19.3 21.2 13.8 16.1 23.7 17.3 7.6 21.0 .. .. 32.2
2000 = 100 1995
2008
104.3 108.0 90.4 .. .. 98.9 92.1 96.6 .. 114.9 115.6 .. 103.9 .. 138.5 .. .. .. .. .. .. 100.0 .. .. .. .. 79.6 105.7 108.5 109.6 102.2 88.5 92.5 .. .. 89.1 151.1 214.3 82.6 .. 97.6 102.0 128.9 121.4 55.6 60.3 .. 119.2 100.0 .. 118.3 123.4 80.2 102.4 104.7 .. ..
93.8 91.5 .. 175.3 .. 87.9 92.9 94.8 83.7 61.7 118.0 .. 83.2 .. 62.3 .. 165.7 .. 112.9 .. 91.8 71.9 .. 205.3 .. .. 71.2 76.2 104.4 140.1 190.9 81.8 105.9 .. 180.5 98.4 107.7 144.4 120.6 78.5 103.1 126.2 75.2 232.9 209.8 156.7 155.6 57.6 85.9 177.1 107.3 136.9 66.5 106.9 .. .. 249.4
2010 World Development Indicators
359
6.2
Growth of merchandise trade Export volume
Import volume
Export value
Import value
average annual % growth
average annual % growth
average annual % growth
average annual % growth
1990–2000
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spaina Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Swedena Switzerlanda Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdoma United Statesa Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe
2000–08
.. .. –8.0 2.9 10.6 .. .. 11.7 .. .. .. 4.5 11.4 7.4 12.6 4.0 8.9 3.7 2.2 .. 6.0 9.6 .. 9.1 .. 5.7 10.7 .. 17.8 .. .. 6.2 6.6 6.1 .. 5.2 .. .. .. 6.1 8.8
.. .. 4.7 2.2 0.7 .. .. 12.7 .. .. .. 1.7 4.0 3.9 9.1 10.1 3.9 4.9 0.3 .. 5.9 8.8 .. 16.8 5.8 9.3 13.1 .. 15.3 .. 8.5 2.1 4.9 9.1 .. –2.4 13.2 .. –4.5 8.4 –5.8
1990–2000
.. .. 0.8 .. 4.9 .. .. 8.3 .. .. .. 7.6 9.3 8.0 8.4 3.1 6.4 4.2 .. .. –2.0 2.6 .. 6.0 .. 4.3 11.1 .. 22.4 .. .. 6.5 9.1 10.5 .. 4.8 .. .. 4.4 2.9 8.0
2000–08
.. .. 14.0 13.7 6.7 .. .. 9.2 .. .. .. 8.8 6.5 2.7 21.5 7.5 2.1 3.2 13.8 .. 12.3 10.0 .. –7.3 3.8 5.8 11.9 .. 8.6 .. 16.6 4.5 4.5 6.3 .. 14.2 14.3 .. 11.1 17.1 –5.6
a. Data are from the International Monetary Fund’s International Financial Statistics database.
360
2010 World Development Indicators
1990–2000
.. .. –4.0 3.1 4.0 .. .. 9.9 .. .. .. 2.5 8.6 11.3 14.0 5.9 7.4 4.4 0.9 .. 6.4 10.5 .. 6.6 6.8 6.0 9.2 .. 15.4 .. 6.5 6.2 7.2 5.2 .. 5.4 22.7 .. 20.6 –4.6 3.4
2000–08
.. .. 19.4 22.1 9.7 .. .. 14.8 .. .. .. 15.0 12.8 7.2 28.8 16.0 10.2 6.6 15.0 .. 16.8 14.0 .. 10.1 23.8 15.3 22.3 .. 25.4 .. 22.8 8.5 7.7 15.0 .. 16.2 21.3 .. 12.8 28.0 3.5
1990–2000
.. .. –1.7 0.8 3.6 .. .. 7.8 .. .. .. 5.8 6.2 8.9 9.8 5.0 5.4 3.6 3.6 .. 0.1 5.0 .. 5.5 12.1 5.2 10.3 .. 21.0 .. 10.7 6.5 9.5 10.1 .. 5.3 22.7 .. 0.6 1.3 1.9
Net barter terms of trade index
2000–08
.. .. 21.6 19.4 16.8 .. .. 13.9 .. .. .. 19.3 15.1 11.1 27.2 14.4 10.3 5.5 22.7 .. 21.9 15.3 .. 16.6 14.3 13.1 22.1 .. 16.6 .. 23.0 10.4 8.7 14.3 .. 18.3 23.4 .. 21.0 24.8 4.7
2000 = 100 1995
2008
.. .. 110.1 .. 156.3 .. .. 104.3 .. .. .. 106.0 104.3 99.0 100.0 100.0 110.2 96.4 .. .. 98.0 116.0 .. 99.1 .. 95.8 105.7 .. 197.2 .. .. 100.1 103.3 116.2 .. 63.4 .. .. .. 189.7 96.8
.. .. 169.5 236.2 94.0 .. .. 83.0 .. .. .. 130.0 102.8 68.6 232.2 92.5 86.6 99.4 145.3 .. 108.9 94.3 .. 21.4 157.5 95.0 91.2 .. 106.2 .. 148.1 105.0 91.8 92.3 .. 249.5 92.8 .. 165.4 170.6 91.5
About the data
6.2
GLOBAL LINKS
Growth of merchandise trade Definitions
Data on international trade in goods are available
from national and international sources such as the
• Export and import volumes are indexes of the
from each country’s balance of payments and
IMF’s International Financial Statistics database, the
quantity of goods traded. They are derived from
customs records. While the balance of payments
United Nations Economic Commission for Latin Amer-
UNCTAD’s volume index series and are the ratio of
focuses on the financial transactions that accom-
ica and the Caribbean, the United Nations Statistics
the export or import value indexes to the correspond-
pany trade, customs data record the direction of
Division’s Monthly Bulletin of Statistics database,
ing unit value indexes. Unit value indexes are based
trade and the physical quantities and value of goods
the World Bank Africa Database, the U.S. Bureau
on data reported by countries that demonstrate
entering or leaving the customs area. Customs data
of Labor Statistics, Japan Customs, and UNCTAD’s
consistency under UNCTAD quality controls, supple-
may differ from data recorded in the balance of pay-
Commodity Price Statistics. The IMF also compiles
mented by UNCTAD’s estimates using the previous
ments because of differences in valuation and time
data on trade prices and volumes in its International
year’s trade values at the Standard International
of recording. The 1993 United Nations System of
Financial Statistics (IFS) database.
Trade Classification three-digit level as weights. For
National Accounts and the fifth edition of the Inter-
Unless otherwise noted, the growth rates and
economies for which UNCTAD does not publish data,
national Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Balance of Payments
terms of trade in the table were calculated from
the export and import volume indexes (lines 72 and
Manual (1993) attempted to reconcile definitions and
index numbers compiled by UNCTAD. The growth
73) in the IMF’s International Financial Statistics are
reporting standards for international trade statistics,
rates and terms of trade for selected economies
used to calculate the average annual growth rates.
but differences in sources, timing, and national prac-
were calculated from index numbers compiled in
• Export and import values are the current value of
tices limit comparability. Real growth rates derived
the IMF’s International Financial Statistics. In some
exports (free on board, f.o.b.) or imports (cost, insur-
from trade volume indexes and terms of trade based
cases price and volume indexes from different
ance, and freight, c.i.f.), converted to U.S. dollars
on unit price indexes may therefore differ from those
sources vary significantly as a result of differences
and expressed as a percentage of the average for
derived from national accounts aggregates.
in estimation procedures. Because the IMF does not
the base period (2000). UNCTAD’s export or import
Trade in goods, or merchandise trade, includes all
publish trade value indexes, for selected economies
value indexes are reported for most economies. For
goods that add to or subtract from an economy’s
the trade value indexes were derived from the vol-
selected economies for which UNCTAD does not pub-
material resources. Trade data are collected on the
ume and price indexes. All indexes are rescaled to
lish data, the value indexes are derived from export
basis of a country’s customs area, which in most
a 2000 base year.
or import volume indexes (lines 72 and 73) and cor-
cases is the same as its geographic area. Goods
The terms of trade measures the relative prices of
responding unit value indexes of exports or imports
provided as part of foreign aid are included, but
a country’s exports and imports. There are several
(lines 74 and 75) in the IMF’s International Financial
goods destined for extraterritorial agencies (such
ways to calculate it. The most common is the net
Statistics. • Net barter terms of trade index is calcu-
as embassies) are not.
barter (or commodity) terms of trade index, or the
lated as the percentage ratio of the export unit value
Collecting and tabulating trade statistics are dif-
ratio of the export price index to the import price
indexes to the import unit value indexes, measured
ficult. Some developing countries lack the capacity
index. When a country’s net barter terms of trade
relative to the base year 2000.
to report timely data, especially landlocked coun-
index increases, its exports become more valuable
tries and countries whose territorial boundaries are
or its imports cheaper.
porous. Their trade has to be estimated from the data reported by their partners. (For further discussion of the use of partner country reports, see About the data for table 6.3.) Countries that belong to common customs unions may need to collect data through direct inquiry of companies. Economic or political concerns may lead some national authorities to suppress or misrepresent data on certain trade flows, such as oil, military equipment, or the exports of a dominant producer. In other cases reported trade data may be distorted by deliberate under- or overinvoicing to affect capital transfers or avoid taxes. And in some regions smuggling and black market trading result in unreported trade flows. By international agreement customs data are reported to the United Nations Statistics Division,
Data sources
which maintains the Commodity Trade (Comtrade)
Data on trade indexes are from UNCTAD’s annual
and Monthly Bulletin of Statistics databases. The
Handbook of Statistics for most economies and
United Nations Conference on Trade and Develop-
from the IMF’s International Financial Statistics for
ment (UNCTAD) compiles international trade sta-
selected economies.
tistics, including price, value, and volume indexes,
2010 World Development Indicators
361
6.3
Direction and growth of merchandise trade
Direction of trade High-income importers
% of world trade, 2008
Source of exports High-income economies European Union Japan United States Other high-income economies Low- and middle-income economies East Asia & Pacific China Europe & Central Asia Russian Federation Latin America & Caribbean Brazil Middle East & N. Africa Algeria South Asia India Sub-Saharan Africa South Africa World
European Union
Japan
United States
Other highincome
Total
27.9 22.1 0.7 1.7 3.5 8.2 2.2 1.7 3.4 1.4 0.8 0.3 1.0 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.1 36.2
2.5 0.4 .. 0.4 1.7 1.7 1.3 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 4.3
7.1 2.3 0.9 .. 4.0 5.6 2.1 1.6 0.2 0.1 2.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.1 12.7
11.6 3.4 1.5 3.0 3.6 5.5 3.8 2.7 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 17.1
49.2 28.2 3.0 5.1 12.9 21.0 9.3 6.7 4.2 1.7 3.7 0.6 1.7 0.4 0.9 0.7 1.2 0.3 70.2
Low- and middle-income importers
% of world trade, 2008
Source of exports High-income economies European Union Japan United States Other high-income economies Low- and middle-income economies East Asia & Pacific China Europe & Central Asia Russian Federation Latin America & Caribbean Brazil Middle East & N. Africa Algeria South Asia India Sub-Saharan Africa South Africa World
362
East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & N. Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
Total
7.3 1.0 1.3 0.7 4.3 2.3 1.4 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 10.2
4.1 3.3 0.2 0.2 0.4 2.9 0.6 0.6 2.0 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.9
3.3 0.7 0.2 1.7 0.6 1.9 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.0 1.1 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 5.1
1.2 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.8 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0
1.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 2.3
1.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 1.7
18.4 6.6 1.8 3.0 6.9 9.8 3.5 2.2 2.7 1.1 1.7 0.6 0.8 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.7 0.2 28.2
2010 World Development Indicators
6.3
GLOBAL LINKS
Direction and growth of merchandise trade Nominal growth of trade High-income importers
average annual % growth, 1998–2008
Source of exports High-income economies European Union Japan United States Other high-income economies Low- and middle-income economies East Asia & Pacific China Europe & Central Asia Russian Federation Latin America & Caribbean Brazil Middle East & N. Africa Algeria South Asia India Sub-Saharan Africa South Africaa World
European Union
Japan
United States
Other highincome
Total
9.7 10.1 4.1 5.4 10.8 18.4 19.4 27.7 22.0 23.9 13.2 12.7 16.6 18.1 14.1 15.9 12.3 12.6 11.1
7.9 5.9 .. 0.7 11.7 13.1 12.4 15.1 16.5 15.8 11.8 10.1 19.0 16.8 6.1 7.5 23.2 25.0 9.7
5.8 7.6 1.4 .. 6.1 12.9 16.3 23.5 10.1 5.9 9.3 11.1 26.7 30.7 9.7 12.1 21.4 17.4 8.4
9.0 9.7 8.1 6.0 12.3 18.2 18.0 23.7 20.8 20.0 17.1 20.7 20.5 29.8 20.0 22.4 14.1 14.6 11.2
8.8 9.8 4.8 5.3 9.5 16.1 17.0 23.2 20.9 21.5 10.8 13.3 18.7 22.0 14.5 17.0 16.1 15.2 10.5
Low- and middle-income importers
average annual % growth, 1998–2008
Source of exports High-income economies European Union Japan United States Other high-income economies Low- and middle-income economies East Asia & Pacific China Europe & Central Asia Russian Federation Latin America & Caribbean Brazil Middle East & N. Africa Algeria South Asia India Sub-Saharan Africa South Africaa World
East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & N. Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
Total
16.4 15.9 14.2 12.1 18.2 23.9 22.4 28.4 20.8 21.2 31.8 31.2 31.2 64.2 27.5 29.8 22.8 28.5 18.1
18.8 18.8 28.0 12.6 20.1 23.9 37.6 41.1 21.9 21.9 20.8 22.2 22.1 14.1 15.5 14.7 23.2 20.0 20.6
7.6 8.0 7.4 6.5 11.9 17.1 25.7 30.8 20.2 21.8 13.9 15.9 18.8 12.1 23.0 26.0 25.0 10.9 10.1
12.9 11.2 10.5 10.6 19.0 23.0 24.6 30.1 22.3 23.7 16.3 19.3 27.3 27.7 24.1 27.9 13.6 19.5 15.8
18.2 16.1 11.2 18.5 20.3 24.3 26.1 35.0 23.2 21.7 22.7 18.0 31.8 86.5 20.8 21.1 14.0 17.9 20.3
12.6 11.5 10.7 11.6 15.9 21.3 26.1 30.7 20.6 14.7 25.1 27.0 27.5 8.3 24.0 25.1 15.2 12.4 15.5
14.4 14.9 13.3 8.6 17.8 22.3 25.5 32.5 21.9 21.8 17.1 19.4 26.9 19.9 23.1 24.9 21.5 16.0 16.5
a. Data for 1998 are based on imports from South Africa reported by other economies because data on exports for South Africa were not available.
2010 World Development Indicators
363
6.3
Direction and growth of merchandise trade
About the data
Definitions
The table provides estimates of the flow of trade in
using the IMF’s published period average exchange
• Merchandise trade includes all trade in goods;
goods between groups of economies. The data are
rate (series rf or rh, monthly averages of the market
trade in services is excluded. • High-income econo-
from the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Direc-
or official rates) for the reporting country or, if unavail-
mies are those classified as such by the World Bank
tion of Trade database. All high-income economies
able, monthly average rates in New York. Because
(see inside front cover). • European Union is defined
and major developing economies report trade on
imports are reported at cost, insurance, and freight
as all high-income EU members: Austria, Belgium,
a timely basis, covering about 85 percent of trade
(c.i.f.) valuations, and exports at free on board (f.o.b.)
Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland,
for recent years. Trade by less timely reporters and
valuations, the IMF adjusts country reports of import
France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lux-
by countries that do not report is estimated using
values by dividing them by 1.10 to estimate equiva-
embourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovak
reports of trading partner countries. Because the
lent export values. The accuracy of this approxima-
Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United
largest exporting and importing countries are reli-
tion depends on the set of partners and the items
Kingdom. • Other high-income economies include
able reporters, a large portion of the missing trade
traded. Other factors affecting the accuracy of trade
all high-income economies (both Organisation for
flows can be estimated from partner reports. Part-
data include lags in reporting, recording differences
Economic Co-operation and Development members
ner country data may introduce discrepancies due to
across countries, and whether the country reports
and others) except the high-income European Union,
smuggling, confidentiality, different exchange rates,
trade according to the general or special system of
Japan, and the United States. • Low- and middle-
overreporting of transit trade, inclusion or exclusion
trade. (For further discussion of the measurement of
income regional groupings are based on World Bank
of freight rates, and different points of valuation and
exports and imports, see About the data for tables
classifications (see inside back cover for regional
times of recording.
4.4 and 4.5.)
groupings) and may differ from those used by other
In addition, estimates of trade within the European
The regional trade flows in the table are calculated
Union (EU) have been significantly affected by changes
from current price values. The growth rates are in
in reporting methods following the creation of a cus-
nominal terms; that is, they include the effects of
toms union. The current system for collecting data on
changes in both volumes and prices.
organizations.
trade between EU members—Intrastat, introduced in 1993—has less exhaustive coverage than the previous customs-based system and has resulted in some problems of asymmetry (estimated imports are about 5 percent less than exports). Despite these issues, only a small portion of world trade is estimated to be omitted from the IMF’s Direction of Trade Statistics Yearbook and Direction of Trade database. Most countries report their trade data in national currencies, which are converted into U.S. dollars
Trade among developing economies has grown faster than trade among high-income economies Annual average growth of merchandise trade, 1998–2008 (percent)
6.3a
High-income importers
Low- and middle-income importers
30
20
10
0 High income
East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & N. Africa
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
Source of exports
Data sources
Low- and middle-income economies increased their imports from other low- and middle-income econo-
Data on the direction and growth of merchandise
mies. High-income economies are also increasingly importing from low- and middle-income economies.
trade were calculated using the IMF’s Direction of
Source: World Bank staff calculations based on data from the International Monetary Fund’s Direction of Trade database.
Trade database.
364
2010 World Development Indicators
6.4
GLOBAL LINKS
High-income economy trade with low- and middle-income economies Exports to low-income economies High-income economies
Total ($ billions) % of total exports Food Cereals Agricultural raw materials Ores and nonferrous metals Fuels Crude petroleum Petroleum products Manufactured goods Chemical products Iron and steel Machinery and transport equipment Furniture Textiles Footwear Other Miscellaneous goods
European Union
Japan
United States
1998
2008
1998
2008
1998
2008
1998
2008
47.0
146.3
21.7
56.2
5.2
15.4
4.5
15.9
12.2 4.3 2.1 1.1 3.7 0.0 3.5 78.9 12.3 3.0 45.4 0.3 6.2 0.4 11.2 1.7
8.9 3.0 2.1 1.9 15.9 0.5 15.0 65.9 10.3 3.8 38.6 0.2 3.7 0.2 9.0 4.8
14.4 3.6 1.5 0.9 2.2 0.0 2.0 79.0 14.2 2.4 46.2 0.5 2.3 0.3 13.2 1.2
10.2 2.3 1.5 1.3 14.8 0.0 14.5 69.2 11.1 2.3 42.0 0.4 1.8 0.2 11.4 2.9
1.0 0.5 1.2 0.6 1.1 0.0 1.0 92.6 5.1 7.7 66.4 0.1 5.0 0.0 8.3 3.6
0.9 0.1 1.6 1.4 2.4 0.0 2.3 90.2 5.3 11.4 61.3 0.1 3.3 0.0 8.7 3.5
23.9 17.0 5.1 0.6 1.0 0.0 0.8 65.2 11.6 1.7 40.1 0.3 4.0 0.5 7.1 4.2
21.4 12.9 6.2 1.9 6.7 0.0 6.3 59.4 6.3 1.4 43.6 0.2 0.7 0.3 6.9 4.4
49.6
188.4
25.4
73.7
4.0
14.8
11.7
71.4
23.5 0.3 6.6 4.6 21.0 19.6 1.1 42.7 0.9 0.5 3.5 0.6 26.1 3.4 7.8 1.6
11.9 0.6 2.3 4.0 43.7 36.9 1.9 35.9 1.1 0.3 3.6 2.0 20.4 3.8 4.5 2.3
30.4 0.2 8.5 4.9 10.9 10.4 0.3 43.8 1.1 0.4 2.6 0.6 23.1 5.2 10.8 1.2
18.5 0.4 3.7 5.9 31.2 23.1 0.4 40.0 1.0 0.3 2.3 1.7 23.3 6.5 5.1 0.7
32.1 0.1 6.1 9.8 14.3 11.7 0.6 35.5 0.4 1.4 3.7 1.9 21.8 1.5 4.8 2.3
11.8 0.2 2.4 7.0 37.8 22.5 2.2 38.2 1.5 0.5 16.4 2.1 9.2 2.7 5.8 2.8
10.6 0.1 1.0 2.4 41.1 37.6 3.1 44.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 38.0 1.1 4.2 0.7
4.3 0.1 0.6 0.4 62.1 58.3 3.2 32.2 0.7 0.2 1.4 2.6 22.9 1.8 2.6 0.5
0.9 1.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 2.8 2.0 0.2 0.0
3.3 9.6 4.4 1.5 0.8 2.6 1.2 6.0 2.3 3.3 0.6 0.1 0.0 4.3 7.7 0.6 0.0
1.9 3.8 7.4 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.6 1.8 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 7.1 0.7 0.0
5.3 3.4 1.7 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.4 0.9 6.2 0.7 1.3 0.5 0.9 11.2 13.4 1.6 0.0
4.2 1.5 1.0 0.2 0.6 0.7 0.0 1.2 4.8 1.1 0.8 0.6 1.2 9.5 8.4 1.2 0.0
Imports from low-income economies
Total ($ billions) % of total imports Food Cereals Agricultural raw materials Ores and nonferrous metals Fuels Crude petroleum Petroleum products Manufactured goods Chemical products Iron and steel Machinery and transport equipment Furniture Textiles Footwear Other Miscellaneous goods
Simple applied tariff rates on imports from low-income economies (%)a
Average Food Cereals Agricultural raw materials Ores and nonferrous metals Fuels Crude petroleum Petroleum products Manufactured goods Chemical products Iron and steel Machinery and transport equipment Furniture Textiles Footwear Other Miscellaneous goods
5.5 6.8 8.9 2.5 1.6 3.1 1.3 5.1 5.6 3.8 5.1 2.5 4.3 9.0 8.6 3.3 0.9
3.9 4.2 2.2 1.5 1.1 1.1 0.7 1.5 4.1 2.6 2.1 1.7 3.5 6.8 6.4 2.4 0.8
1.7 5.3 30.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 3.1 3.1 0.5 0.0
2010 World Development Indicators
365
6.4
High-income economy trade with low- and middle-income economies
Exports to middle-income economies High-income economies
1998
Total ($ billions) % of total exports Food Cereals Agricultural raw materials Ores and nonferrous metals Fuels Crude petroleum Petroleum products Manufactured goods Chemical products Iron and steel Machinery and transport equipment Furniture Textiles Footwear Other Miscellaneous goods
2008
European Union
1998
2008
Japan
United States
1998
2008
1998
2008
691.6
2,371.8
280.7
1,004.8
81.8
280.1
191.8
425.5
7.3 1.6 1.8 1.8 2.4 0.4 1.4 84.2 11.6 2.7 49.3 0.6 6.0 0.4 13.7 2.2
5.9 1.3 1.8 4.1 7.0 1.0 4.9 77.2 13.0 3.8 44.5 0.4 2.5 0.2 12.7 3.5
8.1 1.1 1.2 1.5 1.4 0.1 1.1 85.7 12.9 2.8 46.7 0.8 5.7 0.6 16.0 1.6
5.7 0.9 1.4 2.6 3.3 0.1 2.8 83.4 13.3 4.0 46.9 0.7 3.4 0.5 14.5 3.1
0.6 0.2 1.1 1.7 0.5 0.0 0.4 94.0 7.6 6.1 66.6 0.1 3.1 0.0 10.6 2.1
0.3 0.0 0.9 3.4 2.6 0.0 2.5 88.5 8.8 7.5 60.6 0.2 1.4 0.0 10.0 4.2
8.8 2.8 2.5 1.6 2.0 0.0 1.3 81.4 10.5 1.0 50.5 0.7 5.3 0.2 13.1 3.8
12.0 3.8 3.5 4.3 7.7 0.0 6.0 69.2 14.1 1.7 39.8 0.3 2.0 0.1 11.2 3.3
914.3
3,595.8
285.2
1,364.7
90.5
315.7
320.0
1,023.2
10.8 0.5 2.6 5.3 11.2 7.2 1.5 68.1 3.2 2.5 27.9 1.6 14.5 2.8 15.6 2.0
6.5 0.4 1.3 4.8 24.0 16.2 4.1 61.3 3.9 3.7 29.4 1.8 7.9 1.4 13.4 1.8
14.8 0.3 3.7 7.0 15.3 9.8 1.9 56.9 4.1 2.7 17.7 1.7 15.7 1.9 13.1 1.9
8.4 0.6 1.6 4.9 27.7 19.1 4.1 55.2 3.9 3.7 23.9 1.8 8.8 1.4 11.9 1.3
17.2 0.6 4.6 9.5 13.1 5.5 0.8 54.2 3.0 1.3 20.2 1.3 14.4 1.7 12.3 1.4
7.3 0.2 2.2 11.0 23.4 10.7 3.1 54.5 4.4 2.1 25.1 1.3 8.7 1.1 11.8 1.5
7.2 0.2 1.3 2.9 9.8 7.5 1.9 76.1 2.1 2.2 35.9 2.0 13.5 3.6 16.8 2.6
4.7 0.2 0.9 2.4 26.1 21.8 3.7 63.8 3.2 2.5 32.1 2.4 7.6 1.7 14.3 2.1
1.1 2.8 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.9 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.0 3.1 2.8 0.3 0.0
2.7 12.2 15.7 1.3 0.1 1.4 1.2 6.0 1.5 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.0 4.4 12.8 0.4 0.0
2.5 7.0 11.2 0.6 0.1 0.3 0.0 1.0 2.1 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.1 5.7 16.7 0.8 0.0
3.8 3.9 1.2 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 1.5 4.0 1.7 2.8 0.6 0.6 11.1 11.6 1.2 0.9
2.6 2.9 0.7 0.4 0.4 1.1 0.0 2.9 2.7 1.1 0.3 0.5 0.4 7.6 6.9 0.8 0.2
Imports from middle-income economies
Total ($ billions) % of total imports Food Cereals Agricultural raw materials Ores and nonferrous metals Fuels Crude petroleum Petroleum products Manufactured goods Chemical products Iron and steel Machinery and transport equipment Furniture Textiles Footwear Other Miscellaneous goods
Simple applied tariff rates on imports from middle-income economies (%)a
Average Food Cereals Agricultural raw materials Ores and nonferrous metals Fuels Crude petroleum Petroleum products Manufactured goods Chemical products Iron and steel Machinery and transport equipment Furniture Textiles Footwear Other Miscellaneous goods
5.9 9.6 11.3 2.6 2.1 3.1 5.5 6.1 5.6 3.7 3.4 3.7 5.8 9.9 9.6 5.3 0.8
a. Includes ad valorem equivalents of specific rates.
366
2010 World Development Indicators
4.2 6.0 6.4 2.0 1.3 1.4 0.6 2.4 4.1 2.5 2.0 2.6 4.6 7.5 7.2 5.1 0.4
3.5 13.0 32.3 0.9 1.3 0.1 0.0 0.3 2.7 2.0 1.2 1.1 0.6 6.8 6.5 1.4 0.0
About the data
6.4
GLOBAL LINKS
High-income economy trade with low- and middle-income economies Definitions
Developing economies are becoming increasingly
manufactures as a share of goods imports from both
The product groups in the table are defined in accor-
important in the global trading system. Since the
low- and middle-income economies have grown. And
dance with SITC revision 3: food (0, 1, 22, and 4) and
early 1990s trade between high-income economies
trade between developing economies has grown
cereals (04); agricultural raw materials (2 exclud-
and low- and middle-income economies has grown
substantially over the past decade, a result of their
ing 22, 27, and 28); ores and nonferrous metals
faster than trade among high-income economies.
increasing share of world output and liberalization of
(27, 28, and 68); fuels (3), crude petroleum (crude
The increased trade benefi ts consumers and pro-
trade, among other influences.
petroleum oils and oils obtained from bituminous
ducers. But as was apparent at the World Trade Orga-
Yet trade barriers remain high. The table includes
minerals; 333), and petroleum products (noncrude
nization’s (WTO) Ministerial Conferences in Doha,
information about tariff rates by selected product
petroleum and preparations; 334); manufactured
Qatar, in October 2001; Cancun, Mexico, in Septem-
groups. Applied tariff rates are the tariffs in effect
goods (5–8 excluding 68), chemical products (5),
ber 2003; and Hong Kong SAR, China, in December
for partners in preferential trade agreements such
iron and steel (67), machinery and transport equip-
2005, achieving a more pro-development outcome
as the North American Free Trade Agreement. When
ment (7), furniture (82), textiles (65 and 84), foot-
from trade remains a challenge. Doing so will require
these rates are unavailable, most favored nation
wear (85), and other manufactured goods (6 and 8
strengthening international consultation. After the
rates are used. The difference between most favored
excluding 65, 67, 68, 82, 84, and 85); and miscel-
Doha meetings negotiations were launched on ser-
nation and applied rates can be substantial. Simple
laneous goods (9). • Exports are all merchandise
vices, agriculture, manufactures, WTO rules, the
averages of applied rates are shown because they
exports by high-income economies to low-income
environment, dispute settlement, intellectual prop-
are generally a better indicator of tariff protection
and middle-income economies as recorded in the
erty rights protection, and disciplines on regional
than weighted average rates are.
United Nations Statistics Division’s Comtrade data-
integration. At the most recent negotiations in Hong
The data are from the United Nations Conference
base. Exports are recorded free on board (f.o.b.).
Kong SAR, China, trade ministers agreed to eliminate
on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). Partner coun-
• Imports are all merchandise imports by high-
subsidies of agricultural exports by 2013; to abolish
try reports by high-income economies were used for
income economies from low-income and middle-
cotton export subsidies and grant unlimited export
both exports and imports. Because of differences in
income economies as recorded in the United Nations
access to selected cotton-growing countries in Sub-
sources of data, timing, and treatment of missing data,
Statistics Division’s Commodity Trade (Comtrade)
Saharan Africa; to cut more domestic farm supports
the numbers in the table may not be fully comparable
database. Imports include insurance and freight
in the European Union, Japan, and the United States;
with those used to calculate the direction of trade
charges (c.i.f.). • High-, middle-, and low-income
and to offer more aid to developing countries to help
statistics in table 6.3 or the aggregate flows in tables
economies are those classified as such by the World
them compete in global trade.
4.4, 4.5, and 6.2. Tariff line data were matched to
Bank (see inside front cover). • European Union
Trade flows between high-income and low- and
Standard International Trade Classification (SITC) revi-
is defined as all high-income EU members: Austria,
middle-income economies reflect the changing mix of
sion 3 codes to define commodity groups. For further
Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
exports to and imports from developing economies.
discussion of merchandise trade statistics, see About
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland,
While food and primary commodities have continued
the data for tables 4.4, 4.5, 6.2, 6.3, and 6.5, and for
Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal,
to fall as a share of high-income economies’ imports,
information about tariff barriers, see table 6.8.
Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.
High-income economies export mostly manufactured goods to low- and middle-income economies
6.4a 1998
Share of total exports (%)
2008
100 80 60 40 20 0 Food
Agricultural raw materials
Fuels
Manufactured goods
Machinery and transport equipment
Textiles
Exports to low-income economies
Food
Agricultural raw materials
Fuels
Manufactured goods
Machinery and transport equipment
Textiles
Exports to middle-income economies
Data sources Data on trade values are from United Nations Statistics Division’s Comtrade database. Data
Some 65–75 percent of high-income economy exports to low-income and middle-income economies in
on tariffs are from UNCTAD’s Trade Analysis and
2008 were manufactured goods. Machinery and equipment accounted for nearly 60 percent of manu-
Information System database and are calculated
factured goods exports from high-income economies.
by World Bank staff using the World Integrated
Source: World Bank staff calculations based on data from the United Nations Statistics Division’s Comtrade database.
Trade Solution system.
2010 World Development Indicators
367
6.5
Direction of trade of developing economies Exports
Imports
% of total merchandise exports To developing economies
East Asia & Pacific Cambodia China Indonesia Kiribati Korea, Dem. Rep. Lao PDR Malaysia Mongolia Myanmar Papua New Guinea Philippines Thailand Tonga Vietnam Europe & Central Asia Albania Armenia Azerbaijan Belarus Bosnia and Herzegovina Bulgaria Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic Latvia Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Moldova Poland Romania Russian Federation Serbia Tajikistan Turkey Turkmenistan Ukraine Uzbekistan Latin America & Carib. Argentina Bolivia Brazil Chile Colombia Costa Rica Cuba Dominican Republic Ecuador El Salvador Guatemala Haiti Honduras Jamaica Mexico Nicaragua Panama Paraguay Peru Uruguay Venezuela, RB
368
% of total merchandise imports
Within region 1998 2008
Outside region 1998 2008
To high-income economies 1998 2008
7.7 w .. 4.1 11.2 .. .. .. 9.9 .. 11.6 8.8 7.9 11.8 6.1 18.6 28.6 w 3.1 37.5 63.7 81.3 4.8 29.4 69.5 42.4 49.6 28.1 50.8 28.1 79.5 14.6 11.7 29.1 .. 34.5 14.3 45.3 46.3 52.1 18.3 w 48.3 44.3 27.2 21.9 28.6 14.6 5.9 2.5 26.2 55.4 22.6 0.7 15.4 2.5 4.3 26.0 22.2 60.1 17.8 62.8 22.2
7.9 w 0.8 9.4 8.0 .. 43.6 0.5 8.1 12.3 18.0 0.9 1.9 5.5 .. 6.5 8.8 w 0.3 .. .. 6.6 .. 6.5 5.8 10.9 .. 2.3 1.1 1.2 1.7 3.0 9.3 9.6 .. .. 12.0 .. 19.3 .. 4.6 w 14.3 0.4 11.4 5.7 1.2 1.7 40.6 0.5 5.2 2.8 2.9 .. 0.0 8.4 0.3 .. 1.0 0.8 8.1 6.1 0.9
83.1 w 66.1 86.4 80.7 67.5 48.6 39.4 82.0 58.4 55.4 58.6 90.0 76.5 74.3 74.9 60.5 w 96.5 43.1 28.1 12.0 89.9 62.5 25.8 45.2 45.1 69.5 47.9 70.6 18.4 82.1 78.5 58.9 .. 61.9 69.5 24.6 34.0 36.9 73.1 w 33.4 54.1 60.0 62.1 68.7 39.9 53.5 96.7 67.9 41.7 72.6 98.6 65.2 88.7 94.8 67.9 74.7 35.2 74.0 30.6 59.0
10.8 w .. 6.0 19.1 .. .. .. 20.5 .. 65.5 9.0 20.4 26.2 18.0 19.3 28.1 w 11.1 37.5 5.7 59.3 5.9 31.3 63.3 31.7 53.1 39.3 44.2 37.9 35.7 16.2 21.8 29.2 40.9 46.2 17.9 73.3 51.1 66.1 18.9 w 39.3 72.9 24.3 18.5 34.0 20.6 15.3 15.2 35.8 42.6 45.7 10.7 20.8 2.6 6.9 43.4 15.6 68.4 21.9 42.7 10.7
2010 World Development Indicators
16.3 w 1.8 18.9 13.7 .. 52.3 1.0 11.5 4.2 15.6 2.3 2.4 12.2 .. 4.1 10.3 w 7.8 4.5 13.2 10.1 .. 7.8 6.5 15.4 .. 4.3 3.8 0.8 49.8 3.1 6.6 10.8 1.6 .. 16.8 .. 17.0 .. 11.4 w 26.6 3.1 21.1 20.3 2.5 17.3 34.8 3.1 6.2 0.6 1.9 .. 2.0 8.3 1.7 0.9 5.5 9.8 18.5 19.6 7.8
72.0 w 90.4 75.0 67.3 50.9 11.1 19.0 67.9 31.2 13.6 51.0 76.8 61.0 79.9 68.9 60.2 w 81.1 57.3 81.2 30.6 92.0 58.1 30.1 45.3 40.4 56.2 51.7 61.2 14.4 80.1 71.2 59.9 56.2 39.6 60.7 19.8 30.5 20.3 64.5 w 32.1 23.6 49.8 56.1 60.2 62.1 49.9 73.3 57.5 56.7 51.3 83.4 77.1 88.5 90.4 55.0 77.0 17.5 59.6 34.9 58.8
From developing economies Within region 1998 2008
Outside region 1998 2008
From high-income economies 1998 2008
7.6 w .. 6.2 10.8 .. .. .. 12.4 .. .. 8.3 13.4 13.3 7.4 17.1 28.8 w 9.9 34.5 60.0 72.2 5.2 31.7 50.3 54.1 58.1 26.5 34.2 34.1 57.9 7.6 16.1 31.7 .. 65.2 9.3 63.5 61.2 44.0 19.9 w 30.4 35.2 21.6 24.2 24.2 19.1 23.4 16.5 34.2 37.9 29.2 12.9 21.0 10.2 2.3 49.5 21.2 52.5 28.0 48.9 18.9
7.9 w 1.8 8.1 6.8 .. 17.7 .. 3.0 .. 2.0 1.3 3.7 5.7 .. 3.9 8.8 w 1.1 .. .. 2.9 .. 8.9 3.4 4.6 .. 1.5 3.2 5.3 1.7 7.0 6.1 10.5 .. .. 11.2 .. 4.1 .. 4.6 w 7.6 1.5 8.6 7.9 4.4 3.4 14.5 2.3 4.5 3.8 3.7 5.0 0.0 3.6 3.5 0.5 1.2 3.4 3.1 7.7 1.7
81.3 w 60.4 83.6 81.9 .. 46.5 16.1 83.3 52.5 50.9 89.5 82.3 75.2 84.6 78.9 65.1 w 88.8 .. 33.1 24.8 .. 58.9 45.2 40.7 29.7 72.0 61.3 60.6 35.8 85.3 76.7 57.7 .. 32.5 77.9 28.4 34.7 51.5 76.0 w 58.6 63.3 69.7 54.1 68.9 46.1 62.1 81.0 60.6 57.0 66.2 81.7 62.5 83.2 93.8 45.2 64.2 44.0 68.8 42.9 67.7
12.6 w 65.6 8.8 24.8 .. .. .. 26.1 .. .. 21.8 22.7 24.6 47.6 32.0 28.3 w 22.6 41.6 45.6 70.7 13.6 38.9 51.5 47.0 56.8 40.2 49.9 35.5 69.1 14.5 23.2 20.1 25.3 66.4 24.9 45.0 49.3 49.7 21.4 w 40.9 68.8 16.3 32.6 26.2 29.5 41.1 27.4 44.7 42.1 33.5 33.7 29.6 21.8 4.6 53.3 21.5 53.1 36.2 47.8 37.9
16.3 w 1.4 18.4 9.4 .. 55.1 1.2 6.1 43.6 4.2 1.2 4.2 8.5 .. 5.6 10.3 w 7.4 19.3 13.4 5.9 .. 7.7 9.4 26.3 19.5 3.2 4.1 3.5 3.3 6.9 7.2 20.3 4.3 .. 22.9 .. 12.3 .. 11.4 w 19.1 6.5 29.8 19.7 16.4 6.9 18.3 6.0 15.4 7.6 9.3 10.7 6.5 5.9 15.7 13.1 7.0 11.7 18.5 21.9 11.6
63.9 w 32.9 64.6 65.7 .. 7.8 12.2 66.7 26.7 33.0 75.3 73.1 65.5 48.5 49.0 55.8 w 70.0 39.0 41.0 21.8 .. 52.9 39.0 26.7 23.8 56.6 46.0 61.0 27.4 77.8 69.6 59.5 62.8 13.8 51.5 29.3 38.4 33.5 59.7 w 34.5 24.5 53.7 45.8 53.9 63.0 40.5 63.5 38.9 48.7 56.1 55.6 63.6 71.5 78.8 32.9 46.7 32.6 45.3 30.2 47.1
Exports
Imports
% of total merchandise exports To developing economies
Middle East & N. Africa Algeria Djibouti Egypt, Arab Rep. Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Jordan Lebanon Libya Morocco Syrian Arab Republic Tunisia Yemen, Rep. South Asia Afghanistan Bangladesh India Nepal Pakistan Sri Lanka Sub-Saharan Africa Angola Benin Burkina Faso Burundi Cameroon Central African Republic Chad Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Côte d’Ivoire Ethiopia Gabon Gambia, The Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Kenya Liberia Madagascar Malawi Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mozambique Niger Nigeria Rwanda Senegal Sierra Leone Somalia South Africa Sudan Tanzania Togo Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe
% of total merchandise imports
Within region 1998 2008
Outside region 1998 2008
To high-income economies 1998 2008
4.9 w 1.2 22.4 8.7 0.0 5.9 26.1 17.3 7.3 3.9 15.6 6.3 3.4 5.0 w 31.6 2.9 5.0 36.2 5.3 2.4 12.6 w 0.3 14.5 8.7 3.0 8.2 1.8 4.5 1.3 1.5 25.1 0.9 1.5 10.8 7.6 4.8 3.4 39.0 1.2 9.8 21.8 8.2 9.6 6.3 44.4 31.6 10.4 2.5 26.2 0.0 0.5 13.1 0.8 12.7 17.8 1.7 22.7 34.7
14.3 w 14.3 .. 10.6 14.4 17.1 26.3 11.6 9.9 14.1 14.2 7.2 51.6 15.8 w 14.4 6.4 18.0 .. 13.6 13.1 10.0 w 6.4 58.0 .. 0.3 6.2 8.3 .. 2.0 6.4 8.9 13.3 7.6 6.6 9.4 0.9 .. 18.8 3.3 6.2 12.6 34.7 6.9 0.9 11.6 0.4 17.9 14.7 20.2 0.0 29.9 7.1 24.9 26.8 29.0 8.5 13.3 9.1
76.6 w 84.5 17.5 70.5 78.1 77.0 43.6 69.2 82.9 71.2 65.2 83.3 44.3 78.2 w 54.0 90.2 76.5 61.7 78.9 81.0 64.7 w 93.3 27.4 52.1 61.5 84.9 90.0 83.4 96.4 89.5 58.9 81.1 83.3 82.6 77.2 90.9 25.9 40.9 95.5 75.7 65.2 55.5 82.5 92.7 44.0 68.0 71.1 63.7 45.5 72.1 69.6 51.7 74.2 59.2 52.4 89.8 59.3 55.9
6.1 w 2.9 4.1 11.8 2.0 2.0 27.2 37.2 2.8 2.3 50.6 9.7 1.4 5.9 w 41.5 3.1 4.9 64.4 12.2 6.1 11.1 w 4.6 26.0 17.2 11.9 9.8 8.6 0.3 7.5 1.0 28.3 5.9 2.3 7.9 9.0 1.9 31.1 33.5 5.5 4.9 28.8 7.9 10.3 10.7 13.8 55.0 8.1 4.2 43.5 3.3 4.5 16.5 1.1 19.7 47.0 46.0 26.9 57.5
22.7 w 12.6 .. 19.3 38.0 19.4 25.0 14.2 10.2 25.2 6.8 10.2 81.5 25.5 w 25.9 7.1 28.1 .. 20.6 15.3 26.1 w 42.1 45.4 .. 18.2 11.8 43.9 .. 52.5 37.5 13.6 19.2 28.5 58.4 28.3 37.7 .. 16.7 39.9 5.9 28.0 56.5 44.4 4.2 3.4 1.9 21.1 26.2 12.9 12.9 26.3 16.8 59.2 24.0 26.6 3.7 32.8 13.4
6.5
GLOBAL LINKS
Direction of trade of developing economies
66.1 w 84.5 13.6 59.8 45.7 78.6 38.5 47.9 87.0 71.5 42.6 77.6 16.5 65.9 w 32.6 75.9 65.0 29.0 66.1 73.6 61.1 w 53.3 28.6 45.7 53.7 76.3 47.4 98.1 39.8 61.3 57.1 74.1 58.6 33.7 51.3 44.0 2.5 41.8 54.6 81.2 42.6 25.8 44.2 85.0 61.7 43.0 69.8 24.5 27.3 80.3 69.2 66.7 39.6 43.9 25.4 47.4 40.2 29.0
From developing economies Within region 1998 2008
Outside region 1998 2008
From high-income economies 1998 2008
5.2 w 2.2 2.9 1.1 0.0 13.9 12.8 5.7 8.2 2.4 4.9 4.2 3.6 6.2 w 15.0 17.3 1.0 31.7 2.7 10.4 12.6 w 11.8 14.6 26.6 21.2 14.5 17.4 33.2 42.4 9.8 13.3 1.6 15.3 11.4 26.0 11.6 11.5 8.5 0.7 8.1 68.0 24.7 5.2 14.5 43.7 26.8 4.2 32.4 11.0 13.1 13.3 2.1 4.1 18.6 18.8 45.1 52.6 42.4
14.3 w 15.7 .. 23.4 21.8 31.5 20.8 18.0 9.4 12.4 25.5 9.7 23.1 15.8 w 40.3 18.7 24.1 .. 24.9 17.5 10.0 w 12.2 17.2 25.6 .. 9.9 10.6 .. 10.4 12.0 15.7 16.3 4.0 31.8 12.7 15.2 .. 17.7 1.9 25.3 3.9 5.4 17.1 24.3 11.2 16.6 23.1 6.2 17.9 9.6 60.8 15.3 37.9 22.6 9.3 .. 4.0 6.4
71.4 w 82.1 67.6 65.8 67.4 54.6 63.8 75.7 82.4 71.4 47.9 85.2 70.7 69.6 w 44.7 48.4 74.8 56.2 70.5 63.0 71.8 w 76.0 67.9 44.7 63.3 71.3 57.5 63.2 45.8 68.9 61.8 74.6 79.7 56.7 60.7 73.0 59.6 73.3 97.4 58.1 27.1 39.8 69.7 61.1 36.9 54.2 72.5 44.7 69.1 72.8 14.3 81.2 58.0 57.9 70.0 43.5 43.3 46.0
6.7 w 2.1 0.9 3.6 0.5 35.3 8.3 14.2 9.9 6.3 20.1 9.7 3.2 6.8 w 43.4 16.4 0.7 55.6 4.3 20.6 11.9 w 5.3 7.0 38.5 25.0 19.8 12.7 20.7 55.4 5.5 32.5 2.4 10.0 21.3 23.2 5.8 20.8 9.1 1.3 9.0 57.1 30.7 5.2 12.6 30.0 17.9 4.6 35.3 8.8 11.9 10.7 7.4 5.9 17.0 7.1 20.5 64.0 72.9
22.7 w 29.5 .. 32.0 36.4 36.4 29.6 23.5 25.6 24.1 33.5 19.3 37.6 25.5 w 25.3 29.5 39.0 .. 30.8 31.2 26.1 w 32.3 57.2 15.7 10.6 27.0 8.2 .. 10.6 35.3 24.8 38.4 14.7 49.5 35.5 20.9 .. 33.4 16.2 35.2 19.0 11.4 29.6 43.7 16.6 32.8 26.4 11.1 25.4 40.5 53.6 32.0 43.3 36.5 56.8 28.9 11.7 8.2
60.0 w 68.4 45.8 58.4 61.9 28.4 61.9 60.4 64.4 69.6 46.5 70.3 58.3 58.0 w 31.4 47.6 59.8 15.1 61.5 47.6 53.7 w 62.3 35.7 38.8 56.7 52.7 56.0 54.9 33.8 57.6 41.9 41.2 73.7 29.2 40.5 36.5 39.3 56.6 82.6 40.6 23.2 28.2 55.2 43.4 37.0 49.3 54.9 33.6 65.7 42.5 23.2 60.6 47.5 42.6 35.2 50.6 24.2 14.6
Note: Bilateral trade data are not available for Timor-Leste, Kosovo, West Bank and Gaza, Botswana, Eritrea, Lesotho, Namibia, and Swaziland. Components may not sum to 100 percent because of trade with unspecified partners or with economies not covered by World Bank classification. 2010 World Development Indicators
369
6.5
Direction of trade of developing economies
About the data
Definitions
Developing economies are an increasingly impor-
and commodity. Larger shares of exports from oil-
• Exports to developing economies within region
tant part of the global trading system. Their share
and resource-rich economies are to high-income
are the sum of merchandise exports from the report-
of world merchandise exports rose from 15 percent
economies.
ing economy to other developing economies in the
in 1990 to 31 percent in 2008. And trade between
The relative importance of intraregional trade
same World Bank region as a percentage of total
high-income economies and low- and middle-income
is higher for both landlocked countries and small
merchandise exports by the economy. • Exports to
economies has grown faster than trade between
countries with close trade links to the largest
developing economies outside region are the sum
high-income economies. This increased trade ben-
regional economy. For most developing economies—
of merchandise exports from the reporting economy
efits both producers and consumers in developing
especially smaller ones—there is a “geographic
to other developing economies in other World Bank
and high-income economies.
bias” favoring intraregional trade. Despite the broad
regions as a percentage of total merchandise exports
The table shows trade in goods between devel-
trend toward globalization and the reduction of trade
by the economy. • Exports to high-income econo-
oping economies in the same region and other
barriers, the relative share of intraregional trade
mies are the sum of merchandise exports from the
regions and between developing economies and
increased for most economies between 1998 and
reporting economy to high-income economies as a
high-income economies. Data on exports and
2008. This is due partly to trade-related advantages,
percentage of total merchandise exports by the econ-
imports are from the International Monetary Fund’s
such as proximity, lower transport costs, increased
omy. • Imports from developing economies within
(IMF) Direction of Trade database and should be
knowledge from repeated interaction, and cultural
region are the sum of merchandise imports by the
broadly consistent with data from other sources,
and historical affinity. The direction of trade is also
reporting economy from other developing economies
such as the United Nations Statistics Division’s
influenced by preferential trade agreements that a
in the same World Bank region as a percentage of
Commodity Trade (Comtrade) database. Generally,
country has made with other economies. Though
total merchandise imports by the economy. • Imports
data on trade between developing and high-income
formal agreements on trade liberalization do not
from developing economies outside region are the
economies are complete. But trade fl ows between
automatically increase trade, they nevertheless
sum of merchandise imports by the reporting econ-
many developing economies—particularly those in
affect the direction of trade between the participat-
omy from other developing economies in other World
Sub-Saharan Africa—are not well recorded, and
ing economies. Table 6.7 illustrates the size of exist-
Bank regions as a percentage of total merchandise
the value of trade among developing economies
ing regional trade blocs that have formal preferential
imports by the economy. • Imports from high-income
may be understated. The table does not include
trade agreements.
economies are the sum of merchandise imports by
some developing economies because data on their
Although global integration has increased, develop-
the reporting economy from high-income economies
bilateral trade fl ows are not available. Data on the
ing economies still face trade barriers when access-
as a percentage of total merchandise imports by the
direction of trade between selected high-income
ing other markets (see table 6.8).
economy.
economies are presented and discussed in tables 6.3 and 6.4. At the regional level most exports from developing economies are to high-income economies, but the share of intraregional trade is increasing. Geographic patterns of trade vary widely by country
Developing economies are increasingly trading with other developing economies in the same region
6.5a
Share of within-region trade in total merchandise trade (percent) 30 Europe & Central Asia
20
Middle East & North Africa
Latin America & Caribbean
Data sources Sub-Saharan Africa East Asia & Pacific
10
Data on merchandise trade flows are published in South Asia
the IMF’s Direction of Trade Statistics Yearbook and Direction of Trade Statistics Quarterly; the data in
0 1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
the table were calculated using the IMF’s Direction
Within-region trade (merchandise exports plus merchandise imports) has increased in all regions. In
of Trade database. Regional and income group
2008 nearly 30 percent of merchandise trade in Europe and Central Asia and 20 percent in East Asia
classifications are according to the World Bank
and Pacific was with other economies in the region.
classification of economies as of July 1, 2009,
Source: World Bank staff calculations based on data from International Monetary Fund’s Direction of Trade database.
and are as shown on the cover flaps.
370
2010 World Development Indicators
World Bank commodity price index (2000 = 100) Energy Nonenergy commodities Agriculture Beverages Food Fats and oils Grains Other food Raw materials Timber Other raw materials Fertilizers Metals and minerals Steel products a Commodity prices (2000 prices) Energy Coal, Australian ($/mt) Natural gas, Europe ($/mmBtu) Natural gas, U.S. ($/mmBtu) Natural gas, liquefied, Japan ($/mmBtu) Petroleum, avg, spot ($/bbl) Beverages (cents/kg) Cocoa Coffee, Arabica Coffee, robusta Tea, avg., 3 auctions Tea, Colombo auctions Tea, Kolkata auctions Tea, Mombasa auctions Food Fats and oils ($/mt) Coconut oil Copraa Groundnut oil Palm oil Palm kernel oila Soybeans Soybean meal Soybean oil Grains ($/mt) Barley Maize Rice, Thailand, 5% Sorghuma Wheat, Canadaa Wheat, U.S., hard red winter Wheat, U.S., soft red winter a
GLOBAL LINKS
6.6
Primary commodity prices
1970
1980
1990
1995
2000
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
19 183 188 230 201 237 204 151 136 97 179 82 185 0
153 177 195 273 199 196 199 205 143 92 198 177 141 134
79 115 113 117 116 105 121 124 105 88 124 98 122 131
53 117 122 136 117 126 124 101 125 105 146 110 106 118
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
101 108 114 117 117 129 112 105 107 91 124 110 96 100
123 121 118 109 123 134 115 117 109 90 129 125 126 153
171 135 121 125 121 120 115 129 119 100 140 148 162 170
197 172 134 130 131 123 134 140 143 113 177 151 251 162
207 190 153 144 156 177 160 126 148 116 184 203 266 154
273 217 183 168 198 222 225 142 156 120 196 453 260 231
180 179 166 185 172 182 181 153 142 117 169 246 198 191
.. .. 1 .. 4
49 5 2 7 45
39 2 2 4 22
33 2 1 3 14
26 4 4 5 28
25 4 5 5 28
48 4 5 5 34
43 6 8 5 48
44 8 6 6 57
56 7 6 7 60
102 11 7 10 78
60 7 3 7 52
233 397 321 289 217 343 307
321 427 400 205 137 253 224
123 192 115 200 182 273 144
119 277 230 124 118 145 108
91 192 91 188 179 181 203
170 137 79 147 150 142 150
141 161 72 153 162 156 141
140 230 101 150 167 147 134
142 225 133 168 171 157 175
165 231 162 172 214 163 141
206 246 186 193 223 180 177
243 267 138 229 264 211 212
1,376 779 1,312 901 .. 405 357 992
831 558 1,059 719 .. 365 323 737
327 224 937 282 .. 240 195 435
556 364 823 521 .. 215 164 519
450 305 714 310 444 212 189 338
454 291 1,207 430 445 256 205 538
600 409 1,054 428 588 278 219 559
560 376 963 383 569 249 195 495
542 360 867 427 519 240 187 535
778 514 1,145 661 753 325 261 747
978 652 1,704 758 903 418 339 1,006
610 403 995 574 589 367 343 714
.. 202 438 179 218 190 197
96 154 506 159 235 213 208
78 106 263 101 152 132 125
86 103 266 99 172 147 139
77 89 202 88 147 114 99
102 102 192 103 172 142 134
90 102 216 100 169 142 131
86 90 260 87 179 138 123
104 109 272 110 194 172 142
146 139 277 138 254 216 202
160 178 520 166 363 261 217
108 139 467 127 253 188 156
2010 World Development Indicators
371
6.6
Primary commodity prices
Commodity prices (continued) (2000 prices) Food (continued) Other food Bananas, U.S. ($/mt) Beef (cents/kg) Chicken meat (cents/kg) Fishmeal ($/mt)a Oranges ($/mt) Shrimp, Mexico (cents/kg) Sugar, EU domestic (cents/kg) Sugar, U.S. domestic (cents/kg) Sugar, world (cents/kg) Agricultural raw materials Cotton A index (cents/kg) Logs, Cameroon ($/cu. m) a Logs, Malaysian ($/cu. m) Rubber, Singapore (cents/kg) Plywood (cents/sheet)a Sawnwood, Malaysian ($/cu. m) Tobacco ($/mt)a Woodpulp ($/mt)a Fertilizers ($/mt) Diammonium phosphate Phosphate rock Potassium chloride Triple superphosphate Urea Metals and minerals Aluminum ($/mt) Copper ($/mt) Gold ($/toz) a Iron ore (cents/dmtu) Lead (cents/kg) Nickel ($/mt) Silver (cents/toz)a Tin (cents/kg) Zinc (cents/kg) MUV G-5 index (2000 = 100)
1970
1980
1990
1995
2000
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
573 452 .. 682 582 .. 39 57 29
467 340 85 621 482 1,420 60 82 78
526 249 96 401 516 1,039 57 50 27
369 158 92 411 441 1,253 57 42 24
424 193 119 413 363 1,515 56 43 18
364 192 129 593 661 1,110 58 46 15
476 228 138 589 780 928 61 41 14
547 238 135 664 794 939 60 43 20
605 228 124 1,040 741 915 58 44 29
572 220 133 997 810 855 58 39 19
675 251 136 906 885 854 56 37 23
712 222 144 1,034 764 795 44 46 34
219 149 149 141 357 608 3,727 615
252 310 241 176 338 489 2,806 661
177 334 172 84 345 518 3,297 792
177 282 212 131 485 614 2,194 708
130 275 190 67 448 595 2,976 664
136 271 182 105 419 535 2,568 510
124 301 179 116 422 528 2,488 582
110 304 184 135 462 599 2,533 577
113 285 214 186 532 670 2,653 624
118 323 227 192 543 683 2,808 650
126 421 234 207 516 711 2,869 656
116 354 241 161 475 677 3,523 517
187 38 109 147 ..
274 58 143 222 ..
167 39 95 128 116
180 29 98 124 155
154 44 123 138 101
174 37 110 145 135
201 37 113 169 159
224 38 144 183 199
233 40 156 180 199
366 60 170 287 262
773 276 456 703 394
272 102 530 216 210
1,926 4,895 125 34 105 9,860 614 1,273 102
1,795 2,690 750 35 112 8,037 2,544 2,068 94
1,593 2,586 373 32 79 8,614 475 591 147
1,499 2,437 319 24 52 6,830 431 516 86
1,549 1,813 279 29 45 8,638 500 544 113
1,389 1,727 353 31 50 9,346 477 475 80
1,558 2,602 372 34 80 12,551 607 773 95
1,724 3,340 404 59 89 13,387 666 670 125
2,297 6,007 540 69 115 21,675 1,034 785 293
2,235 6,030 590 72 219 31,537 1,136 1,231 275
2,057 5,560 697 112 167 16,875 1,199 1,480 150
1,400 4,330 818 85 145 12,322 1,235 1,141 139
29
81
103
120
100
103
110
110
112
118
125
119
Note: bbl = barrel, cu. m = cubic meter, dmtu = dry metric ton unit, kg = kilogram, mmBtu = million British thermal units, mt = metric ton, toz = troy ounce. a. Series not included in the nonenergy index.
372
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
6.6
GLOBAL LINKS
Primary commodity prices Definitions
Primary commodities—raw or partially processed
commodity price index contains 41 price series for
• Energy price index is the composite price index for
materials that will be transformed into fi nished
34 nonenergy commodities.
coal, petroleum, and natural gas, weighted by exports
goods—are often developing countries’ most impor-
Separate indexes are compiled for energy and steel
of each commodity from low- and middle-income
tant exports, and commodity revenues can affect liv-
products, which are not included in the nonenergy
countries. • Nonenergy commodity price index cov-
ing standards. Price data are collected from various
commodity price index.
ers the 34 nonenergy primary commodities that make
sources, including international commodity study
The MUV index is a composite index of prices
up the agriculture, fertilizer, and metals and miner-
groups, government agencies, industry trade jour-
for manufactured exports from the five major (G-5)
als indexes. • Agriculture includes beverages, food,
nals, and Bloomberg and Datastream. Prices are
industrial economies (France, Germany, Japan, the
and agricultural raw materials. • Beverages include
compiled in U.S. dollars or converted to U.S. dollars
United Kingdom, and the United States) to low- and
cocoa, coffee, and tea. • Food includes fats and oils,
when quoted in local currencies.
middle-income economies, valued in U.S. dollars.
grains, and other food items. Fats and oils include
The table is based on frequently updated price
The index covers products in groups 5–8 of SITC
coconut oil, groundnut oil, palm oil, soybeans, soy-
reports. Prices are those received by exporters when
revision 1. For the MUV G-5 index, unit value indexes
bean oil, and soybean meal. Grains include barley,
available, or the prices paid by importers or trade
in local currency for each country are converted to
maize, rice, and wheat. Other food items include
unit values. Annual price series are generally simple
U.S. dollars using market exchange rates and are
bananas, beef, chicken meat, oranges, shrimp, and
averages based on higher frequency data. The con-
combined using weights determined by each coun-
sugar. • Agricultural raw materials include timber
stant price series in the table are deflated by the
try’s export share in the base year (1995). The export
and other raw materials. Timber includes tropical
manufactures unit value (MUV) index for the Group
shares were 8.2 percent for France, 17.4 percent
hard logs and sawnwood. Other raw materials include
of Five (G-5) countries (see below).
for Germany, 35.6 percent for Japan, 6.6 percent
cotton, natural rubber, and tobacco. • Fertilizers
for the United Kingdom, and 32.2 percent for the
include phosphate, phosphate rock, potassium, and
United States.
nitrogenous products. • Metals and minerals include
Commodity price indexes are calculated as Laspeyres index numbers; the fixed weights are the 2002–04 average export values for low- and middle-
aluminum, copper, iron ore, lead, nickel, tin, and zinc.
income economies (based on 2001 gross national
• Steel products price index is the composite price
income) rebased to 2000. Data for exports are from
index for eight steel products based on quotations
the United Nations Statistics Division’s Commodity
free on board (f.o.b.) Japan excluding shipments to
Trade Statistics (Comtrade) database Standard Inter-
the United States for all years and to China prior
national Trade Classification (SITC) revision 3, the
to 2001, weighted by product shares of apparent
Food Agriculture Organization’s FAOSTAT database,
combined consumption (volume of deliveries) for Ger-
the International Energy Agency database, BP’s Sta-
many, Japan, and the United States. • Commodity
tistical Review of World Energy, the World Bureau of
prices—for definitions and sources, see “Commod-
Metal Statistics, World Bank staff estimates, and
ity price data” (also known as the “Pink Sheet”) at
other sources.
the World Bank Prospects for Development website
Each index in the table represents a fixed basket of
(www.worldbank.org/prospects, click on Products).
primary commodity exports over time. The nonenergy
• MUV G-5 index is the manufactures unit value index for G-5 country exports to low- and middleincome economies.
Primary commodity prices have been volatile over the past two years
6.6a
World Bank commodity price index, current prices (2000 = 100) 500 Energy index 400 Nonenergy commodities
300
Food
200 Raw materials
Agriculture 100 2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Data sources Data on commodity prices and the MUV G-5 index
Commodity prices rose rapidly in early 2008 before collapsing in the second half of the year. But prices
are compiled by the World Bank’s Development
rose again in 2009. Between January 2009 and January 2010 the average price of energy commodities
Prospects Group. Monthly updates of commod-
increased 57 percent and the average price of nonenergy commodities increased 30 percent.
ity prices are available at www.worldbank.org/
Source: World Bank commodity price data.
prospects.
2010 World Development Indicators
373
6.7
Regional trade blocs
Merchandise exports within bloc
Year of creation High-income and lowand middle-income economies 1989 APECb EEA 1994 EFTA 1960 European Union 1957 NAFTA 1994 SPARTECA 1981 Trans-Pacific SEP 2006 East Asia and Pacific and South Asia APTA 1975 ASEAN 1967 MSG 1993 PICTA 2001 SAARC 1985 Europe, Central Asia, and Middle East CEFTA 1992 CIS 1991 EAEC 1997 ECO 1985 GCC 1981 PAFTA (GAFTA) 1997 UMA 1989 Latin America and the Caribbean Andean Community 1969 CACM 1961 CARICOM 1973 LAIA (ALADI) 1980 MERCOSUR 1991 OECS 1981 Sub-Saharan Africa CEMAC 1994 COMESA 1994 EAC 1996 ECCAS 1983 ECOWAS 1975 Indian Ocean Commission 1984 SADC 1992 UEMOA 1994
Year of entry into Type force of the of most most recent recent agreement agreementa
$ millions 1990
1995
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
1994 2002 1958 1994 1981 2006
None EIA EIA EIA, CU FTA PTA EIA, FTA
901,560 1,688,708 2,261,791 3,310,523 3,775,795 4,193,036 4,607,766 1,079,711 1,463,232 1,714,018 2,863,903 3,237,586 3,805,786 4,190,268 782 925 831 1,252 1,524 2,196 2,910 1,032,397 1,404,255 1,641,609 2,732,159 3,089,257 3,627,406 3,977,321 226,273 394,472 676,141 824,658 902,193 951,551 1,013,245 5,299 9,135 8,579 15,201 15,562 18,617 20,263 1,110 2,614 1,438 2,345 2,927 3,290 4,278
1976 1992 1994 2003 2006
PTA FTA PTA FTA FTA
2,429 27,365 5 6 863
21,728 79,544 18 53 2,024
37,895 98,060 22 81 2,680
127,340 165,458 51 158 7,301
154,380 191,392 63 195 8,053
193,951 216,727 78 242 10,720
233,606 251,367 89 277 10,665
1994 1994 2000 2003 2003c 1998 1994 c
FTA FTA CU PTA CU FTA NNA
.. .. .. 1,243 6,906 13,204 958
619 31,529 10,919 4,746 6,832 12,948 1,109
1,047 28,753 13,936 4,518 8,029 16,188 1,041
2,452 59,441 24,818 12,579 15,408 43,393 1,885
4,801 67,926 24,711 17,365 19,257 52,733 2,402
7,029 100,540 45,714 22,064 23,988 63,563 2,695
8,266 126,005 51,186 26,739 32,699 83,484 4,570
1988 1961 1997 1981 2005 1981c
CU CU EIA PTA EIA NNA
544 667 456 13,350 4,127 29
1,788 1,594 877 35,986 14,199 39
2,046 2,586 1,078 44,253 17,829 38
4,572 4,342 2,090 71,720 21,128 68
5,011 4,808 2,429 90,358 25,775 84
5,875 5,677 3,112 110,421 33,038 104
6,757 6,708 3,808 136,896 42,733 118
1999 1994 2000 2004c 1993 2005c 2000 2000
CU FTA CU NNA PTA NNA FTA CU
139 1,146 335 160 1,532 63 1,655 621
120 1,367 628 157 1,875 113 3,615 560
96 1,443 689 182 2,715 106 4,427 741
201 2,962 1,075 255 5,497 162 7,799 1,390
247 3,363 1,062 313 5,956 182 8,701 1,544
305 4,501 1,385 385 6,676 214 11,912 1,835
355 5,296 1,616 449 8,251 190 15,468 2,096
Note: Regional bloc memberships are as follows: Andean Community, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru; Arab Maghreb Union (UMA), Algeria, Libyan Arab Republic, Mauritania, Morocco, and Tunisia; Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, China, Hong Kong SAR, China, Indonesia, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Peru, the Philippines, the Russian Federation, Singapore, Taiwan (China), Thailand, the United States, and Vietnam; Asia-Pacific Trade Agreement (APTA; formerly Bangkok Agreement), Bangladesh, China, India, the Republic of Korea, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, and Sri Lanka; Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam; Caribbean Community and Common Market (CARICOM), Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago; Central American Common Market (CACM), Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua; Central European Free Trade Area (CEFTA), Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, and Serbia; Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), Burundi, Comoros, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, the Arab Republic of Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Libyan Arab Republic, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Rwanda, Seychelles, Sudan, Swaziland, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe; Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, the Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan; East African Community (EAC), Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda; Economic and Monetary Community of Central Africa (CEMAC; formerly Central African Customs and Economic Union [UDEAC]), Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, and Gabon; Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS), Angola, Burundi, Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Chad, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, and São Tomé and Principe; Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), Benin, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Côte d’Ivoire, the Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, and Togo; Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO), Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan; Eurasian Economic Community (EAEC), Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan; European Economic Area (EEA), European Union plus Iceland, Liechten-
374
2010 World Development Indicators
6.7
GLOBAL LINKS
Regional trade blocs Merchandise exports within bloc
Year of creation High-income and lowand middle-income economies 1989 APECb EEA 1994 EFTA 1960 European Union 1957 NAFTA 1994 SPARTECA 1981 Trans-Pacific SEP 2006 East Asia and Pacific and South Asia APTA 1975 ASEAN 1967 MSG 1993 PICTA 2001 SAARC 1985 Europe, Central Asia, and Middle East CEFTA 1992 CIS 1991 EAEC 1997 ECO 1985 GCC 1981 PAFTA (GAFTA) 1997 UMA 1989 Latin America and the Caribbean Andean Community 1969 CACM 1961 CARICOM 1973 LAIA (ALADI) 1980 MERCOSUR 1991 OECS 1981 Sub-Saharan Africa CEMAC 1994 COMESA 1994 EAC 1996 ECCAS 1983 ECOWAS 1975 Indian Ocean Commission 1984 SADC 1992 UEMOA 1994
Year of entry into Type force of the of most most recent recent agreement agreementa
% of total bloc exports 1990
1995
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
1994 2002 1958 1994 1981 2006
None EIA EIA EIA, CU FTA PTA EIA, FTA
68.3 68.8 0.8 67.3 41.4 10.5 1.5
71.7 67.9 0.7 66.5 46.2 12.9 1.7
73.0 69.0 0.6 67.7 55.7 10.7 0.8
70.8 68.8 0.5 67.4 55.7 11.4 0.8
69.4 69.0 0.6 67.6 53.9 10.2 0.8
67.4 69.4 0.7 67.9 51.3 10.5 0.8
65.3 68.8 0.8 67.3 49.5 8.9 1.0
1976 1992 1994 2003 2006
PTA FTA PTA FTA FTA
1.6 18.9 0.3 0.3 3.2
6.8 24.4 0.4 1.3 4.4
8.0 23.0 0.6 2.1 4.2
11.0 25.3 0.8 2.3 5.6
10.7 24.9 0.8 2.4 5.1
11.0 25.2 0.8 2.6 5.5
11.4 25.6 0.8 2.4 4.8
1994 1994 2000 2003 2003c 1998 1994 c
FTA FTA CU PTA CU FTA NNA
.. .. .. 3.2 8.0 10.2 2.9
9.0 28.6 12.3 7.9 6.8 9.8 3.8
13.4 20.0 11.5 5.6 4.9 7.2 2.2
14.1 18.0 8.9 6.9 4.5 9.6 1.9
19.8 16.9 7.2 7.6 4.5 9.2 2.0
21.9 20.5 10.9 8.0 4.9 9.7 2.0
22.6 18.4 9.3 6.8 4.7 9.0 2.5
1988 1961 1997 1981 2005 1981c
CU CU EIA PTA EIA NNA
4.0 15.3 8.0 11.6 8.9 8.1
8.6 21.8 12.0 17.3 20.3 12.6
7.7 19.1 14.4 13.2 20.0 10.0
9.0 20.1 11.5 13.6 12.9 11.4
7.8 16.3 11.2 14.3 13.5 8.0
7.9 17.4 13.1 15.2 14.9 12.0
7.5 18.7 12.9 16.0 15.0 12.0
1999 1994 2000 2004 c 1993 2005c 2000 2000
CU FTA CU NNA PTA NNA FTA CU
2.3 4.7 17.7 1.4 8.0 3.9 6.6 13.0
2.1 6.1 19.5 1.5 9.0 5.9 10.2 10.3
1.0 4.6 22.6 1.0 7.6 4.4 9.5 13.1
0.9 4.7 17.7 0.6 9.3 4.9 9.3 13.4
0.9 4.0 15.9 0.5 7.9 5.0 9.1 13.1
1.0 4.5 17.5 0.6 7.7 5.8 10.0 14.8
0.8 4.1 17.6 0.4 7.6 5.1 10.1 14.5
stein, and Norway; European Free Trade Association (EFTA), Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland; European Union (EU; formerly European Economic Community and European Community), Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom; Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates; Indian Ocean Commission, Comoros, Madagascar, Mauritius, Réunion, and Seychelles; Latin American Integration Association (LAIA; formerly Latin American Free Trade Area), Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela; Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG), Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu; North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Canada, Mexico, and the United States; Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, British Virgin Islands, Dominica, Grenada, Montserrat, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines; Pacific Island Countries Trade Agreement (PICTA), Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu; Pan-Arab Free Trade Area (PAFTA; also known as Greater Arab Trade Area [GAFTA]), Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen; South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka; South Pacific Regional Trade and Economic Cooperation Agreement (SPARTECA), Australia, Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, and Western Samoa; Southern African Development Community (SADC), Angola, Botswana, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe; Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela; Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership (Trans-Pacific SEP), Brunei Darussalam, Chile, New Zealand, and Singapore; West African Economic and Monetary Union (UEMOA), Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal, and Togo.
2010 World Development Indicators
375
6.7
Regional trade blocs
Merchandise exports by bloc
Year of creation High-income and lowand middle-income economies 1989 APECb EEA 1994 EFTA 1960 European Union 1957 NAFTA 1994 SPARTECA 1981 Trans-Pacific SEP 2006 East Asia and Pacific and South Asia APTA 1975 ASEAN 1967 MSG 1993 PICTA 2001 SAARC 1985 Europe, Central Asia, and Middle East CEFTA 1992 CIS 1991 EAEC 1997 ECO 1985 GCC 1981 PAFTA (GAFTA) 1997 UMA 1989 Latin America and the Caribbean Andean Community 1969 CACM 1961 CARICOM 1973 LAIA (ALADI) 1980 MERCOSUR 1991 OECS 1981 Sub-Saharan Africa CEMAC 1994 COMESA 1994 EAC 1996 ECCAS 1983 ECOWAS 1975 Indian Ocean Commission 1984 SADC 1992 UEMOA 1994
Year of entry into Type force of the of most most recent recent agreement agreementa
% of world exports 1990
1995
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
39.0 46.4 2.9 45.3 16.2 1.5 2.2
46.4 42.4 2.4 41.5 16.8 1.4 3.0
48.5 38.9 2.2 38.0 19.0 1.3 2.7
45.1 40.1 2.3 39.1 14.3 1.3 2.9
45.3 39.1 2.3 38.1 14.0 1.3 3.0
44.7 39.4 2.3 38.4 13.3 1.3 2.9
44.0 38.0 2.3 36.9 12.8 1.4 2.8
1994 2002 1958 1994 1981 2006
None EIA EIA EIA, CU FTA PTA EIA, FTA
1976 1992 1994 2003 2006
PTA FTA PTA FTA FTA
4.5 4.3 0.1 0.1 0.8
6.3 6.4 0.1 0.1 0.9
7.5 6.7 0.1 0.1 1.0
11.2 6.3 0.1 0.1 1.3
12.0 6.4 0.1 0.1 1.3
12.7 6.2 0.1 0.1 1.4
12.8 6.1 0.1 0.1 1.4
1994 1994 2000 2003 2003c 1998 1994 c
FTA FTA CU PTA CU FTA NNA
.. .. .. 1.1 2.6 3.8 1.0
0.1 2.2 1.7 1.2 2.0 2.6 0.6
0.1 2.2 1.9 1.3 2.6 3.5 0.8
0.2 3.2 2.7 1.8 3.3 4.3 0.9
0.2 3.4 2.9 1.9 3.6 4.8 1.0
0.2 3.5 3.0 2.0 3.5 4.7 1.0
0.2 4.3 3.4 2.4 4.3 5.8 1.1
1988 1961 1997 1981 2005 1981c
CU CU EIA PTA EIA NNA
0.4 0.1 0.2 3.4 1.4 0.0
0.4 0.1 0.1 4.1 1.4 0.0
0.4 0.2 0.1 5.3 1.4 0.0
0.5 0.2 0.2 5.1 1.6 0.0
0.5 0.2 0.2 5.2 1.6 0.0
0.5 0.2 0.2 5.2 1.6 0.0
0.6 0.2 0.2 5.4 1.8 0.0
1999 1994 2000 2004 c 1993 2005c 2000 2000
CU FTA CU NNA PTA NNA FTA CU
0.2 0.7 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.7 0.1
0.1 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.7 0.1
0.1 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.7 0.1
0.2 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.0 0.8 0.1
0.2 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.0 0.8 0.1
0.2 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.0 0.9 0.1
0.3 0.8 0.1 0.7 0.7 0.0 1.0 0.1
a. CU is customs union; EIA is economic integration agreement; FTA is free trade agreement; PTA is preferential trade agreement; and NNA is not notified agreement, which refers to preferential trade arrangements established among member countries that are not notified to the World Trade Organization (these agreements may be functionally equivalent to any of the other agreements). b. No preferential trade agreement c. Years of the most recent agreement are collected from the official website of the trade bloc.
376
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
6.7
GLOBAL LINKS
Regional trade blocs Definitions
Trade blocs are groups of countries with preferential
to each bloc’s exports of goods and the share of the
• Merchandise exports within bloc are the sum of
arrangements governing trade between members.
bloc’s exports in world exports. Although the Asia
merchandise exports by members of a trade bloc to
Although the preferences—such as lower tariff duties
Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) has no prefer-
other members of the bloc. They are shown both in
or exemptions from quantitative restrictions—may
ential arrangements, it is included because of the
U.S. dollars and as a percentage of total merchan-
be no greater than those available to other trading
volume of trade between its members.
dise exports by the bloc. • Merchandise exports
partners, such arrangements are intended to encour-
The data on country exports are from the International
by bloc as a share of world exports are the bloc’s
age exports by bloc members to one another—some-
Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Direction of Trade database and
total merchandise exports (within the bloc and to the
times called intratrade.
should be broadly consistent with those from sources
rest of the world) as a share of total merchandise
Most countries are members of a regional trade bloc,
such as the United Nations Statistics Division’s Com-
exports by all economies in the world. • Type of most
and more than a third of world trade takes place within
modity Trade (Comtrade) database. However, trade
recent agreement includes customs union, under
such arrangements. While trade blocs vary in structure,
flows between many developing countries, particularly
which members substantially eliminate all tariff and
they have the same objective: to reduce trade barriers
in Sub-Saharan Africa, are not well recorded, so the
nontariff barriers among themselves and establish
between members. But effective integration requires
value of intratrade for certain groups may be under-
a common external tariff for nonmembers; economic
more than reducing tariffs and quotas. Economic gains
stated. Data on trade between developing and high-
integration agreement, which liberalizes trade in ser-
from competition and scale may not be achieved unless
income countries are generally complete.
vices among members and covers a substantial num-
other barriers that divide markets and impede the free
Unless otherwise noted, the type of agreement and
ber of sectors, affects a sufficient volume of trade,
flow of goods, services, and investments are lifted.
date of enforcement are based on the World Trade
includes substantial modes of supply, and is non-
For example, many regional trade blocs retain contin-
Organization’s (WTO) list of regional trade agree-
discriminatory (in the sense that similarly situated
gent protections on intratrade, including antidumping,
ments. Other types of preferential trade agreements
service suppliers are treated the same); free trade
countervailing duties, and “emergency protection” to
may have entered into force earlier than those shown
agreement, under which members substantially
address balance of payments problems or protect an
in the table and may still be effective.
eliminate all tariff and nontariff barriers but set tar-
industry from import surges. Other barriers include
Although bloc exports have been calculated back
iffs on imports from nonmembers; preferential trade
differing product standards, discrimination in public
to 1990 based on current membership, several blocs
agreement, which is an agreement notified to the
procurement, and cumbersome border formalities.
came into existence after that and membership may
WTO that is not a free trade agreement, a customs
Trade bloc membership may reduce the frictional
have changed over time. For this reason, and because
union, or an economic integration agreement; and
costs of trade, increase the credibility of reform initia-
systems of preferences also change over time, intra-
not notified agreement, which is a preferential trade
tives, and strengthen security among partners. But
trade in earlier years may not have been affected by
arrangement established among member countries
making it work effectively is challenging. All economic
the same preferences as in recent years. In addition,
that is not notified to the World Trade Organization
sectors may be affected, and some may expand while
some countries belong to more than one trade bloc, so
(the agreement may be functionally equivalent to any
others contract, so it is important to weigh the poten-
shares of world exports exceed 100 percent. Exports
of the other agreements).
tial costs and benefits of membership.
include all commodity trade, which may include items
The table shows the value of merchandise intra-
not specified in trade bloc agreements. Differences
trade (service exports are excluded) for important
from previously published estimates may be due to
regional trade blocs and the size of intratrade relative
changes in membership or revisions in underlying data.
The number of trade agreements has increased rapidly since 1990, especially agreements between high-income economies and developing economies and agreements among developing economies
6.7a
Low and middle income–low and middle income High income–low and middle income High income–high income
Cumulative agreements 200
Data sources Data on merchandise trade flows are published in
150
the IMF’s Direction of Trade Statistics Yearbook and 100
Direction of Trade Statistics Quarterly; the data in the table were calculated using the IMF’s Direc-
50
tion of Trade database. Data on trade bloc membership are from the World Bank Policy Research
0 1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2009
Note: Data are cumulative number of trade agreements notified to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade/World Trade Organization (GATT/WTO) at the time they entered into force. Includes only agreements that are currently in force. Excludes agreements on services and accessions of new members to an existing agreement. Source: World Bank staff calculations based on the World Trade Organization’s Regional Trade Agreements Information System.
Report Trade Blocs (2000b), UNCTAD’s Trade and Development Report 2007, WTO’s Regional Trade Agreements Information System, and the World Bank’s International Trade Unit.
2010 World Development Indicators
377
6.8
Tariff barriers All products
Primary products
Manufactured products
% Most recent year
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Azerbaijan Bahamas, The Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile China† Hong Kong SAR, China Macau SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Ethiopia European Union Fiji Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Ghana Grenada Guatemala Guinea †Data for Taiwan, China
378
2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2006 2008 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 2008 2008 2007 2007 2008 2008 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2006 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2006 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008
Binding coverage
.. 100.0 .. 100.0 97.9 100.0 100.0 97.1 .. .. 73.4 15.5 97.9 .. 97.9 39.0 .. .. 100.0 .. 96.3 100.0 95.4 39.2 21.8 .. 13.3 99.7 .. .. .. 100.0 100.0 46.5 28.7 100.0 .. 16.1 100.0 33.1 100.0 31.6 100.0 94.8 100.0 100.0 99.3 100.0 .. .. 100.0 51.3 100.0 13.7 100.0 14.3 100.0 100.0 38.6 100.0
2010 World Development Indicators
Simple mean bound rate
.. 7.0 .. 59.2 58.7 31.9 8.5 9.9 .. .. 34.4 169.3 78.1 .. 58.2 28.6 .. .. 40.0 .. 18.9 31.4 24.3 41.9 68.3 .. 79.9 5.1 .. .. .. 25.1 10.0 0.0 0.0 42.8 .. 27.3 42.9 11.2 6.0 21.0 41.0 58.7 34.9 21.8 36.8 36.6 .. .. 4.2 40.1 21.2 101.8 7.2 92.5 56.8 42.2 20.3 5.9
Simple mean tariff
Weighted mean tariff
6.2 2.4 16.3 7.5 11.6 9.8 3.7 3.9 8.4 28.5 4.3 14.5 15.1 8.0 11.6 13.3 18.1 17.7 6.2 6.6 8.0 13.1 3.1 11.5 12.8 12.5 18.6 3.6 15.3 17.5 16.9 1.4 8.6 0.0 0.0 10.7 12.8 18.6 6.0 13.2 2.5 11.0 30.2 11.9 9.0 9.7 12.3 3.9 9.6 18.2 1.6 11.0 18.6 18.7 0.6 13.0 10.6 4.4 13.9 5.3
6.5 2.1 9.7 7.7 13.6 5.3 2.3 2.5 3.9 23.9 3.6 11.0 14.8 2.3 9.3 15.5 29.5 16.5 4.1 4.7 8.7 6.7 6.1 6.9 10.7 10.0 12.7 1.0 12.2 13.5 13.3 1.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 8.7 11.0 14.5 3.8 6.6 1.1 9.1 29.1 7.9 5.1 5.4 8.0 3.1 5.4 10.1 1.7 8.9 14.4 14.7 0.5 9.8 8.8 3.0 12.5 1.9
Share of tariff Share of tariff lines lines with international with specific rates peaks
4.2 10.4 60.6 23.0 48.3 21.9 0.0 5.2 47.4 77.4 0.2 41.1 44.9 27.3 43.3 50.6 66.7 49.3 0.0 10.9 30.8 26.4 21.6 40.9 34.1 49.2 52.4 6.7 46.8 46.8 44.3 0.0 13.3 0.0 0.0 41.0 42.1 52.3 0.3 48.6 3.9 33.6 87.9 43.3 29.2 32.1 18.1 15.7 22.4 56.0 1.4 38.2 52.1 90.9 0.0 40.8 43.3 18.9 57.7 6.8
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%
%
Simple mean tariff
Weighted mean tariff
Simple mean tariff
Weighted mean tariff
7.0 4.8 17.0 11.6 13.8 7.8 5.5 1.4 9.8 24.4 6.8 15.1 26.3 7.0 15.5 15.1 10.0 43.5 6.1 3.2 4.5 7.9 0.9 11.0 11.7 14.7 21.9 1.9 15.9 18.9 20.6 1.4 8.8 0.0 0.0 9.7 14.1 21.9 8.5 15.3 4.4 10.6 23.1 19.3 11.6 7.7 36.2 5.2 9.2 19.4 2.3 11.9 21.0 17.0 4.3 16.8 14.1 5.1 15.4 8.0
6.7 3.2 8.8 14.0 13.1 1.3 2.2 0.4 3.4 15.1 6.9 7.3 21.9 0.6 6.5 11.3 16.1 44.9 3.3 1.9 1.1 1.1 13.2 6.8 7.9 10.5 10.8 0.3 12.6 13.9 18.3 1.4 2.4 0.0 0.0 7.7 10.8 18.6 5.1 4.1 1.9 8.1 23.2 5.7 4.5 4.2 6.3 2.4 3.5 6.6 0.4 7.3 15.2 12.2 1.2 14.4 9.9 2.4 14.0 2.0
6.1 2.1 16.2 6.8 11.2 10.1 3.5 4.4 8.2 29.3 4.0 14.5 13.4 8.1 11.1 13.0 19.6 15.5 6.2 7.0 8.5 13.7 3.4 11.5 12.9 12.1 18.2 4.1 15.0 17.3 16.5 1.4 8.7 0.0 0.0 10.8 12.6 18.2 5.8 12.9 2.3 11.1 31.3 10.6 8.7 9.9 9.5 3.8 9.6 18.0 1.5 10.8 18.3 19.2 0.1 12.5 10.0 4.3 13.7 4.8
6.3 1.4 9.8 6.2 13.7 5.9 2.4 3.3 4.1 29.7 3.1 13.1 12.3 3.9 11.0 17.5 31.3 16.0 4.1 6.2 9.9 9.3 4.6 6.6 11.3 9.9 14.4 1.2 11.8 13.2 12.7 0.8 5.8 0.0 0.0 9.4 11.1 14.1 3.8 9.8 0.9 9.4 31.0 9.3 5.2 5.5 9.8 3.9 7.2 12.8 1.2 10.5 14.2 17.4 0.1 8.8 8.4 3.5 11.2 1.9
All products
Primary products
6.8
GLOBAL LINKS
Tariff barriers
Manufactured products
% Most recent year
Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Israel Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kosovo Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Puerto Rico Qatar Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia
2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 2008 2008 2006 2008 2008 2008 2008
2008 2008 2008 2007 2007 2008 2006 2008 2008 2008 2007 2008 2008 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008
Binding coverage
.. 100.0 .. 100.0 95.0 73.8 96.6 .. .. 75.0 100.0 99.7 99.9 .. 14.8 .. .. 94.6 99.9 99.9 .. .. .. .. .. 100.0 30.0 31.6 83.7 97.1 40.2 39.3 17.8 .. 100.0 .. 100.0 100.0 .. 17.4 96.3 .. 99.9 100.0 96.7 19.3 100.0 100.0 98.7 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 67.0 .. 100.0 .. 100.0 ..
Simple mean bound rate
.. 56.7 .. 32.4 13.5 49.6 37.1 .. .. 21.5 49.6 2.9 16.2 .. 95.4 .. .. 15.8 100.0 7.4 .. .. .. .. .. 6.9 27.3 75.4 14.5 36.9 28.5 19.6 94.4 .. 35.0 .. 17.5 41.3 .. 83.6 19.2 .. 10.0 41.7 44.7 118.4 3.0 13.8 60.0 23.4 31.7 33.5 30.1 25.7 .. 15.9 .. 89.5 ..
Simple mean tariff
Weighted mean tariff
12.9 10.8 3.0 4.6 2.4 9.7 5.8 24.8 .. 2.2 9.2 2.6 10.7 3.9 12.1 .. .. 8.3 4.1 3.5 5.8 5.7 9.2 .. 0.0 4.9 12.1 12.1 5.9 21.5 12.9 12.6 4.2 5.3 6.4 4.1 4.9 11.7 11.0 4.1 6.3 12.4 2.8 5.4 13.0 10.7 0.6 3.8 14.0 7.2 4.5 8.3 3.8 5.0 .. 4.3 8.2 18.6 4.0
10.7 6.9 4.8 3.2 1.1 6.1 3.6 20.1 .. 1.1 8.9 1.3 5.6 2.1 6.3 .. .. 7.1 4.0 8.5 8.3 4.8 14.4 .. 0.0 3.3 8.4 6.0 3.1 20.3 8.4 10.1 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.4 5.1 9.4 7.7 3.9 1.1 13.1 2.0 3.6 9.2 8.9 0.4 3.3 9.0 7.1 2.3 3.3 2.1 3.6 .. 3.7 5.8 12.0 3.8
Share of tariff Share of tariff lines lines with international with specific rates peaks
50.3 41.9 5.0 20.6 6.5 7.3 12.6 56.6 .. 0.9 35.8 6.9 33.2 6.7 36.5 .. .. 4.6 0.0 0.9 15.1 11.6 37.8 .. 0.0 15.7 41.6 43.8 24.8 87.0 48.4 49.0 16.8 2.3 11.5 6.7 0.4 41.1 36.7 8.1 25.3 40.9 0.0 0.4 49.3 33.5 0.6 0.2 51.1 33.6 23.3 18.0 6.3 15.8 .. 0.2 25.1 52.9 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%
%
Simple mean tariff
Weighted mean tariff
Simple mean tariff
Weighted mean tariff
14.9 17.7 5.6 5.6 2.7 19.5 6.6 21.5 .. 3.5 15.8 4.9 14.4 5.8 15.2 .. .. 20.7 3.3 4.3 9.9 8.2 7.7 .. 0.0 7.9 13.9 12.8 2.9 17.5 12.8 11.2 6.2 3.8 7.3 6.5 5.2 19.3 13.9 5.8 3.6 12.5 1.5 7.7 14.0 12.3 1.9 4.6 12.8 11.1 12.6 6.4 5.3 6.0 .. 5.4 7.7 15.8 3.3
10.9 5.9 3.9 3.5 1.7 7.3 2.6 12.5 .. 1.2 9.4 1.2 3.8 0.8 5.6 .. .. 11.6 3.1 1.2 8.3 5.0 1.1 .. 0.0 4.8 4.2 5.7 2.3 18.4 7.9 9.2 1.5 1.3 0.9 2.1 5.4 11.4 8.0 4.5 0.6 9.7 0.4 3.9 10.7 9.6 1.1 3.0 6.3 7.9 2.7 1.1 1.7 5.2 .. 4.0 4.8 9.1 2.7
12.6 9.7 2.4 4.4 2.4 8.4 5.8 25.1 .. 2.1 8.3 2.3 10.1 3.7 11.7 .. .. 6.6 4.3 3.4 5.3 5.2 9.6 .. 0.0 4.7 11.9 11.8 6.5 22.8 12.8 12.8 4.0 5.6 6.4 3.8 4.9 10.9 10.5 3.9 6.9 12.6 3.0 5.1 12.8 10.5 0.4 3.7 14.3 6.8 3.4 8.6 3.8 4.8 .. 4.2 8.2 19.0 4.1
10.4 7.3 5.6 3.1 0.9 5.9 4.4 21.2 .. 1.1 8.5 1.6 7.3 2.6 6.9 .. .. 4.8 4.4 9.4 8.3 5.1 17.2 .. 0.0 2.6 10.4 6.0 3.4 22.6 8.7 11.0 2.6 2.1 2.2 2.7 4.9 8.2 7.5 3.6 1.3 15.8 2.7 3.4 7.6 8.1 0.2 3.4 12.3 6.8 2.2 3.9 2.3 2.7 .. 3.8 5.9 13.7 4.2
2010 World Development Indicators
379
6.8
Tariff barriers All products
Primary products
Manufactured products
% Most recent year
Senegal Serbiaa Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa Sri Lanka St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia St. Vincent & Grenadines Sudan Suriname Swaziland Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income OECD Non-OECD
2008 2005 2007 2004 2008 2008 2008 2006 2008 2007 2007 2008 2007 2008 2008 2002 2006 2008 2006 2008 2008 2006 2008 2002 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 2006 2008 2007
Binding coverage
100.0 .. .. 100.0 69.7 100.0 .. 96.0 38.1 97.9 99.6 .. .. .. 96.3 99.8 .. .. 13.4 75.0 .. 14.0 100.0 57.9 50.6 .. 15.7 .. 100.0 100.0 100.0 .. .. 100.0 .. .. .. 16.8 22.4 79.6 w 40.7 87.4 84.2 90.4 75.4 79.1 94.7 97.0 92.9 64.7 47.9 92.2 98.6 87.8
a. Includes Montenegro.
380
2010 World Development Indicators
Simple mean bound rate
30.0 .. .. 47.4 7.0 78.7 .. 19.2 29.8 75.9 61.9 .. .. .. 19.2 0.0 .. .. 120.0 25.7 .. 80.0 55.7 57.9 28.5 .. 73.4 .. 14.7 3.6 31.6 .. .. 36.5 .. .. .. 106.0 89.8 31.9 w 52.4 34.0 35.7 32.3 36.5 32.5 11.6 40.9 32.8 52.5 43.2 21.5 7.2 31.7
Simple mean tariff
13.4 8.1 6.5 .. 0.0 9.2 .. 7.7 11.3 12.3 9.6 11.3 14.3 11.5 9.5 0.0 14.7 4.9 11.7 10.8 .. 13.1 8.2 23.0 2.4 5.4 12.0 4.9 4.2 3.0 9.5 12.1 16.8 11.9 11.7 .. 6.7 10.8 16.7 7.1 w 12.1 8.2 9.7 7.2 8.8 8.4 4.8 8.0 12.8 13.3 11.7 4.2 4.0 4.4
Weighted mean tariff
8.5 6.0 28.3 .. 0.0 13.8 .. 4.5 7.1 12.3 9.0 8.4 11.4 11.8 5.2 0.0 15.5 3.8 10.2 4.6 .. 13.9 4.2 18.3 1.8 2.9 7.4 3.7 3.6 1.5 3.6 7.3 15.0 11.4 10.6 .. 6.9 5.0 17.3 2.8 w 9.2 4.6 5.2 4.0 4.8 4.1 3.6 4.3 10.8 7.0 7.5 1.8 1.8 1.5
Share of tariff Share of tariff lines lines with international with specific rates peaks
50.6 17.8 12.8 .. 0.0 1.9 .. 25.4 23.5 44.3 39.9 44.4 34.9 39.4 34.2 0.0 23.3 0.1 35.4 22.9 .. 48.9 43.6 55.5 4.4 14.8 37.3 4.7 0.2 3.6 26.6 21.6 65.0 44.0 32.2 .. 1.8 49.7 38.8 16.6 w 35.3 21.8 25.6 19.5 23.4 21.7 12.6 21.7 37.7 37.8 37.9 6.0 4.9 7.7
0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.9 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 w 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.4
%
%
Simple mean tariff
Weighted mean tariff
Simple mean tariff
Weighted mean tariff
14.1 10.9 14.0 .. 0.0 10.3 .. 5.2 17.6 12.7 12.6 15.1 18.0 17.8 9.2 0.0 14.4 5.4 15.8 13.5 .. 14.7 13.1 32.2 12.4 14.8 14.4 4.8 4.5 2.5 5.7 12.4 19.5 11.4 14.5 .. 9.6 8.0 19.5 8.7 w 13.5 10.5 12.7 8.8 11.0 9.2 8.2 8.9 17.8 15.8 13.1 5.4 4.5 6.7
7.0 4.5 50.5 .. 0.0 17.5 .. 1.7 9.0 11.5 4.9 7.8 11.6 15.9 1.5 0.0 11.7 2.6 12.8 2.1 .. 10.4 2.7 13.9 2.8 12.6 7.4 0.8 2.6 1.0 1.1 3.6 16.9 10.0 10.2 .. 8.6 5.7 19.8 2.2 w 8.0 3.3 3.7 2.8 3.6 2.8 3.0 2.1 8.3 7.0 6.4 1.6 1.6 1.6
13.3 7.3 4.8 .. 0.0 9.1 .. 8.2 10.6 12.1 9.1 10.6 13.7 10.6 10.0 0.0 14.7 4.8 11.2 10.4 .. 12.9 7.5 22.2 1.4 3.8 11.7 5.0 4.2 3.1 9.9 11.9 16.2 12.0 11.3 .. 6.3 10.8 16.3 6.9 w 11.8 7.9 9.3 7.0 8.6 8.3 4.4 8.0 12.3 13.0 11.5 4.1 4.1 4.1
10.4 6.8 6.4 .. 0.0 8.6 .. 6.1 6.4 12.6 12.2 8.6 11.3 10.9 7.3 0.0 17.1 4.4 10.1 5.8 .. 15.9 5.6 20.0 1.5 1.1 8.0 5.6 4.4 1.9 4.9 7.1 14.3 11.6 11.0 .. 5.6 4.4 15.3 3.3 w 9.9 5.5 6.6 4.5 5.7 5.5 3.8 5.2 11.9 7.1 8.1 2.1 2.1 1.9
About the data
6.8
GLOBAL LINKS
Tariff barriers Definitions
Poor people in developing countries work primarily in
nation or applied rates are calculated using all traded
• Binding coverage is the percentage of product
agriculture and labor-intensive manufactures, sectors
items. Weighted mean tariffs are weighted by the
lines with an agreed bound rate. • Simple mean
that confront the greatest trade barriers. Removing
value of the country’s trade with each trading part-
bound rate is the unweighted average of all the lines
barriers to merchandise trade could increase growth
ner. Simple averages are often a better indicator of
in the tariff schedule in which bound rates have been
in these countries—even more if trade in services
tariff protection than weighted averages, which are
set. • Simple mean tariff is the unweighted average
(retailing, business, financial, and telecommunica-
biased downward because higher tariffs discourage
of effectively applied rates or most favored nation
tions services) were also liberalized.
trade and reduce the weights applied to these tariffs.
rates for all products subject to tariffs calculated
In general, tariffs in high-income countries on
Bound rates result from trade negotiations incorpo-
for all traded goods. • Weighted mean tariff is the
imports from developing countries, though low, are
rated into a country’s schedule of concessions and
average of effectively applied rates or most favored
twice those collected from other high-income coun-
are thus enforceable.
nation rates weighted by the product import shares
tries. But protection is also an issue for developing
Some countries set fairly uniform tariff rates across
corresponding to each partner country. • Share of
countries, which maintain high tariffs on agricultural
all imports. Others are selective, setting high tariffs
tariff lines with international peaks is the share
commodities, labor-intensive manufactures, and
to protect favored domestic industries. The share
of lines in the tariff schedule with tariff rates that
other products and services. In some developing
of tariff lines with international peaks provides an
exceed 15 percent. • Share of tariff lines with spe-
country regions new trade policies could make the
indication of how selectively tariffs are applied. The
cific rates is the share of lines in the tariff schedule
difference between achieving important Millennium
effective rate of protection—the degree to which the
that are set on a per unit basis or that combine ad
Development Goals—reducing poverty, lowering
value added in an industry is protected—may exceed
valorem and per unit rates. • Primary products are
maternal and child mortality rates, improving edu-
the nominal rate if the tariff system systematically
commodities classified in SITC revision 3 sections
cational attainment—and falling far short.
differentiates among imports of raw materials, inter-
0–4 plus division 68 (nonferrous metals). • Manu-
mediate products, and finished goods.
factured products are commodities classified in
Countries use a combination of tariff and nontariff measures to regulate imports. The most common
The share of tariff lines with specific rates shows
form of tariff is an ad valorem duty, based on the
the extent to which countries use tariffs based on
value of the import, but tariffs may also be levied
physical quantities or other, non–ad valorem mea-
on a specific, or per unit, basis or may combine ad
sures. Some countries such as Switzerland apply
valorem and specific rates. Tariffs may be used to
mainly specific duties. To the extent possible, these
raise fiscal revenues or to protect domestic indus-
specifi c rates have been converted to their ad
tries from foreign competition—or both. Nontariff
valorem equivalent rates and have been included in
barriers, which limit the quantity of imports of a par-
the calculation of simple and weighted tariffs.
ticular good, include quotas, prohibitions, licensing
Data are classified using the Harmonized System
schemes, export restraint arrangements, and health
of trade at the six- or eight-digit level. Tariff line data
and quarantine measures. Because of the difficulty
were matched to Standard International Trade Clas-
of combining nontariff barriers into an aggregate indi-
sification (SITC) revision 3 codes to define commodity
cator, they are not included in the table.
groups and import weights. Import weights were cal-
Unless specified as most favored nation rates, the
culated using the United Nations Statistics Division’s
tariff rates used in calculating the indicators in the
Commodity Trade (Comtrade) database. The table
table are effectively applied rates. Effectively applied
shows tariff rates for three commodity groups: all
rates are those in effect for partners in preferen-
products, primary products, and manufactured prod-
tial trade arrangements such as the North Ameri-
ucts. Effectively applied tariff rates at the six- and
can Free Trade Agreement. The difference between
eight-digit product level are averaged for products in
most favored nation and applied rates can be sub-
each commodity group. When the effectively applied
stantial. As more countries report their free trade
rate is unavailable, the most favored nation rate is
agreements, suspensions of tariffs, or other spe-
used instead.
SITC revision 3 sections 5–8 excluding division 68.
cial preferences, World Development Indicators will
Data are shown only for the last year for which com-
include their effectively applied rates. All estimates
plete data are available and for all economies with
are calculated using the most recent information,
populations of 1 million or more and for countries
All indicators in the table were calculated by World
which is not necessarily revised every year. As a
with populations of less than 1 million when avail-
Bank staff using the World Integrated Trade Solu-
result, data for the same year may differ from data
able. EU member countries apply a common tariff
tion system. Data on tariffs were provided by the
in last year’s edition.
schedule that is listed under European Union and
United Nations Conference on Trade and Develop-
are thus not listed separately.
ment and the World Trade Organization. Data on
Three measures of average tariffs are shown: sim-
Data sources
ple bound rates and the simple and the weighted
global imports are from the United Nations Statis-
tariffs. Bound rates are based on all products in a
tics Division’s Comtrade database.
country’s tariff schedule, while the most favored
2010 World Development Indicators
381
6.9 Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
382
Trade facilitation Logistics Performance Index
Burden of customs procedures
1–5 (worst to best) 2009
1–7 (worst to best) 2008–09a
To export 2009
To import 2009
2.24 2.46 2.36 2.25 3.10 2.52 3.84 3.76 2.64 2.74 2.53 3.94 2.79 2.51 2.66 2.32 3.20 2.83 2.23 2.29 2.37 2.55 3.87 .. 2.49 3.09 3.49 3.88 2.77 2.68 2.48 2.91 2.53 2.77 2.07 3.51 3.85 2.82 2.77 2.61 2.67 1.70 3.16 2.41 3.89 3.84 2.41 2.49 2.61 4.11 2.47 2.96 2.63 2.60 2.10 2.59 2.78
.. 3.6 2.7 .. 2.8 2.7 4.9 5.3 3.9 2.8 .. 4.6 3.4 2.8 3.5 4.4 2.9 3.6 3.8 3.0 3.3 3.2 4.7 .. 2.3 5.8 4.6 6.1 3.8 .. .. 3.9 3.3 3.8 .. 4.6 5.8 4.5 3.1 4.0 4.1 .. 5.5 3.3 5.7 4.8 .. 5.1 4.6 5.1 3.4 4.1 4.2 .. .. .. 4.0
2.0 1.7 4.6 6.0 3.7 .. 2.6 2.0 7.0 1.4 .. 1.7 3.0 15.0 2.0 .. 2.8 2.0 4.0 .. 1.3 3.4 2.8 .. 74.0 3.5 2.8 1.7 7.0 2.0 .. 2.0 1.0 1.0 .. 2.5 1.0 2.2 2.1 1.3 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 1.6 3.2 4.3 4.6 .. 3.6 2.9 3.0 2.6 3.5 .. 4.2 2.4
4.0 2.0 7.1 8.0 3.8 .. 2.8 3.7 3.0 1.4 .. 1.6 7.0 28.3 2.0 .. 3.9 3.9 14.0 .. 4.0 8.9 3.7 .. 35.0 3.0 2.6 1.6 7.0 3.0 .. 2.0 1.0 1.0 .. 3.5 1.0 3.5 3.4 3.1 2.0 3.0 4.0 6.0 1.8 4.5 13.0 3.5 .. 2.4 6.8 3.5 3.4 3.9 .. 5.3 3.2
2010 World Development Indicators
Lead time
Documents
days
number To export June 2009
12 7 8 11 9 5 6 4 9 6 8 4 7 8 6 6 8 5 11 9 11 10 3 9 6 6 7 4 6 8 11 6 10 7 .. 4 4 6 9 6 8 9 3 8 4 2 7 6 4 4 6 5 10 7 6 8 7
Liner Quality of Freight Shipping port costs to the Connectivity infrastructure United Index States
To import June 2009
11 9 9 8 7 7 5 5 14 8 8 5 7 7 7 9 7 7 11 10 11 11 4 17 10 7 5 4 8 9 12 7 9 8 .. 7 3 7 7 6 8 13 4 8 5 2 8 8 4 5 7 6 10 9 6 10 10
0–100 (low to high) 2009
.. 2.3 8.4 11.3 26.0 .. 28.8 .. .. 7.9 .. 82.8 13.5 .. .. .. 31.1 5.8 .. .. 4.7 11.6 41.3 .. .. 18.8 132.5 104.5 23.2 3.8 11.4 14.6 19.4 8.5 5.9 0.4 27.7 21.6 17.1 52.0 10.3 3.3 5.7 .. 10.2 67.0 9.2 7.5 3.8 84.3 19.3 41.9 14.7 8.3 3.5 4.4 10.7
1–7 (worst to best) 2008–09
.. 3.2 2.9 .. 3.6 2.9 b 4.6 5.0b 4.2b 3.0 .. 6.3 3.3 3.0b 1.5 3.7b 2.6 3.6 4.0b 3.1b 3.5 2.7 5.6 .. 2.7b 5.4 4.3 6.8 3.2 .. .. 2.6 5.0 3.8 .. 4.2b 6.2 4.3 3.3 4.3 4.2 .. 5.6 3.8b 6.5 5.9 .. 4.7 4.0 6.4 4.0 4.1 4.3 .. .. .. 5.1
1 kilogram DHL air package $ 2010
143.10 150.40 154.40 154.40 88.55 143.10 90.75 113.80 150.40 90.75 150.40 103.00 154.40 88.55 150.40 154.40 88.55 150.40 154.40 154.40 88.50 154.40 68.20 154.40 154.40 88.55 78.25 82.10 88.55 154.40 154.40 88.55 154.40 150.40 72.85 150.40 113.80 72.85 88.55 143.10 88.55 154.40 150.40 154.40 113.80 103.00 154.40 154.40 150.40 103.00 154.40 113.80 88.55 154.40 154.40 72.85 88.55
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Logistics Performance Index
Burden of customs procedures
1–5 (worst to best) 2009
1–7 (worst to best) 2008–09a
To export 2009
To import 2009
To export June 2009
To import June 2009
0–100 (low to high) 2009
2.99 3.12 2.76 2.57 2.11 3.89 3.41 3.64 2.53 3.97 2.74 2.83 2.59 .. 3.64 .. 3.28 2.62 2.46 3.25 3.34 2.30 2.38 2.33 3.13 2.77 2.66 2.42 3.44 2.27 2.63 2.72 3.05 2.57 2.25 2.38 2.29 2.33 2.02 2.20 4.07 3.65 2.54 2.54 2.59 3.93 2.84 2.53 3.02 2.41 2.75 2.80 3.14 3.44 3.34 .. 2.95
4.3 3.9 3.7 .. .. 5.1 4.0 4.0 3.4 4.4 4.6 3.3 3.3 .. 4.6 .. 3.5 2.8 .. 4.1 .. 3.8 .. 3.5 4.8 4.0 3.6 3.7 4.8 3.7 4.0 4.6 3.7 .. 3.1 4.1 3.1 .. 4.2 3.1 5.2 5.9 3.8 .. 3.1 5.2 5.1 3.6 4.3 .. 3.6 3.8 3.0 3.9 4.9 4.7 4.5
3.5 2.3 2.1 2.6 .. 1.0 2.0 2.6 10.0 1.0 3.2 2.8 3.0 .. 1.6 .. 2.0 2.0 .. 1.3 3.4 .. 4.0 3.2 2.0 .. .. 4.2 2.6 5.0 2.0 3.0 2.1 .. 14.0 2.0 .. 4.6 3.0 1.8 1.8 1.3 3.2 .. 2.5 1.0 .. 2.3 1.4 .. 1.0 2.0 1.8 3.0 2.5 .. 3.8
5.0 5.3 5.4 28.3 .. 1.0 2.0 3.0 10.0 1.0 4.6 11.5 5.9 .. 2.0 .. 3.0 .. .. 1.6 2.2 .. 5.0 10.0 2.3 .. .. 3.7 2.8 4.0 3.0 2.4 2.5 .. 12.0 3.2 .. 8.4 3.0 6.3 1.9 1.6 3.2 .. 4.1 2.0 .. 1.6 1.4 .. 4.0 3.8 5.0 3.6 5.0 .. 2.3
5 8 5 7 10 4 5 4 6 4 7 11 9 .. 3 8 8 7 9 6 5 6 10 .. 6 6 4 11 7 7 11 5 5 6 8 7 7 .. 11 9 4 7 5 8 10 4 10 9 3 7 8 7 8 5 4 7 5
7 9 6 8 10 4 4 4 6 5 7 13 8 .. 3 8 10 7 10 6 7 8 9 .. 6 6 9 10 7 10 11 6 5 7 8 10 10 .. 9 10 5 5 5 10 9 4 10 8 4 9 10 8 8 5 5 10 7
.. 41.0 25.7 28.9 5.1 7.6 18.7 70.0 19.6 66.3 23.7 .. 12.8 .. 86.7 .. 6.5 .. .. 5.2 29.6 .. 5.5 9.4 8.1 .. 8.6 .. 81.2 .. 7.5 14.8 31.9 .. .. 38.4 9.4 3.8 13.6 .. 88.7 10.6 10.6 .. 19.9 7.9 45.3 26.6 32.7 6.6 0.0 17.0 15.9 9.2 33.0 10.9 2.1
Lead time
Documents
days
number
6.9
GLOBAL LINKS
Trade facilitation
Liner Quality of Freight Shipping port costs to the Connectivity infrastructure United Index States
1–7 (worst to best) 2008–09
1 kilogram DHL air package $ 2010
3.9b 3.5 3.4 .. .. 4.4 4.6 3.7 5.3 5.2 4.5 3.0b 3.6 .. 5.1 .. 4.1 1.6b .. 4.4 .. 3.0 b .. 3.3 4.7 3.4b 3.0 3.5b 5.5 3.8b 3.5 4.3 3.7 .. 2.9 b 4.2 3.2 .. 5.4 2.8 b 6.6 5.5 2.7 .. 2.8 5.8 5.2 4.0 5.5 .. 3.5b 2.7 3.0 2.8 4.7 5.4 5.0
2010 World Development Indicators
150.40 90.75 90.75 143.10 143.10 103.00 143.10 103.00 72.85 113.80 143.10 150.40 154.40 88.50 90.75 .. 143.10 150.40 88.50 150.40 143.10 154.40 154.40 154.40 150.40 150.40 154.40 154.40 90.75 154.40 154.40 154.40 58.80 150.40 88.50 154.40 154.40 88.50 154.40 88.50 103.00 90.75 88.55 154.40 154.40 113.80 143.10 143.10 88.55 88.50 88.55 88.55 90.75 150.40 113.80 .. 143.10
383
6.9 Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Trade facilitation Logistics Performance Index
Burden of customs procedures
1–5 (worst to best) 2009
1–7 (worst to best) 2008–09a
2.84 2.61 2.04 3.22 2.86 2.69 c 1.97 4.09 3.24 2.87 1.34 3.46 3.63 2.29 2.21 .. 4.08 3.97 2.74 2.35 2.60 3.29 1.71 2.60 .. 2.84 3.22 2.49 2.82 2.57 3.63 3.95 3.86 2.75 2.79 2.68 2.96 .. 2.58 2.28 2.29 2.87d u 2.43d 2.69 d 2.59d 2.80d 2.61d 2.73d 2.74d 2.74 d 2.60 d 2.49 d 2.42d 3.55 d 3.57d
4.1 2.7 .. 4.8 4.4 3.3 .. 6.4 4.7 5.4 .. 4.3 4.4 3.7 .. .. 5.8 5.1 2.9 3.2 3.0 4.1 3.0 .. 2.8 4.2 3.4 .. 3.4 3.0 5.9 4.6 4.6 3.8 .. 1.8 3.6 .. .. 3.8 3.0 4.1d u 3.4 d 3.7d 3.6d 3.8 d 3.6d 3.7d 3.6d 3.6d 3.7d 3.4 d 3.6d 4.9 d 4.9 d
Lead time
Documents
days
number
To export 2009
2.0 4.0 .. 2.3 1.4 2.0 c 2.0 2.2 3.0 1.0 .. 2.3 4.0 1.3 39.0 .. 1.0 2.6 2.5 7.0 3.2 1.6 .. .. .. 1.7 2.2 3.0 5.5 1.7 2.5 3.3 2.8 3.0 1.4 9.4 1.4 .. 3.1 9.2 25.0 3.8d u 6.0d 3.8 d 4.7d 2.9d 4.5d 3.6d 2.8 d 3.9d 2.7d 1.9d 8.1d 2.1d 2.2d
To import 2009
2.0 2.9 .. 6.3 2.7 3.0c 32.0 1.8 5.0 2.0 .. 3.3 7.1 2.5 5.0 .. 2.6 2.6 3.2 .. 7.1 2.6 .. .. .. 7.0 3.8 .. 14.0 7.0 2.0 1.9 4.0 3.0 2.0 12.1 1.7 .. 3.6 4.0 18.0 4.6d u 6.4 d 5.1d 6.1d 4.0d 5.5d 4.9 d 3.0d 5.5d 7.2d 3.3d 7.0d 2.7d 2.9d
To export June 2009
5 8 9 5 6 6 7 4 6 6 .. 8 6 8 6 9 4 4 8 10 5 4 6 6 5 5 7 .. 6 6 4 4 4 10 7 8 6 6 6 6 7 7u 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 8 5 4
Liner Quality of Freight Shipping port costs to the Connectivity infrastructure United Index States
To import June 2009
6 13 9 5 5 6 7 4 8 8 .. 9 8 6 6 11 3 5 9 10 7 3 7 8 6 7 8 .. 7 10 5 4 5 10 11 9 8 6 9 9 9 7u 9 8 8 8 8 7 8 7 8 9 9 5 5
0–100 (low to high) 2009
23.3 20.6 .. 47.3 15.0 .. 5.6 99.5 .. 19.8 2.8 32.1 70.2 34.7 9.3 .. 31.3 2.7 11.0 .. 9.5 36.8 .. 14.4 15.9 6.5 32.0 .. .. 22.8 60.5 84.8 82.4 22.3 .. 20.4 26.4 .. 14.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
1–7 (worst to best) 2008–09
3.3 3.5 .. 4.7 4.4 3.3c .. 6.8 4.1b 5.2 .. 4.7 5.2 4.8 .. .. 5.9 5.4 b 3.3 1.9 b 2.8 4.7 2.3 .. 4.0 4.9 3.7 .. 3.4b 3.7 6.2 5.2 5.7 4.9 .. 2.4 3.3 .. .. 3.7b 4.4b 4.2 u 3.4 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.7 3.3 3.8 3.9 3.6 3.7 5.3 5.3
1 kilogram DHL air package $ 2010
150.40 150.40 154.40 143.10 154.40 150.40 154.40 82.10 150.40 150.40 154.40 154.40 113.80 90.75 154.40 154.40 113.80 113.80 143.10 150.40 154.40 90.75 88.50 154.40 72.85 154.40 143.10 150.40 154.40 150.40 143.10 103.00 .. 88.55 150.40 88.55 90.75 .. 143.10 154.40 154.40 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
a. Average of the 2008 and 2009 survey ratings. b. Landlocked country. c. Includes Montenegro. d. Aggregates are computed according to the World Bank classification of economies as of July 1, 2009, and may differ from data published in the original source.
384
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
6.9
GLOBAL LINKS
Trade facilitation Definitions
Broadly defi ned, trade facilitation encompasses
The direct costs of cross-border trade include
• Logistics Performance Index reflects perceptions
customs efficiency and other physical and regulatory
freight, customs, and storage fees. Indirect costs
of a country’s logistics based on efficiency of customs
environments where trade takes place, harmoniza-
include the value of time to import or export and the
clearance process, quality of trade- and transport-
tion of standards and conformance to international
risk of delay or loss of shipments. Long lead times
related infrastructure, ease of arranging competitively
regulations, and the logistics of moving goods and
and burdensome regulatory procedures may lower
priced shipments, quality of logistics services, abil-
associated documentation through countries and
competitiveness. Data on lead time are from the LPI
ity to track and trace consignments, and frequency
ports. Though collection of trade facilitation data
survey. Respondents provided separate values for
with which shipments reach the consignee within
has improved over the last decade, data that allow
the best case (10 percent of shipments) and the
the scheduled time. The index ranges from 1 to 5,
meaningful evaluation, especially for developing
median case (50 percent of shipments). The data
with a higher score representing better performance.
economies, are lacking. Data on trade facilitation
are exponentiated averages of the logarithm of sin-
• Burden of customs procedure measures business
are drawn from research by private and international
gle value responses and of midpoint values of range
executives’ perceptions of their country’s efficiency of
agencies. Most data are perception-based evalua-
responses for the median case.
customs procedures. Values range from 1 to 7, with a
tions by business executives and professionals.
Data on the number of documents needed to export
higher rating indicating greater efficiency. • Lead time
Because of different backgrounds, values, and per-
or import are from the World Bank’s Doing Business
to export is the median time (the value for 50 percent
sonalities, those surveyed may evaluate the same
surveys, which compile procedural requirements for
of shipments) from shipment point to port of loading.
situation quite differently. Perception-based indica-
exporting and importing a standardized cargo of goods
tors are thus subject to bias and require caution when
by ocean transport from local freight forwarders, ship-
interpreting the results. Nevertheless, they convey
ping lines, customs brokers, port officials, and banks.
much needed information on trade facilitation.
To make the data comparable across economies, sev-
The table presents data from Logistics Performance Surveys conducted by the World Bank in part-
eral assumptions about the business and the traded goods are used (see www.doingbusiness.org).
nership with academic and international institutions
Access to global shipping and air freight networks
and private companies and individuals engaged in
and the quality and accessibility of ports and roads
international logistics. The Logistics Performance
affect logistics performance. The table shows two
Index assesses logistics performance across six
indicators related to trade and transport service infra-
aspects of the logistics environment (see Defini-
structure: the Liner Shipping Connectivity Index and
tions), based on more than 5,000 country assess-
the quality of port infrastructure rating. The Liner Ship-
ments by nearly 1,000 international freight forward-
ping Connectivity Index captures how well countries
ers. Respondents evaluate eight markets on six core
are connected to global shipping networks. It is com-
dimensions on a scale from 1 (worst) to 5 (best).
puted by the United Nations Conference on Trade and
The markets are chosen based on the most impor-
Development (UNCTAD) based on five components of
tant export and import markets of the respondent’s
the maritime transport sector: number of ships, their
country, random selection, and, for landlocked coun-
container-carrying capacity, maximum vessel size,
tries, neighboring countries that connect them with
number of services, and number of companies that
international markets. Scores for the six areas are
deploy container ships in a country’s ports. For each
averaged across all respondents and aggregated to
component a country’s value is divided by the maxi-
a single score. Details of the survey methodology
mum value of each component in 2004, the five com-
and index construction methodology are in Arvis and
ponents are averaged for each country, and the aver-
others (2010).
• Lead time to import is the median time (the value for 50 percent of shipments) from port of discharge to arrival at the consignee. • Documents to export and documents to import are all documents required per shipment by government ministries, customs authorities, port and container terminals, health and technical control agencies, and banks to export or import goods. Documents renewed annually and not requiring renewal per shipment are excluded. • Liner Shipping Connectivity Index indicates how well countries are connected to global shipping networks based on the status of their maritime transport sector. The highest value in 2004 is 100. • Quality of port infrastructure measures business executives’ perceptions of their country’s port facilities. Values range from 1 to 7, with a higher rating indicating better development of port infrastructure. • Freight costs to the United States is the DHL international U.S. inbound worldwide priority express rate for a 1 kilogram air package. Any surcharges are excluded. Data sources
age is divided by the maximum average for 2004 and
Data on the Logistics Performance Index and lead
Data on the burden of customs procedures are
multiplied by 100. The index generates a value of 100
time to export and import are from Arvis and oth-
from the World Economic Forum’s Executive Opinion
for the country with the highest average index in 2004.
ers’ Connecting to Compete: Trade Logistics in the
Survey. The 2009 round included more than 13,000
The quality of port infrastructure measures busi-
Global Economy 2010. Data on the burden of cus-
respondents from 133 countries. Sampling follows
ness executives’ perception of their country’s port
toms procedure and quality of port infrastructure
a dual stratifi cation based on company size and
facilities. Values range from 1 (port infrastructure
ratings are from the World Economic Forum’s
the sector of activity. Data are collected online or
considered extremely underdeveloped) to 7 (port
Global Competitiveness Report 2009–2010. Data
through in-person interviews. Responses are aggre-
infrastructure considered efficient by international
on number of documents to export and import are
gated using sector-weighted averaging. The data for
standards). Respondents in landlocked countries
from the World Bank’s Doing Business project
the latest year are combined with the data for the
were asked: “How accessible are port facilities (1 =
(www.doingbusiness.org). Data on the Liner Ship-
previous year to create a two-year moving average.
extremely inaccessible; 7 = extremely accessible.)”
ping Connectivity Index are from UNCTAD’s Trans-
Respondents evaluated the efficiency of customs
The costs of transport services are a crucial deter-
port Newsletter, No. 43 (2009). Freight costs to the
procedures in their country. The lowest value (1) rates
minant of export competitiveness. The proxy indica-
United States are based on DHL’s “DHL Express
the customs procedure as extremely inefficient, and
tor in the table is the shipping rates to the United
Standard Rate Guideline 2010” (2010).
the highest score (7) as extremely efficient.
States of an international freight moving business.
2010 World Development Indicators
385
6.10
External debt Total external debt
Long-term debt
$ millions
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
386
1995
2008
.. 456 33,042 11,500 98,465 371 .. .. 321 15,941 1,694 .. 1,614 5,272 .. 717 160,469 10,379 1,271 1,162 2,284 10,942 .. 946 843 22,038 118,090 .. 25,044 13,239 5,893 3,774 18,899 .. .. .. .. 4,447 13,877 33,475 2,509 37 .. 10,322 .. .. 4,361 426 1,240 .. 5,495 .. 3,282 3,248 895 821 4,851
2,200 3,188 5,476 15,130 128,285 3,418 .. .. 4,309 23,644 12,299 .. 986 5,537 8,316 438 255,614 38,045 1,681 1,445 4,215 2,794 .. 949 1,749 64,277 378,245 .. 46,887 12,199 5,485 8,812 12,561 .. .. .. .. 10,484 16,851 32,616 10,110 962 .. 2,882 .. .. 2,367 453 3,380 .. 4,970 .. 15,889 3,092 1,157 1,935 3,430
2010 World Development Indicators
1995
.. 330 31,303 9,543 54,913 298 .. .. 206 15,121 1,301 .. 1,483 4,459 .. 707 98,260 8,808 1,140 1,099 2,110 9,612 .. 854 777 7,178 94,674 .. 13,946 9,636 4,872 3,106 11,902 .. .. .. .. 3,653 11,951 30,687 1,979 37 .. 9,788 .. .. 3,977 385 1,039 .. 4,200 .. 2,328 2,991 794 766 4,247
$ millions Public and publicly guaranteed IBRD loans Total and IDA credits 2008 1995 2008
2,096 2,222 3,011 12,711 66,410 1,446 .. .. 2,734 20,973 3,752 .. 926 2,403 3,006 395 73,623 4,663 1,517 1,308 3,892 2,129 .. 815 1,705 8,818 89,283 .. 29,390 10,872 5,084 3,043 10,615 .. .. .. .. 7,146 9,595 28,518 5,742 957 .. 2,826 .. .. 2,247 420 2,222 .. 3,412 .. 4,374 2,830 1,004 1,830 2,291
.. 109 2,049 81 4,913 96 .. .. 30 5,692 116 .. 498 865 472 108 6,038 444 608 591 65 1,082 .. 414 379 1,383 14,248 .. 2,559 1,413 279 303 2,386 .. .. .. .. 300 1,108 2,356 327 24 .. 1,470 .. .. 110 162 84 .. 2,434 .. 158 847 210 389 828
444 835 11 369 5,069 1,030 .. .. 775 10,613 42 .. 255 282 1,520 5 10,671 1,207 626 819 545 260 .. 390 905 202 22,250 .. 5,439 2,437 299 41 1,914 .. .. .. .. 458 624 2,700 409 473 .. 859 .. .. 20 62 989 .. 1,330 .. 806 1,288 309 507 449
Private nonguaranteed 1995 2008
.. 0 0 0 16,066 0 .. .. 0 0 0 .. 0 239 .. 0 30,830 342 0 0 0 288 .. 0 0 11,429 1,090 .. 5,553 0 0 214 2,660 .. .. .. .. 19 440 313 5 0 .. 0 .. .. 0 0 0 .. 27 .. 142 0 0 0 123
0 106 1,161 0 24,352 1,373 .. .. 327 0 1,589 .. 0 2,969 4,398 0 145,339 14,889 0 0 0 636 .. 0 0 40,549 101,774 .. 11,812 0 0 1,904 414 .. .. .. .. 843 5,592 1,579 3,316 0 .. 0 .. .. 0 0 341 .. 39 .. 9,364 0 0 0 590
Short-term debt
Use of IMF credit
$ millions 1995 2008
$ millions 1995 2008
.. 17 62 779 261 1,304 1,958 2,419 21,355 37,523 2 465 .. .. .. .. 14 1,169 199 1,986 110 6,959 .. .. 47 38 307 166 .. 912 10 43 31,238 36,652 512 18,493 56 110 15 19 102 323 991 5 .. .. 57 71 17 4 3,431 14,910 22,325 187,188 .. .. 5,545 5,684 3,118 673 1,002 363 430 3,864 3,910 1,344 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 616 2,003 1,312 1,664 2,372 2,519 525 1,052 0 5 .. .. 460 56 .. .. .. .. 287 120 15 20 85 357 .. .. 620 1,356 .. .. 811 2,151 164 192 95 144 27 0 382 518
.. 65 1,478 0 6,131 70 .. .. 101 622 283 .. 84 268 48 0 142 717 75 48 72 51 .. 35 49 0 0 .. 0 485 19 24 427 .. .. .. .. 160 173 103 0 0 .. 73 .. .. 97 26 116 .. 648 .. 0 94 6 29 99
87 80 0 0 0 135 .. .. 79 686 0 .. 22 0 0 0 0 0 54 117 0 24 .. 63 41 0 0 .. 0 654 38 0 188 .. .. .. .. 492 0 0 0 0 .. 0 .. .. 0 12 460 .. 162 .. 0 71 9 105 31
Total external debt
Long-term debt
$ millions
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
1995
2008
.. 95,174 124,413 21,565 .. .. .. .. 4,581 .. 7,661 3,750 7,309 .. .. .. .. 609 2,155 463 2,966 684 2,478 .. 769 1,277 4,302 2,238 34,343 2,958 2,396 1,416 165,379 695 520 23,771 7,458 5,771 .. 2,410 .. .. 10,396 1,608 34,092 .. .. 30,229 6,098 2,506 2,574 30,833 39,379 44,080 .. .. ..
.. 230,611 150,851 13,937 .. .. .. .. 10,034 .. 6,577 107,595 7,441 .. .. .. .. 2,464 4,944 42,108 24,395 682 3,484 .. 31,719 4,678 2,086 963 66,182 2,190 1,960 626 203,984 3,787 1,721 20,825 3,432 7,210 .. 3,685 .. .. 3,558 966 11,221 .. .. 49,337 10,722 1,418 4,163 28,555 64,856 218,022 .. .. ..
1995
.. 81,091 65,323 15,116 .. .. .. .. 3,721 .. 6,624 2,834 5,857 .. .. .. .. 472 2,091 271 1,550 642 1,164 .. 430 788 3,687 2,078 16,023 2,739 2,127 1,148 93,902 450 472 23,190 5,209 5,378 .. 2,339 .. .. 8,572 1,351 28,140 .. .. 23,788 3,781 1,668 1,453 18,931 28,525 40,890 .. .. ..
$ millions Public and publicly guaranteed IBRD loans Total and IDA credits 2008 1995 2008
.. 78,733 76,904 8,902 .. .. .. .. 6,598 .. 5,123 1,915 6,268 .. .. .. .. 1,963 2,710 2,258 20,561 653 1,237 .. 5,329 1,538 1,722 838 21,464 2,150 1,643 577 113,955 792 1,653 16,538 2,788 5,413 .. 3,551 .. .. 2,259 883 3,590 .. .. 39,359 9,661 1,064 2,265 19,330 39,058 43,426 .. .. ..
.. 27,348 13,259 316 .. .. .. .. 595 .. 806 295 2,412 .. .. .. .. 141 285 55 113 207 269 .. 62 181 1,121 1,306 1,059 863 347 157 13,823 152 59 3,999 890 777 .. 1,023 .. .. 341 598 3,489 .. .. 6,403 175 407 189 1,729 5,185 2,067 .. .. ..
.. 32,848 8,974 761 .. .. .. .. 327 .. 872 463 3,050 .. .. .. .. 655 685 61 368 306 72 .. 27 591 1,066 188 85 534 243 111 5,867 440 338 2,555 1,149 770 .. 1,507 .. .. 347 248 2,455 .. .. 10,999 271 229 230 2,712 2,720 1,776 .. .. ..
Private nonguaranteed 1995 2008
.. 6,618 33,123 0 .. .. .. .. 128 .. 0 103 445 .. .. .. .. 0 0 0 50 0 0 .. 29 289 0 0 11,046 0 0 267 18,348 9 0 331 1,769 0 .. 0 .. .. 0 133 301 .. .. 1,593 0 711 338 1,288 4,847 1,012 .. .. ..
.. 106,632 47,383 0 .. .. .. .. 2,164 .. 0 95,043 0 .. .. .. .. 307 2,213 24,934 470 0 0 .. 18,222 1,412 6 0 21,918 0 0 49 65,602 1,516 48 2,656 0 0 .. 0 .. .. 468 13 175 .. .. 4,232 1,061 345 751 3,078 18,797 109,692 .. .. ..
6.10
GLOBAL LINKS
External debt
Short-term debt
Use of IMF credit
$ millions 1995 2008
$ millions 1995 2008
.. 5,049 25,966 6,449 .. .. .. .. 492 .. 785 381 634 .. .. .. .. 13 0 31 1,365 4 978 .. 49 143 542 44 7,274 72 169 1 37,300 6 0 198 279 393 .. 23 .. .. 1,785 72 5,651 .. .. 3,235 2,207 78 784 9,659 5,279 2,178 .. .. ..
.. 45,246 26,565 5,035 .. .. .. .. 1,271 .. 1,426 10,637 921 .. .. .. .. 30 0 14,091 3,246 0 1,389 .. 8,169 1,729 258 0 22,800 0 301 0 24,427 1,314 0 1,631 629 1,797 .. 57 .. .. 720 19 7,456 .. .. 1,395 0 9 1,146 6,147 7,001 64,904 .. .. ..
.. 2,416 0 0 .. .. .. .. 240 .. 251 432 374 .. .. .. .. 124 64 160 0 38 336 .. 262 57 73 116 0 147 100 0 15,828 230 47 52 202 0 .. 48 .. .. 39 52 0 .. .. 1,613 111 50 0 955 728 0 .. .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
.. 0 0 0 .. .. .. .. 0 .. 28 0 252 .. .. .. .. 165 21 825 117 30 858 .. 0 0 99 125 0 40 16 0 0 166 20 0 15 0 .. 77 .. .. 111 51 0 .. .. 4,352 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. .. ..
387
6.10
External debt Total external debt
Long-term debt
$ millions 1995
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
6,832 121,401 1,029 .. 3,916 10,785a 1,220 .. .. .. 2,678 25,358 .. 8,395 17,603 249 .. .. .. 634 7,364 100,039 .. 1,476 .. 10,818 73,781 402 3,609 8,429 .. .. .. 5,318 1,799 35,744 25,428 .. 6,251 6,958 4,989 .. s 167,801 1,704,407 805,205 899,202 1,872,207 455,541 290,169 598,197 139,821 152,409 236,070
2008
1995
$ millions Public and publicly guaranteed IBRD loans Total and IDA credits 2008 1995 2008
104,943 3,957 14,988 402,453 101,582 103,246 679 971 645 .. .. .. 2,861 3,266 2,419 30,918 6,788 a 8,475 389 1,028 327 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2,949 1,961 1,983 41,943 9,837 13,173 .. .. .. 15,154 7,175 12,624 19,633 9,779 12,599 362 238 348 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,466 590 1,357 5,938 6,203 3,710 64,798 16,826 12,167 .. .. .. 1,573 1,286 1,433 .. .. .. 20,776 9,215 16,449 277,277 50,317 77,945 638 385 587 2,249 3,089 1,781 92,479 6,581 10,726 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 11,049 3,833 10,044 3,995 1,415 3,156 50,229 28,428 29,925 26,158 21,778 21,618 .. .. .. 6,258 5,562 5,679 2,986 5,291 1,167 3,462 .. ..b .. s .. s .. s 168,325 141,776 137,779 3,550,214 1,133,675 1,241,882 1,324,547 545,642 547,976 2,225,666 588,033 693,906 3,718,539 1,275,451 1,379,661 771,628 255,407 276,172 1,398,989 229,733 298,622 894,367 361,873 411,812 131,545 123,516 105,449 326,311 129,770 158,527 195,699 175,152 129,079
844 1,524 512 .. 1,160 1,252a 234 .. .. .. 432 0 .. 1,512 1,279 25 .. .. .. 0 2,269 1,906 .. 541 .. 1,766 5,069 1 1,792 491 .. .. .. 513 157 1,639 231 .. 827 1,434 896 .. s 35,778 143,754 95,455 48,299 179,531 37,604 13,644 38,485 12,279 42,036 35,483
2,572 3,851 242 .. 791 2,931 108 .. .. .. 446 26 .. 2,381 1,300 17 .. .. .. 365 1,971 128 .. 604 .. 1,375 8,100 14 1,004 3,022 .. .. .. 713 368 0 5,074 .. 2,113 371 .. .. s 46,592 163,171 109,824 53,347 209,763 41,959 31,975 35,635 10,907 58,965 30,324
Private nonguaranteed 1995 2008
Short-term debt
Use of IMF credit
$ millions 1995 2008
$ millions 1995 2008
534 58,839 1,303 31,116 0 244,552 10,201 54,655 0 0 32 23 .. .. .. .. 44 180 260 197 1,773a 18,320 2,139a 4,123 0 0 27 9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0 0 551 793 4,935 10,833 9,673 17,937 .. .. .. .. 90 275 535 2,087 496 0 6,368 6,628 0 0 11 15 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0 53 43 41 0 889 963 1,322 39,117 28,421 44,095 24,210 .. .. .. .. 0 0 85 92 .. .. .. .. 0 0 1,310 4,327 7,079 140,094 15,701 50,714 0 1 17 51 0 0 103 458 84 56,648 223 20,397 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 127 187 1,336 817 15 629 212 211 2,013 3,310 3,063 16,994 0 0 3,272 4,419 .. .. .. .. 0 0 689 483 13 1,049 415 676 381 .. 685 .. .. s .. s .. s .. s 2,827 5,390 15,555 20,533 206,482 1,463,386 312,058 823,829 94,294 399,839 153,797 365,611 112,188 1,063,547 158,262 458,218 209,310 1,468,776 327,614 844,362 89,982 220,924 108,814 274,370 11,268 793,291 33,428 291,917 87,303 323,261 122,389 158,470 694 5,866 13,434 19,972 8,301 111,139 9,045 51,271 11,760 14,295 40,504 48,361
1,038 0 9,617 0 26 11 .. .. 347 64 84 a 0 165 53 .. .. .. .. .. .. 166 173 913 0 .. .. 595 169 960 406 0 0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 0 15 197 17 0 0 .. .. 105 48 .. .. 293 0 685 8,524 0 0 417 9 1,542 4,709 .. .. .. .. .. .. 21 0 157 0 2,239 0 377 121 .. .. 0 95 1,239 96 461 .. .. s .. s 7,642 4,623 52,239 21,117 11,472 11,122 40,767 9,996 59,881 25,740 1,337 162 15,788 15,158 26,632 824 2,177 258 5,293 5,374 8,654 3,963
a. Includes Montenegro. b. Data are likely to be revised after being reconciled with creditor data. Total external debt for 2008 was $5.199 billion, according to debtor reports published in Global Development Finance.
388
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
6.10
Definitions
External indebtedness affects a country’s creditworthi-
Debt data, normally reported in the currency of
ness and investor perceptions. Data on external debt
repayment, are converted into U.S. dollars to pro-
repayable in foreign currency, goods, or services. It
are gathered through the World Bank’s Debtor Report-
duce summary tables. Stock fi gures (amount of
is the sum of public, publicly guaranteed, and private
ing System. Indebtedness is calculated using loan-by-
debt outstanding) are converted using end-of-period
nonguaranteed long-term debt, short-term debt, and
loan reports submitted by countries on long-term pub-
exchange rates, as published in the IMF’s Interna-
use of IMF credit. • Long-term debt is debt that has
lic and publicly guaranteed borrowing and information
tional Financial Statistics (line ae). Flow figures are
an original or extended maturity of more than one
on short-term debt collected by the countries or from
converted at annual average exchange rates (line
year. It has three components: public, publicly guar-
creditors through the reporting systems of the Bank
rf). Projected debt service is converted using end-
anteed, and private nonguaranteed debt. • Public
for International Settlements. These data are supple-
of-period exchange rates. Debt repayable in multiple
and publicly guaranteed debt comprises the long-
mented by information from major multilateral banks
currencies, goods, or services and debt with a provi-
term external obligations of public debtors, including
and official lending agencies in major creditor coun-
sion for maintenance of the value of the currency of
the national government and political subdivisions
tries and by estimates by World Bank and International
repayment are shown at book value.
(or an agency of either) and autonomous public bod-
• Total external debt is debt owed to nonresidents
Monetary Fund (IMF) staff. The table includes data on
Because flow data are converted at annual aver-
ies, and the external obligations of private debtors
long-term private nonguaranteed debt reported to the
age exchange rates and stock data at end-of-period
that are guaranteed for repayment by a public entity.
World Bank or estimated by its staff.
exchange rates, year-to-year changes in debt outstand-
• IBRD loans and IDA credits are extended by the
Data coverage, quality, and timeliness vary by coun-
ing and disbursed are sometimes not equal to net flows
World Bank. The International Bank for Reconstruc-
try. Coverage varies for debt instruments and borrow-
(disbursements less principal repayments); similarly,
tion and Development (IBRD) lends at market rates.
ers. The widening spectrum of debt instruments and
changes in debt outstanding, including undisbursed
The International Development Association (IDA) pro-
investors alongside the expansion of private nonguar-
debt, differ from commitments less repayments. Dis-
vides credits at concessional rates. • Private non-
anteed borrowing makes comprehensive coverage
crepancies are particularly notable when exchange
guaranteed debt consists of the long-term external
of external debt more complex. Reporting countries
rates have moved sharply during the year. Cancella-
obligations of private debtors that are not guaranteed
differ in their capacity to monitor debt, especially
tions and reschedulings of other liabilities into long-
for repayment by a public entity. • Short-term debt is
private nonguaranteed debt. Even data on public
term public debt also contribute to the differences.
debt owed to nonresidents having an original matu-
and publicly guaranteed debt are affected by cover-
Variations in reporting rescheduled debt also affect
rity of one year or less and interest in arrears on long-
age and reporting accuracy—because of monitoring
cross-country comparability. For example, reschedul-
term debt. • Use of IMF credit denotes members’
capacity and sometimes because of unwillingness to
ing of official Paris Club creditors may be subject to
drawings on the IMF other than those drawn against
provide information. A key part often underreported
lags between completion of the general rescheduling
the country’s reserve tranche position and includes
is military debt. Currently, 128 developing countries
agreement and completion of the specific bilateral
purchases and drawings under Stand-By, Extended,
report to the Debtor Reporting System. Nonreporting
agreements that define the terms of the rescheduled
Structural Adjustment, Enhanced Structural Adjust-
countries might have outstanding debt with the World
debt. Other areas of inconsistency include country
ment, and Systemic Transformation Facility Arrange-
Bank, other international financial institutions, and
treatment of arrears and of nonresident national
ments, together with Trust Fund loans.
private creditors.
deposits denominated in foreign currency.
Debt flows from private creditors to low- and middle-income economies fell sharply in 2008
6.10a
Low-income economies Net inflows ($ billions) 8
Middle-income economies Net inflows ($ billions) 600
Official creditors
Data sources Private creditors
500
6
Data on external debt are mainly from reports to the World Bank through its Debtor Reporting Sys-
400 4
2
tem from member countries that have received
300
IBRD loans or IDA credits, with additional infor-
200
mation from the files of the World Bank, the IMF, the African Development Bank and African Devel-
100
opment Fund, the Asian Development Bank and
0 0
Asian Development Fund, and the Inter-American
Private creditors –2 1990
1995
2000
2005 2008
–100 1990
Official creditors 1995
2000
2005 2008
Development Bank. Summary tables of the external debt of developing countries are published
In 2008 debt flows from private creditors to low- and middle-income economies fell 61 percent, a decline
annually in the World Bank’s Global Develop-
only partially offset by an increase in net flows from official creditors.
ment Finance, on its Global Development Finance
Source: Global Development Finance data files.
CD-ROM, and on GDF Online.
2010 World Development Indicators
389
GLOBAL LINKS
External debt
6.11 Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
390
Ratios for external debt Total external debt
Total debt service
Multilateral debt service
% of GNI 1995 2008
% of exports of goods and services and incomea 1995 2008
% of public and publicly guaranteed debt service 1995 2008
.. 18.4 83.5 311.9 38.9 25.3 .. .. 10.6 40.8 12.2 .. 82.1 81.2 .. 15.1 21.2 81.8 53.6 117.6 71.8 133.3 .. 85.9 58.5 32.1 16.5 .. 27.5 271.4 479.7 32.8 188.7 .. .. .. .. 28.5 72.0 55.8 26.7 6.3 .. 136.8 .. .. 101.6 113.0 48.2 .. 86.9 .. 22.6 90.0 379.4 28.1 132.9
.. 25.2 3.2 21.3 39.9 27.6 .. .. 10.5 27.7 20.6 .. 14.8 34.3 43.9 3.4 16.2 79.0 21.2 124.7 46.0 12.1 .. 48.7 26.1 41.3 8.7 .. 20.2 118.2 65.6 30.3 56.0 .. .. .. .. 23.8 33.1 19.9 46.6 58.6 .. 10.9 .. .. 19.4 61.5 26.6 .. 31.3 .. 41.3 73.2 274.1 27.8 25.0
2010 World Development Indicators
.. 1.4 .. 12.0 30.1 3.1 .. .. 1.3 13.2 3.4 .. 6.8 29.4 .. 3.1 36.6 16.5 .. 27.6 0.7 20.9 .. .. .. 24.5 9.9 .. 31.5 .. 13.2 13.8 23.1 .. .. .. .. 6.1 24.8 13.2 8.9 0.1 .. 18.5 .. .. 15.3 15.5 .. .. 24.0 .. 11.1 24.8 52.4 51.0 32.3
.. 3.0 .. 2.5 10.7 12.7 .. .. 0.9 3.9 3.1 .. .. 11.3 4.4 .. 22.7 14.7 .. 28.1 0.6 .. .. .. .. 18.2 2.0 .. 16.2 .. .. 10.5 9.2 .. .. .. .. .. .. 4.7 9.9 .. .. 2.8 .. .. .. .. 4.2 .. 3.2 .. 12.2 9.6 .. 1.9 ..
.. 11.4 17.7 0.6 21.6 69.8 .. .. 21.8 27.1 55.4 .. 54.8 75.5 .. 76.0 18.5 10.5 76.7 70.6 11.9 61.0 .. 100.0 86.1 76.2 7.6 .. 32.7 .. 21.8 50.5 59.3 .. .. .. .. 39.8 32.0 26.3 55.1 100.0 .. 41.9 .. .. 17.9 49.1 0.4 .. 48.4 .. 47.5 30.5 86.3 92.2 55.9
96.7 50.2 13.6 0.7 74.6 83.6 .. .. 23.8 61.3 6.8 .. 38.1 92.6 73.3 47.3 8.9 76.8 52.6 94.1 75.5 39.8 .. 85.1 92.5 13.5 24.1 .. 32.3 45.9 24.5 44.0 99.8 .. .. .. .. 28.5 62.3 23.7 59.3 66.8 .. 45.0 .. .. 13.1 56.0 37.4 .. 20.7 .. 74.3 66.7 100.0 79.2 66.7
Short-term debt
% of total debt 1995 2008
.. 13.7 0.8 17.0 21.7 0.6 .. .. 4.4 1.2 6.5 .. 2.9 5.8 .. 1.4 19.5 4.9 4.4 1.3 4.5 9.1 .. 6.0 2.0 15.6 18.9 .. 22.1 23.6 17.0 11.4 20.7 .. .. .. .. 13.8 9.5 7.1 20.9 0.0 .. 4.5 .. .. 6.6 3.5 6.9 .. 11.3 .. 24.7 5.0 10.6 3.2 7.9
0.8 24.4 23.8 16.0 29.2 13.6 .. .. 27.1 8.4 56.6 .. 3.8 3.0 11.0 9.8 14.3 48.6 6.5 1.3 7.7 0.2 .. 7.5 0.2 23.2 49.5 .. 12.1 5.5 6.6 43.9 10.7 .. .. .. .. 19.1 9.9 7.7 10.4 0.5 .. 1.9 .. .. 5.1 4.5 10.6 .. 27.3 .. 13.5 6.2 12.5 0.0 15.1
Present value of debt
% of total reserves 1995 2008
.. 23.5 6.3 919.7 133.6 1.9 .. .. 11.6 8.4 29.2 .. 23.7 30.5 .. 0.2 60.7 31.3 16.1 6.9 53.1 6,444.5 .. 24.0 11.6 23.1 27.8 .. 65.6 1,980.9 1,575.1 40.5 739.1 .. .. .. .. 165.3 73.4 13.9 55.9 0.0 .. 56.5 .. .. 187.8 14.0 43.0 .. 77.1 .. 103.6 188.9 469.2 13.4 141.7
.. 33.0 0.9 13.5 80.9 33.1 .. .. 18.1 34.3 227.2 .. 3.0 2.2 25.9 0.5 18.9 103.1 11.9 7.2 12.2 0.2 .. 54.2 0.3 64.6 9.5 .. 24.0 865.3 9.3 101.7 59.7 .. .. .. .. 87.6 37.2 7.3 39.8 8.0 .. 6.4 .. .. 6.2 17.5 24.1 .. .. .. 46.2 .. 116.0 0.0 20.8
% of GNI 2008 b
4 21 3 24 48 27 .. .. 12 20 24 .. 10 c 14 c 44 3 19 91 14c 80 c 42 4c .. 41c 19 c 41 10 .. 23 100 c 74 c 33 76c .. .. .. .. 24 34 20 47 38c .. 8c .. .. 23 29 c 24 .. 20c .. 42 49 c 214 c 17c 12c
% of exports of goods, services, and incomea 2008b
21 51 6 27 171 97 .. .. 14 67 38 .. 35c 29c 81 5 121 128 110c 705c 57 15c .. 267c 32c 74 25 .. 108 316c 70c 61 144c .. .. .. .. 61 75 49 98 697c .. 49c .. .. 27 63c 65 .. 46c .. 109 149c 496c 51c 15c
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Total external debt
Total debt service
Multilateral debt service
% of GNI 1995 2008
% of exports of goods and services and incomea 1995 2008
% of public and publicly guaranteed debt service 1995 2008
% of total debt 1995 2008
.. 29.8 29.9 29.7 .. .. .. .. 16.2 .. 12.4 3.9 24.7 .. .. .. .. 13.2 6.1 1.6 .. 6.1 .. .. 1.3 .. 7.6 24.9 7.0 13.4 22.9 8.7 27.0 7.9 10.1 33.4 34.5 17.8 .. 7.5 .. .. 38.7 16.7 13.8 .. .. 26.5 3.4 20.8 5.6 15.9 16.1 11.0 .. .. ..
.. 24.2 28.4 1.3 .. .. .. .. 40.6 .. 33.5 7.8 32.5 .. .. .. .. 59.0 37.4 60.3 13.2 60.3 .. .. 31.8 99.9 74.3 51.4 15.5 45.5 49.6 34.5 19.5 79.1 2.8 30.3 17.4 15.0 .. 54.2 .. .. 30.3 95.5 45.4 .. .. 43.2 52.7 31.7 48.0 49.9 29.2 13.5 .. .. ..
.. 5.3 20.9 29.9 .. .. .. .. 10.7 .. 10.2 10.2 8.7 .. .. .. .. 2.1 0.0 6.7 46.0 0.6 39.5 .. 6.4 11.2 12.6 1.9 21.2 2.4 7.1 0.1 22.6 0.9 0.1 0.8 3.7 6.8 .. 0.9 .. .. 17.2 4.5 16.6 .. .. 10.7 36.2 3.1 30.4 31.3 13.4 4.9 .. .. ..
.. 27.0 63.4 23.9 .. .. .. .. 82.3 .. 118.8 18.5 83.8 .. .. .. .. 37.5 122.6 8.8 24.3 55.8 .. .. 10.1 29.0 143.3 165.8 40.6 122.3 175.3 37.3 60.5 40.3 43.3 75.1 360.6 .. .. 54.7 .. .. 368.6 87.9 131.7 .. .. 49.5 80.9 57.3 31.5 60.3 51.7 32.2 .. .. ..
.. 19.0 30.4 .. .. .. .. .. 69.7 .. 31.4 95.0 21.7 .. .. .. .. 56.9 99.5 127.3 90.6 33.4 515.4 .. 69.3 49.6 23.4 22.7 35.1 25.8 .. 7.0 19.1 57.0 33.6 24.4 39.4 .. .. 28.9 .. .. 55.3 18.1 5.7 .. .. 28.7 49.8 19.2 25.5 23.9 35.0 42.1 .. .. ..
.. 8.7 13.4 .. .. .. .. .. 14.2 .. 16.0 41.8 4.5 .. .. .. .. 8.2 .. 37.7 14.0 2.5 131.3 .. 30.6 8.7 .. .. .. .. .. 2.8 12.1 11.3 .. 10.3 1.2 .. .. 3.6 .. .. 7.3 .. .. .. .. 8.7 9.2 .. 4.8 12.5 15.5 25.0 .. .. ..
.. 14.3 30.6 3.4 .. .. .. .. 23.8 .. 10.4 47.3 36.9 .. .. .. .. 79.7 87.6 16.8 5.1 71.3 100.0 .. 6.0 64.1 74.8 35.2 4.8 54.2 65.5 27.6 7.7 56.9 37.6 39.0 59.0 0.6 .. 76.3 .. .. 51.3 89.7 80.0 .. .. 66.3 13.0 41.1 59.0 35.9 19.9 4.9 .. .. ..
Short-term debt
.. 19.6 17.6 36.1 .. .. .. .. 12.7 .. 21.7 9.9 12.4 .. .. .. .. 1.2 0.0 33.5 13.3 0.0 39.9 .. 25.8 37.0 12.4 0.0 34.5 0.0 15.4 0.0 12.0 34.7 0.0 7.8 18.3 24.9 .. 1.5 .. .. 20.2 2.0 66.4 .. .. 2.8 0.0 0.6 27.5 21.5 10.8 29.8 .. .. ..
Present value of debt
% of total reserves 1995 2008
.. 22.1 174.2 .. .. .. .. .. 72.2 .. 34.4 23.0 164.9 .. .. .. .. 9.7 0.0 5.2 16.9 0.9 3,481.0 .. 6.0 51.9 497.1 37.8 29.5 22.2 187.9 0.1 218.8 2.3 0.3 5.1 142.8 60.4 .. 3.5 .. .. 1,256.8 75.6 330.7 .. .. 128.0 282.4 29.1 70.8 111.6 67.8 14.6 .. .. ..
6.11
.. 17.6 51.4 .. .. .. .. .. 71.7 .. 16.0 53.5 32.0 .. .. .. .. 2.4 0.0 268.7 11.5 .. 863.2 .. 126.8 81.9 26.3 0.0 24.7 0.0 .. 0.0 25.6 78.5 .. 7.2 37.9 .. .. .. .. .. 63.1 2.7 13.9 .. .. 15.5 .. 0.4 40.0 19.7 18.7 104.4 .. .. ..
% of GNI 2008 b
.. 18 35 4 .. .. .. .. 87 .. 32 106 19 .. .. .. .. 42c 83 147 95 18 340 c .. 78 55 20c 9c 35 11c 41c 7 20 67 28 24 15c 35 .. 21 .. .. 32c 13c 6 .. .. 24 54 21 29 28 37 46 .. .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
% of exports of goods, services, and incomea 2008b
.. 70 102 12 .. .. .. .. 148 .. 41 164 68 .. .. .. .. 53c 261 301 89 27 306c .. 120 96 68c 39c 30 33c 65c 10 62 96 42 51 36c 84 .. 63 .. .. 53c 63c 12 .. .. 120 62 22 50 81 77 103 .. .. ..
391
GLOBAL LINKS
Ratios for external debt
6.11 Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Ratios for external debt Total external debt
Total debt service
Multilateral debt service
% of GNI 1995 2008
% of exports of goods and services and incomea 1995 2008
% of public and publicly guaranteed debt service 1995 2008
19.4 31.0 79.2 .. .. .. 149.0 .. .. .. .. 17.1 .. 65.3 136.3 14.0 .. .. .. 53.6 143.5 60.6 .. 116.7 .. 63.0 44.3 16.1 63.3 17.8 .. .. .. 28.0 13.5 49.0 124.0 .. 169.9 215.1 73.5 .. w 89.2 36.0 39.5 33.4 38.1 35.5 32.5 35.2 53.5 32.2 76.2
54.7 25.8 15.4 .. 21.8 63.5 20.3 .. .. .. .. 15.7 .. 38.1 37.5 13.6 .. .. .. 29.2 29.9 32.0 .. 56.1 .. 58.5 35.3 3.7 15.8 51.7 .. .. .. 34.9 14.3 16.0 29.7 .. 25.6 23.0 .. .. w 30.8 21.9 16.0 28.0 22.1 13.7 37.3 21.8 15.1 21.3 21.2
10.5 6.3 20.5 .. 16.8 .. 53.7 .. .. .. .. 9.5 .. 8.0 6.7 1.5 .. .. .. .. 17.4 11.6 .. 6.0 .. 16.9 27.7 .. 19.8 6.6 .. .. .. 22.1 .. 22.9 .. .. 3.1 .. .. .. w 18.0 17.0 16.7 17.3 17.1 12.7 10.6 25.4 19.7 25.6 15.9
25.3 11.5 .. .. .. 13.9 .. .. .. .. .. 4.4 .. 9.3 2.5 .. .. .. .. 3.1 1.2 7.7 .. .. .. .. 29.5 .. 1.7 19.4 .. .. .. 14.6 .. 5.6 1.9 .. 2.4 3.2 .. .. w 3.5 9.7 5.2 15.2 9.5 3.9 18.6 14.0 5.3 8.4 3.3
21.3 9.7 99.0 .. 62.2 100.0 d 8.4 .. .. .. .. 0.0 .. 14.0 100.0 64.0 .. .. .. .. 66.7 20.9 .. 75.5 .. 43.8 20.7 1.9 69.7 13.6 .. .. .. 27.3 1.9 11.6 2.9 .. 78.3 50.6 33.6 .. w 37.8 21.5 23.5 19.6 22.1 18.2 16.3 24.2 19.3 27.4 35.0
28.3 4.0 69.7 .. 55.7 60.4 63.5 .. .. .. .. 1.8 .. 21.0 20.6 73.4 .. .. .. 27.0 99.9 1.4 .. 99.3 .. 48.2 10.6 2.4 56.7 29.7 .. .. .. 26.7 19.2 11.2 13.2 .. 57.1 50.4 .. .. w 45.0 17.7 26.6 12.7 18.5 21.7 10.7 20.2 18.9 23.1 32.8
Short-term debt
% of total debt 1995 2008
19.1 8.4 3.1 .. 6.6 19.8d 2.2 .. .. .. 20.6 38.1 .. 6.4 36.2 4.5 .. .. .. 6.8 13.1 44.1 .. 5.8 .. 12.1 21.3 4.3 2.8 2.6 .. .. .. 25.1 11.8 8.6 12.9 .. 11.0 6.0 13.7 .. w 9.3 18.3 19.1 17.6 17.5 23.9 11.5 20.5 9.6 5.9 17.2
Present value of debt
% of total reserves 1995 2008
29.7 49.7 13.6 56.6 3.3 32.3 .. .. 6.9 95.6 13.3 .. 2.3 77.8 .. .. .. .. .. .. 26.9 .. 42.8 216.7 .. .. 13.8 25.3 33.8 3,898.2 4.1 3.7 .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.8 .. 22.3 356.6 37.4 119.4 .. .. 5.9 65.1 .. .. 20.8 77.6 18.3 113.0 8.0 1.5 20.4 22.4 22.1 20.9 .. .. .. .. .. .. 7.4 73.7 5.3 .. 33.8 28.6 16.9 247.2 .. .. 7.7 107.9 22.6 186.2 .. 77.2 .. w .. w 12.2 111.8 23.2 69.0 27.6 66.8 20.6 70.9 22.7 70.2 35.6 64.8 20.9 53.3 17.7 88.6 15.2 18.4 15.7 29.5 24.7 193.5
78.2 12.8 3.8 .. 12.3 35.9 4.1 .. .. .. .. 52.6 .. 79.7 473.7 2.0 .. .. .. .. 46.2 21.8 .. 15.9 .. 47.9 68.8 .. 19.9 64.7 .. .. .. 12.8 .. 39.5 18.5 .. 5.9 61.7 .. .. w 22.0 19.8 13.3 31.8 19.9 11.9 40.6 31.8 .. 18.6 29.1
% of GNI 2008 b
57 30 8c .. 16 c 70 10c .. .. .. .. 16 .. 35 78 c 12 .. .. .. 23 14 c 31 .. 51c .. 58 40 5 10c 63 .. .. .. 40 15 21 29 .. 18 6c .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
% of exports of goods, services, and incomea 2008b
149 81 74c .. 50c 111 36c .. .. .. .. 46 .. 96 296c 14 .. .. .. 26 54c 32 .. 106c .. 85 170 6 37c 124 .. .. .. 122 31 58 36 .. 39 14c .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
a. Includes workers’ remittances. b. The numerator refers to 2008, whereas the denominator is a three year average of 2006–08 data. c. Data are from debt sustainability analyses for low-income countries. Present value estimates for these countries are for public and publicly guaranteed debt only. d. Includes Montenegro.
392
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
6.11
Definitions
A country’s external debt burden, both debt outstand-
providing coverage for such obligations. The present
ing and debt service, affects its creditworthiness and
value of external debt provides a measure of future
and comprises public, publicly guaranteed, and pri-
vulnerability. The table shows total external debt rela-
debt service obligations.
vate nonguaranteed long-term debt, short-term debt,
• Total external debt is debt owed to nonresidents
tive to a country’s size—gross national income (GNI).
The present value of external debt is calculated by
and use of IMF credit. It is presented as a share of
Total debt service is contrasted with countries’ ability
discounting the debt service (interest plus amortiza-
GNI. • Total debt service is the sum of principal
to obtain foreign exchange through exports of goods,
tion) due on long-term external debt over the life of
repayments and interest actually paid in foreign cur-
services, income, and workers’ remittances.
existing loans. Short-term debt is included at face
rency, goods, or services on long-term debt; inter-
Multilateral debt service (shown as a share of the
value. The data on debt are in U.S. dollars converted
est paid on short-term debt; and repayments (repur-
country’s total public and publicly guaranteed debt
at official exchange rates (see About the data for
chases and charges) to the IMF. • Exports of goods,
service) are obligations to international fi nancial
table 6.10). The discount rate on long-term debt
services, and income refer to international trans-
institutions, such as the World Bank, the Interna-
depends on the currency of repayment and is based
actions involving a change in ownership of general
tional Monetary Fund (IMF), and regional develop-
on commercial interest reference rates established
merchandise, goods sent for processing and repairs,
ment banks. Multilateral debt service takes priority
by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
nonmonetary gold, services, receipts of employee
over private and bilateral debt service, and bor-
Development. Loans from the International Bank
compensation for nonresident workers, investment
rowers must stay current with multilateral debts
for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), cred-
income, and workers’ remittances. • Multilateral
to remain creditworthy. While bilateral and private
its from the International Development Association
debt service is the repayment of principal and inter-
creditors often write off debts, international financial
(IDA), and obligations to the IMF are discounted using
est to the World Bank, regional development banks,
institution bylaws prohibit granting debt relief or can-
a special drawing rights reference rate. When the
and other multilateral and intergovernmental agen-
celing debts directly. However, the recent decrease
discount rate is greater than the loan interest rate,
cies. • Short-term debt includes all debt having an
in multilateral debt service ratios for some countries
the present value is less than the nominal sum of
original maturity of one year or less and interest in
reflects debt relief from special programs, such as
future debt service obligations.
arrears on long-term debt. • Total reserves comprise
the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Debt
Debt ratios are used to assess the sustainability of
holdings of monetary gold, special drawing rights,
Initiative and the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative
a country’s debt service obligations, but no absolute
reserves of IMF members held by the IMF, and hold-
(MDRI) (see table 1.4.) Other countries have accel-
rules determine what values are too high. Empirical
ings of foreign exchange under the control of mon-
erated repayment of debt outstanding. Indebted
analysis of developing countries’ experience and
etary authorities. • Present value of debt is the sum
countries may also apply to the Paris and London
debt service performance shows that debt service
of short-term external debt plus the discounted sum
Clubs to renegotiate obligations to public and private
difficulties become increasingly likely when the pres-
of total debt service payments due on public, publicly
creditors.
ent value of debt reaches 200 percent of exports.
guaranteed, and private nonguaranteed long-term
Because short-term debt poses an immediate
Still, what constitutes a sustainable debt burden var-
external debt over the life of existing loans.
burden and is particularly important for monitoring
ies by country. Countries with fast-growing econo-
vulnerability, it is compared with the total debt and
mies and exports are likely to be able to sustain
foreign exchange reserves that are instrumental in
higher debt levels. Data sources
6.11a
The burden of external debt service declined over 2000–08
Data on external debt are mainly from reports to the World Bank through its Debtor Reporting Sys-
Share of exports of goods, services, and income (percent) 30
tem from member countries that have received IBRD loans or IDA credits, with additional information from the files of the World Bank, the IMF, the African Development Bank and African Devel-
20
opment Fund, the Asian Development Bank and
Total debt service
Asian Development Fund, and the Inter- American Development Bank. Data on GNI, exports of
10 Interest payments
goods and services, and total reserves are from the World Bank’s national accounts files and the IMF’s Balance of Payments and International
0 1981
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2008
Financial Statistics databases. Summary tables
The total external debt service of low- and middle-income economies fell from 20 percent of export
of the external debt of developing countries are
revenues in 2000 to under 10 percent in 2008. About 26 percent of the total debt service in 2008 was
published annually in the World Bank’s Global
interest payments on outstanding debt compared with 32 percent in 2000.
Development Finance, on its Global Development
Source: Global Development Finance data files.
Finance CD-ROM, and on GDF Online.
2010 World Development Indicators
393
GLOBAL LINKS
Ratios for external debt
6.12
Global private financial flows Equity flows
Debt flows
$ millions Foreign direct investment 1995
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
394
.. 70 0 472 5,609 25 12,026 1,901 330 2 15 10,689 a 13 393 0 70 4,859 90 10 2 151 7 9,319 6 33 2,957 35,849 .. 968 122 125 337 211 108 .. 2,568 4,139 414 452 598 38 .. 201 14 1,044 23,736 –315 8 6 11,985 107 1,053 75 1 0 7 50
2010 World Development Indicators
2008
300 937 2,646 1,679 9,753 935 47,281 14,440 15 973 2,158 99,732 120 512 1,056 109 45,058 9,205 137 4 815 38 45,364 121 834 16,787 147,791 63,005 10,583 1,000 2,622 2,021 402 4,798 .. 10,864 3,111 2,885 993 9,495 784 36 1,947 109 –7,765 100,372 20 72 1,564 21,248 2,112 5,304 838 382 15 30 877
Portfolio equity 1995
.. 0 .. 0 1,552 .. 2,585 1,262 .. –15 .. 6,505a 0 0 .. 6 2,775 0 .. 0 .. 0 –3,077 .. .. –249 0 .. 165 .. 0 0 1 4 .. 1,236 .. .. 13 0 0 .. 10 .. 2,027 6,823 .. .. .. –1,513 0 0 .. .. .. .. 0
2008
.. .. .. .. –531 –1 19,408 –6,945 0 10 1 8,818 .. 0 .. –37 –7,565 –106 .. .. 0 –1 3,109 .. .. 1,823 8,721 19,477 –86 .. .. 0 79 –115 .. –1,124 2,792 0 1 –674 0 .. –308 0 –1,782 –16,145 .. .. 118 –85,366 0 –5,260 0 .. .. 0 0
$ millions Commercial bank and other lending
Bonds 1995
.. 0 –278 0 3,705 0 .. .. 0 0 0 .. 0 0 .. 0 2,636 –6 0 0 0 0 .. 0 0 489 317 .. 1,008 0 0 –4 0 .. .. .. .. 0 0 0 0 0 .. 0 .. .. 0 0 0 .. 0 .. 44 0 0 0 –13
2008
0 0 0 0 14 0 .. .. 0 0 0 .. 0 0 0 0 1,637 –287 0 0 0 0 .. 0 0 –1,688 –2,096 .. 47 0 0 –240 0 .. .. .. .. –20 0 0 0 0 .. 0 .. .. –50 0 500 .. 0 .. 5 0 0 0 0
1995
.. 0 788 123 754 0 .. .. 0 –21 103 .. 0 41 .. –6 8,283 –93 0 –1 13 –65 .. 0 0 1,773 4,696 .. 1,250 0 –50 –20 14 .. .. .. .. –31 59 –311 –31 0 .. –48 .. .. –75 0 0 .. 38 .. –34 –15 0 0 38
2008
0 396 –474 2,667 1,889 374 .. .. 350 112 385 .. 0 343 254 –1 25,551 4,379 –3 0 0 –106 .. 0 0 5,053 14,238 .. 486 –7 –6 258 –177 .. .. .. .. –89 592 –235 298 1 .. –33 .. .. –3 11 123 .. 68 .. 1,007 4 0 50 –5
Equity flows
Debt flows
$ millions Foreign direct investment 1995
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
4,804 2,144 4,346 17 .. 1,447 1,350 4,842 147 39 13 964 32 .. 1,776 .. 7 96 95 180 35 275 5 –88 73 9 10 6 4,178 111 7 19 9,526 26 10 92 45 280 153 .. 12,206 3,316 89 7 1,079 2,393 46 723 223 455 103 2,557 1,478 3,659 685 .. ..
2008
62,786 41,169 9,318 1,492 .. –19,886 9,638 15,442 1,437 24,552 1,966 14,648 96 .. 2,200 .. 57 233 228 1,357 3,606 218 144 4,111 1,770 598 1,477 37 7,376 127 103 378 22,481 708 683 2,466 587 283 535 1 –2,389 5,466 626 147 3,636 –1,543 2,928 5,438 2,402 –30 320 4,079 1,403 14,849 3,575 .. ..
Portfolio equity 1995
–62 1,590 1,493 0 .. 0 991 5,358 0 50,597 0 .. 5 .. 4,219 .. 0 .. 0 0 .. .. .. .. 6 .. .. .. 0 .. 0 22 519 –1 0 20 0 .. 46 0 –743 .. 0 .. 0 636 0 10 0 .. 0 171 0 219 –179 .. ..
2008
–197 –15,030 322 .. .. 931 994 –29,022 0 –69,692 500 –1,280 5 .. –41,247 .. 0 6 .. –50 466 .. 0 0 113 –49 .. .. –10,716 .. .. 34 –3,503 11 .. 148 0 .. 4 .. –12,565 170 0 .. –4,684 –11,888 –809 –270 0 .. 0 180 –1,289 564 6,776 .. ..
$ millions Commercial bank and other lending
Bonds 1995
.. 285 2,248 0 .. .. .. .. 13 .. 0 0 0 .. .. .. .. 0 0 43 350 0 0 .. 0 0 0 0 2,440 0 0 150 3,758 0 0 0 0 0 .. 0 .. .. 0 0 0 .. .. 0 0 –32 0 0 1,110 250 .. .. ..
2008
.. 1,754 3,519 0 .. .. .. .. 250 .. –2 –310 0 .. .. .. .. 0 0 154 –233 0 0 .. –184 0 0 0 –250 0 0 0 –4,540 –6 0 –589 0 0 .. 0 .. .. 0 0 0 .. .. 0 –507 0 0 –1,488 –839 2,811 .. .. ..
1995
.. 955 60 –37 .. .. .. .. 15 .. –201 240 –163 .. .. .. .. 0 0 3 333 12 0 .. 55 0 –4 –23 1,231 0 0 126 1,401 24 –14 158 24 36 .. –5 .. .. –81 –24 –448 .. .. 317 –12 –311 –16 43 –215 228 .. .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
2008
.. 10,028 3,573 –1,197 .. .. .. .. 12 .. –65 12,174 –8 .. .. .. .. –74 366 5,020 –80 –3 0 .. 2,942 460 3 0 –106 –1 –6 –29 16,603 386 44 –67 –1 0 .. –1 .. .. 77 –7 –37 .. .. 652 157 149 91 –83 –1,351 26,111 .. .. ..
395
GLOBAL LINKS
6.12
Global private financial flows
6.12
Global private financial flows Equity flows
Debt flows
$ millions Foreign direct investment 1995
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
419 2,065 2 –1,875 32 45b 7 11,535 236 150 1 1,248 8,086 56 12 52 14,939 4,158 100 10 120 2,068 .. 26 299 264 885 233 121 267 .. 21,731 57,800 157 –24 985 1,780 123 –218 97 118 328,496 s 3,243 95,596 52,899 42,698 98,839 50,798 9,443 30,181 940 2,931 4,546 229,657 78,432
a. Includes Luxembourg. b. Includes Montenegro.
396
2010 World Development Indicators
2008
13,883 72,885 103 22,486 706 2,992 –3 22,724 3,231 1,917 87 9,645 71,207 752 2,601 10 41,908 6,549 .. 376 744 9,835 .. 68 .. 2,638 18,299 820 788 10,913 .. 93,506 319,737 2,205 918 349 9,579 .. 1,555 939 52 1,823,282 s 26,440 571,567 267,487 304,080 598,007 187,724 172,056 125,669 30,229 48,678 33,651 1,225,275 426,921
Portfolio equity 1995
0 47 0 0 4 .. 0 –159 –16 .. .. 2,914 4,216 .. 0 1 1,853 5,851 0 .. 0 2,253 .. 0 17 12 195 .. 0 .. .. 8,070 16,523 0 .. 270 .. 0 .. .. .. 127,074 s –6 14,050 5,393 8,657 14,043 3,746 467 5,216 32 1,585 2,998 113,030 23,737
2008
23 –15,005 0 .. .. –57 0 –2,209 103 –291 .. –4,707 –446 –488 0 .. –1,494 24,352 .. 0 3 –4,594 .. .. .. –39 716 .. –32 388 .. 72,710 110,447 2 .. 3 –578 .. 0 –6 .. –207,952 s –591 –56,548 –16,777 –39,771 –57,139 –8,139 –14,608 –9,674 402 –15,778 –9,342 –150,812 –273,433
$ millions Commercial bank and other lending
Bonds 1995
0 –810 0 .. 0 0b 0 .. .. .. 0 731 .. 0 0 0 .. .. .. 0 0 2,123 .. 0 .. 588 627 0 0 –200 .. .. .. 144 0 –468 0 .. 0 0 –30 .. s –30 21,247 6,470 14,777 21,216 8,206 –96 11,311 660 285 851 .. ..
2008
221 15,402 0 .. 0 0 0 .. .. .. 0 –698 .. –65 0 0 .. .. .. 0 0 –778 .. 0 .. 0 248 0 0 780 .. .. .. –534 0 3,051 –26 .. 0 0 0 .. s –26 14,984 692 14,291 14,958 –470 19,329 –4,015 –824 1,689 –750 .. ..
1995
413 444 0 .. –25 0b –28 .. .. .. 0 748 .. 103 0 0 .. .. .. 0 18 3,702 .. 0 .. –96 174 20 –9 –19 .. .. .. 39 201 –216 356 .. –2 –37 140 .. s 420 26,959 8,429 18,529 27,379 9,554 1,794 13,833 633 1,349 217 .. ..
2008
17,036 23,060 0 .. –37 3,400 0 .. .. .. 0 –805 .. 155 0 0 .. .. .. 17 –9 –554 .. 0 .. 29 21,760 –36 –1 16,521 .. .. .. 32 –146 –434 –51 .. –1 71 11 .. s 329 213,213 48,183 165,030 213,542 16,310 134,897 51,851 –2,090 10,978 1,597 .. ..
About the data
6.12
Definitions
Private financial flows—equity and debt—account for
Statistics on bonds, bank lending, and supplier
• Foreign direct investment is net inflows of invest-
the bulk of development finance. Equity flows com-
credits are produced by aggregating transactions
ment to acquire a lasting interest in or management
prise foreign direct investment (FDI) and portfolio
of public and publicly guaranteed debt and private
control over an enterprise operating in an economy
equity. Debt flows are financing raised through bond
nonguaranteed debt. Data on public and publicly
other than that of the investor. It is the sum of equity
issuance, bank lending, and supplier credits. Data on
guaranteed debt are reported through the Debtor
capital, reinvested earnings, other long-term capital,
equity flows are based on balance of payments data
Reporting System by World Bank member econo-
and short-term capital, as shown in the balance of
reported by the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
mies that have received loans from the International
payments. • Portfolio equity includes net inflows
FDI data are supplemented by staff estimates using
Bank for Reconstruction and Development or cred-
from equity securities other than those recorded
data from the United Nations Conference on Trade
its from the International Development Association.
as direct investment and including shares, stocks,
and Development and official national sources.
The reports are cross-checked with data from market
depository receipts, and direct purchases of shares
The internationally accepted definition of FDI (from
sources that include transactions data. Information
in local stock markets by foreign investors • Bonds
the fifth edition of the IMF’s Balance of Payments
on private nonguaranteed bonds and bank lending
are securities issued with a fixed rate of interest for a
Manual [1993]), includes three components: equity
is collected from market sources, because official
period of more than one year. They include net flows
investment, reinvested earnings, and short- and
national sources reporting to the Debtor Reporting
through cross-border public and publicly guaranteed
long-term loans between parent firms and foreign
System are not asked for a breakdown of private
and private nonguaranteed bond issues. • Commer-
affiliates. Distinguished from other kinds of interna-
nonguaranteed bonds and loans.
cial bank and other lending includes net commercial
tional investment, FDI is made to establish a lasting
Data on equity flows are shown for all countries
interest in or effective management control over an
for which data are available. Debt flows are shown
enterprise in another country. The IMF suggests that
only for 128 developing countries that report to the
investments should account for at least 10 percent
Debtor Reporting System; nonreporting countries
of voting stock to be counted as FDI. In practice many
may also receive debt flows.
countries set a higher threshold. Many countries fail
The volume of global private fi nancial fl ows
to report reinvested earnings, and the definition of
reported by the World Bank generally differs from
long-term loans differs among countries.
that reported by other sources because of differ-
FDI data do not give a complete picture of inter-
ences in sources, classification of economies, and
national investment in an economy. Balance of
method used to adjust and disaggregate reported
payments data on FDI do not include capital raised
information. In addition, particularly for debt financ-
locally, an important source of investment financing
ing, differences may also reflect how some install-
in some developing countries. In addition, FDI data
ments of the transactions and certain offshore issu-
omit nonequity cross-border transactions such as
ances are treated.
bank lending (public and publicly guaranteed and private nonguaranteed) and other private credits.
intrafirm flows of goods and services. For a detailed discussion of the data issues, see the World Bank’s World Debt Tables 1993–94 (vol. 1, chap. 3).
Most global foreign direct investment is directed to high-income economies and a few large middle-income economies FDI net inflows (percent of world total)
6.12a
To low-income economies To other middle-income economies To Brazil, China, India, the Russian Federation, and South Africa
40
30
Data sources
20
Data on equity and debt flows are compiled from a
10
variety of public and private sources, including the World Bank’s Debtor Reporting System, the IMF’s
0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
International Financial Statistics and Balance of
The share of FDI net inflows to developing economies increased 10 percentage points between 2007 and
Payments databases, and Dealogic. These data
2008 because of decreasing inflows to high-income economies. Brazil, China, India, the Russian Federa-
are also published annually in the World Bank’s
tion, and South Africa received more than half the FDI net inflows to all developing economies.
Global Development Finance, on its Global Develop-
Source: World Development Indicators data files.
ment Finance CD-ROM, and on GDF Online.
2010 World Development Indicators
397
GLOBAL LINKS
Global private financial flows
6.13
Net official financial flows Total
International financial institutions
$ millions
$ millions
From From bilateral multilateral sourcesa,b,c sources 2008 2008
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
398
World Banka IDA IBRD 2008 2008
IMF Concessional 2008
Nonconcessional 2008
United Nationsb,c
Regional development banks b ConcesNonOther sional concessional institutions 2008 2008 2008
$ millions UNICEF 2008
UNRWA 2008
UNTA 2008
Others 2008
8.5 7.8 –162.9 816.6 –70.4 69.7
190.5 140.9 –106.2 34.8 –401.3 69.6
41.3 19.9 0.0 6.1 0.0 68.8
0.0 11.7 –102.2 0.0 –604.6 –0.9
35.7 –11.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 –19.6
0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
50.9 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 8.0
0.0 26.5 0.0 –0.4 –60.6 0.0
3.2 85.4 –13.9 0.1 260.5 3.6
35.7 0.8 1.1 16.3 0.7 0.6
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1.0 0.4 0.9 0.8 1.0 1.6
22.7 3.8 7.9 9.8 1.7 7.5
29.1 57.5 1,501.4
174.0 1,274.0 0.9
42.2 607.0 0.0
56.3 0.0 –0.9
–15.4 198.7 0.0
–6.2 0.0 0.0
8.8 298.5 0.0
48.8 121.7 –2.1
28.1 –2.0 0.0
1.0 20.8 0.6
0.0 0.0 0.0
0.6 0.8 0.5
9.8 28.5 2.8
–31.9 46.4 24.1 –19.4 581.5 71.9 40.5 –0.8 235.8 60.5
154.8 119.6 63.6 23.0 943.4 –432.1 299.1 43.7 156.8 94.7
84.1 24.3 16.5 –0.5 0.0 0.0 159.2 –6.2 14.1 28.7
0.0 0.0 –24.6 0.0 914.2 –406.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 –5.4
18.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.2 21.7 0.0 8.4
0.0 0.0 –2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
29.5 36.9 0.0 –2.3 3.0 0.0 38.8 2.2 97.3 45.3
0.0 –43.4 56.9 –4.7 –592.7 –2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 –20.9
3.6 92.0 8.9 25.5 603.9 –23.0 46.0 –1.7 16.7 18.5
5.4 1.1 0.8 0.7 1.8 .. 15.8 9.2 6.4 6.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.8 0.6 0.8 0.4 1.5 .. 1.1 0.6 0.8 1.0
12.5 8.1 6.7 3.9 11.7 .. 20.0 17.9 21.5 13.0
–2.3 53.4 138.1 –447.0 .. –102.6 –108.4 –18.1 22.2 1.7 .. .. ..
17.9 –46.5 –101.8 1,394.2 .. 1,946.8 –16.7 10.1 –228.8 –503.4 .. .. ..
–10.5 –57.0 –0.7 –299.8 .. –0.7 50.7 –2.4 –0.2 –103.6 .. .. 0.0
0.0 –25.7 –154.3 632.9 .. 689.0 0.0 0.0 –4.2 –377.4 143.0 .. 0.0
15.3 –14.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 –137.0 1.9 0.0 –44.5 .. .. ..
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 64.3 .. .. ..
–3.7 5.2 0.0 0.0 .. –5.5 1.2 –0.4 –9.7 –0.6 .. .. ..
0.0 0.0 50.9 1,001.7 .. 1,349.8 –33.7 –8.7 –261.5 –59.6 .. .. ..
–2.1 15.9 0.0 15.7 .. –97.4 –15.4 –0.6 42.6 –13.1 .. .. ..
5.6 11.1 0.4 12.0 .. 2.0 57.9 2.8 0.6 7.7 0.4 0.6 ..
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ..
0.5 0.5 0.9 2.2 .. 0.8 1.3 0.2 0.7 1.1 0.6 1.4 ..
12.8 17.5 1.0 29.5 .. 8.8 58.3 17.3 2.9 22.3 3.7 2.0 ..
696.7 –121.8 –960.1 –2.2 71.9 .. 86.6
–41.0 –434.7 118.6 264.6 40.0 .. 354.7
–0.7 –1.1 –39.2 –0.8 19.5 0.0 156.5
–22.9 –71.3 65.4 –1.0 0.0 –7.2 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0
–42.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0
–21.3 –26.4 8.5 –14.1 4.8 .. 72.2
–9.3 –17.8 125.5 201.0 0.0 .. –6.4
52.4 –323.3 –60.2 74.9 1.7 .. 31.8
0.6 1.1 3.0 0.6 2.6 .. 45.9
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0
0.8 0.8 1.4 0.7 1.1 .. 1.1
2.0 3.3 14.2 3.3 10.3 .. 53.6
–194.9 5.3 1.8
–56.9 54.0 417.8
0.0 2.3 110.2
9.2 0.0 0.0
0.0 6.3 –35.0
–24.7 0.0 255.6
–0.2 13.5 69.9
–25.1 0.0 0.3
–19.8 22.6 2.8
0.7 1.2 1.3
0.0 0.0 0.0
0.4 0.3 0.8
2.6 7.8 11.9
25.9 .. –24.5 –7.1 0.0 162.3 219.1
371.4 .. 167.6 15.5 8.3 183.5 175.0
256.5 0.0 0.0 –8.4 –3.9 –3.9 51.1
0.0 0.0 66.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 .. 0.0 7.9 –2.0 50.5 0.0
0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 5.6 0.0 0.0
85.9 .. –6.4 11.6 –1.2 100.5 100.7
–4.1 .. 58.5 –5.6 0.0 0.0 –18.4
1.5 .. 40.6 –16.8 0.0 6.7 28.7
9.4 .. 1.6 6.0 2.2 4.7 0.9
0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.9 .. 0.6 0.5 0.2 0.8 1.1
21.3 .. 6.6 20.3 7.4 24.2 10.9
2010 World Development Indicators
Total
International financial institutions
$ millions
$ millions
From From bilateral multilateral sourcesa,b,c sources 2008 2008
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
World Banka IDA IBRD 2008 2008
IMF Concessional 2008
Nonconcessional 2008
6.13
GLOBAL LINKS
Net official financial flows
United Nationsb,c
Regional development banks b ConcesNonOther sional concessional institutions 2008 2008 2008
$ millions UNICEF 2008
UNRWA 2008
UNTA 2008
Others 2008
.. 551.1 –2,040.2 –89.6 ..
.. 2,359.6 942.5 84.7 ..
0.0 192.2 466.6 0.0 ..
–29.8 731.6 146.7 77.2 ..
.. 0.0 0.0 0.0 ..
.. 0.0 0.0 0.0 ..
.. 0.0 24.6 0.0 ..
.. 1,306.4 283.7 0.0 ..
.. 57.6 0.0 0.0 ..
.. 36.6 5.2 1.4 2.1
.. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
.. 0.3 1.1 0.6 0.4
.. 34.9 14.6 5.5 7.3
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
–82.3
62.2
0.0
–34.0
0.0
0.0
–5.3
73.8
25.5
0.6
0.0
0.3
1.3
–2,086.4 –11.0 –83.9 .. .. .. .. –5.2 86.5 –0.4 115.2 5.1 0.0 .. –2.4 30.5 27.8 –6.5 –634.9 –5.3 128.3 –16.4 –192.0 –12.9 6.2 816.9 –4.3 –150.4 .. –31.1
51.8 40.9 182.4 .. .. .. .. 58.3 74.7 1,066.0 128.3 13.8 527.7 .. –19.7 32.7 390.3 185.5 –82.1 263.5 157.7 23.9 1,503.0 50.2 33.0 952.5 403.3 38.0 .. 42.9
–2.5 –44.4 0.0 36.4 103.6 0.0 .. .. –3.5 –458.0 .. .. .. .. 9.3 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 –23.8 0.0 –75.7 10.9 –1.0 –4.3 0.0 .. .. 0.0 3.0 –5.9 37.0 210.2 0.0 11.7 0.0 0.0 –49.8 87.1 0.0 42.6 0.0 –0.6 20.5 0.0 1,343.3 22.2 –16.8 9.9 0.0 –1.3 –20.0 254.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. .. –7.9 0.0
0.0 0.0 –10.6 .. .. .. .. 19.0 –4.3 0.0 0.0 –5.0 302.5 .. 0.0 0.0 59.0 97.0 0.0 28.4 3.1 0.0 0.0 10.9 –5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0
–59.3 0.0 0.0 .. .. .. .. 0.0 0.0 846.2 40.1 0.0 226.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0
0.0 –0.2 28.9 .. .. .. .. 17.3 24.8 0.0 0.0 2.2 –26.8 .. 0.0 0.0 75.5 43.5 0.0 56.8 19.2 –0.1 0.0 0.0 15.2 –1.1 65.3 0.0 .. 13.7
0.0 –1.1 –3.6 .. .. .. .. –5.0 0.7 –2.0 0.0 0.0 –6.4 .. –7.7 6.1 0.0 –2.2 –34.5 0.0 –7.6 10.5 153.1 –3.3 0.0 398.9 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0
19.9 1.5 –4.4 .. .. .. .. –0.7 15.0 245.6 38.0 –0.8 0.0 .. –15.0 –8.9 8.2 1.9 –2.5 65.6 80.1 –7.9 0.0 18.9 3.6 564.5 36.1 –0.7 .. 2.6
0.6 1.1 15.1 2.3 .. .. .. 1.0 2.5 .. 0.6 1.1 5.6 0.0 .. 0.7 17.1 9.2 0.4 11.2 2.6 0.0 0.8 0.7 1.2 1.3 15.7 13.9 1.3 6.0
130.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. .. .. 0.0 0.0 .. 122.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.9 0.3 1.9 1.4 .. .. .. 1.3 0.7 .. 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.4 .. 1.0 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.6 1.0 1.5 1.2 0.9 0.8 1.1 0.7 1.1
5.8 2.9 51.5 5.5 .. .. .. 16.1 31.5 .. 1.8 5.8 30.7 1.1 .. 2.7 19.0 23.4 3.7 13.7 17.0 0.9 4.8 16.1 6.9 9.3 31.0 23.7 5.2 27.4
21.5 17.3 –27.3
154.4 123.4 167.4
28.3 15.0 333.0
0.0 0.0 –188.8
29.1 11.9 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0
79.9 19.7 27.9
–4.5 0.0 –81.9
9.6 30.9 0.0
0.7 19.5 43.3
0.0 0.0 0.0
1.4 0.7 1.0
9.9 25.7 32.9
.. 195.5 –4.2 –97.0 3.3 –122.0 –761.0 –3,201.7
.. 4,210.7 147.1 –27.6 –22.1 21.8 –94.1 –73.6
0.0 37.9 0.0 –1.7 –1.5 0.0 –7.1 0.0
0.0 –243.2 53.8 –25.7 –20.7 63.2 –279.6 –73.6
.. –162.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
.. 3,183.5 –5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
.. 435.6 –6.9 –7.6 –6.9 –7.0 –33.0 0.0
.. 1,065.8 94.3 4.0 –0.2 103.6 205.7 0.0
.. –163.5 7.2 –3.5 2.4 –147.7 1.0 0.0
0.2 21.0 0.4 1.3 1.2 0.9 3.0 ..
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ..
0.1 1.9 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.8 0.8 ..
0.4 34.4 3.1 5.6 3.1 8.0 15.1 ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
399
6.13
Net official financial flows Total
International financial institutions
$ millions
$ millions
From From bilateral multilateral sourcesa,b,c sources 2008 2008
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
World Banka IDA IBRD 2008 2008
IMF Concessional 2008
Nonconcessional 2008
United Nationsb,c
Regional development banks b ConcesNonOther sional concessional institutions 2008 2008 2008
$ millions UNICEF 2008
UNRWA 2008
UNTA 2008
Others 2008
17.8 –539.3 3.4 .. 233.6 –48.7 12.2 .. .. .. 0.0 0.0
811.6 –679.2 156.7 .. 261.3 439.0 92.4 .. .. .. 31.8 –14.2
0.0 0.0 40.5 .. 133.9 34.5 25.6 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
–48.5 –485.2 0.0 .. 0.0 –22.1 0.0 .. –50.2 –14.3 0.0 –0.3
0.0 0.0 3.6 .. 38.4 0.0 18.0 .. .. .. 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. .. .. 0.0 0.0
0.7 0.0 31.3 .. 68.5 0.0 15.5 .. .. .. 0.0 0.0
64.5 –193.8 0.0 .. –10.9 301.8 0.0 .. .. .. 0.0 –22.4
794.9 –0.2 25.2 .. 6.7 107.4 6.6 .. .. .. 0.0 0.0
.. .. 8.3 0.0 5.4 2.3 8.3 .. .. .. 12.2 2.8
.. .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. .. .. 0.0 0.0
.. .. 0.8 0.7 1.3 1.0 1.1 .. .. .. 0.0 0.5
.. .. 47.0 .. 18.0 14.1 17.3 .. .. .. 19.6 5.2
34.0 274.2 10.1
167.0 157.2 22.8
40.0 –1.2 –0.2
0.0 0.0 –5.9
–6.1 0.0 0.0
–72.2 –65.5 0.0
74.1 0.0 1.9
84.8 0.0 –8.2
28.9 149.5 30.3
1.1 17.7 1.4
0.0 0.0 0.0
1.2 0.8 0.6
15.2 55.9 2.9
.. 234.5 0.0 –219.7 .. –0.7 .. –30.6 434.9 –76.0 –16.1 –220.7 ..
.. 54.0 567.9 –12.9 .. –76.3 .. –76.1 3,424.6 0.8 295.2 5,070.5 ..
–1.5 7.4 392.9 –3.4 .. –117.0 0.0 –2.1 –5.9 0.0 171.8 0.0 ..
0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 .. 0.0 –11.1 –203.1 570.0 –1.2 0.0 686.6 ..
.. –31.0 0.0 0.0 .. 47.7 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ..
.. 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. 0.0 .. 0.0 1,587.7 0.0 0.0 4,401.4 ..
.. 48.9 98.8 –4.2 .. –14.9 .. 0.0 0.0 0.0 67.6 0.0 ..
.. –1.3 –1.0 –4.0 .. 0.0 .. –19.2 0.0 0.0 –0.9 –34.5 ..
.. 2.7 19.8 –12.7 .. –6.3 .. 139.8 1,259.3 –1.5 0.9 9.1 ..
0.8 2.2 17.9 1.0 1.1 4.3 0.0 0.7 1.6 0.9 22.4 1.2 ..
57.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ..
1.3 0.8 1.1 1.2 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.8 0.6 0.0 1.1 1.8 ..
6.2 24.3 38.4 7.6 6.1 9.4 0.6 7.0 11.3 2.6 32.3 4.9 ..
–19.8 –1.1 –56.9 410.7 .. –9.7 –16.3 13.0 .. s 1,433.9 –5,743.3 –4,014.2 –1,729.1 –4,309.4 –3,563.6 –1,682.4 1,151.3 –2,391.2 823.5 1,353.0 .. ..
408.6 52.6 251.7 770.3 .. 118.9 125.6 10.6 .. s 8,021.8 26,241.4 17,133.6 9,213.7 35,140.6 3,304.2 10,789.2 5,245.4 1,945.5 8,284.8 5,140.7
0.0 12.7 0.0 555.1 .. 69.9 50.7 0.0 .. s 3,369.2 1,121.8 1,062.3 59.5 4,491.0 738.5 347.3 102.2 30.3 921.1 2,351.5 .. ..
0.5 3.0 1.0 4.1 3.7 10.3 8.8 4.6 984.1 s 473.9 238.0 212.0 26.0 982.9 59.8 20.1 27.9 27.2 122.5 466.6 1.2 ..
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 496.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 807.1 s 0.0 807.1 684.5 122.5 807.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 807.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 ..
61.4 0.0 0.0 –2.4 –13.8 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 –39.3 0.0 194.5 .. .. .. .. 0.0 –61.6 –9.9 0.0 0.0 11.0 0.0 45.6 0.0 –1.7 0.0 –0.3 .. s .. s .. s .. s –39.4 716.6 221.8 1,697.9 2,619.3 –243.5 10,112.2 828.3 964.7 –252.0 7,703.0 879.5 1,654.6 8.5 2,409.2 –51.2 2,579.9 473.1 10,334.0 2,526.2 424.8 –48.6 0.0 306.7 272.6 –82.5 7,086.2 156.2 2,271.8 88.1 –47.5 251.0 –302.8 –59.8 –29.1 13.6 488.3 65.7 3,108.9 876.1 –574.9 510.2 215.4 922.6 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
200.2 12.2 159.1 17.8 .. 0.0 –5.0 –0.1 .. s 58.8 5,893.3 4,589.2 1,304.2 5,952.1 1,480.7 263.2 1,434.9 505.2 2,578.8 –310.7 .. ..
146.4 29.6 87.2 16.6 .. 93.2 –15.8 –2.2 .. s 523.4 4,262.5 738.4 3,524.1 4,785.9 48.0 2,566.1 916.4 784.9 –52.9 523.4 .. ..
0.6 1.9 0.4 5.8 0.5 3.9 1.5 20.0 0.1 9.3 0.9 16.1 1.6 28.7 0.5 9.8 645.3 s 1,941.2 s 37.3 962.3 107.4 495.0 36.8 515.2 23.1 133.2 644.0 1,564.4 98.3 196.0 13.7 146.3 67.5 133.1 71.9 97.0 6.4 169.9 156.0 880.6 1.3 7.2 .. ..
a. Aggregates include amounts for economies that do not report to the World Bank’s Debtor Reporting System and may differ from aggregates published in Global Development Finance 2010. b. Aggregates include amounts for economies not specified elsewhere. c. World and income group aggregates include flows not allocated by country or region.
400
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
6.13
Definitions
The table shows concessional and nonconcessional
creditworthy for International Bank for Reconstruction
• Total net official financial flows are disbursements
financial flows from official bilateral sources, the
and Development (IBRD) lending. Exceptions are also
of public or publicly guaranteed loans and credits,
major international financial institutions, and UN
made for small island economies. The IBRD lends to
less repayments of principal. • IDA is the Interna-
agencies. The international financial institutions fund
creditworthy countries at a variable base rate of six-
tional Development Association, the concessional
nonconcessional lending operations primarily by sell-
month LIBOR plus a spread, either variable or fixed, for
loan window of the World Bank Group. • IBRD is the
ing low-interest, highly rated bonds backed by prudent
the life of the loan. The rate is reset every six months
International Bank for Reconstruction and Develop-
lending and financial policies and the strong financial
and applies to the interest period beginning on that
ment, the founding and largest member of the World
support of their members. Funds are then on-lent to
date. Although some outstanding IBRD loans have a
Bank Group. • IMF is the International Monetary
developing countries at slightly higher interest rates
low enough interest rate to be classified as conces-
Fund, which provides concessional lending through
with 15- to 20-year maturities. Lending terms vary
sional under the DAC definition, all IBRD loans in the
the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility and the
with market conditions and institutional policies.
table are classified as nonconcessional. Lending by the
IMF Trust Fund and nonconcessional lending through
International Finance Corporation is not included.
credit to its members, mainly for balance of payments
Concessional flows from international financial institutions are credits provided through concessional
The International Monetary Fund makes conces-
needs. • Regional development banks are the African
lending facilities. Subsidies from donors or other
sional funds available through its Poverty Reduction
Development Bank, which serves all of Africa, includ-
resources reduce the cost of these loans. Grants
and Growth Facility and the IMF Trust Fund. Eligibility
ing North Africa; the Asian Development Bank, which
are not included in net flows. The Organisation for
is based principally on a country’s per capita income
serves South and Central Asia and East Asia and
Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD)
and eligibility under IDA.
Pacific; the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development Assistance Committee (DAC) defines
Regional development banks also maintain conces-
Development, which serves Europe and Central Asia;
concessional flows from bilateral donors as flows with
sional windows. Their loans are recorded in the table
and the Inter-American Development Bank, which
a grant element of at least 25 percent, evaluated
according to each institution’s classification and not
serves the Americas. • Concessional financial flows
assuming a 10 percent nominal discount rate.
according to the DAC definition.
are disbursements made through concessional lend-
World Bank concessional lending is done by the
Data for flows from international financial institutions
ing facilities. • Nonconcessional financial flows are
International Development Association (IDA) based
are available for 128 countries that report to the World
all disbursements that are not concessional. • Other
on gross national income (GNI) per capita and perfor-
Bank’s Debtor Reporting System. World Bank flows for
institutions, a residual category in the World Bank’s
mance standards assessed by World Bank staff. Cut-
nonreporting countries were collected from its opera-
Debtor Reporting System, includes other multilateral
off for IDA eligibility, set at the beginning of the World
tional records. Nonreporting countries may have net
institutions such as the Caribbean Development Fund,
Bank’s fiscal year, has been $1,135 since July 1, 2009,
flows from other international financial institutions.
Council of Europe, European Development Fund,
measured in 2008 U.S. dollars using the Atlas method
Official flows from the United Nations are mainly con-
Islamic Development Bank, and Nordic Development
(see Users guide). In exceptional circumstances IDA
cessional flows classified as official development assis-
Fund. • United Nations includes the United Nations
extends temporary eligibility to countries above the cut-
tance but may include nonconcessional flows classified
Children’s Fund (UNICEF), United Nations Relief and
off that are undertaking major adjustments but are not
as other official flows in OECD-DAC databases.
Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), United Nations Regular Programme for Technical Assistance (UNTA), and other UN agen-
Net lending from the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development declined as countries paid off loans, and concessional lending from the International Development Association increased From IDA Net inflows ($ billions) 3,000
cies, such as the International Fund for Agricultural
6.13a
HIV/AIDS, United Nations Development Programme,
From IBRD 1990
2008
Net inflows ($ billions) 3,000
2,000
2,000
1,000
1,000
0
0
–1,000
–1,000
Development, Joint United Nations Programme on
1990
2008
United Nations Population Fund, United Nations Refugee Agency, and World Food Programme. Data sources Data on net fi nancial fl ows from international financial institutions are from the World Bank’s Debtor Reporting System and published annually in the World Bank’s Global Development Finance, on its Global Development Finance CD-ROM, and
East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Latin Middle East South Sub-Saharan Central America & & North Asia Africa Asia Caribbean Africa
East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Latin Middle East South Sub-Saharan Central America & & North Asia Africa Asia Caribbean Africa
All regions except Middle East and North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa received positive net disbursements from the IBRD. The world’s poorest countries in Sub-Saharan Africa continue to receive concessional lending from the International Development Association. Source: Global Development Finance data files.
on GDF Online. Data on official flows from UN agencies are from the OECD DAC annual Development Co-operation Report and are available electronically on the OECD DAC’s International Development Statistics CD-ROM and at www.oecd.org/ dac/stats/idsonline.
2010 World Development Indicators
401
GLOBAL LINKS
Net official financial flows
6.14
Financial flows from Development Assistance Committee members
Net disbursements Total net flowsa
2008
$ millions Australia Austria Belgium Canada Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Japan Luxembourg Netherlands New Zealand Norway Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States Total
Official development assistancea
Total 2008
3,997 2,954 11,302 1,714 4,425 2,386 24,068 4,785 5,150 2,803 –222 1,166 40,641 10,908 33,395 13,981 1,166 703 6,101 1,328 5,581 4,861 31,783 9,579 426 415 –14,022 6,993 433 348 3,963 3,963 1,528 620 30,087 6,867 5,896 4,732 12,923 2,038 41,878 11,500 14,084 26,842 264,581 121,483
Other official flowsa
Bilateral grants 2008
Bilateral loans 2008
Contributions to multilateral institutions 2008
2,600 1,275 1,404 3,396 1,853 681 5,980 9,392 312 931 1,919 7,764 279 5,312 278 2,941 238 4,776 3,086 1,536 7,064 24,825 87,839
53 –42 –28 –39 –25 13 481 –329 0 0 –81 –940 0 –112 0 95 136 25 57 14 303 –965 –1,384
301 480 1,010 1,428 975 473 4,446 4,918 391 397 3,022 2,756 136 1,793 70 928 247 2,065 1,589 487 4,133 2,982 35,029
2008
Private flowsa
Total 2008
59 314 103 9,348 –138 1,816 1,608 16,184 –84 2,303 22 –1,422 –229 29,962 –462 18,251 1 460 0 4,500 408 207 –1,986 23,738 0 0 0 –21,345 8 29 0 0 0 906 0 23,220 31 1,108 0 10,487 –22 29,938 –1,100 –28,781 –1,782 121,224
Net grants by NGOsa
Bilateral Multilateral Foreign portfolio portfolio direct investment investment investment 2008 2008 2008
Private export credits 2008
2008
1,673 7,532 1,617 14,872 2,303 –32 24,609 9,598 460 0 1,544 25,710 0 –24,523 29 0 341 23,334 –314 11,432 23,783 54,172 178,140
–136 1,817 199 324 0 0 –745 3,708 0 0 2 –4,878 0 –18 0 0 660 –114 1,422 –671 3,932 1,068 6,572
670 137 361 1,491 129 13 0 1,626 2 273 105 452 11 330 48 0 1 0 25 398 462 17,122 23,655
–1,223 0 0 988 0 –1,390 6,098 5,218 0 4,500 –1,339 3,952 0 3,365 0 0 –95 0 0 0 2,223 –75,801 –53,504
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 –275 0 0 0 –1,046 0 –169 0 0 0 0 0 –274 0 –8,220 –9,983
Official development assistance Commitmentsb
$ millions 2000 2008
Australia Austria Belgium Canada Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Japan Luxembourg Netherlands New Zealand Norway Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States Total
2,141 956 1,451 3,282 2,732 574 8,066 9,183 415 430 2,869 14,388 227 6,072 235 2,189 764 2,717 2,189 1,359 7,224 15,108 84,571
4,698 1,693 2,949 5,343 2,298 1,221 14,861 16,864 645 1,272 5,158 18,425 388 9,010 456 4,489 582 6,015 4,018 1,891 12,825 33,919 149,021
Gross disbursementsb
$ millions 2000 2008
1,845 738 1,451 2,908 2,914 614 8,601 9,321 415 430 2,838 13,704 227 5,694 221 2,471 764 2,717 2,739 1,339 7,224 13,015 82,188
2,834 1,631 2,319 4,673 2,631 1,073 11,637 14,910 645 1,272 4,655 15,491 388 6,792 357 3,635 582 6,864 4,513 1,824 12,825 27,210 128,762
Note: Components may not sum to totals because of gaps in reporting. a. At current prices and exchange rates. b. At 2007 prices and exchange rates.
402
2010 World Development Indicators
Net disbursements
$ 2000
millionsb
1,845 734 1,413 2,867 2,883 603 7,062 8,076 415 430 2,443 11,357 227 5,532 221 2,459 497 2,339 2,738 1,335 7,144 11,928 74,548
2008
2,834 1,585 2,219 4,635 2,573 1,072 10,122 13,060 645 1,272 4,440 8,502 388 6,522 357 3,635 576 6,304 4,510 1,813 12,315 26,254 115,632
Per capita b $ 2000 2008
% of 2000
96 90 138 93 540 116 120 98 38 114 43 89 515 347 58 548 48 59 309 186 122 43 88
0.27 0.23 0.36 0.25 1.06 0.31 0.30 0.27 0.20 0.29 0.13 0.28 0.70 0.84 0.25 0.76 0.26 0.22 0.80 0.34 0.32 0.10 0.22
133 190 208 139 467 201 163 159 57 293 75 67 792 396 84 757 56 137 487 235 202 86 129
GNI a
% of general government disbursementsa
2008
2000
2008
0.32 0.43 0.48 0.32 0.82 0.44 0.39 0.38 0.21 0.59 0.22 0.19 0.97 0.80 0.30 0.88 0.27 0.45 0.98 0.42 0.43 0.19 0.31
0.73 0.46 0.74 0.60 1.96 0.64 0.62 0.57 0.42 0.87 0.28 0.86 1.76 1.86 0.57 1.83 0.60 0.57 1.35 1.11 0.80 0.31 0.60
0.88 0.86 0.96 0.81 1.62 0.89 0.74 0.89 0.42 1.20 0.44 0.53 1.94 1.77 0.68 2.22 0.56 1.07 1.93 1.29 0.92 0.48 0.73
6.14
About the data
The flows of official and private financial resources
dropped. ODA recipients now comprise all low- and
are transactions by the official sector whose main
from the members of the Development Assistance
middle-income countries except those that are mem-
objective is other than development or whose grant
Committee (DAC) of the Organisation for Economic
bers of the Group of Eight or the European Union
element is less than 25 percent. • Private flows are
Co-operation and Development (OECD) to developing
(including countries with a firm date for EU acces-
flows at market terms financed from private sector
economies are compiled by DAC, based principally on
sion). The content and structure of tables 6.14–6.17
resources in donor countries. They include changes
reporting by DAC members using standard question-
were revised to reflect this change. Because official
in holdings of private long-term assets by reporting
naires issued by the DAC Secretariat.
aid flows are quite small relative to ODA, the net
country residents. • Foreign direct investment is
effect of these changes is believed to be minor.
investment by residents of DAC member countries
The table shows data reported by DAC member economies and does not include aid provided by the
Flows are transfers of resources, either in cash or
to acquire a lasting management interest (at least
European Commission—a multilateral member of
in the form of commodities or services measured on
10 percent of voting stock) in an enterprise operating
DAC.
a cash basis. Short-term capital transactions (with
in the recipient country. The data reflect changes in
DAC exists to help its members coordinate their
one year or less maturity) are not counted. Repay-
the net worth of subsidiaries in recipient countries
development assistance and to encourage the
ments of the principal (but not interest) of ODA loans
whose parent company is in the DAC source coun-
expansion and improve the effectiveness of the
are recorded as negative flows. Proceeds from offi -
try. • Bilateral portfolio investment is bank lending
aggregate resources flowing to recipient economies.
cial equity investments in a developing country are
and the purchase of bonds, shares, and real estate
In this capacity DAC monitors the flow of all financial
reported as ODA, while proceeds from their later sale
by residents of DAC member countries in recipi-
resources, but its main concern is official develop-
are recorded as negative flows.
ent countries. • Multilateral portfolio investment
ment assistance (ODA). Grants or loans to countries
The table is based on donor country reports and
is transactions of private banks and nonbanks in
and territories on the DAC list of aid recipients have
does not provide a complete picture of the resources
DAC member countries in the securities issued by
to meet three criteria to be counted as ODA. They
received by developing economies for two reasons.
multilateral institutions. • Private export credits are
are undertaken by the official sector. They promote
First, flows from DAC members are only part of the
loans extended to recipient countries by the private
economic development and welfare as the main
aggregate resource flows to these economies. Sec-
sector in DAC member countries to promote trade;
objective. And they are provided on concessional
ond, the data that record contributions to multilateral
they may be supported by an official guarantee. • Net
financial terms (loans must have a grant element of
institutions measure the flow of resources made
grants by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)
at least 25 percent, calculated at a discount rate of
available to those institutions by DAC members, not
are private grants by NGOs, net of subsidies from
10 percent). The DAC Statistical Reporting Directives
the flow of resources from those institutions to devel-
the official sector. • Commitments are obligations,
provide the most detailed explanation of this defini-
oping and transition economies.
expressed in writing and backed by funds, under-
tion and all ODA-related rules.
Aid as a share of gross national income (GNI), aid
taken by an official donor to provide specified assis-
This definition excludes nonconcessional fl ows
per capita, and ODA as a share of the general gov-
tance to a recipient country or multilateral organiza-
from official creditors, which are classified as “other
ernment disbursements of the donor are calculated
tion. • Gross disbursements are the international
official flows,” and aid for military purposes. Trans-
by the OECD. The denominators used in calculating
transfer of financial resources, goods, and services,
fer payments to private individuals, such as pen-
these ratios may differ from corresponding values
valued at the cost to the donor.
sions, reparations, and insurance payouts, are in
elsewhere in this book because of differences in tim-
general not counted. In addition to financial flows,
ing or definitions.
ODA includes technical cooperation, most expenditures for peacekeeping under UN mandates and
Definitions
assistance to refugees, contributions to multilateral
• Net disbursements are gross disbursements of
institutions such as the United Nations and its spe-
grants and loans minus repayments of principal on
cialized agencies, and concessional funding to multi-
earlier loans. • Total net flows are ODA or official
lateral development banks.
aid flows, other official flows, private flows, and net
A DAC revision of the list of countries and terri-
grants by nongovernmental organizations. • Official
tories counted as aid recipients has governed aid
development assistance refers to flows that meet
reporting for the three years starting in 2005. In the
the DAC definition of ODA and are made to coun-
past DAC distinguished aid going to Part I and Part II
tries and territories on the DAC list of aid recipients.
Data on financial flows are compiled by OECD DAC
countries. Part I countries, the recipients of ODA,
• Bilateral grants are transfers of money or in kind
and published in its annual statistical report, Geo-
comprised many of the countries classified by the
for which no repayment is required. • Bilateral loans
graphical Distribution of Financial Flows to Devel-
World Bank as low- and middle-income economies.
are loans extended by governments or official agen-
oping Countries, and its annual Development
Part II countries, whose assistance was designated
cies with a grant element of at least 25 percent (at a
Co-operation Report. Data are available electroni-
official aid, included the more advanced countries
10 percent discount rate). • Contributions to multi-
cally on the OECD-DAC’s International Develop-
of Central and Eastern Europe, countries of the for-
lateral institutions are concessional funding received
ment Statistics CD-ROM and at www.oecd.org/
mer Soviet Union, and certain advanced developing
by multilateral institutions from DAC members as
dac/stats/idsonline.
countries and territories. This distinction has been
grants or capital subscriptions. • Other official flows
Data sources
2010 World Development Indicators
403
GLOBAL LINKS
Financial flows from Development Assistance Committee members
6.15 6.15a
Allocation of bilateral aid from Development Assistance Committee members
Aid by purpose Net disbursements
$ millionsa 2000 2008
Australia Austria Belgium Canada Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Japan Luxembourg Netherlands New Zealand Norway Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States Total
758 273 477 1,160 1,024 217 2,829 2,687 99 154 377 9,768 99 2,243 85 934 179 720 1,242 627 2,710 7,405 36,064
2,653 1,234 1,376 3,357 1,828 693 6,461 9,063 312 931 1,838 6,823 279 5,200 278 3,036 373 4,802 3,142 1,550 7,367 23,860 86,455
Share of bilateral ODA net disbursements Development projects, programs, and other resource provisions 2000 2008
27.8 28.7 33.6 39.6 65.8 40.8 25.4 16.8 69.6 79.1 10.2 60.4 84.4 41.1 39.7 57.9 30.4 69.3 60.9 58.6 47.7 14.6 40.5
41.2 12.2 25.5 28.5 67.9 33.7 33.2 17.9 16.4 71.1 32.3 28.8 76.8 71.1 56.4 56.0 53.0 54.3 62.5 46.3 61.5 70.0 50.4
% Technical cooperationb 2000 2008
Debt-related aid 2000 2008
Humanitarian assistance 2000 2008
Administrative costs 2000 2008
55.1 41.8 46.9 43.0 25.3 41.4 50.6 63.8 23.8 0.4 8.1 24.9 3.2 33.7 48.1 23.0 50.4 17.9 13.6 19.4 25.5 64.4 39.4
1.1 20.4 6.6 1.1 1.0 0.0 17.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 57.5 4.2 0.8 6.8 0.0 1.0 14.6 2.3 3.1 0.9 5.7 1.7 5.4
9.7 2.7 5.4 5.0 0.0 10.5 0.4 4.1 6.4 15.5 18.3 0.9 10.4 9.1 3.4 11.3 1.9 3.7 14.6 20.2 12.7 9.6 6.1
6.2 6.4 7.5 11.4 8.0 7.2 6.7 8.7 0.2 5.1 5.9 9.5 1.2 9.4 8.8 6.9 2.7 6.8 7.7 0.9 8.4 9.7 8.6
34.0 21.5 52.9 49.3 10.0 42.3 45.0 47.2 70.6 4.4 9.2 28.7 3.6 12.6 25.7 23.8 42.3 25.3 18.7 27.6 15.7 5.4 23.0
9.7 59.4 7.3 4.0 5.3 0.3 15.1 28.3 0.0 0.0 48.4 25.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 1.4 0.1 7.1 0.0 6.4 7.5 0.9 10.2
11.3 3.6 9.2 10.7 9.2 12.9 0.4 3.3 5.5 19.1 6.5 3.8 12.1 7.7 9.4 11.9 0.3 9.0 11.6 10.7 9.1 18.4 10.2
3.8 3.3 5.1 7.5 7.6 10.8 6.4 3.3 7.5 5.4 3.6 13.8 7.5 6.2 8.4 6.9 4.3 4.3 7.2 9.1 6.3 5.3 6.2
a. At current exchange rates and prices. b. Includes aid for promoting development awareness and aid provided to refugees in donor economies.
About the data Aid can be used in many ways. The sector to which
provide debt relief on liabilities that recipient coun-
human resources from donors or action directed to
aid goes, the form it takes, and the procurement
tries have difficulty servicing. Thus, this type of aid
human resources (such as training or advice). Also
restrictions attached to it are important influences
may not provide a full value of new resource flows
included are aid for promoting development aware-
on aid effectiveness. The data on allocation of offi -
for development, in particular for heavily indebted
ness and aid provided to refugees in the donor econ-
cial development assistance (ODA) in the table are
poor countries. Humanitarian assistance provides
omy. Assistance specifically to facilitate a capital
based principally on reporting by members of the
relief following sudden disasters and supports food
project is not included. • Debt-related aid groups
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Devel-
programs in emergency situations. This type of aid
all actions relating to debt, including forgiveness,
opment (OECD) Development Assistance Committee
does not generally contribute to financing long-term
swaps, buybacks, rescheduling, and refinancing.
(DAC). For more detailed explanation of ODA, see
development.
• Humanitarian assistance is emergency and dis-
About the data for table 6.14. The form in which an ODA contribution reaches
tress relief (including aid to refugees and assistance Definitions
for disaster preparedness). • Administrative costs
the benefiting sector or the economy is important. A
• Net disbursements are gross disbursements of
are the total current budget outlays of institutions
distinction is made between resource provision and
grants and loans minus repayments of principal on
responsible for the formulation and implementation
technical cooperation. Resource provision involves
earlier loans • Development projects, programs,
of donor’s aid programs and other administrative
mainly cash or in-kind transfers and financing of
and other resource provisions are aid provided as
costs incurred by donors in aid delivery.
capital projects, with the deliverables being finan-
cash transfers, aid in kind, development food aid,
cial support and the provision of commodities and
and the financing of capital projects, intended to
supplies. Technical cooperation includes grants to
increase or improve the recipient’s stock of physical
nationals of aid-recipient countries receiving educa-
capital and to support recipient’s development plans
Data on aid flows are published by OECD DAC in its
tion or training at home or abroad, and payments
and other activities with finance and commodity
annual statistical report, Geographical Distribution
to consultants, advisers, and similar personnel and
supply. • Technical cooperation is the provision of
of Financial Flows to Developing Countries, and its
to teachers and administrators serving in recipient
resources whose main aim is to augment the stock of
annual Development Co-operation Report. Data are
countries. Technical cooperation is spent mostly in
human intellectual capital, such as the level of knowl-
available electronically on the OECD DAC’s Interna-
the donor economy.
edge, skills, and technical know-how in the recipient
tional Development Statistics CD-ROM and at www.
Two other types of aid are presented because they
country (including the cost of associated equipment).
oecd.org/dac/stats/idsonline.
serve distinctive purposes. Debt-related aid aims to
Contributions take the form mainly of the supply of
404
2010 World Development Indicators
Data sources
6.15b
6.15
Aid by sector Total sectorallocable aid
Social infrastructure and services
Economic infrastructure, Multiservices, and production sector sector or crossTransport Government Water and comand civil supply and cutting
Share of bilateral ODA commitments (%)
2008
Total 2008
Education 2008
Health 2008
Population 2008
sanitation 2008
society 2008
Total 2008
Australia Austria Belgium Canada Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Japan Luxembourg Netherlands New Zealand Norway Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom United States Total
70.9 33.0 71.7 63.1 64.9 73.9 66.2 66.2 71.8 65.4 42.5 68.8 70.4 74.6 54.5 67.2 65.8 65.0 51.3 45.9 62.7 74.9 67.8
45.3 24.9 45.5 41.9 34.9 37.2 29.7 35.6 63.3 53.1 24.1 17.4 46.7 58.5 41.8 42.1 48.9 43.4 30.4 21.8 42.4 51.8 39.2
10.4 12.6 12.2 7.5 3.9 7.9 18.6 13.7 27.7 12.8 3.5 4.4 10.2 13.2 17.5 8.7 19.1 9.4 3.9 3.2 7.4 3.5 8.0
5.5 3.4 11.4 9.7 1.2 3.8 1.9 2.4 2.5 13.3 5.3 1.3 13.3 5.1 5.3 6.0 2.1 5.2 4.8 3.1 7.0 3.9 4.0
2.3 0.4 0.6 1.7 1.7 1.4 0.1 1.4 1.9 3.6 0.4 0.2 7.1 4.9 1.6 2.3 0.1 2.1 2.0 0.2 5.5 19.4 6.6
0.5 2.8 5.8 1.2 1.2 5.6 3.8 7.2 0.2 3.0 7.0 9.3 6.8 5.7 1.2 1.5 0.1 10.7 2.4 3.2 2.0 2.7 4.8
23.1 4.9 11.8 20.3 23.3 12.9 1.6 9.6 19.8 16.3 6.2 1.5 4.0 27.2 14.7 20.4 21.3 9.9 14.8 11.3 17.3 15.4 12.2
11.3 5.6 17.9 14.1 15.9 21.7 25.8 23.3 4.9 8.2 11.7 48.7 14.5 10.2 9.4 14.0 14.0 15.0 11.7 13.9 16.4 20.3 22.9
munication Agriculture 2008 2008
5.2 0.3 3.1 2.9 1.3 1.3 15.1 1.8 2.0 0.4 1.7 25.3 1.8 1.6 1.8 0.4 12.9 4.2 1.5 1.3 1.5 5.8 7.8
3.9 0.9 6.8 7.1 3.6 9.6 5.6 1.9 1.3 6.0 3.2 5.8 6.2 1.7 3.1 4.1 0.8 3.7 3.0 5.0 1.2 5.1 4.3
Untied aida
2008
2008
14.3 2.5 8.3 7.1 14.0 15.0 10.6 7.3 3.7 4.1 6.7 2.7 9.2 5.9 3.3 11.1 2.9 6.6 9.2 10.3 3.9 2.8 5.7
96.7 82.3 91.9 90.8 98.5 92.3 81.9 98.2 37.9 b 100.0b 78.0 96.5 100.0 b 94.5 92.7 100.0 29.1b 69.1 99.9 97.3 100.0b 75.0 87.3
a. Excludes technical cooperation and administrative costs. b. Gross disbursements.
About the data
Definitions
The Development Assistance Committee (DAC)
• Bilateral official development assistance (ODA)
and planning and activities promoting good gover-
records the sector classifi cation of aid using a
commitments are firm obligations, expressed in
nance and civil society. • Economic infrastructure,
three-level hierarchy. The top level is grouped by
writing and backed by the necessary funds, under-
services, and production sector group assistance
themes, such as social infrastructure and services;
taken by official bilateral donors to provide specified
for networks, utilities, services that facilitate eco-
economic infrastructure, services, and production;
assistance to a recipient country or a multilateral
nomic activity, and contributions to all directly pro-
and multisector or cross-cutting areas. The second
organization. Bilateral commitments are recorded
ductive sectors. • Transport and communication
level is more specifi c. Education and health and
in the full amount of expected transfer, irrespective
refer to road, rail, water, and air transport; post
transport and storage are examples. The third level
of the time required for completing disbursements.
and telecommunications; and television and print
comprises subsectors such as basic education and
• Total sector-allocable aid is the sum of aid that
media. • Agriculture refers to sector policy, devel-
basic health. Some contributions are reported as
can be assigned to specific sectors or multisector
opment, and inputs; crop and livestock production;
non-sector-allocable aid.
activities. • Social infrastructure and services refer
and agricultural credit, cooperatives, and research.
Reporting on the sectoral destination and the
to efforts to develop the human resources poten-
• Multisector or cross-cutting refers to support for
form of aid by donors may not be complete. Also,
tial of aid recipients. • Education refers to general
projects that straddle several sectors. • Untied aid
measures of aid allocation may differ from the per-
teaching and instruction at all levels, as well as con-
is ODA not subject to restrictions by donors on pro-
spectives of donors and recipients because of dif-
struction to improve or adapt educational establish-
curement sources.
ference in classification, available information, and
ments. Training in a particular field is reported for the
recording time.
sector concerned. • Health refers to assistance to
Data sources
The proportion of untied aid is reported because
hospitals, clinics, other medical and dental services,
Data on aid flows are published annually by the
tying arrangements may prevent recipients from
public health administration, and medical insur-
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
obtaining the best value for their money. Tying
ance programs. • Population refers to all activities
Development (OECD) DAC in Geographical Distri-
requires recipients to purchase goods and services
related to family planning and research into popula-
bution of Financial Flows to Developing Countries
from the donor country or from a specified group of
tion problems. • Water supply and sanitation refer
and Development Co-operation Report. Data are
countries. Such arrangements prevent a recipient
to assistance for water supply and use, sanitation,
available electronically on the OECD DAC’s Inter-
from misappropriating or mismanaging aid receipts,
and water resources development (including rivers).
national Development Statistics CD-ROM and at
but they may also be motivated by a desire to benefit
• Government and civil society refer to assistance
www.oecd.org/dac/stats/idsonline.
donor country suppliers.
to strengthen government administrative apparatus
2010 World Development Indicators
405
GLOBAL LINKS
Allocation of bilateral aid from Development Assistance Committee members
6.16
Aid dependency Net official development assistance (ODA)
Total $ millions 2000 2008
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
406
Aid dependency ratios
Per capita $ 2000 2008
Net ODA as % of GNI 2000 2008
Net ODA as % of gross capital formation 2000 2008
Net ODA as % of imports of goods, services, and income 2000 2008
Net ODA as % of central government expense 2000 2008
136 317 200 302 52 216
4,865 386 316 369 131 303
6 103 7 21 1 70
168 123 9 20 3 98
.. 8.4 0.4 4.1 0.0 11.0
45.8 3.0 0.2 0.5 0.0 2.4
.. 34.8 1.5 22.0 0.1 60.6
165.8 9.7 0.6 3.5 0.2 6.2
.. 21.0 .. 4.1 0.1 21.2
.. 5.1 .. 0.6 0.2 5.7
.. .. .. .. .. ..
196.1 .. 0.8 .. .. 12.3
139 1,172 ..
235 2,061 110
17 8 ..
27 13 11
2.8 2.4 ..
0.6 2.4 0.2
12.8 10.8 ..
2.5 10.7 0.5
5.8 11.7 ..
1.4 7.8 0.3
.. .. 1.3
3.3 23.9 0.5
241 482 737 31 231 .. 338 93 396 377
641 628 482 716 460 .. 998 509 743 525
36 58 199 18 1 .. 29 14 31 24
74 65 128 373 2 .. 66 63 51 27
10.7 5.9 12.4 0.5 0.0 .. 13.0 12.9 11.2 4.0
9.6 3.9 2.5 5.4 0.0 .. 12.6 43.9 7.5 2.3
56.4 31.6 65.1 1.4 0.2 .. 77.2 213.8 61.8 22.4
46.3 21.5 10.7 16.5 0.2 .. .. .. .. ..
32.4 19.7 17.4 1.0 0.2 .. 48.9 56.5 16.1 12.7
.. 9.6 3.6 10.9 0.2 .. .. 93.4 9.2 6.0
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
64.3 .. 6.7 .. 0.1 .. 98.2 .. .. ..
75 130 49 1,712 .. 186 177 32 10 351 66 44 ..
256 416 73 1,489 .. 972 1,610 505 66 617 397 127 ..
20 15 3 1 .. 5 3 11 2 20 15 4 ..
59 38 4 1 .. 22 25 140 15 30 90 11 ..
8.0 9.5 0.1 0.1 .. 0.2 4.5 1.4 0.1 3.6 0.3 .. ..
13.0 6.2 0.0 0.0 .. 0.4 15.5 6.6 0.2 2.7 0.6 .. ..
82.4 40.4 0.3 0.4 .. 1.3 119.1 4.4 0.4 31.2 1.6 .. ..
111.2 32.8 0.2 0.1 .. 1.6 57.8 22.6 0.9 26.0 1.9 .. ..
.. .. 0.2 0.6 .. 1.0 .. 1.6 0.1 7.9 0.6 .. ..
.. .. 0.1 0.1 .. 1.7 .. .. 0.4 5.9 1.0 .. ..
.. .. 0.3 .. .. .. 15.2 .. .. .. 0.8 .. ..
.. .. 0.2 .. .. 1.7 .. .. 1.0 14.7 .. .. ..
56 146 1,327 180 176 .. 686
153 231 1,348 233 143 .. 3,327
6 12 19 30 48 .. 10
15 17 17 38 29 .. 41
0.2 1.0 1.3 1.4 27.7 .. 8.4
0.3 0.4 0.8 1.1 8.7 .. 13.0
1.0 4.6 6.8 8.1 116.6 .. 41.4
1.8 1.5 3.7 7.1 .. .. 64.7
0.5 2.3 5.6 3.0 34.4 .. 41.0
0.7 1.0 2.0 2.0 .. .. 34.5
.. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. 2.7 49.9 .. .. ..
12 50 169
55 94 888
9 38 36
38 57 206
0.3 12.4 5.3
0.4 12.3 7.0
1.1 67.8 20.8
1.5 46.2 22.9
0.5 .. 13.6
.. 22.8 10.9
.. .. 47.9
.. .. 23.8
598
1,293
31
55
12.4
8.6
50.0
21.6
17.2
10.0
..
..
263 153 80 208 448
536 319 132 912 564
23 18 62 24 72
39 32 84 92 77
1.4 5.0 39.5 .. 6.4
1.4 9.1 31.6 .. 4.3
7.6 24.9 329.8 20.8 22.3
7.8 54.2 123.3 49.3 12.6
4.4 15.7 .. 15.1 8.9
3.1 16.7 .. 31.5 4.7
12.5 .. .. .. ..
11.7 .. .. .. 18.4
2010 World Development Indicators
Net official development assistance (ODA)
Total $ millions 2000 2008
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Aid dependency ratios
Per capita $ 2000 2008
Net ODA as % of GNI 2000 2008
Net ODA as % of gross capital formation 2000 2008
Net ODA as % of imports of goods, services, and income 2000 2008
Net ODA as % of central government expense 2000 2008
.. 1,457 1,651 130 100
.. 2,108 1,225 98 9,870
.. 1 8 2 4
.. 2 5 1 321
.. 0.3 1.1 0.1 ..
.. 0.2 0.3 .. ..
.. 1.3 4.5 0.4 ..
.. 0.5 0.9 .. ..
.. 1.8 2.5 0.7 ..
.. 0.5 0.7 .. ..
.. 2.0 .. 0.2 ..
.. 1.1 .. 0.1 ..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
9
79
3
30
0.1
0.6
..
..
0.2
0.7
..
1.6
552 189 509 73 .. .. .. 215 281 .. 199 37 67 .. .. 251 320 446 45 359 216 20 –58 123 217 419 903 106 152 387
742 333 1,360 218 .. .. .. 360 496 .. 1,076 143 1,250 60 .. 221 841 913 158 964 311 110 149 299 246 1,217 1,994 534 207 716
115 13 16 3 .. .. .. 44 52 .. 53 19 24 .. .. 125 21 38 2 34 83 17 –1 30 91 15 49 2 84 16
126 21 35 9 .. .. .. 68 80 .. 257 70 330 10 .. 108 44 61 6 76 97 86 1 82 93 39 89 11 97 25
6.4 1.1 4.1 .. .. .. .. 16.7 16.9 .. 1.1 3.6 17.4 .. .. 7.1 8.4 26.1 0.1 15.0 19.8 0.4 0.0 9.4 20.0 1.2 22.5 .. 3.9 7.0
3.3 0.3 4.5 .. .. .. .. 7.2 9.3 .. 3.7 7.0 185.8 0.1 .. 2.3 8.9 21.2 0.1 11.4 .. 1.2 0.0 4.5 4.8 1.4 22.0 .. 2.4 5.6
29.2 5.7 23.0 .. .. .. .. 78.3 57.2 .. 5.7 11.1 .. .. .. 31.5 54.9 188.6 0.2 60.4 103.3 1.7 0.0 39.7 68.6 4.4 68.7 .. 22.8 29.0
13.7 0.7 23.4 .. .. .. .. 29.3 24.1 .. 12.0 31.4 742.0 0.2 .. 8.4 25.0 80.6 .. .. .. 4.3 0.1 13.4 12.1 3.8 109.4 .. 9.1 17.9
8.7 1.8 12.9 .. .. .. .. 28.5 44.0 .. .. 4.4 .. .. .. 10.5 20.2 65.6 0.0 34.4 .. 0.7 0.0 11.2 27.4 3.1 51.2 4.0 8.2 21.2
3.8 0.5 10.6 .. .. .. .. 7.4 .. .. 3.3 8.2 41.4 0.2 .. 2.8 .. .. 0.1 .. .. 1.6 0.0 5.0 .. 2.5 38.3 .. 4.4 16.1
.. 7.5 23.9 .. .. .. .. 99.2 .. .. 3.8 .. .. .. .. .. 77.8 .. 0.3 127.8 .. 2.2 –0.1 32.9 85.2 .. .. .. 13.7 ..
9.6 1.7 20.9 .. .. .. .. 41.8 .. .. 12.1 17.2 .. .. .. 7.4 .. .. .. .. .. 6.1 .. 15.1 17.8 4.6 .. .. .. ..
560 208 174
741 605 1,290
110 19 1
131 41 9
15.0 11.7 0.4
11.5 11.3 0.7
47.2 101.4 ..
.. .. ..
23.5 43.0 1.1
13.4 .. 2.1
86.4 .. ..
57.3 .. ..
45 700 15 275 82 397 572 ..
32 1,539 29 304 134 466 61 ..
19 5 5 51 15 15 7 ..
11 9 8 46 21 16 1 ..
0.2 1.0 0.1 8.3 1.1 0.8 0.7 ..
.. 0.9 0.1 4.0 0.8 0.4 0.0 ..
1.9 5.5 0.5 35.7 6.1 3.7 3.6 ..
.. 4.3 0.5 19.0 4.1 1.4 0.2 ..
0.6 4.8 0.1 13.7 2.3 3.4 1.1 ..
0.1 2.9 0.1 .. 1.3 1.1 0.1 ..
0.9 5.7 0.6 26.2 .. 4.2 4.3 ..
.. 5.7 .. .. 5.0 2.2 0.2 ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
407
GLOBAL LINKS
6.16
Aid dependency
6.16
Aid dependency Net official development assistance (ODA)
Total $ millions 2000 2008
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Aid dependency ratios
Per capita $ 2000 2008
Net ODA as % of GNI 2000 2008
.. .. 321 22 424 1,134 a 181 .. .. 61 101 486
.. .. 931 .. 1,058 1,047 367 .. .. .. 758 1,125
.. .. 40 1 43 151a 43 .. .. 31 14 11
.. .. 96 .. 87 142 66 .. .. .. 85 23
.. .. 18.7 0.0 .. 12.6a 29.3 .. .. 0.3 .. 0.4
.. .. 19.3 .. 8.0 2.1 19.2 .. .. .. .. 0.4
275 220 13
730 2,384 67
15 6 12
36 58 58
1.7 1.9 0.9
1.8 4.8 2.3
158 124 1,035 697 231 70 –2 222 327 31 844 .. ..
136 291 2,331 –621 278 330 12 479 2,024 18 1,657 618 ..
10 20 30 11 284 13 –1 23 5 7 35 .. ..
7 43 55 –9 253 51 9 46 27 4 52 13 ..
0.9 15.8 11.6 0.6 71.6 5.4 0.0 1.2 0.1 1.2 13.9 .. ..
0.3 5.8 11.7 –0.2 9.5 11.4 0.1 1.3 0.3 0.1 11.8 0.3 ..
5 8 3 22 212 14 76 14 8w 18 5 5 6 10 5 10 9 16 3 20 0 ..
10 7 2 30 659 13 86 49 19 w 42 11 10 12 23 5 19 16 73 8 49 0 ..
0.1 1.4 0.1 5.5 13.3 3.0 25.8 2.5 0.2 w 6.5 0.4 0.6 0.2 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.2 1.0 0.7 4.1 0.0 ..
17 33 186 187 76 59 1,681 2,552 637 2,593 263 305 795 1,086 176 611 49,791 s 128,609 s 41,380 15,018 22,711 50,070 16,814 37,094 5,182 11,825 49,488 128,113 8,563 9,118 4,462 8,241 4,838 9,299 4,472 23,624 4,199 12,318 13,245 40,090 304 496 .. ..
0.1 0.7 0.0 2.9 .. 1.3 8.4 .. 0.2 w 7.4 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.9 0.8 4.3 0.0 ..
Net ODA as % of gross capital formation 2000 2008
.. .. 101.2 0.1 44.2 150.1a 413.2 .. .. 1.1 .. 2.3
Net ODA as % of imports of goods, services, and income 2000 2008
Net ODA as % of central government expense 2000 2008
.. .. 86.7 .. 26.4 8.9 127.5 .. .. .. .. 1.8
.. .. 71.2 0.0 22.0 .. 68.8 .. .. 0.5 .. 1.3
.. .. 63.6 .. .. 3.6 53.3 .. .. .. .. 0.9
.. .. .. .. 71.1 .. 98.8 .. .. 0.8 .. 1.3
.. .. .. .. .. 5.6 .. .. .. .. .. 1.3
6.0 9.7 5.1
6.6 18.0 14.4
3.2 8.5 0.9
4.3 17.1 ..
7.3 .. ..
.. .. ..
4.7 125.1 64.7 2.5 285.9 29.4 –0.1 4.2 0.6 3.1 70.0 .. ..
1.8 28.2 .. –0.8 .. .. 0.4 4.4 1.3 1.8 49.1 1.4 ..
2.4 .. 46.4 0.9 .. 10.5 0.0 2.1 0.5 .. 53.6 .. ..
.. 6.9 28.2 –0.3 .. .. .. 1.6 0.9 .. 29.4 0.6 ..
.. 160.3 .. .. .. .. .. 4.1 .. .. 95.5 .. ..
.. .. .. –1.2 .. 75.3 .. 3.9 1.2 .. 76.3 0.9 ..
0.5 8.3 0.3 18.2 47.4 14.3 140.8 17.5 0.7 w 30.3 1.6 2.2 0.8 3.4 1.6 2.4 1.2 4.0 3.0 23.1 0.0 ..
0.5 2.9 0.1 6.8 .. .. 34.1 .. .. w 27.3 1.0 1.2 0.6 2.4 0.4 0.8 1.0 .. 2.3 21.9 .. ..
0.3 .. 0.3 9.3 18.0 6.2 53.1 .. 0.5 w 18.4 1.3 2.1 0.5 2.7 1.4 1.4 0.9 3.3 3.6 11.0 0.0 ..
0.3 .. 0.1 2.9 .. 2.2 15.8 .. 0.6 w 13.6 0.9 1.3 0.4 2.1 0.4 0.5 0.8 6.0 2.5 9.2 0.0 ..
0.3 .. 0.3 .. .. .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
0.4 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
Note: Regional aggregates include data for economies not listed in the table. World and income group totals include aid not allocated by country or region—including administrative costs, research on development issues, and aid to nongovernmental organizations. Thus regional and income group totals do not sum to the world total. a. Includes Montenegro.
408
2010 World Development Indicators
6.16
About the data
Unless otherwise noted, aid includes official devel-
provide measures of recipient country dependency on
The nominal values used here may overstate the
opment assistance (ODA; see About the data for
aid. But care must be taken in drawing policy conclu-
real value of aid to recipients. Changes in interna-
table 6.14). The data cover loans and grants from
sions. For foreign policy reasons some countries have
tional prices and exchange rates can reduce the pur-
Development Assistance Committee (DAC) member
traditionally received large amounts of aid. Thus aid
chasing power of aid. Tying aid, still prevalent though
countries, multilateral organizations, and non-DAC
dependency ratios may reveal as much about a donor’s
declining in importance, also tends to reduce its pur-
donors. They do not reflect aid given by recipient
interests as about a recipient’s needs. Ratios are gen-
chasing power (see About the data for table 6.15).
countries to other developing countries. As a result,
erally much higher in Sub-Saharan Africa than in other
The aggregates refer to World Bank definitions.
some countries that are net donors (such as Saudi
regions, and they increased in the 1980s. High ratios
Therefore the ratios shown may differ from those
Arabia) are shown in the table as aid recipients (see
are due only in part to aid flows. Many African countries
of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
table 6.16a). Aid given before 2005 to countries that
saw severe erosion in their terms of trade in the 1980s,
Development (OECD).
were Part II recipients (see About the data for table
which, along with weak policies, contributed to falling
6.14 for more information) is defined as official aid.
incomes, imports, and investment. Thus the increase
The table does not distinguish types of aid (pro-
in aid dependency ratios reflects events affecting both
• Net official development assistance is flows (net of
the numerator (aid) and the denominator (GNI).
repayment of principal) that meet the DAC definition
gram, project, or food aid; emergency assistance;
Definitions
postconflict peacekeeping assistance; or technical
Because the table relies on information from
of ODA and are made to countries and territories on
cooperation), which may have different effects on the
donors, it is not necessarily consistent with infor-
the DAC list of aid recipients. See About the data for
economy. Expenditures on technical cooperation do
mation recorded by recipients in the balance of pay-
table 6.14. • Net official development assistance
not always directly benefit the economy to the extent
ments, which often excludes all or some technical
per capita is net ODA divided by midyear population.
that they defray costs incurred outside the country on
assistance—particularly payments to expatriates
• Aid dependency ratios are calculated using values
salaries and benefits of technical experts and over-
made directly by the donor. Similarly, grant commod-
in U.S. dollars converted at official exchange rates.
head costs of firms supplying technical services.
ity aid may not always be recorded in trade data or in
Imports of goods, services, and income refer to inter-
the balance of payments. Moreover, DAC statistics
national transactions involving a change in ownership
exclude purely military aid.
of general merchandise, goods sent for processing
Ratios of aid to gross national income (GNI), gross capital formation, imports, and government spending
and repairs, nonmonetary gold, services, receipts
6.16a
Official development assistance from non-DAC donors, 2004–08
and investment income. For definitions of GNI, gross
Net disbursements ($ millions) 2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
108
135
161
179
249
Hungary
70
100
149
103
107
Iceland
21
27
41
48
48
Korea, Rep.a
423
752
455
696
802
Poland
118
205
297
363
372
28
56
55
67
92
339
601
714
602
780
Slovak Republic Turkey
capital formation, and central government expense, see Definitions for tables 1.1, 4.8, and 4.10.
OECD members (non-DAC) Czech Republic
of employee compensation for nonresident workers,
Arab countries Kuwait Saudi Arabia United Arab Emirates
161
218
158
110
283
1,734
1,005
2,095
2,079
5,564
181
141
219
429
88
84
95
90
111
138
graphical Distribution of Financial Flows to Devel-
421
483
513
514
435
oping Countries, and in its annual Development
..
..
74
67
178
Co- operation Report. Data are available electroni-
22
86
121
188
343
cally on the OECD DAC’s International Development
3,712
3,905
5,142
5,558
9,481
Statistics CD-ROM and at www.oecd.org/dac/
Other donors Israelb Taiwan, China Thailand Others Total
Data sources Data on financial flows are compiled by OECD DAC and published in its annual statistical report, Geo-
Note: The table does not reflect aid provided by several major emerging non–Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development donors because information on their aid has not been disclosed. a. The Republic of Korea became a DAC member in November 2009. Its disbursements will be reflected in DAC data beginning with 2010 flows. b. Includes $47.9 million in 2004, $49.2 million in 2005, $45.5 million in 2006, $42.9 million in 2007, and $43.0 million in 2008 for first-year sustenance expenses for people arriving from developing countries (many of which are experiencing civil war or severe unrest) or people who have left their country for humanitarian or political reasons. Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
stats/idsonline. Data on population, GNI, gross capital formation, imports of goods and services, and central government expense used in computing the ratios are from World Bank and International Monetary Fund databases.
2010 World Development Indicators
409
GLOBAL LINKS
Aid dependency
6.17
Distribution of net aid by Development Assistance Committee members Ten major DAC donors
$ millions
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
410
Total $ millions 2008
United States 2008
4,300.1 352.2 325.9 233.3 103.8 225.1
2,111.6 35.9 9.1 42.7 7.2 93.8
Germany 2008
European Commission 2008
United Kingdom 2008
France 2008
Japan 2008
Netherlands 2008
294.0 44.7 12.5 11.7 22.1 27.9
349.3 84.6 84.7 49.4 16.6 16.3
322.3 2.8 2.1 9.6 1.0 6.6
19.9 4.4 121.8 2.9 12.8 5.5
208.0 –2.5 4.0 17.8 5.9 57.7
112.0 18.3 0.0 –2.7 0.3 0.2
Spain 2008
Other DAC donors $ millions 2008
Sweden 2008
Canada 2008
71.8 16.9 64.2 13.6 29.7 0.7
73.9 11.3 2.1 5.0 0.2 2.7
207.9 0.0 2.9 0.4 1.9 0.3
529.4 135.8 22.6 83.1 6.3 13.4
129.2 1,009.0 75.3
42.0 93.2 8.9
26.4 65.9 21.3
13.0 194.5 17.4
1.9 252.5 1.1
28.2 –3.7 1.5
–2.8 41.1 0.4
0.0 84.7 0.0
0.4 9.4 0.1
1.0 38.1 14.8
0.2 82.1 0.0
19.0 151.1 9.6
429.6 539.1 426.7 709.4 427.0
34.6 123.8 26.4 231.9 12.3
46.6 52.7 46.9 439.0 126.7
127.1 43.8 105.2 26.7 48.6
0.0 1.0 9.3 1.1 13.5
66.4 13.9 6.3 2.4 41.0
27.2 35.5 10.6 –2.1 93.3
35.3 41.4 31.3 0.0 0.5
2.0 93.0 42.4 0.0 36.8
0.5 27.6 28.7 4.3 3.2
7.0 21.5 5.0 1.4 11.4
83.0 84.9 114.6 4.8 39.7
620.6 339.7 462.5 357.6
19.4 30.2 69.8 16.1
44.9 23.1 33.8 110.0
145.5 84.6 37.5 59.9
0.2 14.2 30.4 2.9
142.0 17.4 35.2 113.2
21.0 23.3 114.8 15.6
88.9 32.3 1.9 0.6
2.9 1.9 11.8 12.6
23.0 7.0 16.1 0.7
29.9 4.2 11.5 11.9
102.9 101.4 99.8 14.0
170.4 423.0 58.3 1,477.7
34.2 80.7 1.0 65.2
6.8 32.6 20.1 411.9
41.9 145.6 6.5 124.7
5.7 11.5 0.5 174.9
26.4 39.5 9.1 207.5
12.2 14.4 6.6 278.3
2.9 7.5 0.2 16.7
2.2 10.9 7.1 43.0
6.4 10.1 0.6 14.8
2.9 6.3 2.5 54.3
29.1 64.0 4.2 86.3
955.2 1,168.7 449.3 66.9 337.2 387.3 94.4
636.1 196.6 0.3 –0.1 88.8 7.4 12.0
42.1 61.2 –0.3 29.7 17.5 21.2 2.6
57.0 224.3 28.5 5.9 144.3 337.0 2.6
3.3 192.9 0.0 –0.2 0.3 1.4 0.2
22.7 30.5 368.0 6.6 39.5 4.3 3.0
–6.9 51.2 10.6 –1.2 19.5 0.0 4.0
32.6 47.8 0.0 4.7 0.1 0.1 0.1
85.0 0.7 39.3 15.5 5.2 0.9 45.8
26.3 68.0 1.6 1.0 0.0 2.7 0.9
14.4 22.9 0.8 2.9 3.4 0.2 8.3
42.8 272.7 0.6 2.1 18.6 12.0 14.9
136.6 232.8 1,167.5 232.3 69.4
24.8 46.4 470.8 42.4 3.4
8.1 24.7 170.3 13.4 1.3
57.7 40.4 207.7 28.4 16.9
1.5 –0.6 8.8 0.0 5.6
9.9 –0.8 142.0 3.4 0.8
1.6 –5.7 11.6 30.6 17.7
0.0 3.3 19.7 0.3 3.9
32.1 87.9 15.6 83.6 1.8
0.7 0.7 2.2 3.6 1.9
1.6 4.5 14.5 3.6 0.1
–1.4 32.1 104.4 23.0 16.1
2,299.8
811.4
98.3
460.8
253.7
18.7
47.1
113.6
60.5
46.9
152.6
236.2
44.3 37.7 691.9
0.5 12.0 402.1
–3.0 0.8 70.7
6.7 9.9 113.4
0.0 3.8 12.8
37.4 0.5 5.4
1.8 1.1 2.4
0.0 3.9 8.9
0.5 2.2 2.7
0.0 0.9 27.3
0.7 0.8 3.8
–0.2 1.9 42.5
839.1
79.5
71.7
115.9
150.8
43.0
54.0
120.2
16.1
1.3
74.0
112.5
504.7 243.9 101.0 673.3 369.7
70.4 43.3 0.7 259.1 96.3
18.8 23.7 0.6 5.7 32.2
39.1 35.0 48.4 117.2 23.8
0.7 1.2 0.1 0.0 0.0
2.6 73.0 5.6 38.4 1.4
10.6 16.9 5.8 11.7 40.9
27.4 0.0 0.0 4.6 1.2
255.9 2.9 16.4 45.5 117.6
27.3 0.7 0.1 9.1 17.5
15.0 6.5 0.5 147.6 14.2
37.0 40.7 22.9 34.5 24.8
2010 World Development Indicators
GLOBAL LINKS
6.17
Distribution of net aid by Development Assistance Committee members Ten major DAC donors
$ millions
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Total $ millions 2008
United States 2008
1,669.2 628.9 64.8 9,780.9
52.1 115.1 2.7 2,742.0
68.8
Sweden 2008
Canada 2008
Other DAC donors $ millions 2008
14.0 9.5 0.7 129.0
12.3 12.2 0.0 26.7
13.3 82.4 0.2 142.0
116.8 330.7 11.6 2,057.8
–5.3
2.0
0.1
3.4
1.5
–50.1 37.9 8.8 0.0
0.3 0.0 15.9 1.0
12.7 0.1 38.6 0.4
0.1 0.3 65.9 5.8
7.7 0.2 26.2 2.4
32.3 6.3 124.3 20.6
1.0 25.4
12.4 66.3
0.1 0.0
3.3 0.2
8.7 20.8
0.3 1.7
17.4 67.0
1.0 7.9 32.4 1.1
305.8 –1.8 26.8 29.0
13.8 13.2 14.0 0.2
2.5 0.0 20.0 0.0
51.8 1.5 24.3 0.0
1.8 0.2 26.3 0.0
16.2 0.7 2.0 0.0
105.1 23.3 70.6 3.7
61.6 139.9 130.5 0.3 149.0 40.4 95.0 21.7 83.1 10.6 483.8 161.4 58.4 23.3 46.2
2.1 2.4 146.9 18.9 0.0 0.0 0.6 6.8 6.1 1.2 6.7 197.9 82.4 1.0 98.6
3.8 88.4 0.9 –9.2 81.9 29.4 15.8 10.8 7.3 0.9 163.2 12.3 5.8 1.9 –2.8
21.4 20.4 30.8 117.5 34.5 14.5 0.4 –54.7 9.6 60.7 105.8 23.7 42.5 9.7 33.9
20.2 4.2 0.1 0.0 79.6 0.2 0.0 –0.3 6.9 6.6 0.6 105.7 15.8 0.3 2.4
4.1 14.6 2.9 0.0 31.2 34.1 0.0 –15.1 1.8 4.1 117.4 78.5 9.2 15.1 2.9
11.3 0.6 14.5 0.4 29.3 1.1 0.0 0.0 13.5 1.2 0.0 119.6 21.6 2.3 2.5
0.0 3.1 16.3 0.3 99.1 1.5 0.3 5.9 0.2 1.8 10.3 77.2 22.3 1.1 9.4
21.3 39.0 102.1 7.8 82.9 15.2 –2.0 9.4 22.1 16.9 111.5 423.8 131.9 25.5 164.2
26.1 21.0 27.5
34.8 151.5 91.1
10.7 7.4 47.2
1.4 67.8 11.9
43.8 16.9 29.0
37.0 0.1 1.7
125.4 24.0 25.4
33.5 1.6 1.0
16.8 15.3 26.7
133.3 69.2 102.2
0.5 89.0 1.2 0.1 7.0 93.6 31.6
0.0 62.7 2.8 25.4 17.5 52.4 58.2
0.6 260.3 0.0 1.1 0.1 –11.6 1.3
0.7 9.4 0.2 –0.1 0.9 9.3 –5.6
0.5 34.2 4.1 –82.6 30.9 –17.9 –284.4
0.1 31.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 –1.4 1.2
0.0 3.3 7.4 0.0 23.0 131.5 35.3
0.0 9.0 0.2 0.2 1.9 3.0 6.2
0.0 41.6 0.6 0.7 1.0 15.6 15.5
0.0 88.2 –0.1 342.0 3.3 68.6 101.6
European Commission 2008
United Kingdom 2008
France 2008
147.7 29.7 42.7 1,854.3
122.3 54.5 1.8 38.0
613.1 100.7 1.7 639.0
–27.2 103.5 15.6 315.0
599.8 –284.9 –16.7 1,755.2
4.9 75.5 4.5 81.8
–0.9
–7.8
74.3
6.0
–0.8
–3.7
539.0 245.8 1,042.7 207.8
384.1 157.6 439.4 152.4
21.7 18.4 85.3 5.5
122.5 16.2 91.3 18.2
4.5 5.4 91.4 0.3
3.3 3.4 55.7 1.2
175.2 232.4
63.6 3.2
21.3 28.8
33.4 18.7
13.7 0.3
865.7 91.5 858.4 56.0
209.6 13.7 276.0 14.3
36.4 7.4 316.6 3.4
121.6 25.6 49.5 4.3
202.6 414.0 562.2 152.4 680.1 179.5 111.1 126.1 197.2 171.6 1,095.5 1,501.7 475.9 173.2 497.2
32.1 83.9 87.7 5.6 53.3 25.6 0.2 102.5 35.9 35.4 5.7 226.7 71.6 71.0 77.7
24.8 17.7 29.6 10.8 39.4 17.4 0.8 39.2 10.7 32.4 90.6 74.9 14.3 22.2 62.3
566.1 420.6 727.5
103.5 45.9 363.9
3.8 979.4 30.2 288.8 115.2 437.1 32.2
1.4 350.6 13.7 2.0 29.7 94.0 71.3
Germany 2008
Japan 2008
Netherlands 2008
Spain 2008
2010 World Development Indicators
411
6.17
Distribution of net aid by Development Assistance Committee members Ten major DAC donors
$ millions Total $ millions 2008
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
United States 2008
Germany 2008
European Commission 2008
United Kingdom 2008
France 2008
Japan 2008
Netherlands 2008
Spain 2008
Sweden 2008
Canada 2008
553.4
117.4
24.5
103.2
99.9
4.0
17.8
38.8
24.9
14.4
14.3
94.4
678.8 932.8 219.0
71.6 94.5 15.8
27.8 107.8 14.9
134.7 392.6 44.2
1.0 12.1 92.6
189.0 17.8 1.3
25.1 5.9 14.1
37.9 6.1 0.0
59.1 16.3 3.4
0.3 39.4 2.3
73.3 4.5 4.2
59.0 235.9 26.4
704.7 1,045.3
242.7 378.7
10.1 150.1
139.3 164.0
76.1 113.5
8.5 32.9
23.3 3.7
18.7 36.3
14.6 0.6
25.0 12.6
21.8 14.7
124.7 138.3
497.4 2,096.1 28.8
51.8 848.2 8.7
11.1 47.3 –1.0
111.6 277.8 11.2
1.8 199.2 2.5
19.6 11.2 0.3
96.7 109.6 3.2
19.8 157.6 0.0
26.0 37.7 0.0
15.5 65.0 0.0
42.1 83.9 0.6
101.5 258.6 3.3
106.2 174.3 1,551.6 –673.4 255.4 215.0 11.6 478.6 1,991.4 2.4 1,280.1 527.2
16.2 59.9 247.0 39.6 32.7 3.0 0.3 –8.1 –5.4 –3.4 352.9 98.9
27.0 22.2 87.4 –19.2 6.7 8.4 0.3 27.4 –50.1 1.8 37.8 77.1
51.6 31.1 185.9 27.2 27.4 39.0 7.7 230.2 1,342.5 3.5 275.1 242.3
2.3 7.7 254.2 2.2 0.2 9.0 0.9 1.5 4.6 0.4 65.7 3.2
26.7 5.9 4.8 –2.9 0.5 127.7 1.7 160.5 293.8 0.3 17.4 25.0
–56.7 8.1 71.0 –748.5 26.5 0.3 0.0 54.0 285.9 –1.5 57.0 8.4
2.9 0.8 114.9 1.1 0.0 13.2 0.0 –1.3 –0.6 0.0 82.9 0.0
7.5 2.5 3.4 0.1 14.0 3.5 0.0 16.2 92.1 0.0 11.5 0.3
0.0 12.5 125.5 7.7 6.0 0.8 0.0 0.1 7.3 0.0 64.1 21.5
1.9 5.7 44.7 1.2 1.8 2.6 0.7 2.5 –2.3 0.0 21.2 18.7
26.8 17.9 412.9 18.1 139.7 7.5 0.1 –4.4 23.7 1.2 294.6 31.7
–0.5 29.5 8.2 115.0 77.4 67.2 45.5 24.9 9,062.7 s 2,060.2 5,122.7 3,708.6 1,242.5 9,040.7 725.9 547.6 818.1 2,499.9 676.3 2,353.5 22.0 ..
11.3 10.6 6.8 68.0 661.3 17.7 109.7 62.0 14,427.7 s 4,472.9 7,431.6 4,054.3 2,938.9 14,069.3 599.6 2,636.0 1,102.2 2,174.0 912.8 4,849.5 358.4 ..
0.1 1.0 0.5 125.9 102.6 33.2 61.6 89.2 7,366.8 s 2,835.3 2,554.4 2,301.8 229.9 7,363.8 545.0 91.5 167.0 843.2 1,552.7 2,507.0 3.1 ..
1.4 3.0 6.6 165.6 74.2 4.7 1.2 7.4 6,461.3 s 1,507.0 3,615.3 2,055.2 1,482.4 6,450.3 691.8 426.0 211.4 1,449.9 16.0 2,681.5 11.0 ..
1.0 48.6 2.8 619.0 30.3 12.0 37.1 10.0 6,823.3 s 1,929.7 2,700.6 2,115.1 584.9 6,822.0 86.7 505.4 268.7 1,874.7 1,044.6 1,391.9 1.3 ..
0.0 0.0 0.2 40.6 75.1 37.8 85.1 29.8 5,199.6 s 1,405.5 916.8 663.3 195.1 5,199.3 171.7 94.4 230.2 224.6 297.5 1,496.6 0.3 ..
24.2 1.0 119.9 18.0 53.4 9.6 1,664.2 62.6 2,043.6 490.6 224.4 25.5 812.8 226.5 592.2 222.9 100,882.5 s 23,859.6 s 7,152.3 29,256.8 42,807.3 9,982.7 30,905.9 7,734.7 10,837.8 2,184.5 100,440.2 23,850.3 6,695.7 943.2 6,867.0 1,353.2 8,059.3 1,870.7 17,614.1 4,701.8 9,186.2 2,813.1 29,656.6 6,691.1 442.4 9.3 .. ..
9.4 0.2 0.4 0.1 15.5 0.1 49.5 37.6 103.2 71.8 1.9 1.2 1.0 51.5 4.8 25.7 4,801.6 s 3,142.3 s 703.2 983.2 2,278.5 623.5 1,517.1 449.8 690.1 165.9 4,786.7 3,134.1 189.3 165.7 185.2 205.9 1,975.6 200.4 596.3 129.6 128.0 156.1 846.6 1,015.6 14.9 8.3 .. ..
Note: Regional aggregates include data for economies not specified elsewhere. World and income group totals include aid not allocated by country or region.
412
Other DAC donors $ millions 2008
2010 World Development Indicators
1.1 –0.7 0.0 8.8 0.6 2.6 37.6 342.8 44.3 312.9 1.3 22.0 14.3 179.5 21.1 94.5 3,356.7 s 16,381.0 s 1,295.7 4,911.8 872.6 6,708.7 713.3 5,592.8 118.4 1,005.2 3,355.3 16,368.5 280.1 2,296.7 37.2 784.7 480.6 734.5 272.1 2,848.1 400.7 1,188.4 1,302.5 4,520.9 1.3 12.5 .. ..
About the data
6.17
Definitions
The table shows net bilateral aid to low- and middle-
and payment of experts hired by donor countries.
• Net aid refers to net bilateral official development
income economies from members of the Develop-
Moreover, a full accounting would include donor
assistance that meets the DAC definition of official
ment Assistance Committee (DAC) of the Organisa-
country contributions to multilateral institutions,
development assistance and is made to countries
tion for Economic Co-operation and Development
the flow of resources from multilateral institutions
and territories on the DAC list of aid recipients. See
(OECD). The data include aid to some countries and
to recipient countries, and fl ows from countries
About the data for table 6.14. • Other DAC donors
territories not shown in the table and aid to unspeci-
that are not members of DAC. Previous editions of
are Australia, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland,
fied economies recorded only at the regional or global
the table included only DAC member economies.
Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, New Zealand,
level. Aid to countries and territories not shown in the
The table also includes net aid from the European
Norway, Portugal, and Switzerland.
table has been assigned to regional totals based
Commission—a multilateral member of DAC.
on the World Bank’s regional classification system.
The expenditures that countries report as official
Aid to unspecified economies is included in regional
development assistance (ODA) have changed. For
totals and, when possible, income group totals. Aid
example, some DAC members have reported as
not allocated by country or region—including admin-
ODA the aid provided to refugees during the first 12
istrative costs, research on development, and aid to
months of their stay within the donor’s borders.
nongovernmental organizations—is included in the
Some of the aid recipients shown in the table are
world total. Thus regional and income group totals
also aid donors. See table 6.16a for a summary of
do not sum to the world total.
ODA from non-DAC countries.
The table is based on donor country reports of bilateral programs, which may differ from reports by recipient countries. Recipients may lack access to information on such aid expenditures as development- oriented research, stipends and tuition costs for aid-financed students in donor countries,
6.17a
Destination of aid varies by donor Share of bilateral official development assistance net disbursements, 2008
East Asia & Pacific Middle East & North Africa
United States 5%
Germany
Latin America & Caribbean Sub-Saharan Africa European Commission 5%
9%
7%
7% 10%
37%
Europe & Central Asia South Asia
21%
31% 11%
40%
9% 26%
9% 33%
15%
United Kingdom
7%
France
18%
Japan 2%
9%
2% 3%
10%
13% 8%
44%
15%
27%
5%
4% 49%
Data sources 26%
20%
36%
27% 0%
Data on financial flows are compiled by OECD DAC and published in its annual statistical report, Geographical Distribution of Financial Flows to Devel-
In 2008 Sub-Saharan Africa received 38 percent of total bilateral net official development assistance disbursements from Development Assistance Committee (DAC) donors, and the Middle East and North Africa received 22 percent. However, destinations of aid vary by donor. Note: Data are the distribution of bilateral aid from the top six DAC donors in 2008 and exclude aid to high-income economies (less than 1 percent of bilateral aid) and aid unallocated by region. Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Development Assistance Committee.
oping Countries, and its annual Development Co-operation Report. Data are available electronically on the OECD DAC’s International Development Statistics CD-ROM and at www.oecd.org/ dac/stats/idsonline.
2010 World Development Indicators
413
GLOBAL LINKS
Distribution of net aid by Development Assistance Committee members
6.18 Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
414
Movement of people Net migration
International migrant stock
thousands 1990–95 2000–05
thousands 1995 2005
3,266 –423 –50 143 120 –500 371 234 –116 –500 0 85 105 –100 –1,025 14 –184 –349 –128 –250 150 –5 643 37 –10 90 –829 b 300 –250 1,208 –14 62 375 153 –120 8 58 –129 –50 –498 –249 –359 –108 768 43 239 20 45 –544 2,649 40 470 –360 350 20 –133 –120
805 –100 –140 175 –100 –100 641 220 –100 –700 20 196 99 –100 62 20 –229 –41 100 192 10 –12 1,089 –45 219 30 –2,058b 113 –120 –237 4 84 –339 –13 –163 67 46 –148 –400 –291 –340 229 1 –340 33 761 10 31 –309 930 12 154 –300 –425 1 –140 –150
2010 World Development Indicators
70 71 299 38 1,588 682 3,854 989 525 1,006 1,185 916 146 70 73 39 731 47 464 295 116 246 5,047 67 78 136 437b 2,431 109 1,919 131 228 1,985 721 25 454 297 322 88 174 28 12 309 795 103 6,085 164 148 250 8,992 1,038 549 46 814 32 22 31
86 83 242 56 1,494 493 4,336 1,156 255 1,032 1,107 882 188 114 35 80 686 104 773 82 304 212 6,304 76 358 231 590 b 2,721 110 480 129 443 2,371 661 15 453 421 393 124 247 36 15 202 554 171 6,479 245 232 191 10,598 1,669 975 53 401 19 30 26
Refugees
Workers’ remittances and compensation of employees
thousands By country of origin By country of asylum 1995 2008 1995 2008
$ millions Received Paid 1995 2008 1995 2008
2,679.1 5.8 1.5 246.7 0.3 201.4 0.0 0.0 200.5 57.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 769.8 0.0 0.1 4.2 0.1 350.6 61.2 2.0 0.0 0.2 59.7 14.3 124.7c 0.2 1.9 89.7 0.2 0.2 0.2 245.6 24.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.9 23.5 286.7 0.4 101.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.4 13.6 0.2 42.9 0.4 0.8 13.9 1.2
2,833.1 15.0 9.1 171.4 1.0 16.3 0.0 0.0 16.3 10.1 5.4 0.1 0.3 0.5 74.4 0.0 1.4 3.0 0.7 281.6 17.3 13.9 0.1 125.1 55.1 1.0 195.3c 0.0 373.5 368.0 19.9 0.4 22.2 97.0 7.9 1.4 0.0 0.3 1.1 6.8 5.2 186.4 0.2 63.9 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.4 12.6 0.2 13.2 0.1 5.9 9.5 1.1 23.1 1.1
19.6 4.7 192.5 10.9 10.3 219.0 62.1 34.4 233.7 51.1 29.0 31.7 23.8 0.7 40.0 0.3 2.1 1.3 29.8 173.0 0.0 45.8 152.1 33.9 0.1 0.3 288.3 1.5 0.2 1,433.8 19.4 24.2 297.9 198.6 1.8 2.7 64.8 1.0 0.2 5.4 0.2 1.1 .. 393.5 10.2 155.2 0.8 6.6 0.1 1,267.9 83.2 4.4 1.5 672.3 15.4 .. 0.1
0.0 0.1 94.1 12.7 2.8 4.0 20.9 37.6 2.1 28.4 0.6 17.0 6.9 0.7 7.3 3.0 3.9 5.1 0.6 21.1 0.2 81.0 173.7 7.4 330.5 1.6 301.0 0.1 0.2 155.2 24.8 18.1 24.8 1.6 0.5 2.1 23.4 .. 101.4 97.9 0.0 4.9 0.0 83.6 6.6 171.2 9.0 14.8 1.0 582.7 18.2 2.2 0.1 21.5 7.9 0.0 0.0
.. 427 1,120a 5 64 65 1,651 1,012 3 1,202 29 4,937 100 7 .. 59 3,315 42 80a .. 12 11 .. 0 1 .. 878a .. 815 .. 4 123 151 544 .. 191 523 839 386 3,226 1,064 .. 1 27 74 4,640 4 19a 284 4,523 17 3,286 358 1 2 109a 124
.. 1,495 2,202a 82 694 1,062 4,713 3,239 1,554 8,995 443 10,425 271a 1,144 2,735 114 5,089 2,634 50a 4 325 145 .. .. .. 3 48,524a 355 4,884 .. 15a 605 195 1,602 .. 1,415 890 3,556 2,828 8,694 3,804 .. 398 387 828 15,908 11a 67 732 11,064 126 2,687 4,460 72 30a 1,410 2,869
.. .. .. 210 195 17 700 346 9 1 12 3,252 26 9 .. 200 347 34 51 5 52 22 .. 27 15 7a 19 .. 150 .. 27 36 457 16 .. 101 209 7 4 223 1 .. 3 0 54 4,935 99 .. 12 11,348 5 300 8 10 3 .. 8
.. 16 .. 669 596 185 3,049 3,446 593 15 141 4,240 115a 106 70 145 1,191 74 44a 0 187 42 .. .. .. 6 5,737 393 88 .. 102a 269 21 116 .. 3,826 3,222 29 66 241 19 .. 105 21 457 6,247 186 a 3 47 14,976 6a 1,912 26 56 ..a 117 5
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
Net migration
International migrant stock
thousands 1990–95 2000–05
thousands 1995 2005
104 –960 –725 –1,164 –154 –1 484 294 –113 474 509 –1,509 222 0 –627 .. –598 –273 –30 –134 230 –84 –523 10 –99 –27 –7 –920 287 –260 –15 –7 –1,364 –121 –173 –450 650 –126 –13 –101 191 143 –114 –3 –96 42 23 –2,611 8 0 –30 –300 –900 –77 0 –4 14
70 –1,540 –1,000 –993 –224 230 115 1,750 –76 82 104 –200 25 0 –65 .. 264 –75 –115 –20 100 –36 62 14 –36 –10 –5 –30 150 –134 30 0 –2,702 –320 17 –550 –20 –1,000 –1 –100 110 103 –206 –28 –170 84 –50 –1,239 8 0 –45 –525 –900 –200 291 –27 219
293 7,022 219 3,016 134 264 1,919 1,723 22 1,363 1,608 3,295 528 35 584 .. 1,090 482 23 527 656 6 199 506 272 115 44 325 1,193 174 118 18 458 473 7 55 246 114 118 625 1,387 594 27 171 582 237 582 4,077 73 31 183 51 210 964 528 339 406
333 5,887 136 2,062 128 618 2,661 3,068 27 1,999 2,345 2,974 790 37 551 .. 1,870 288 20 380 721 6 97 618 165 120 40 279 2,029 165 66 41 605 440 9 51 406 93 132 819 1,735 858 35 183 972 371 666 3,554 102 25 168 42 375 825 764 352 713
6.18
GLOBAL LINKS
Movement of people Refugees
Workers’ remittances and compensation of employees
thousands By country of origin By country of asylum 1995 2008 1995 2008
$ millions Received Paid 1995 2008 1995 2008
2.3 5.0 9.8 112.4 718.7 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 9.3 0.0 0.0 .. 0.8 0.0 58.2 0.2 13.5 0.0 744.6 0.6 0.1 12.9 0.1 0.0 0.1 77.2 84.3 0.0 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.3 125.6 152.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 .. 23.9 10.3 1.9 0.0 0.0 5.3 0.2 2.0 0.1 5.9 0.5 19.7 0.0 0.0 0.0
1.6 19.6 19.3 69.1 1,903.5 0.0 1.5 0.1 0.8 0.2 1.9 4.8 9.7 0.9 1.1 .. 0.9 2.5 8.6 0.8 13.0 0.0 75.2 2.1 0.5 7.5 0.3 0.1 0.6 1.8 45.6 0.0 6.2 5.6 1.3 3.5 0.2 184.4 1.0 4.2 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.8 14.2 0.0 0.1 32.4 0.1 0.0 0.1 7.3 1.4 2.4 0.0 .. 0.1
11.4 227.5 0.0 2,072.0 116.7 0.4 .. 74.3 0.0 5.4 1,288.9 d 15.6 234.7 .. 0.0 .. 3.3 13.4 .. .. 348.0 d 0.1 120.1 4.0 0.0 9.0 0.1 1.0 5.3 17.9 34.4 .. 38.7 .. .. 0.1 0.1 .. 1.7 124.8 80.0 3.8 0.6 27.6 8.1 47.6 .. 1,202.5 0.9 9.6 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.2 .. ..
7.8 184.5 0.4 980.1 39.5 9.7 9.1 47.1 .. 2.0 2,452.0 d 4.4 320.6 .. 0.2 .. 38.2 0.4 .. 0.0 472.6d .. 10.2 6.7 0.8 1.7 .. 4.2 36.7 9.6 27.0 .. 1.1 0.1 0.0 0.8 3.2 .. 6.8 124.8 77.6 2.7 0.1 0.3 10.1 36.1 0.0 1,780.9 16.9 10.0 0.1 1.1 0.1 12.8 0.4 .. 0.0
152 6,223 651 1,600a .. 347 701 2,364 653 1,151 1,441 116 298 a .. 1,080 .. .. 1 22 41 1,225a 411 .. .. 1 68 14 1 716a 112 5 132 4,368 1 .. 1,970 59 81 16 57 1,359 1,652 75 8 804a 239 39 1,712 112 16 287 599 5,360 724 3,953 .. ..
2,631 49,941 6,794 1,115a 3a 646 1,422 3,139 2,180 1,929 3,794 192 1,692a .. 3,062 .. .. 1,232 1a 601 7,180 439 58 16a 1,460 407 11a 1a 1,920 a 344 a 2a 215 26,304 1,897 200 a 6,895 116 150a 14 2,727 3,299 626 818 79a 9,980a 685 39 7,039 196 13a 503 2,437 18,643 10,447 4,057 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
146 419 .. .. .. 173 1,407 1,824 74 1,820 107 503 4 .. 634 .. 1,354 41 9 1 .. 75 .. 222 1 1 11 1a 1,329 42 14 1 .. 1 .. 20 21 .. 11 9 2,802 427 .. 29 5 603 1,537 4 20 16 .. 34 151 262 527 .. ..
1,562 3,815a 1,971 .. 17a 2,829 3,550 12,716 419 4,743 472 3,559 65 .. 1,973 .. 5,559 196 1a 58 4,028 13 0 964 615 33 21a 1a 6,385 83a .. 14 .. 115 77a 58 57 32a 43 5 8,280 1,202 .. 18a 103a 4,776 5,181 2a 198 135a .. 133 44 1,717 1,410 .. ..
415
6.18
Movement of people Net migration
International migrant stock
thousands 1990–95 2000–05
thousands 1995 2005
Romania –529 –270 135 Russian Federation 2,220 964 11,707 Rwanda –1,681 6 337 Saudi Arabia –500 285 4,611 Senegal –100 –100 291 Serbia 451 –339 874 Sierra Leone –450 336 101 Singapore 250 139 992 Slovak Republic –3 10 114 Slovenia 38 23 200 Somalia –893 –200 19 South Africa 900 700 1,098 Spain 324 2,504 1,041 Sri Lanka –256 –442 426 Sudan –168 –532 1,111 Swaziland –38 –46 35 Sweden 151 186 906 Switzerland 227 200 1,471 Syrian Arab Republic –70 300 817 Tajikistan –296 –345 305 Tanzania 591 –345 1,134 Thailand –39 1,411 549 Timor-Leste 0 41 10 Togo –122 –4 169 Trinidad and Tobago –24 –20 46 Tunisia –43 –81 38 Turkey –70 –71 1,212 Turkmenistan 50 –25 260 Uganda 120 –5 661 Ukraine 100 –173 6,172 United Arab Emirates 340 577 1,716 United Kingdom 167 948 4,191 United States 6,565 5,676 28,522 Uruguay –20 –104 93 Uzbekistan –340 –400 1,474 Venezuela, RB 40 40 1,019 Vietnam –840 –200 39 West Bank and Gaza 1 11 1,201 Yemen, Rep. 650 –100 378 Zambia –11 –82 271 Zimbabwe –192 –700 433 ..f s ..f s165,659g s World Low income –344 –3,728 15,731 Middle income –12,982 –14,512 62,754 Lower middle income –11,033 –11,119 33,284 Upper middle income –1,949 –3,393 29,471 Low & middle income –13,325 –18,240 78,485 East Asia & Pacific –3,285 –3,722 3,047 Europe & Central Asia –3,597 –2,138 31,097 Latin America & Carib. –3,388 –5,738 5,440 Middle East & N. Africa –1,044 –1,850 8,985 South Asia –1,262 –3,181 13,257 Sub-Saharan Africa –749 –1,611 16,659 High income 13,308 18,091 87,174 Euro area 4,604 7,269 23,080
Refugees
Workers’ remittances and compensation of employees
thousands By country of origin By country of asylum 1995 2008 1995 2008
$ millions Received Paid 1995 2008 1995 2008
133 17.0 4.8 12,080 207.0 103.1 436 1,819.4 72.5 6,337 0.3 0.7 220 17.6 16.0 675 86.1e 185.9 152 379.5 32.5 1,494 0.0 0.1 124 0.0 0.3 167 12.9 0.1 21 638.7 561.2 1,249 0.5 0.5 4,608 0.0 0.0 366 107.6 137.8 640 445.3 419.2 39 0.0 0.0 1,113 0.0 0.0 1,660 0.0 0.0 1,326 8.0 15.2 306 59.0 0.5 798 0.1 1.3 982 0.2 1.8 12 .. 0.0 183 93.2 16.8 38 0.0 0.2 35 0.3 2.3 1,334 44.9 214.4 224 0.0 0.7 652 24.2 7.5 5,391 1.7 28.4 2,863 0.0 0.3 5,838 0.1 0.2 39,266 0.2 2.1 84 0.3 0.2 1,268 0.1 6.3 1,011 0.5 5.8 55 543.5 328.2 1,661 72.8 340.0 455 0.4 1.8 287 0.0 0.2 391 0.0 16.8 194,797g s 18,068.7d,h s15,161.6d,h s 14,820 8,552.0 5,386.1 62,860 3,719.2 4,672.9 32,088 2,490.7 3,629.0 30,772 1,228.5 1,043.9 77,680 12,271.2 10,059.0 4,739 952.9 761.1 28,924 1,631.5 712.5 5,951 155.7 446.6 10,002 948.0 2,368.9 11,785 2,958.7 3,142.1 16,279 5,624.4 2,627.7 117,117 267.3 109.4 31,629 13.9 1.0
0.2 1.6 9 9,381 2 664 246.7 3.5 2,502 6,033 3,938 26,145 7.8 55.1 21 68 1 70 13.2 240.6 .. 216 16,594 21,696 76 143a 66.8 33.2 146 1,288a 650.7e 96.7 1,295a,e 5,538 a,e .. 138 .. 3 4.7 7.8 24 150a 0.1 0.0 .. .. .. .. 2.3 0.3 26 1,973 3 144 22.3 0.3 272 343 31 353 0.6 1.8 .. .. .. .. 101.4 43.5 105 823 629 1,133 5.9 4.7 3,237 11,776 868 14,659 0.0 0.3 809 2,947 16 385 674.1 181.6 346 3,100 1 2a 0.7 0.8 83 100 a 4 8a 199.2 77.0 288 822 336 854 82.9 46.1 1,473 2,200 10,114 19,022 1,567.6d 339 850a 15 252a 373.5d 0.6 1.8 .. 2,544 .. 199 829.7 321.9 1 19 1 54 106.6 112.9 1,695 1,898 .. .. .. 0.0 .. .. .. .. 47a 10.9 9.4 15 284a .. 0.0 32 109a 14 .. 0.2 0.1 680 1,977 36 16 12.8 11.1 3,327 1,360 .. 111 23.3 0.1 4 .. 7 .. 229.4 162.1 .. 724 .. 364 5.2 7.2 6 5,769 1 54 0.4 0.2 .. .. .. .. 90.9 292.1 2,469 7,861 2,581 4,633 623.3 279.5 2,179 3,045 22,181 48,187 0.1 0.1 .. 108 .. 5 2.6 0.8 .. .. .. .. 1.6 201.2 2 137 203 860 .. .. 34.4 2.4 .. 7,200 a 1,836.1d 582 630 a 19 18a 1,201.0d 53.5 140.2 1,081 1,411 61 337 130.0 83.5 .. 68 59 139 0.5 3.5 44 .. 7 .. 18,068.7d s 15,161.6d s 101,963 s 443,392 s 100,821 s 288,361 s 4,882.4 2,024.9 3,525 31,917 431 2,400 9,932.2 10,916.7 53,106 303,872 10,282 65,441 8,477.2 9,826.5 31,986 203,769 1,959 15,361 1,455.1 1,090.2 21,121 100,103 8,323 50,080 14,814.7 12,941.6 56,631 335,789 10,714 67,841 447.0 463.6 9,525 86,060 1,617 14,551 1,221.9 187.7 7,206 57,516 4,770 34,731 93.9 350.2 13,427 64,438 1,123 4,258 5,683.0 7,696.9 13,275 34,798 722 6,156 1,625.5 2,119.0 10,005 71,652 476 4,352 5,743.4 2,124.1 3,193 21,324 2,006 3,794 3,254.1 2,220.0 45,332 107,603 90,107 220,520 1,690.4 966.3 30,826 71,436 28,737 83,142
a. World Bank estimates. b. Includes Taiwan, China. c. Includes Tibetans, who are listed separately by the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR). d. Includes Palestinian refugees under the mandate of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), who are not included in data from the UNHCR. e. Includes Montenegro. f. World totals computed by the United Nations sum to zero, but because the aggregates refer to World Bank definitions, regional and income group totals do not. g. World totals are computed by the World Bank and include only economies covered by World Development Indicators, so data may differ from what is published by the United Nations Population Division. h. Includes refugees without specified country of origin and Palestinian refugees under the mandate of the UNRWA, so regional and income group totals do not sum to the world total.
416
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
6.18
Definitions
Movement of people, most often through migration,
registrations varies greatly. Many refugees may not
• Net migration is the net total of migrants during the
is a significant part of global integration. Migrants
be aware of the need to register or may choose not
period. It is the total number of immigrants less the
contribute to the economies of both their host coun-
to do so. And administrative records tend to over-
total number of emigrants, including both citizens and
try and their country of origin. Yet reliable statistics
estimate the number of refugees because it is eas-
noncitizens. Data are five-year estimates. • Interna-
on migration are difficult to collect and are often
ier to register than to de-register. The UN Refugee
tional migrant stock is the number of people born in
incomplete, making international comparisons a
Agency (UNHCR) collects and maintains data on
a country other than that in which they live. It includes
challenge.
refugees, except for Palestinian refugees residing
refugees. • Refugees are people who are recognized
The United Nations Population Division provides
in areas under the mandate of the United Nations
as refugees under the 1951 Convention Relating
data on net migration and migrant stock. To derive
Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in
to the Status of Refugees or its 1967 Protocol, the
estimates of net migration, the organization takes
the Near East (UNRWA). The UNRWA provides ser-
1969 Organization of African Unity Convention Gov-
into account the past migration history of a country
vices to Palestinian refugees who live in certain
erning the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in
or area, the migration policy of a country, and the
areas and who register with the agency. Registra-
Africa, people recognized as refugees in accordance
influx of refugees in recent periods. The data to cal-
tion is voluntary, and estimates by the UNRWA are
with the UNHCR statute, people granted refugee-like
culate these official estimates come from a variety
not an accurate count of the Palestinian refugee
humanitarian status, and people provided temporary
of sources, including border statistics, administra-
population. The table shows estimates of refugees
protection. Asylum seekers—people who have applied
tive records, surveys, and censuses. When no offi -
collected by the UNHCR, complemented by estimates
for asylum or refugee status and who have not yet
cial estimates can be made because of insufficient
of Palestinian refugees under the UNRWA mandate.
received a decision or who are registered as asylum
data, net migration is derived through the balance
Thus, the aggregates differ from those published by
seekers—are excluded. Palestinian refugees are
equation, which is the difference between overall
the UNHCR.
people (and their descendants) whose residence was
population growth and the natural increase during
Workers’ remittances and compensation of employ-
Palestine between June 1946 and May 1948 and who
ees are World Bank staff estimates based on data
lost their homes and means of livelihood as a result
The data used to estimate the international migrant
from the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Balance
of the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict. • Country of origin
stock at a particular time are obtained mainly from
of Payments Statistics Yearbook. The IMF data are
refers to the nationality or country of citizenship of a
population censuses. The estimates are derived
supplemented by World Bank staff estimates for
claimant. • Country of asylum is the country where an
from the data on foreign-born population—people
missing data for countries where workers’ remit-
asylum claim was filed and granted. • Workers’ remit-
who have residence in one country but were born in
tances are important. The data reported here are the
tances and compensation of employees received and
another country. When data on the foreign-born popu-
sum of three items defined in the fifth edition of the
paid comprise current transfers by migrant workers
lation are not available, data on foreign population—
IMF’s Balance of Payments Manual: workers’ remit-
and wages and salaries earned by nonresident work-
that is, people who are citizens of a country other
tances, compensation of employees, and migrants’
ers. Remittances are classified as current private
than the country in which they reside—are used as
transfers.
transfers from migrant workers resident in the host
the 1990–2000 intercensal period.
estimates.
The distinction among these three items is not
country for more than a year, irrespective of their
After the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991 peo-
always consistent in the data reported by countries
immigration status, to recipients in their country of
ple living in one of the newly independent countries
to the IMF. In some cases countries compile data on
origin. Migrants’ transfers are defined as the net worth
who were born in another were classified as interna-
the basis of the citizenship of migrant workers rather
of migrants who are expected to remain in the host
tional migrants. Estimates of migrant stock in the
than their residency status. Some countries also
country for more than one year that is transferred to
newly independent states from 1990 on are based
report remittances entirely as workers’ remittances
another country at the time of migration. Compensa-
on the 1989 census of the Soviet Union.
or compensation of employees. Following the fifth
tion of employees is the income of migrants who have
For countries with information on the interna-
edition of the Balance of Payments Manual in 1993,
lived in the host country for less than a year.
tional migrant stock for at least two points in time,
migrants’ transfers are considered a capital transac-
interpolation or extrapolation was used to estimate
tion, but previous editions regarded them as current
the international migrant stock on July 1 of the refer-
transfers. For these reasons the figures presented in
Data on net migration are from the United Nations
ence years. For countries with only one observation,
the table take all three items into account.
Population Division’s World Population Prospects:
Data sources
estimates for the reference years were derived using
The 2008 Revision. Data on migration stock are
rates of change in the migrant stock in the years pre-
from the United Nations Population Division’s
ceding or following the single observation available.
Trends in Total Migrant Stock: The 2008 Revision.
A model was used to estimate migrants for countries
Data on refugees are from the UNHCR’s Statisti-
that had no data.
cal Yearbook 2008, complemented by statistics
Registrations, together with other sources—
on Palestinian refugees under the mandate of
including estimates and surveys—are the main
the UNRWA as published on its website. Data on
sources of refugee data. But there are difficulties
remittances are World Bank staff estimates based
in collecting accurate statistics. Although refugees
on IMF balance of payments data.
are often registered individually, the accuracy of
2010 World Development Indicators
417
GLOBAL LINKS
Movement of people
6.19
Travel and tourism International tourists
Inbound tourism expenditure
thousands Inbound Outbound 1995 2008 1995 2008
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Central African Republic Chad Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Haiti Honduras
418
.. 304a 520a,b 9 2,289 12 3,726a 17,173d .. 156 161 5,560d 138 284 115d 521 1,991 3,466 124f 34b .. 100f 16,932 26g 19f 1,540 20,034 7,137 1,433a 35g 37f 785 188 1,485d 742g 3,381d 2,124d 1,776b,g 440a,h 2,871 235 315a,b 530 103g 2,644 60,033 125g 45 85a 14,847d 286b 10,130 563a 12g .. 145 271
.. .. 2,675a 12 1,772a,b 1,090 294 3 4,665 3,815 558 .. 5,586a 2,519 21,935d 3,713 1,409 432 467 830 91 626 7,165d 5,645 186 .. 594 249 322d .. 1,500 .. 5,050 2,600 5,780 3,524 226f .. 201b 36 2,001 31 185f .. 17,142 18,206 14g .. 25f .. 2,699 1,070 53,049 4,520 17,319 .. 1,222a 1,057 47g 50 43f .. 2,089 273 .. .. 9,415d .. 2,316g 72 6,649d .. 4,503d 5,035 3,980b,g 168 1,005a,h 271 12,296 2,683 1,385 348 81a,b .. 1,970 1,764 330b 120 3,583 5,147 78,449 18,686 .. 203 147 .. 1,290a 228 24,884d 55,800 587b .. 15,939 .. 1,715a 333 46g .. 30 .. 304 .. 899 149
2010 World Development Indicators
.. 3,716 1,539 .. 4,611 516 5,808 9,876 2,162 875 380 8,887 .. 589 .. .. 4,936 5,727 .. .. 786 .. 27,037 11 .. 3,061 45,844 81,911 2,041 .. .. 519 .. .. 202 .. 6,347 413 815 4,531 1,012 .. .. .. 5,854 23,347 .. 307 .. 73,000 .. .. 1,277 .. .. .. 387
$ millions 1995 2008
.. 70 32c 27 2,550 14 11,915 14,529 87 25e 28 4,548e 85e 92 257 176 1,085 662 .. 2 71 75 9,176 4c 43c 1,186 8,730e 9,604c,e 887 .. 15 763 103 1,349e 1,100c 2,880e 3,691e 1,571e 315 2,954 152 58c 452 177 2,383 31,295 94 28e 75 24,052 30 4,182 216 1 3 90e 85
.. 1,849 325c 293 5,308 377 28,470 24,343 381 91e 585 13,063 206 302 920 515e 6,109 4,831 57 2 1,300 165 17,771 .. .. 2,632 44,130 20,413c 2,499 .. 54 2,526 114e 11,668 2,548 8,728 6,686e 4,176e 745 12,104 1,180 60 1,662 1,184 4,861 66,821 13 83 505 51,225 970 17,586 1,068e 2 3 279 622
% of exports 1995 2008
.. 23.2 .. 0.7 10.2 4.7 17.1 16.2 11.1 0.6 0.5 2.4 13.8 7.5 22.9 7.3 2.1 9.8 .. 1.9 7.3 3.7 4.2 .. .. 6.1 5.9 3.5 7.2 .. 1.1 17.1 2.4 19.3 .. 10.2 5.6 27.4 6.1 22.3 7.5 43.1 17.6 23.1 5.0 8.6 3.2 15.8 13.1 4.0 1.9 26.9 7.7 0.1 5.3 46.8 5.2
.. 48.2 .. 0.5 6.5 21.5 12.2 10.1 1.2 0.5 1.6 2.8 15.3 4.3 13.4 9.2 2.7 15.8 .. 1.2 20.5 2.2 3.4 .. .. 3.4 2.8 4.5 5.9 .. 0.9 18.5 1.0 39.4 .. 5.2 3.6 35.1 3.6 22.1 19.3 .. 9.4 33.7 3.8 8.7 0.2 30.8 13.7 2.9 13.7 22.1 11.1 0.2 .. 33.5 8.9
Outbound tourism expenditure
$ millions 1995 2008
.. .. 19 1,644 186c 469c 113 447 4,013 5,971 12 383 7,260 24,903 11,686 13,988 165 454 234e 918 101 812 8,115e 20,883 48 107 72 381 97 274 153 490e 3,982 13,269 312 3,380 .. 91 25e 98 22 191 140 502 12,658 34,007 43c .. 38c .. 934 1,788 3,688e 40,987 10,497c,e 15,888c,e 1,162 2,337 .. .. 69 168 336 718 312 380e 422e 1,152 .. .. 1,635e 4,731 4,288e 9,678e 267 522e 331 790 1,371 3,390 99 709 .. .. 121 938 30 156e 2,853 5,534 20,699 52,135 182 346 16 8 171 338 66,527 103,386 74 870 1,495 3,946 167 750 29 30 6 16 35e 383 99 421
% of imports 1995 2008
.. 2.3 .. 3.2 15.4 1.7 9.7 12.7 12.8 3.1 1.8 4.5 5.4 4.6 2.4 7.5 6.3 4.8 .. 9.7 1.6 8.7 6.3 .. .. 5.1 2.7 6.5 7.3 .. 5.1 7.1 8.2 4.6 .. 5.4 7.4 4.4 5.8 8.0 2.7 .. 4.2 2.1 7.6 6.2 10.6 6.9 12.1 11.3 3.5 6.0 4.5 2.9 6.7 4.4 5.3
.. 22.6 .. 1.0 8.8 8.1 10.3 6.3 4.0 3.6 1.9 4.4 5.1 6.7 2.1 8.4 6.0 8.0 .. 18.5 2.5 6.0 7.0 .. .. 2.6 3.3 3.7 5.2 .. 2.6 4.4 4.1 3.3 .. 3.0 5.4 2.9 3.8 5.0 6.4 .. 5.0 1.6 4.7 6.2 14.4 2.2 4.5 6.8 6.9 3.3 4.8 1.7 .. 13.3 3.6
International tourists
Inbound tourism expenditure
thousands Inbound Outbound 1995 2008 1995 2008
Hungary India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Dem. Rep. Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Mongolia Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar
.. 2,124h 4,324 489 61a 4,818 2,215h 31,052 1,147b,g 3,345a,h 1,075h .. 896 .. 3,753a,b .. 72f 36 60 539 450 87 .. 56 650 147d 75g 192 7,469 42f,g .. 422 20,241b 32 108 2,602b .. 117 272 363 6,574d 1,475 281 35 656 2,880 279f 378 345 42 438h 479 1,760b 19,215 9,511h 3,131g 309f
8,814 5,367h 6,234 2,034 .. 8,026 2,572h 42,734 1,767b,g 8,351a,h 3,729b 3,447 1,644 .. 6,891a,b .. 293f 2,435 1,295 1,684 1,333 285 .. .. 1,611 255d 375g 742 22,052 190f,g .. 930 22,637b 7 446 7,879b 771 193 929 500 10,104d 2,411 858 48 1,111 4,440 1,273f 823 1,293 114 428h 2,058 3,139b 12,960 12,321b 3,894g 1,405f
13,083 3,056 1,782 1,000 .. 2,547 2,259 18,173 .. 15,298 1,128 523 .. .. 3,819 .. 878 42 .. 1,812 .. .. .. 484 1,925 .. 39 .. 20,642 .. .. 107 8,450 71 .. 1,317 .. .. .. 100 12,313 920 255 10 .. 590 .. .. 185 51 427 508 1,615 36,387 .. 1,237 ..
18,471 10,647 5,486 .. .. 7,713 4,207 28,284 .. 15,987 2,288 5,243 .. .. 11,996 .. 2,649 1,521 .. 3,782 .. .. .. .. 2,847 .. .. .. .. .. .. 226 14,450 85 .. 3,058 .. .. .. 561 18,458 1,965 1,100 .. .. 3,395 .. .. 369 .. 278 1,971 2,745 47,561 20,989 1,493 ..
$ millions 1995 2008
2,938 2,582e 5,229e 205 18e 2,698 3,491 30,426 1,199 4,894 973 155 590 .. 6,670 .. 307 5e 52 37 710 29 .. 4 102 19e 106 22 5,044 26 11e 616 6,847 71 33 1,469 49 169 278e 232 10,611 2,318e 51 7e 47 2,730 193 582 372 25e 162 521 1,141 6,927 5,646 1,828c ..
7,112 12,461 8,150 2,196 555 9,953 4,807 48,793 2,222 13,781 3,539 1,255 1,398 .. 12,783 .. 610 569 276e 1,134 7,690 34e 158e 99 1,406 262 620 48 18,553 227 .. 1,823 14,647 289 261 8,885 213 59 382 353 20,526 5,030e 276e 45 586 5,559 1,111 915 2,223 4 128 2,396 4,990 12,841 14,047 3,645c 874c
% of exports 1995 2008
14.9 6.8 9.9 1.1 .. 5.5 12.7 10.3 35.3 1.0 28.0 2.6 16.7 .. 4.5 .. 2.2 1.1 12.8 1.8 .. 14.6 .. 0.1 3.2 2.7 14.2 4.7 6.1 4.9 2.2 26.2 7.7 8.0 6.5 16.2 10.2 12.9 16.0 22.5 4.4 13.0 7.7 2.2 0.4 4.9 2.5 5.7 4.9 0.8 3.4 7.9 4.3 19.4 17.5 .. ..
5.6 4.3 5.3 .. 1.4 4.5 5.9 7.3 42.0 1.5 28.6 1.6 16.9 .. 2.5 .. 0.6 20.7 19.4 8.0 32.0 3.6 24.9 0.2 4.9 5.3 21.8 .. 8.1 11.7 .. 36.9 4.7 11.6 12.9 26.3 6.6 1.2 10.4 20.6 3.2 12.5 9.4 5.9 0.7 2.5 2.8 3.6 13.8 0.1 1.4 6.8 8.5 6.0 17.0 .. ..
GLOBAL LINKS
6.19
Travel and tourism
Outbound tourism expenditure
$ millions 1995 2008
1,501 996e 2,172e 247 117e 2,034e 2,626 17,219 173 46,966 719 296 183 .. 6,947 .. 2,514 7e 34 62 .. 17 .. 493 107 27e 79 53 2,722 74 30 184 3,587 73 22 356 68 18e 90e 167 13,151 1,259e 56 26 939 4,481 349e 654 181 58e 173 428 551 5,865 2,540 1,155c ..
4,637 12,081 8,547 9,482 705 10,551 4,445 37,728 312 38,976 1,140 1,305 266e .. 19,512 .. 8,341 451 .. 1,250 4,297 19 58 1,339 1,533 190 143e 84 7,724 201 .. 489 10,185 345 212 1,910 241 40 92 545 22,212 2,991e 218 49 4,774 15,932e 1,199 2,035 560 56 210 1,353 2,778 10,381 5,283 1,834c 3,751c
% of imports 1995 2008
7.5 2.1 4.0 1.6 .. 4.8 7.4 6.9 4.6 11.2 14.7 4.9 3.1 .. 4.5 .. 19.9 1.0 4.5 2.8 .. 1.6 .. 8.6 2.7 1.7 8.0 8.0 3.1 7.5 5.9 7.5 4.4 7.3 4.2 3.2 6.6 0.9 4.3 10.3 6.1 7.3 4.9 5.7 7.3 9.6 6.3 4.6 2.3 3.0 3.3 4.5 1.7 17.3 6.4 .. ..
2010 World Development Indicators
3.7 3.3 5.9 .. 3.3 5.4 5.3 5.6 3.1 4.4 5.9 2.6 2.1 .. 3.8 .. 22.0 9.5 .. 6.6 14.5 1.1 2.5 5.1 4.5 2.5 3.9 .. 4.3 7.7 .. 7.7 3.1 6.1 11.3 4.1 5.5 1.4 2.1 12.5 3.9 7.0 4.1 3.7 10.0 12.2 4.5 4.3 3.2 2.1 2.2 4.0 4.0 4.4 5.1 .. ..
419
6.19
Travel and tourism International tourists
thousands Inbound Outbound 1995 2008 1995 2008
Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela, RB Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe World Low income Middle income Lower middle income Upper middle income Low & middle income East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Carib. Middle East & N. Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa High income Euro area
Inbound tourism expenditure
$ millions 1995 2008
5,445a 8,862a 5,737 13,072 689 2,627 23,676a 21,329 36,538 4,312e 15,923 10,290a .. 981 .. .. 4 202 3,325 14,757 .. 4,087 .. 7,227c .. 875 .. .. 168 622 .. 646 .. .. .. 1,113 36g 6 73 57e 34e 38 g 10,583e 6,070 7,778 2,867 6,828 7,611e 1,767d 218 23,837 630 3,004 903d 1,771d .. 2,459 1,128 3,115 732d .. .. .. .. .. .. 4,488 9,592 2,520 4,429 2,655 8,861 34,920 57,316 3,648 11,229 27,369 70,234 438h 504 966 367 803 403h 331e 29 436 195 .. 8e 754f .. 1,177 54 32 300i 3,434d 10,127 12,681 4,390 14,399 2,310d 8,608f 11,148 .. 11,354 17,573 6,946f 5,430d 1,746 5,253 1,258e 2,972 815d .. .. .. .. .. 24 1,358 285 750 157 .. 502e 1,820 4,018 9,257 21,980 6,952b 14,536 .. .. .. .. .. .. 74f .. .. 13e 38 53f 433g 261 .. 232 615 260g 7,049h 1,778 3,118 1,838 3,909 4,120h 25,019 7,083 24,994 3,981 9,873 4,957e 218 8 21 38 13 .. 531 160 844 148 337 78e 6,722 3,716 25,449 6,552 15,499 191e 7,126b,i .. .. 632 7,162c 2,315b,i 21,719 30,142 41,345 69,011 27,577 45,345 43,490 57,938 51,285 63,549 93,700 166,530 2,022 1,938 562 734 725 1,180 92 1,069 246 1,150 15 64c 700 745 534 1,745 995 984 4,254a .. .. .. 3,926c 1,351a 387f .. .. 255e 212 220f 404f .. .. 50e 886e 61f 163 812 .. .. 29 146 1,416a 2,508a 256 .. 145 365c 536,909 t 927,848 t 576,560 t 1,027,062 t 486,780 t 1,139,379 t 23,743 .. .. .. .. 8,001 157,253 345,869 175,694 363,133 88,430 305,501 57,366 166,594 36,710 142,650 39,463 146,807 100,145 179,371 124,078 208,648 48,963 158,652 167,692 375,532 195,002 413,087 92,494 323,111 43,653 109,209 36,055 .. 31,197 104,753 54,490 123,198 86,619 149,215 19,155 81,028 38,965 60,922 21,780 41,578 21,591 55,179 13,349 42,820 13,407 25,352 9,771 43,878 3,819 8,472 5,151 15,005 4,016 15,342 12,954 29,153 .. .. 6,729 22,956 364,532 546,528 337,054 531,446 394,244 816,408 202,533 290,386 140,127 232,712 164,023 356,496
% of exports 1995 2008
7.3 4.6 5.4 .. 11.2 .. 44.4 4.8 5.7 10.9 .. 7.7 20.4 7.9 1.2 5.3 4.6 9.2 21.9 .. 39.7 13.2 .. 2.8 8.3 23.0 13.6 0.7 11.7 1.1 .. 8.6 11.8 20.7 .. 4.8 .. 33.4 2.3 2.4 .. 7.6 w 10.6 8.1 8.2 7.9 8.1 7.8 8.4 7.5 13.0 6.8 7.6 7.5 7.8
4.2 3.0 30.4 2.2 21.6 7.4 10.2 2.5 3.8 8.4 .. 9.0 16.4 7.9 2.7 1.5 5.6 5.5 19.0 1.4 26.1 10.5 .. 4.2 4.3 15.5 14.2 .. 15.5 7.9 .. 6.0 9.1 12.6 .. 1.0 5.6 22.9 8.7 2.8 .. 5.8 w 9.1 5.5 4.9 6.0 5.6 4.5 5.9 5.3 16.7 4.4 6.0 5.8 6.3
Outbound tourism expenditure
$ millions 1995 2008
749 2,411 11,599e 28,122 13 104 .. 16,666c 154 352 .. 1,435 51 24 4,663e 14,189e 338 2,596 606 1,567 .. .. 2,414 6,792 5,826 26,829 279 777 43e 1,188e 45 63 6,816 17,310 9,478 13,407 498e 710 .. 11e 360e 746 4,791 6,963 .. .. 40 59 91 204 294 555 911e 4,031 74 .. 80e 314 210e 4,585 .. 13,288c 30,749 84,218 60,924 117,969 332 487 .. .. 1,852 2,566 .. .. 162e 376 76e 246 83 107 106c .. 458,837 t 1,028,751 t .. .. 65,704 227,180 20,472 111,854 45,510 115,055 69,333 239,061 14,769 70,557 22,399 68,075 18,751 44,731 4,844 19,782 2,393 16,660 6,761 22,119 388,810 790,377 154,993 312,836
% of imports 1995 2008
6.6 14.0 3.5 .. 8.5 .. 19.4 3.2 3.2 5.6 .. 7.2 4.3 4.7 3.5 3.5 8.4 8.7 9.0 .. 16.8 5.8 .. 6.0 4.3 3.3 2.3 4.1 5.4 1.1 .. 9.4 6.8 9.3 .. 11.0 .. 5.8 3.1 6.2 .. 7.4 w 5.0 5.8 3.9 7.4 5.8 3.5 9.5 6.5 5.7 3.0 6.7 7.8 7.8
2.7 7.6 7.4 9.5 6.5 5.4 4.1 3.6 3.2 4.1 .. 6.3 5.2 5.0 11.0 2.5 7.8 5.1 4.6 0.3 9.3 3.4 .. 4.3 1.9 2.1 1.9 .. 6.0 4.6 .. 10.0 4.7 4.8 .. 4.3 .. 8.5 2.1 2.0 .. 5.3 w .. 4.3 3.9 4.9 4.3 3.7 4.9 4.5 5.7 3.5 5.9 5.7 5.6
Note: Aggregates are based on World Bank country classifications and differ from those of the World Tourism Organization. Regional and income group totals include countries not shown in the table for which data are available. a. Arrivals of nonresident visitors at national borders. b. Includes nationals residing abroad. c. Country estimates. d. Arrivals in all types of accommodation establishments. e. Expenditure of travel related items only; excludes passenger transport items. f. Arrivals in hotels and similar establishments. g. Arrivals by air only. h. Excludes nationals residing abroad. i. Arrivals in hotels only.
420
2010 World Development Indicators
About the data
6.19
GLOBAL LINKS
Travel and tourism Definitions
Tourism is defined as the activities of people trav-
are unavailable or incomplete, the table shows the
• International inbound tourists (overnight visitors)
eling to and staying in places outside their usual
arrivals of international visitors, which include tour-
are the number of tourists who travel to a country
environment for no more than one year for leisure,
ists, same-day visitors, cruise passengers, and crew
other than that in which they usually reside, and out-
business, and other purposes not related to an activ-
members.
side their usual environment, for a period not exceed-
ity remunerated from within the place visited. The
Sources and collection methods for arrivals differ
ing 12 months and whose main purpose in visiting
social and economic phenomenon of tourism has
across countries. In some cases data are from bor-
is other than an activity remunerated from within the
grown substantially over the past quarter century.
der statistics (police, immigration, and the like) and
country visited. When data on number of tourists are
Statistical information on tourism is based mainly
supplemented by border surveys. In other cases data
not available, the number of visitors, which includes
on data on arrivals and overnight stays along with
are from tourism accommodation establishments.
tourists, same-day visitors, cruise passengers, and
balance of payments information. These data do
For some countries number of arrivals is limited to
crew members, is shown instead. • International out-
not completely capture the economic phenomenon
arrivals by air and for others to arrivals staying in
bound tourists are the number of departures that
of tourism or provide the information needed for
hotels. Some countries include arrivals of nation-
people make from their country of usual residence
effective public policies and effi cient business
als residing abroad while others do not. Caution
to any other country for any purpose other than an
operations. Data are needed on the scale and sig-
should thus be used in comparing arrivals across
activity remunerated in the country visited. • Inbound
nifi cance of tourism. Information on the role of tour-
countries.
tourism expenditure is expenditures by international
ism in national economies is particularly deficient.
The World Tourism Organization is improving its
inbound visitors, including payments to national carri-
Although the World Tourism Organization reports
coverage of tourism expenditure data, using balance
ers for international transport. These receipts include
progress in harmonizing definitions and measure-
of payments data from the International Monetary
any other prepayment made for goods or services
ment, differences in national practices still prevent
Fund (IMF) supplemented by data from individual
received in the destination country. They may include
full comparability.
countries. These data, shown in the table, include
receipts from same-day visitors, except when these
The data in the table are from the World Tourism
travel and passenger transport items as defined in
are important enough to justify separate classifica-
Organization, a United Nations agency. The data on
the IMF’s (1993) Balance of Payments Manual. When
tion. For some countries they do not include receipts
inbound and outbound tourists refer to the number of
the IMF does not report data on passenger transport
for passenger transport items. Their share in exports
arrivals and departures, not to the number of people
items, expenditure data for travel items are shown.
is calculated as a ratio to exports of goods and ser-
traveling. Thus a person who makes several trips to
The aggregates are calculated using the World
vices (all transactions between residents of a coun-
a country during a given period is counted each time
Bank’s weighted aggregation methodology (see Sta-
try and the rest of the world involving a change of
as a new arrival. Unless otherwise indicated in the
tistical methods) and differ from the World Tourism
ownership from residents to nonresidents of general
footnotes, the data on inbound tourism show the
Organization’s aggregates.
merchandise, goods sent for processing and repairs,
arrivals of nonresident tourists (overnight visitors) at
nonmonetary gold, and services). • Outbound tour-
national borders. When data on international tourists
ism expenditure is expenditures of international outbound visitors in other countries, including payments
High-income economies remain the main recipients of increased international tourism expenditure, but the share of developing economies’ receipts has risen 1995 Total receipts from international tourism: $487 billion Middle East & North Africa 2% Latin America & Caribbean 5% Europe & Central Asia 4% East Asia & Pacific 6%
South Asia 1% Sub-Saharan Africa 1%
to foreign carriers for international transport. These
6.19a
2008 Total receipts from international tourism: $1,139 billion Middle East & North Africa 4%
South Asia 1% Sub-Saharan Africa 2%
Latin America & Caribbean 5%
expenditures may include those by residents traveling abroad as same-day visitors, except when these are important enough to justify separate classification. For some countries they do not include expenditures for passenger transport items. Their share in imports is calculated as a ratio to imports of goods and services (all transactions between residents of a
Europe & Central Asia 7%
country and the rest of the world involving a change of ownership from nonresidents to residents of general
High income 81%
merchandise, goods sent for processing and repairs,
East Asia & Pacific 9%
nonmonetary gold, and services). High income 72%
Data sources Data on visitors and tourism expenditure are from the World Tourism Organization’s Yearbook of Tourism Statistics and Compendium of Tourism Statistics 2010. Data in the table are updated
Although more than 70 percent of international tourism expenditures went to high-income economies in
from electronic files provided by the World Tour-
2008, the share of developing economies’ receipts has increased since 1995. The share of receipts by
ism Organization. Data on exports and imports
East Asia and Pacific and Europe and Central Asia increased the most—about 3 percentage points.
are from the IMF’s Balance of Payments Statistics
Source: World Bank staff calculations based on World Tourism Organization data.
Yearbook and data files.
2010 World Development Indicators
421 Text figures, tables, and boxes
PRIMARY DATA DOCUMENTATION As a major user of socioeconomic data, the World Bank recognizes the importance of data documentation to inform users of differences in the methods and conventions used by primary data collectors—usually national statistical agencies, central banks, and customs services—and by international organizations, which compile the statistics that appear in the World Development Indicators database. These differences may give rise to significant discrepancies over time both within countries and across them. Delays in reporting data and the use of old surveys as the base for current estimates may further compromise the quality of data reported here. The tables in this section provide information on sources, methods, and reporting standards of the principal demographic, economic, and environmental indicators in World Development Indicators. Additional documentation is available from the World Bank’s Country Statistical Information Database at www. worldbank.org/data. The demand for good-quality statistical data is increasing. Timely and reliable statistics are key to the broad development strategy often referred to as “managing for results.” Monitoring and reporting on publicly agreed indicators are central to implementing poverty reduction strategies and lie at the heart of the Millennium Development Goals and the new Results Measurement System adopted for the 14th replenishment of the International Development Association. A global action plan to improve national and international statistics was agreed on during the Second Roundtable on Managing for Development Results in February 2004 in Marrakech, Morocco. The plan, now referred to as the Marrakech Action Plan for Statistics, or MAPS, has been widely endorsed and forms the overarching framework for statistical capacity building. The third roundtable conference, held in February 2007 in Hanoi, Vietnam, reaffirmed MAPS as the guiding strategy for improving the capacity of the national and international statistical systems. See www.mfdr.org/RT3 for reports from the conference.
2010 World Development Indicators
423
PRIMARY DATA DOCUMENTATION Currency
National accounts
SNA System of price Reference National Accounts valuation year
Base year
Afghanistan Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas, The Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Channel Islands Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Comoros Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti
424
Afghan afghani 2002/03 a Albanian lek Algerian dinar 1980 U.S. dollar Euro Angolan kwanza 1997 East Caribbean dollar 1990 Argentine peso 1993 a Armenian dram Aruban florin 1995 a Australian dollar Euro 2000 a New Azeri manat Bahamian dollar 2006 Bahraini dinar 1985 Bangladeshi taka 1995/96 Barbados dollar 1974 a Belarusian rubel Euro 2000 Belize dollar 2000 CFA franc 1985 Bermuda dollar 1996 Bhutanese ngultrum 2000 Bolivian Boliviano 1990 a Bosnia and Herzegovina convertible mark Botswana pula 1993/94 Brazilian real 2000 Brunei dollar 2000 a Bulgarian lev CFA franc Burundi franc Cambodian riel CFA franc Canadian dollar Cape Verde escudo Cayman Islands dollar CFA franc CFA franc Jersey pound and Guernsey pound Chilean peso Chinese yuan Hong Kong dollar Colombian peso Comorian franc Congolese franc CFA franc Costa Rican colon CFA franc Croatian kuna Cuban peso Euro Czech koruna Danish krone Djibouti franc
2010 World Development Indicators
1996
b
1996
b
2007
b b
2003
a
b b
b
2000
b b b
b b
1996
b
b b
2002
1999 1980 2000 2000 2000 1980 2000 1995 2007, 2003 2003 2000 2006 2000 1990 1987 1978 1991 1996
b
b
b b
b
2007
b
b b b b
b
b
1997
b
1984 a
2000 2000 1990
2000 1995
b b
Balance of payments and trade
Balance of Payments Manual in use
External debt
System of trade
Accounting concept
2005
BPM5 BPM5
Actual Actual Actual
G G S
C C B
G G G
1991–96
2005
1971–84 1990–95
2005 2005
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
1992–95
2005 2005 2005
Alternative conversion factor
VAB VAB VAB
VAP VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAP VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAP VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAP VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAP
PPP survey year
Actual Preliminary
G S G S S S G S G G G G G G S G S
S G
Actual Actual Actual
1990–95
2005 2005
1992
2005
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
1960–85
2005 2005 2005
BPM5 BPM5
Actual Actual Actual
2005 2005
1978–89, 1991–92 1992–93
VAB VAB VAB VAB VAP VAB VAB VAP VAB VAP VAB VAP VAB VAP VAB VAB VAB VAB
Government IMF data finance dissemination standard
1978–93 1992–94 1999–2001 1993
Actual
Preliminary Actual
2005 2005 2005 2005
BPM5 BPM5
Preliminary Actual
BPM5
Actual
2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005
BPM4 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
Actual Actual Actual Actual
2005 2005
2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005
C C
G G S S
C C C B C C C C C B B
S S G G G G G S S G G
C C C
G
G S G G
B C
B C C C C
G
Actual
G S G S G S
BPM4 BPM5
Preliminary Actual
S S
B
G G
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
Actual Preliminary
S S G S
C B C B
S G S S
S S S S G G G G G
C C C C C
G G S G S
C C C
S S S
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
Actual Preliminary Estimate Preliminary Actual Actual
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 Actual
C
G S G S
G G S G
PRIMARY DATA DOCUMENTATION Latest population census
Latest demographic, education, or health household survey
1979 2001 2008 2000
MICS, 2003 MICS, 2005 MICS, 2006
Afghanistan Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas, The Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina
1970 2001 2001 2001 2000 2006 2001 2009 2000 2001 2001 2000 1999 2001 2000 2002 2000 2005 2001 1991
MICS, 2001; MIS, 2006/07
Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria
Source of most recent income and expenditure data
LSMS, 2005 IHS, 1995
Vital Latest Latest registration agricultural industrial complete census data
Yes
1998 2001
2005
Yes Yes
c
IHS, 2000
1964–65
DHS, 2005
IHS, 2006 IHS, 2007
Yes Yes Yes
DHS, 2006
ES/BS, 1994 IS, 2000 ES/BS, 2005
Yes Yes Yes
DHS, 2007
IHS, 2005
MICS, 2005 MICS, 2006 DHS, 2006
ES/BS, 2007 IHS, 2000 ES/BS, 1995 CWIQ, 2003
DHS, 2008 MICS, 2006
IHS, 2003 IHS, 2007 LSMS, 2007
2001 2000 2001 2001
MICS, 2000 DHS, 1996
ES/BS, 1993/94 LFS, 2007
Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Channel Islands
2006 1990 2008 1987 2006 2000 1999 2003 1993 2001
MICS, 2006 MICS, 2005 DHS, 2005 MICS, 2006
Chile China Hong Kong SAR, China Colombia Comoros Congo, Dem. Rep. Congo, Rep. Costa Rica Côte d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti
2002 2000 2006 2005 2003 1984 1996 2000 1998 2001 2002 2001 2001 2001 2009
2002
2001
2001 1999–2000
2004 2004 2005 1997
2005
1997
Yes Yes Yes Yes
1994 1999–2000 d
2004
1992 Yes
ES/BS, 2003
MICS, 2006 DHS, 2004
CWIQ, 2003 CWIQ, 2006 IHS, 2007 PS, 2001 LFS, 2000 ES/BS, 2001
2000 1984–88
2000
1993 1996
2005 2004
Yes
Yes Yes
2005 1993 1999
Yes Yes Yes
PS, 2003 PS, 2002–03
1984 1996/2001 2004
2001
1985
Latest trade data
Latest water withdrawal data
2008 2008 2007
2000 2000 2000
2006 1991 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2005 2008 2008 2008 2008
2000 1990 2000 2000 2000 2000 2005 2003 2000 2000 2000 2000 2001 2000 2000
2008 2008 2006 2008
2000 2000
2005 2008 2004 2006 2008 2008
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
2005 1996
2000 2000
2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 1986 1995 2008 2008 2008 2006 2008 2008 2008 1998
2000 2000
2000
Yes
NSS, 2007
IHS, 2006 IHS, 2005
Yes
1997 1997
2005 2005
2001
2004
Yes DHS, 2005 MICS, 2000 DHS, 2007 DHS, 2005 RHS, 1993 MICS, 2006
IHS, 2006 IHS, 2004 1-2-3, 2005–06 CWIQ/PS, 2005 LFS, 2007 IHS, 2002 ES/BS, 2005
MICS, 2006 RHS, 1993 MICS, 2006
IS, 1996 ITR, 1997 PS, 2002
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
1990 1985–86 1973 2001 2003
2000 1999–2000
2005 2005 2004
2010 World Development Indicators
2000 2000 2002 2000
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
425
PRIMARY DATA DOCUMENTATION Currency
National accounts
Base year
Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Faeroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Polynesia Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Greenland Grenada Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland India
East Caribbean dollar 1990 Dominican peso 1991 U.S. dollar 2000 Egyptian pound 1991/92 U.S. dollar 1990 CFA franc 2000 Eritrean nakfa 1992 Estonian kroon 2000 Ethiopian birr 1999/2000 Danish krone Fijian dollar 1995 Euro 2000 a Euro CFP franc CFA franc 1991 Gambian dalasi 1987 a Georgian lari Euro 2000 New Ghanaian cedi 1975 a Euro Danish krone East Caribbean dollar 1990 U.S. dollar Guatemalan quetzal 2001 Guinean franc 1996 CFA franc 1986 Guyana dollar 1988 Haitian gourde 1986/87 Honduran lempira 2000 a Hungarian forint Iceland krona 2000 Indian rupee 1999/2000
Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Dem. Rep.
Indonesian rupiah 2000 Iranian rial 1997/98 Iraqi dinar 1997 Euro 2000 Manx pound 2005 Israeli new shekel 2005 Euro 2000 Jamaican dollar 2003 Japanese yen 2000 Jordanian dinar 1994 a Kazakh tenge Kenyan shilling 2001 Australian dollar 1991 Democratic People's Republic of Korean won Korean won 2000 Euro Kuwaiti dinar 1995 a Kyrgyz som Lao kip 1990 Latvian lats 2000 Lebanese pound 1997 Lesotho loti 1995 Liberian dollar 1992
Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia
426
2010 World Development Indicators
SNA System of price Reference National Accounts valuation year b
b
b b
b
2000
1996
b
b b
2000
VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAP VAB VAB VAB VAP VAB
Balance of payments and trade
Alternative conversion factor
Balance of Payments Manual in use
External debt
System of trade
Accounting concept
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual
G G S S S
C B B C
G G S S S
Actual
S G
B C C
G S S
2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
Preliminary Estimate Actual
C C C B C
G G G S G S
BPM5
Actual
G G G G G G S G S G G S G S G G
C C
2005 2005 2005
BPM4 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM4 BPM5 BPM5
B
G
Actual Estimate Actual Actual Preliminary Actual
S S G S G S S G G
B C
G G G
2005 2005 2005
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
B C C C
G S S S
2005 2005 2005 2005
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
Actual Actual
S G S G
C C
S
2005 2005
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
S S G G G G G G
C C C C B C B
S S G S S S G G
S
C
S
S G G S G G
C C
G S
C B C
S G G G
PPP survey year
2005 2005 1965–84
2005
1987–95
2005 2005
1993 1990–95 1973–87
VAB b
b
2000
b
b
b
VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAP VAB VAB VAB
2005 2005 1991 1988–89
1980–2002 1997, 2004
Government IMF data finance dissemination standard
Actual Actual
Actual
Actual
C
G S
2003 b b
1995
b b
VAP VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB
1987–95
2005 2005 2005 2005
Actual Actual Actual Actual
BPM5 b
1995
b
b
b
VAB VAP VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAP
1990–95 1987–95
2005
BPM5
2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
Actual Preliminary Actual Actual Actual Estimate
PRIMARY DATA DOCUMENTATION Latest population census
Latest demographic, education, or health household survey
Source of most recent income and expenditure data
Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt, Arab Rep. El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Faeroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Polynesia Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Greenland Grenada Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland India
2001 2002 2001 2006 2007 2002 1984 2000 2007
2001
DHS, 2005/06
IHS, 2004/05
Indonesia Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Dem. Rep.
2000 2006 1997 2006 2006 2008 2001 2001 2005 2004 1999 1999 2005 2008
DHS, 2007 DHS, 2000 MICS, 2006
IHS, 2007 ES/BS, 2005
Korea, Rep. Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyz Republic Lao PDR Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia
2005 1981 2005 2009 2005 2000 1970 2006 2008
Vital Latest Latest registration agricultural industrial complete census data
Yes DHS, 2007 RHS, 2004 DHS, 2008 RHS, 2008
IHS, 2005 LFS, 2005 ES/BS, 2004–05 IHS, 2007
Yes Yes
1971 1999–2000 1999–2000 1970–71
DHS, 2002 DHS, 2005
ES/BS, 2004 ES/BS, 2005
2004 2001
2001 2001–02
2005 2005 2005
Yes Yes Yes Yes
1999–2000 1999–2000
2003 2004 2004
Yes Yes
1974–75 2001–02 2004 1999–2000 1984 1999–2000
Yes
c
2007 2000 2006e 2007 2003 2003 2002 2001 2000 2001
IS, 2000 ES/BS, 1994/95 DHS, 2000 MICS, 2005/06 MICS, 2005; RHS, 2005 DHS, 2008
CWIQ/IHS, 2005 IHS, 2003 IHS, 2007 IHS, 2000 LSMS, 2006 IHS, 2000
c
2001 2000 2002 1996 2009 2002 2003 2001 2001
RHS, 2002 DHS, 2005 MICS, 2006 MICS, 2006 DHS, 2005/06 DHS, 2005/06
LSMS, 2006 CWIQ, 2003 CWIQ, 2002 IHS, 1998 IHS, 2001 IHS, 2006 ES/BS, 2004
c
IHS, 2000
MICS 2005 DHS, 2007 MICS, 2006 DHS, 2003; SPA, 2004
ES/BS, 2001 ES/BS, 2000 LSMS, 2004 IS, 1993 ES/BS, 2006 ES/BS, 2007 IHS, 2005–06
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2005 2004 2002 2003
2003 2000–01 1988 1971 1993 2000 1995–96/ 2000–01 2003 2003 1981 2000
Latest trade data
2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2003 2008 2008 2005 2007 2008 2008 2008 2006 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 2008
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2005 2000 2000 2000
2004 2004 2003
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
2004 2004 1996 2004
2008 2006 2008 2008
2000 2004 2000 2000
2004 2004
2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2005
2004 2000 2000 2000 2005 2000 2003
1981 2000 1996 2000 1997
2004 2005
1977–79
2005
Yes
2000 ES/BS, 1998
MICS, 2000 DHS, 2004 DHS, 2007; MIS, 2008/09
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2004 2000 2002
2008 2008 2005 2008 1997 2007 2008 2008 2008
MICS, 2000
FHS, 1996 MICS 2005/06 MICS, 2006
Latest water withdrawal data
ES/BS, 2007 ES/BS, 2002–03 IHS, 2007 ES/BS, 2002–03 CWIQ, 2007
Yes
2000
2005
Yes Yes
1970 2002 1998–99 2001 1998–99 1999–2000
2004 1998 2005 1997
Yes
2008
2000
2007 2007 1975 2008 2008 2004 1985
2002 2000 2000 2000 2005 2000 2000
2010 World Development Indicators
427
PRIMARY DATA DOCUMENTATION Currency
National accounts
Base year
Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macau SAR, China Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta
Libyan dinar 1999 Swiss franc Lithuanian litas 2000 Euro Macao pataca 2002 Macedonian denar 1997 Malagasy ariary 1984 Malawi kwacha 1994 Malaysian ringgit 2000 Maldivian rufiyaa 1995 CFA franc 1987 Euro (data reported 1973 in Maltese liri) Marshall Islands U.S. dollar 1991 Mauritania Mauritanian ouguiya 1998 Mauritius Mauritian rupee 2006 Mayotte Euro Mexico Mexican peso 2003 Micronesia, Fed. Sts. U.S. dollar 1998 a Moldova Moldovan leu Monaco Euro Mongolia Mongolian tugrik 2005 Montenegro Euro 2000 Morocco Moroccan dirham 1998 Mozambique New Mozambican 2003 metical Myanmar Myanmar kyat 1985/86 Namibia Namibian dollar 2004/05 Nepal Nepalese rupee 2000/01 Netherlands Antilles Netherlands Antilles guilder a Netherlands Euro New Caledonia CFP franc New Zealand New Zealand dollar 2000/01 Nicaragua Nicaraguan gold 1994 cordoba Niger CFA franc 1987 Nigeria Nigerian naira 2002 Northern Mariana Islands U.S. dollar a Norway Norwegian krone Oman Rial Omani 1988 Pakistan Pakistani rupee 1999/2000 Palau U.S. dollar 1995 Panama Panamanian balboa 1996 Papua New Guinea Papua New Guinea kina 1998 Paraguay Paraguayan guarani 1994 Peru Peruvian new sol 1994 Philippines Philippine peso 1985 a Poland Polish zloty Portugal Euro 2000 Puerto Rico U.S. dollar 1954 Qatar Qatari riyal 2001 a Romania New Romanian leu Russian Federation Rwanda Samoa
428
Russian ruble Rwandan franc Samoan tala
2010 World Development Indicators
2000 1995 2002
SNA System of price Reference National Accounts valuation year
b
2000 1995
b
VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAP VAB VAB VAB
Balance of payments and trade
Alternative conversion factor
1986 1990–95
1996
b
b b
b
2000
b
b
2000
b
b
b
2002
b b
2005
b
b
VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB
Balance of Payments Manual in use
External debt
BPM5
Accounting concept
G S G S G G S G G G G G
G
C C B C
G S
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM4 BPM5
2005 2005
BPM4 BPM5
Actual Actual
G G
C
G G
2005
BPM5
Actual
G
C
S
1990–95
2005
BPM5
Actual
G
C
S
BPM5
Estimate Actual Actual Actual
S
C
G
S S
C
1992–95
2005 2005 2005 2005
S G
G G S S
C B C
G G
C
S
C B
G
BPM5 BPM5
Actual
System of trade
2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005
VAB VAB VAB b
PPP survey year
Government IMF data finance dissemination standard
Actual Actual Actual Estimate Actual Actual
C
S S G G G G S
VAP VAB VAB
2005 2005
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
VAB
2005
BPM5
2005
BPM5 BPM5
Actual
S S G S
2005 2005
BPM5 BPM5
Preliminary Preliminary
S G
2005 2005 2005
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
Actual
G G G
C B C
S G G
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual
C B C C B C C
G S S S S
2005 2005
BPM5
Actual
S G S S G S S G G S
G
2005 2005 2005 2005 2005
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
B C
G S
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
Preliminary Estimate Preliminary
G G G
C C
S G
VAB VAB
1965–95
VAP VAB
1993 1971–98
VAB VAP VAB VAB VAB VAB VAP VAB VAP VAB VAB VAP VAP VAB VAB VAP VAB
1989 1985–90
1987–89, 1992 1987–95 1994
2005 2005
Estimate
C C C
Actual
G G
PRIMARY DATA DOCUMENTATION Latest population census
Latest demographic, education, or health household survey
Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macau SAR, China Macedonia, FYR Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta
1995 2000 2001 2001 2006 2002 1993 2008 2000 2006 1998 2005
MICS, 2000
Marshall Islands Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia, Fed. Sts. Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique
1999 2000 2000 2007 2005 2000 2004 2008 2000 2003 2004 2007
Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands Antilles
1983 2001 2001 2001
Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua
2001 2009 2006 2005
Niger Nigeria Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Samoa
Source of most recent income and expenditure data
2001 ES/BS, 2004
MICS, 2005 DHS, 2003/04 MICS 2006 MICS, 2001 DHS, 2006
Vital Latest Latest registration agricultural industrial complete census data
ES/BS, 2006 PS, 2005 LSMS, 2004–05 ES/BS, 2004
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
1994 2004 1993
Yes Yes
IHS, 2006 Yes
MICS, 2007
2003 1999–2000d
IHS, 2000
1984 2001
2005 2004 2000 2005 2000 2004
2004
1984–85 Yes
Latest water withdrawal data
2004
2000
2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008
2000
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
1999
2008 2008 2007 2008
2000
2003 1991
Latest trade data
2000 2003
ENPF, 1995
LFS, 2008
DHS, 2005
ES/BS, 2007
Yes
2004
2008
2000
MICS, 2005 MICS, 2005/06 MICS, 2006 DHS, 2003
LSMS, 2006–08 ES/BS, 2007 ES/BS, 2007 ES/BS, 2002/03
Yes Yes
1999
2007
2000
2005
2008 2008
2000 2000
MICS, 2000 DHS, 2006/07 DHS, 2006
ES/BS, 1993/94 LSMS, 2003/04
2001 2008 2002 2008
2000 2000 2000 2000
2008 2008 2008 2007
2000 2000
2008 2008
2000 2000
1996 1999–2000 2003 1996–97 2002
2001
Yes IHS, 1999
RHS, 2006/07
IS, 1997 LSMS, 2005
2001 2006 2000 2001 2003 1998 2005 2000 2000 2002 2007 2007 2002 2001 2000 2004 2002
DHS/MICS, 2006 DHS, 2008
QWIC/PS, 2005 IHS, 2003–04
RHS, 1999
LFS, 2007
2002 2002 2006
RHS, 1996 DHS, 2007/08
IHS, 2007 IHS, 2000
IS, 2000 FHS, 1995 DHS, 2006/07
Yes Yes Yes
1999–2000 d 2002 2001
2004 2003
1980 1960 Yes
LSMS, 2004/05
1999 1978–79 2000
2003 2005
2008 2008 2008
2000 2003 2000
2001
2000
2006 2004 2004 2004
2008 2004 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
2005 2005
2008 2008
2005 2000
2005 1998
2008 2008 2008
2000 2000
Yes LSMS, 2003 DHS, 1996 RHS, 2004 DHS, 2007/08 DHS, 2008
LFS, 2006 IHS, 1996 IHS, 2007 LSMS, 2007 ES/BS, 2006 ES/BS, 2005 IS, 1997
RHS, 1995/96
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
1991 1994 2002 1996/2002 1999 1997/2002 2000–01 2002 1994–95 1984 1999
2010 World Development Indicators
429
PRIMARY DATA DOCUMENTATION Currency
National accounts
SNA System of price Reference National Accounts valuation year
Base year
San Marino São Tomé and Príncipe
Euro 1995 São Tomé and 2001 Principe dobra Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabian riyal 1999 Senegal CFA franc 1999 a Serbia Serbian dinar Seychelles Seychelles rupee 1986 Sierra Leone Sierra Leonean leone 1990 Singapore Singapore dollar 2000 Slovak Republic Euro 2000 a Slovenia Euro Solomon Islands Solomon Islands dollar 2004 Somalia Somali shilling 1985 South Africa South African rand 2000 Spain Euro 2000 Sri Lanka Sri Lankan rupee 2002 St. Kitts and Nevis East Caribbean dollar 1990 St. Lucia East Caribbean dollar 1990 St. Vincent & Grenadines East Caribbean dollar 1990 Sudan Sudanese pound 1981/82f Suriname Suriname dollar 1990 Swaziland Swaziland lilangeni 2000 a Sweden Swedish krona Switzerland Swiss franc 2000 Syrian Arab Republic Syrian pound 2000 a Tajikistan Tajik somoni Tanzania Tanzanian shilling 1992 Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, RB Vietnam Virgin Islands (U.S.) West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe
430
Thai baht U.S. dollar CFA franc Tongan pa'anga Trinidad and Tobago dollar Tunisian dinar New Turkish lira New Turkmen manat
1988 2000 1978 2000/01 2000
Ugandan shilling Ukrainian hryvnia U.A.E. dirham Pound sterling U.S. dollar Uruguayan peso Uzbek sum Vanuatu vatu Venezuelan bolivar fuerte Vietnamese dong U.S. dollar Israeli new shekel Yemeni rial Zambian kwacha Zimbabwe dollar
2001/02
2010 World Development Indicators
2000
1987 2002
b
b b
b b
1995 2000
b b
b b
b
1996 b
2000
2000
b
b
1990 1998 a
a
2007
b
2003
b
1995 2000 a
b
2000
2005 a
1997
b
1983 1997 1994 1982 1997 1990 1994 1990
b
Balance of payments and trade
Alternative conversion factor
VAB VAP VAP VAB VAB VAP VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAP VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB
VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAB VAP VAB
Balance of Payments Manual in use
2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005
BPM4 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
1977–90 2005 2005 2005
1970–2008 1990–95
1987–95
System of trade
Accounting concept
S S
C
Preliminary
Actual Actual Actual Preliminary
Actual Estimate Preliminary
G S S G S G G S
B C C B C C C
G G G S G S S S
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
Preliminary Actual
2005
BPM5
Estimate
G
C
S
2005
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
Actual Actual
S
B
S
C
G G G
2005 2005
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
Actual Actual Estimate
G S G
C B
S S
2005 2005
Actual Actual
Actual Actual Estimate Actual
G G G G G S G
B C C C C C
G S G S S S
2005
BPM5 BPM5 BPM4 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
C C
G G
C
G
B B B C
G G G G
2005 2005 2005 1990–95
Actual Preliminary Actual Preliminary Actual Preliminary
G
VAP
1991
2005
BPM4
Estimate
G G
VAB VAP VAB VAB
1990–96 1990–92 1991, 1998
2005 2005 2005
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
Actual Preliminary Actual
G G G
C C B C
G G
2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005
1987–95, 1997–2007
BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5 BPM5
External debt
G S G G G G G G G G S S G S
2005
VAP VAP VAP VAB VAB VAP VAB VAB
PPP survey year
Government IMF data finance dissemination standard
C B C C C C C
S S G G G G G G G S S G G G
PRIMARY DATA DOCUMENTATION Latest population census
San Marino São Tomé and Príncipe
Latest demographic, education, or health household survey
Source of most recent income and expenditure data
c
Vital Latest Latest registration agricultural industrial complete census data
PS, 2000–01
2004 2002 2002 2002 2004 2000 2001 2002 1999 1987 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2008 2004 2007
Demographic survey, 2007 DHS, 2005; MIS, 2008–09 MICS, 2005–06
Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tonga Trinidad and Tobago
2000 2004 1981 2006 2000
Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan
DHS, 2008 General household, 2005
MICS, 2006 DHS, 2003 DHS, 1987
MICS-PAPFAM, 2006 MICS, 2000 DHS, 2006/07 c
MICS, 2006 MICS, 2005 DHS, 2004/05; AIS, 2007/08 MICS, 2005/06 DGHS, 2003 MICS, 2006
2008 1999 1998–99
PS, 2005 Yes Yes IHS, 2003 IS, 1996 ES/BS, 2004
2000 2004 2000 2002
Latest water withdrawal data
Yes
2001
Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovak Republic Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia St. Vincent & Grenadines Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania
Latest trade data
ES/BS, 2000 IHS, 2000 ES/BS, 2002
1998 1984–85
Yes Yes Yes
2001 2000
2005 2004 2005
Yes Yes
2000 1999 2002
2005 2004 2005
IHS, 1995
Yes Yes
ES/BS, 1999 ES/BS, 2000/01 IS, 2000 ES/BS, 2000
Yes
2000
Yes Yes
LSMS, 2004 ES/BS, 2000/01 IHS, 2004 LSMS, 2007 CWIQ, 2006
2003 1999–2000 2000 1981 1994 2002–03 2003
Yes Yes
MICS, 2006
IHS, 1992
2004 2000 1995
MICS, 2006 DHS, 2003 MICS,2006
IHS, 2000 LFS, 2006 LSMS, 1998
Yes
Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, RB
2002 2001 2005 2001 2000 2004 1989 2009 2001
DHS, 2006; SPA, 2007 DHS, 2007
PS, 2005 ES/BS, 2008
Yes
Vietnam Virgin Islands (U.S.) West Bank and Gaza Yemen, Rep. Zambia Zimbabwe
2009 2000 2007 2004 2000 2002
MICS, 2006
IS, 1999 LFS, 2000 IHS, 2007 ES/BS, 2003
Yes Yes Yes Yes
MICS, 2000
IHS, 2003
Yes
MICS, 2006
IHS, 2006
CPS (monthly)
2005 2001
2004
1999
1996 2001 2004
2005
2004 2001
2000
1991
2001
1998 1999–2000d 1997/2002 2000
2004 2004 2004
2006 2002 2003 2000
2003 2000 2000 2000
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2003 2000 2002
2008 2005 2007 2007 2008
2000
2008 2008 2000
2000 2003 2000
2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008
2002 2000
2000 2005 2000 2000 2000 2000
2007 2008
1997 2001
2007 2008 2008 2008 2002 2008 2008 2008 2007 1982 2008 2008 2008 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2007 2008 2008 2007 2000 2007
1999
2008
2000
2005
2008 2008 2008
2000 2000 2002
Yes PAPFAM, 2006 MICS, 2006 DHS, 2007 DHS, 2005/06
ES/BS, 2005 IHS, 2004–05
1971 2002 1990 1960
1995
Note: For explanation of the abbreviations used in the table see notes following the table. a. Original chained constant price data are rescaled. b. Country uses the 1993 System of National Accounts methodology. c. Register based. d. Conducted annually. e. Rolling. f. Reporting period switch from fiscal year to calendar year from 1996. Pre-1996 data converted to calendar year.
2010 World Development Indicators
431
Primary data documentation notes • Base year is the base or pricing period used for
element of staff estimation, and estimate that data
The preliminary results from the very recent censuses
constant price calculations in the country’s national
are World Bank staff estimates. • System of trade
could be reflected in timely revisions if basic data are
accounts. Price indexes derived from national
refers to the United Nations general trade system (G)
available, such as population by age and sex, as well
accounts aggregates, such as the implicit deflator for
or special trade system (S). Under the general trade
as the detailed definition of counting, coverage, and
gross domestic product (GDP), express the price level
system goods entering directly for domestic con-
completeness. Countries that hold register-based
relative to base year prices. • Reference year is the
sumption and goods entered into customs storage
censuses produce similar census tables every 5 or
year in which the local currency, constant price series
are recorded as imports at arrival. Under the special
10 years. Germany’s 2001 census is a register-based
of a country is valued. The reference year is usually
trade system goods are recorded as imports when
test census using a sample of 1.2 percent of the
the same as the base year used to report the con-
declared for domestic consumption whether at time
population. A rare case, France has been conducting
stant price series. However, when the constant price
of entry or on withdrawal from customs storage.
a rolling census every year since 2004; the 1999
data are chain linked, the base year is changed annu-
Exports under the general system comprise outward-
general population census was the last to cover the
ally, so the data are rescaled to a specific reference
moving goods: (a) national goods wholly or partly
entire population simultaneously (www.insee.fr/en/
year to provide a consistent time series. When the
produced in the country; (b) foreign goods, neither
recensement/page_accueil_rp.htm). • Latest demo-
country has not rescaled following a change in base
transformed nor declared for domestic consumption
graphic, education, or health household survey indi-
year, World Bank staff rescale the data to maintain a
in the country, that move outward from customs stor-
cates the household surveys used to compile the
longer historical series. To allow for cross-country
age; and (c) nationalized goods that have been
demographic, education, and health data in sec-
comparison and data aggregation, constant price
declared for domestic consumption and move out-
tion 2. AIS is HIV/AIDS Indicator Survey, CPS is Cur-
data reported in World Development Indicators are
ward without being transformed. Under the special
rent Population Survey, DGHS is Demographic and
rescaled to a common reference year (2000) and cur-
system of trade, exports are categories a and c. In
General Health Survey, DHS is Demographic and
rency (U.S. dollars). • System of National Accounts
some compilations categories b and c are classified
Health Survey, ENPF is National Family Planning Sur-
identifies countries that use the 1993 System of
as re-exports. Direct transit trade—goods entering
vey (Encuesta Nacional de Planificacion Familiar),
National Accounts (1993 SNA), the terminology
or leaving for transport only—is excluded from both
FHS is Family Health Survey, LSMS is Living Stan-
applied in World Development Indicators since 2001,
import and export statistics. See About the data for
dards Measurement Survey, MICS is Multiple Indica-
to compile national accounts. Although more coun-
tables 4.4, 4.5, and 6.2 for further discussion. • Gov-
tor Cluster Survey, MIS is Malaria Indicator Survey,
tries are adopting the 1993 SNA, many still follow the
ernment finance accounting concept is the account-
NSS is National Sample Survey on Population Change,
1968 SNA, and some low-income countries use con-
ing basis for reporting central government financial
PAPFAM is Pan Arab Project for Family Health, RHS is
cepts from the 1953 SNA. • SNA price valuation
data. For most countries government finance data
Reproductive Health Survey, and SPA is Service Provi-
shows whether value added in the national accounts
have been consolidated (C) into one set of accounts
sion Assessments. Detailed information for AIS,
is reported at basic prices (VAB) or producer prices
capturing all central government fiscal activities. Bud-
DHS, MIS, and SPA are available at www.measuredhs.
(VAP). Producer prices include taxes paid by produc-
getary central government accounts (B) exclude some
com/aboutsurveys; for MICS at www.childinfo.org;
ers and thus tend to overstate the actual value added
central government units. See About the data for
and for RHS at www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/sur-
in production. However, VAB can be higher than VAP
tables 4.10, 4.11, and 4.12 for further details. • IMF
veys. • Source of most recent income and expendi-
in countries with high agricultural subsidies. See
data dissemination standard shows the countries
ture data shows household surveys that collect
About the data for tables 4.1 and 4.2 for further dis-
that subscribe to the IMF’s Special Data Dissemina-
income and expenditure data. Names and detailed
cussion of national accounts valuation. • Alternative
tion Standard (SDDS) or General Data Dissemination
information on household surveys can be found on
conversion factor identifies the countries and years
System (GDDS). S refers to countries that subscribe
the website of the International Household Survey
for which a World Bank–estimated conversion factor
to the SDDS and have posted data on the Dissemina-
Network (www.surveynetwork.org). Core Welfare Indi-
has been used in place of the official exchange rate
tion Standards Bulletin Board at http://dsbb.imf.org.
cator Questionnaire Surveys (CWIQ), developed by
(line rf in the International Monetary Fund’s [IMF]
G refers to countries that subscribe to the GDDS. The
the World Bank, measure changes in key social indi-
International Financial Statistics). See Statistical meth-
SDDS was established for member countries that
cators for different population groups—specifically
ods for further discussion of alternative conversion
have or might seek access to international capital
indicators of access, utilization, and satisfaction with
factors. • Purchasing power parity (PPP) survey year
markets to guide them in providing their economic
core social and economic services. Expenditure sur-
is the latest available survey year for the International
and financial data to the public. The GDDS helps
vey/budget surveys (ES/BS) collect detailed informa-
Comparison Program’s estimates of PPPs. See About
countries disseminate comprehensive, timely, acces-
tion on household consumption as well as on general
the data for table 1.1 for a more detailed description
sible, and reliable economic, financial, and socio-
demographic, social, and economic characteristics.
of PPPs. • Balance of Payments Manual in use refers
demographic statistics. IMF member countries elect
Integrated household surveys (IHS) collect detailed
to the classification system used to compile and
to participate in either the SDDS or the GDDS. Both
information on a wide variety of topics, including
report data on balance of payments items in table
standards enhance the availability of timely and com-
health, education, economic activities, housing, and
4.15. BPM4 refers to the 4th edition of the IMF’s
prehensive data and therefore contribute to the pur-
utilities. Income surveys (IS) collect information on
Balance of Payments Manual (1977), and BPM5 to the
suit of sound macroeconomic policies. The SDDS is
the income and wealth of households as well as vari-
5th edition (1993). • External debt shows debt
also expected to improve the functioning of financial
ous social and economic characteristics. Labor force
reporting status for 2008 data. Actual indicates that
markets. • Latest population census shows the most
surveys (LFS) collect information on employment,
data are as reported, preliminary that data are based
recent year in which a census was conducted and in
unemployment, hours of work, income, and wages.
on reported or collected information but include an
which at least preliminary results have been released.
Living Standards Measurement Studies (LSMS),
432
2010 World Development Indicators
Primary data documentation notes developed by the World Bank, provide a comprehen-
national accounts and balance of payments data
Revisions to national accounts data
sive picture of household welfare and the factors that
using calendar years, but some use fiscal years. In
National accounts data are revised by national sta-
affect it; they typically incorporate data collection at
World Development Indicators fiscal year data are
tistical offices when methodologies change or data
the individual, household, and community levels. Pri-
assigned to the calendar year that contains the larger
sources improve. National accounts data in World
ority surveys (PS) are a light monitoring survey,
share of the fiscal year. If a country’s fiscal year ends
Development Indicators are also revised when data
designed by the World Bank, for collecting data from
before June 30, data are shown in the first year of
sources change. The following notes, while not com-
a large number of households cost-effectively and
the fiscal period; if the fiscal year ends on or after
prehensive, provide information on revisions from
quickly. Income tax registers (ITR) provide information
June 30, data are shown in the second year of the
previous data.
on a population’s income and allowance, such as
period. Balance of payments data are reported in
• Antigua and Barbuda. The government has
gross income, taxable income, and taxes by socio-
World Development Indicators by calendar year and
revised national accounts data for 1998–2008.
economic group. 1-2-3 surveys (1-2-3) are imple-
so are not comparable to the national accounts data
• Bahamas. The government has revised national
mented in three phases and collect sociodemographic
of the countries that report their national accounts
accounts data for 1997–2007. The new base year
and employment data, data on the informal sector,
on a fiscal year basis.
is 2006. • Belize. The government has revised
and information on living conditions and household consumption. • Vital registration complete identifies
national accounts data for 1991–2008. • BerEconomies with exceptional reporting periods
countries judged to have at least 90 percent complete registries of vital (birth and death) statistics by the United Nations Statistics Division and reported in Population and Vital Statistics Reports. Countries with complete vital statistics registries may have more accurate and more timely demographic indicators than other countries. • Latest agricultural census shows the most recent year in which an agricultural census was conducted and reported to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Economy
Fiscal year end
Reporting period for national accounts data
Afghanistan
Mar. 20
FY
Australia
Jun. 30
FY
Bangladesh
Jun. 30
FY
Botswana
Jun. 30
FY
Canada
Mar. 31
CY
Egypt, Arab Rep.
Jun. 30
FY
Jul. 7
FY
Ethiopia
muda. The Statistical Offi ce has revised national accounts data for 1996–2007. • Croatia. The Statistical Bureau has revised main GDP aggregates for 1995–2005. • Guatemala. The government has revised national accounts data to conform to the 1993 SNA methodology. The new base year is 2001. • Haiti. The government has revised national accounts data following changes in the methodology. Current price series since 1991 and constant price series since 1996 have been revised. The new base year is 1986/87. • Kiribati. The government
• Latest industrial data show the most recent year
Gambia, The
Jun. 30
CY
statistical office has revised national accounts data
for which manufacturing value added data at the
Haiti
Sep. 30
FY
for 1970–2008. • Lebanon. The government has
three-digit level of the International Standard Indus-
India
Mar. 31
FY
revised national accounts data for 1997–2007.
trial Classification (ISIC, revision 2 or 3) are available
Indonesia
Mar. 31
CY
The new base year is 1997. • Maldives. National
in the United Nations Industrial Development Organi-
Iran, Islamic Rep.
Mar. 20
FY
accounts data for 2001–08 have been revised to
zation database. • Latest trade data show the most
Japan
Mar. 31
CY
refl ect a change in source from the Asian Develop-
recent year for which structure of merchandise trade
Kenya
Jun. 30
CY
ment Bank to the Maldives Planning Department.
data from the United Nations Statistics Division’s
Kuwait
Jun. 30
CY
• Mauritius. National accounts now refl ect fiscal
Lesotho
Mar. 31
CY
year data rather than calendar year data. The new
Malawi
Mar. 31
CY
Myanmar
Mar. 31
FY
Namibia
Mar. 31
CY
Nepal
Jul. 14
FY
New Zealand
Mar. 31
FY
Pakistan
Jun. 30
FY
the calendar year. Exceptions are shown in the table
Puerto Rico
Jun. 30
FY
has revised national accounts data for 1998–2008.
at right. The ending date reported here is for the fis-
Sierra Leone
Jun. 30
CY
• Uruguay. The government has revised national
cal year of the central government. Fiscal years for
Singapore
Mar. 31
CY
accounts data for 1997–2008. The new base year
other levels of government and reporting years for
South Africa
Mar. 31
CY
is 2005.
statistical surveys may differ. And some countries
Swaziland
Mar. 31
CY
that follow a fiscal year report their national accounts
Sweden
Jun. 30
CY
Changes to national currencies
data on a calendar year basis as shown in the report-
Thailand
Sep. 30
CY
• Slovak Republic. On January 1, 2009, the euro
ing period column.
Uganda
Jun. 30
FY
replaced the Slovak koruna as the Slovak Repub-
United States
Sep. 30
CY
lic’s currency. • Turkmenistan. On January 1, 2009,
Zimbabwe
Jun. 30
CY
Commodity Trade (Comtrade) database are available. • Latest water withdrawal data show the most recent year for which data on freshwater withdrawals have been compiled from a variety of sources. See About the data for table 3.5 for more information. Exceptional reporting periods In most economies the fi scal year is concurrent with
The reporting period for national accounts data is designated as either calendar year basis (CY) or fiscal year basis (FY). Most economies report their
base year is 2006. • Micronesia, Fed. Sts. The government statistical offi ce has revised national accounts data for 1995–2008. • Namibia. The government has revised national accounts data since 2000. The new base year is 2004/05. • Serbia. The Statistical Bureau has revised current and constant GDP for 1997–2006. • St. Lucia. The government
the Turkmen manat was redenominated (1 new manat = 5,000 old manats).
2010 World Development Indicators
433
STATISTICAL METHODS This section describes some of the statistical procedures used in preparing World
indicator as a weight) and denoted by a u when calculated as unweighted
Development Indicators. It covers the methods employed for calculating regional
averages. The aggregate ratios are based on available data, including data
and income group aggregates and for calculating growth rates, and it describes the
for economies not shown in the main tables. Missing values are assumed
World Bank Atlas method for deriving the conversion factor used to estimate gross
to have the same average value as the available data. No aggregate is cal-
national income (GNI) and GNI per capita in U.S. dollars. Other statistical procedures
culated if missing data account for more than a third of the value of weights
and calculations are described in the About the data sections following each table.
in the benchmark year. In a few cases the aggregate ratio may be computed as the ratio of group totals after imputing values for missing data according to the above rules for computing totals.
Aggregation rules Aggregates based on the World Bank’s regional and income classifications of econo-
•
Aggregate growth rates are denoted by a w when calculated as a weighted
mies appear at the end of most tables. The countries included in these classifica-
average of growth rates. In a few cases growth rates may be computed from
tions are shown on the flaps on the front and back covers of the book. Most tables
time series of group totals. Growth rates are not calculated if more than half
also include the aggregate euro area. This aggregate includes the member states of
the observations in a period are missing. For further discussion of methods of computing growth rates see below.
the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) of the European Union that have adopted the euro as their currency: Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany,
•
Aggregates denoted by an m are medians of the values shown in the table.
Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovak Republic,
No value is shown if more than half the observations for countries with a
Slovenia, and Spain. Other classifications, such as the European Union and regional
population of more than 1 million are missing.
trade blocs, are documented in About the data for the tables in which they appear.
Exceptions to the rules occur throughout the book. Depending on the judg-
Because of missing data, aggregates for groups of economies should be
ment of World Bank analysts, the aggregates may be based on as little as 50
treated as approximations of unknown totals or average values. Regional and
percent of the available data. In other cases, where missing or excluded values
income group aggregates are based on the largest available set of data, including
are judged to be small or irrelevant, aggregates are based only on the data
values for the 154 economies shown in the main tables, other economies shown
shown in the tables.
in table 1.6, and Taiwan, China. The aggregation rules are intended to yield estimates for a consistent set of economies from one period to the next and for all
Growth rates
indicators. Small differences between sums of subgroup aggregates and overall
Growth rates are calculated as annual averages and represented as percentages.
totals and averages may occur because of the approximations used. In addition,
Except where noted, growth rates of values are computed from constant price
compilation errors and data reporting practices may cause discrepancies in theo-
series. Three principal methods are used to calculate growth rates: least squares,
retically identical aggregates such as world exports and world imports.
exponential endpoint, and geometric endpoint. Rates of change from one period
Five methods of aggregation are used in World Development Indicators: •
to the next are calculated as proportional changes from the earlier period.
For group and world totals denoted in the tables by a t, missing data are imputed based on the relationship of the sum of available data to the total
Least squares growth rate. Least squares growth rates are used wherever
in the year of the previous estimate. The imputation process works forward
there is a sufficiently long time series to permit a reliable calculation. No growth
and backward from 2000. Missing values in 2000 are imputed using one of
rate is calculated if more than half the observations in a period are missing.
several proxy variables for which complete data are available in that year. The
The least squares growth rate, r, is estimated by fitting a linear regression trend
imputed value is calculated so that it (or its proxy) bears the same relation-
line to the logarithmic annual values of the variable in the relevant period. The
ship to the total of available data. Imputed values are usually not calculated
regression equation takes the form
if missing data account for more than a third of the total in the benchmark year. The variables used as proxies are GNI in U.S. dollars, total population,
ln Xt = a + bt
exports and imports of goods and services in U.S. dollars, and value added in agriculture, industry, manufacturing, and services in U.S. dollars. •
Aggregates marked by an s are sums of available data. Missing values are
which is the logarithmic transformation of the compound growth equation, Xt = Xo (1 + r ) t.
not imputed. Sums are not computed if more than a third of the observations •
in the series or a proxy for the series are missing in a given year.
In this equation X is the variable, t is time, and a = ln Xo and b = ln (1 + r) are
Aggregates of ratios are denoted by a w when calculated as weighted averages
parameters to be estimated. If b* is the least-squares estimate of b, then the
of the ratios (using the value of the denominator or, in some cases, another
average annual growth rate, r, is obtained as [exp(b*) – 1] and is multiplied by 100
434
2010 World Development Indicators
for expression as a percentage. The calculated growth rate is an average rate that
The inflation rate for Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the
is representative of the available observations over the entire period. It does not
euro area, representing international inflation, is measured by the change in the
necessarily match the actual growth rate between any two periods.
“SDR deflator.” (Special drawing rights, or SDRs, are the International Monetary Fund’s unit of account.) The SDR deflator is calculated as a weighted average of
Exponential growth rate. The growth rate between two points in time for cer-
these countries’ GDP deflators in SDR terms, the weights being the amount of
tain demographic indicators, notably labor force and population, is calculated
each country’s currency in one SDR unit. Weights vary over time because both
from the equation
the composition of the SDR and the relative exchange rates for each currency change. The SDR deflator is calculated in SDR terms first and then converted r = ln(pn/p 0)/n
to U.S. dollars using the SDR to dollar Atlas conversion factor. The Atlas conversion factor is then applied to a country’s GNI. The resulting GNI in U.S. dollars is
where pn and p0 are the last and first observations in the period, n is the number
divided by the midyear population to derive GNI per capita.
of years in the period, and ln is the natural logarithm operator. This growth rate is
When official exchange rates are deemed to be unreliable or unrepresenta-
based on a model of continuous, exponential growth between two points in time.
tive of the effective exchange rate during a period, an alternative estimate of the
It does not take into account the intermediate values of the series. Nor does it
exchange rate is used in the Atlas formula (see below).
correspond to the annual rate of change measured at a one-year interval, which
The following formulas describe the calculation of the Atlas conversion factor for year t:
is given by (pn – pn–1)/pn–1. Geometric growth rate. The geometric growth rate is applicable to compound growth over discrete periods, such as the payment and reinvestment of interest or dividends. Although continuous growth, as modeled by the exponential growth rate, may be more realistic, most economic phenomena are measured only at intervals, in which case the compound growth model is appropriate. The average
and the calculation of GNI per capita in U.S. dollars for year t:
growth rate over n periods is calculated as Yt$ = (Yt /Nt)/et*
r = exp[ln(pn/p 0)/n] – 1. where et* is the Atlas conversion factor (national currency to the U.S. dollar) for
Like the exponential growth rate, it does not take into account intermediate
year t, et is the average annual exchange rate (national currency to the U.S. dollar)
values of the series.
for year t, pt is the GDP deflator for year t, ptS$ is the SDR deflator in U.S. dollar terms for year t, Yt$ is the Atlas GNI per capita in U.S. dollars in year t, Yt is current
World Bank Atlas method
GNI (local currency) for year t, and Nt is the midyear population for year t.
In calculating GNI and GNI per capita in U.S. dollars for certain operational purposes, the World Bank uses the Atlas conversion factor. The purpose of the
Alternative conversion factors
Atlas conversion factor is to reduce the impact of exchange rate fluctuations in
The World Bank systematically assesses the appropriateness of official exchange
the cross-country comparison of national incomes.
rates as conversion factors. An alternative conversion factor is used when the
The Atlas conversion factor for any year is the average of a country’s exchange
official exchange rate is judged to diverge by an exceptionally large margin from
rate (or alternative conversion factor) for that year and its exchange rates for
the rate effectively applied to domestic transactions of foreign currencies and
the two preceding years, adjusted for the difference between the rate of infla-
traded products. This applies to only a small number of countries, as shown
tion in the country and that in Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States,
in Primary data documentation. Alternative conversion factors are used in the
and the euro area. A country’s inflation rate is measured by the change in its
Atlas methodology and elsewhere in World Development Indicators as single-year
GDP deflator.
conversion factors.
2010 World Development Indicators
435
CREDITS 1. World view
Nations; Ricardo Quercioli of the International Energy Agency; Amy Cassara, Chris-
Section 1 was prepared by a team led by Eric Swanson. Sarwar Lateef and Eric
tian Layke, Daniel Prager, and Robin White of the World Resources Institute; Laura
Swanson wrote the introduction with input from Sulekha Patel, Uranbileg Batjargal,
Battlebury of the World Conservation Monitoring Centre; and Gerhard Metchies of
and Masako Hiraga. Bhaskar Naidu Kalimili coordinated tables 1.1 and 1.6. Shota
German Technical Cooperation (GTZ). The World Bank’s Environment Department
Hatakeyama, Mehdi Akhlagi, Raymond Muhula, and Masako Hiraga prepared
devoted substantial staff resources to the book, for which the team is very grateful.
tables 1.2, 1.3, and 1.5. Uranbileg Batjargal prepared table 1.4, with valuable
Mehdi Akhlaghi wrote the introduction with valuable comments from Sarwar Lateef,
assistance from Azita Amjadi. Yuri Dikhanov and the International Comparison
Bruce Ross-Larson, and Eric Swanson. Other contributions were made by Susmita
Program team provided the new estimates of purchasing power parities (PPP), and
Dasgupta, Kirk Hamilton, Craig Meisner, Brian Blankespoor, Olivier Dupriz, Akiko
Sup Lee prepared the special PPP table. Changqing Sun prepared the estimates of
Saesaka, Kiran Pandey, Giovanni Ruta, and Lopamudra Chakraborti.
gross national income in PPP terms. Luca Bandiera of the World Bank’s Economic Policy and Debt Department provided the estimates of debt relief for the Heavily
4. Economy
Indebted Poor Countries Debt Initiative and Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative.
Section 4 was prepared by Bala Bhaskar Naidu Kalimili and Soong Sup Lee in close collaboration with the Sustainable Development and Economic Data Team
2. People
of the World Bank’s Development Data Group, led by Soong Sup Lee. Soong Sup
Section 2 was prepared by Sulekha Patel and Shota Hatakeyama in partner-
Lee wrote the introduction with valuable suggestions from Sarwar Lateef and
ship with the World Bank’s Human Development Network and the Development
Eric Swanson, and with assistance from Uranbileg Batjargal and Olga Akcadag.
Research Group in the Development Economics Vice Presidency. Masako Hiraga
Contributions to the section were provided by Azita Amjadi (trade). The national
and William Prince provided invaluable assistance in data and table preparation,
accounts data for low- and middle-income economies were gathered by the World
and Kiyomi Horiuchi prepared the demographic estimates and projections. The
Bank’s regional staff through the annual Unified Survey. Maja Bresslauer, Mah-
introduction was written by Sulekha Patel with valuable inputs and comments
yar Eshragh-Tabary, Victor Gabor, Bala Bhaskar Naidu Kalimili, and Raymond
from Albert Motivans of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
Muhula worked on updating, estimating, and validating the databases for national
Organization Institute for Statistics. Carla AbouZahr from the World Health Organi-
accounts. The team is grateful to the International Monetary Fund, Organisation for
zation provided comments during initial discussions, and Sarwar Lateef provided
Economic Co-operation and Development, United Nations Industrial Development
comments on the first draft. The poverty estimates were prepared by Shaohua
Organization, and World Trade Organization for access to their databases.
Chen and and Prem Sangraula of the World Bank’s Poverty Monitoring Group and Changquin Sun. The data on children at work were prepared by Lorenzo
5. States and markets
Guarcello and Furio Rosati from the Understanding Children’s Work project. Other
Section 5 was prepared by David Cieslikowski and Raymond Muhula, in partner-
contributions were provided by Eduard Bos, Charu Garg, and Emi Suzuki (popula-
ship with the World Bank’s Financial and Private Sector Development Network,
tion, health, and nutrition); Montserrat Pallares-Miralles and Carolina Romero
Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network, Sustainable Develop-
Robayo (vulnerability and security); Lawrence Jeffrey Johnson and Sara Elder of
ment Network, the International Finance Corporation, and external partners.
the International Labour Organization (labor force); Juan Cruz Perusia and Olivier
David Cieslikowski wrote the introduction with input from Eric Swanson. Gary
Labe of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization
Milante and Nadia F. Pittaretti gave valuable advice on the development of the
Institute for Statistics (education and literacy); the World Health Organization’s
fragile situations table. Other contributors include Ada Karina Izaguirre (privatiza-
Chandika Indikadahena (health expenditure), Monika Bloessner and Mercedes
tion and infrastructure projects); Leora Klapper (business registration); Federica
de Onis (malnutrition and overweight), Neeru Gupta and Teena Kunjument (health
Saliola (Enterprise Surveys); Sylvia Solf (Doing Business); Alka Banerjee, Isilay
workers), Jessica Ho (hospital beds), Rifat Hossain (water and sanitation) and
Cabuk, and Nabeel Gadit (Standard & Poor’s global stock market indexes); Jeff
Philippe Glaziou (tuberculosis); Delice Gan of International Diabetes Federation
Wagland of KPMG (tax rates); Satish Mannan (public policies and institutions);
(diabetes); and Nyein Nyein Lwin of the United Nations Children’s Fund (health).
Nigel Adderley of the International Institute for Strategic Studies (military person-
Eric Swanson provided valuable comments and suggestions on the introduction
nel); Bjorn Hagelin and Sam Perlo-Freeman of the Stockholm International Peace
and at all stages of production.
Research Institute (military expenditures and arms transfers); Kacem Iaych of the International Road Federation, Ananthanaryan Sainarayan of the Internataional
3. Environment
Civil Aviation Organization, and Helene Stephan (transport); Jane Degerlund of
Section 3 was prepared by Mehdi Akhlaghi in partnership with the World Bank’s
Containerisation International (ports); Vanessa Grey and Esperanza Magpan-
Sustainable Development Network. Important contributions were made by Carola
tay of the International Telecommunication Union; Ernesto Fernandez Polcuch
Fabi and Edward Gillin of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
and Georges Boade of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
436
2010 World Development Indicators
Organization Institute for Statistics (research and development, researchers, and
Joseph Caponio provided production assistance. Communications Development’s
technicians); Anders Halvorsen of the World Information Technology and Services
London partner, Peter Grundy of Peter Grundy Art & Design, designed the report.
Alliance (information and communication technology expenditures); and Ryan
Staff from External Affairs oversaw printing and dissemination of the book.
Lamb of the World Intellectual Property Organization (patents and trademarks).
Client services 6. Global links
The Development Data Group’s Client Services and Communications Team (Azita
Section 6 was prepared by Uranbileg Batjargal in partnership with the Financial
Amjadi, Richard Fix, Buyant Erdene Khaltarkhuu, Alison Kwong, Beatriz Prieto-
Data Team of the World Bank’s Development Data Group, Development Research
Oramas, and Vera Wen) contributed to the design and planning and helped coor-
Group (trade), Development Prospects Group (commodity prices and remittances),
dinate work with the Office of the Publisher.
International Trade Department (trade facilitation), and external partners. Uranbileg Batjargal wrote the introduction, with valuable comments from Eric Swanson.
Administrative assistance, office technology, and systems support
Substantial input for the data and tables came from Azita Amjadi (trade and tariffs)
Awatif Abuzeid and Estela Zamora provided administrative assistance. Jean-Pierre
and Yasue Sakuramoto (external debt and financial data). Eric Swanson provided
Djomalieu, Gytis Kanchas, and Nacer Megherbi provided information technology
guidance on table contents and organization. Other contributors include Frederic
support. Ramvel Chandrasekaran, Ugendran Makhachkala, and Malarvizhi Veerap-
Docquier (emigration rates); Flavine Creppy and Yumiko Mochizuki of the United
pan provided systems support on the Development Data Platform application.
Nations Conference on Trade and Development, and Francis Ng (trade); Betty Dow (commodity prices); Ciara Browne and Thierry Geiger of the World Economic
Publishing and dissemination
Forum, Jean François Arvis, Monica Alina Mustra, Philip Schuler, and Vera Wen
The Office of the Publisher, under the direction of Carlos Rossel, provided valu-
(trade facilitation); Christine Nashick, Jeff Reynolds, and Joe Siegel of DHL (freight
able assistance throughout the production process. Denise Bergeron, Stephen
costs); Yasmin Ahmad, Elena Bernaldo, and Aimee Nichols of the Organisation for
McGroarty, and Nora Ridolfi coordinated printing and supervised marketing and
Economic Co-operation and Development (aid); Akane Hanai and Ibrahim Levent
distribution. Merrell Tuck-Primdahl of the Development Economics Vice Presi-
(external debt); Henrik Pilgaard of the United Nations Refugee Agency (refugees);
dent’s Office managed the communications strategy.
Costanza Giovannelli and Bela Hovy of the United Nations Population Division (migration); Sanket Mohapatra and Ani Rudra Silwal (remittances); and Teresa
World Development Indicators CD-ROM
Ciller of the World Tourism Organization (tourism). Ramgopal Erabelly, Shelley Lai
Programming was carried out under the management of Vilas Mandlekar by Abarna
Fu, and William Prince provided valuable technical assistance.
Panchapakesan and Sujay Ramasamy. System testing was carried out under the guidance of Azita Amjadi and Vilas Mandlekar and included Buyant Erdene Khal-
Other parts of the book
tarkhuu, Parastoo Oloumi, William Prince, and Vera Wen. Systems development
Jeff Lecksell of the World Bank’s Map Design Unit coordinated preparation of
was undertaken in the Data and Information Systems Team lead by Reza Farivari.
the maps on the inside covers. David Cieslikowski prepared Users guide. Eric
Masako Hiraga produced the social indicators tables. Kiyomi Horiuchi produced
Swanson wrote Statistical methods. Maja Bresslauer, Buyant Erdene Khaltarkhuu,
the population projection tables. William Prince coordinated user interface design
and William Prince prepared Primary data documentation. Richard Fix and Alison
and overall production and provided quality assurance, with assistance from Jomo
Kwong prepared Partners and Index of indicators.
Tariku. Photo credits belong to the World Bank photo library.
Database management
WDI Online
Mehdi Akhlaghi and William Prince coordinated management of the integrated
Design, programming, and testing were carried out by Reza Farivari and his team:
World Development Indicators database. Operation of the database management
Azita Amjadi, Ying Chi, Ramgopal Erabelly, Shelley Fu, and Buyant Erdene Khal-
system was made possible by Ramgopal Erabelly, Shelley Fu, and Shahin Outadi in
tarkhuu. William Prince coordinated production and provided quality assurance.
the Data and Information Systems Team under the leadership of Reza Farivari.
Malika Khek and Devika Levy of the Office of the Publisher were responsible for implementation of WDI Online and management of the subscription service.
Design, production, and editing Richard Fix and Alison Kwong coordinated all stages of production with Communica-
Client feedback
tions Development Incorporated, which provided overall design direction, editing,
The team is grateful to the many people who have taken the time to provide
and layout, led by Meta de Coquereaumont, Bruce Ross-Larson, and Christopher
assistance on its publications. Their feedback and suggestions have helped
Trott. Elaine Wilson created the cover and graphics and typeset the book.
improve this year’s edition.
2010 World Development Indicators
437
BIBLIOGRAPHY Abadzi, Helen. 2007. “Absenteeism and Beyond: Instructional Time Loss and Consequences.” Policy Research Working Paper 4376. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Ball, Nicole. 1984. “Measuring Third World Security Expenditure: A Research Note.” World Development 12 (2): 157–64.
Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab. 2009. “Showing Up Is the First Step:
Barnes, Douglas F. 2009. “Indoor Air Pollution and Improved Stoves: what Have
Addressing Provider Absence in Education and Health.” Fighting Poverty: What
We Learned, How Do We Move Forward?” Seminar presentation, November 12.
Works? Issue 2.
World Bank, Development Research Group. Washington, D.C.
Africa Union and United Nations Economic Commission for Africa. 2005. “Trans-
Bates, Bryson, Zbigniew Kundzewicz, Shaohong Wu, and Jean Palutikof, eds.
port and the Millennium Development Goals in Africa.” Background document
2008. Climate Change and Water. Technical Paper IV. Geneva: Intergovernmental
for the meeting of experts preceding the meeting of African transport ministers on the role of transport in achieving the Millennium Development Goals, April 4–5, Addis Ababa. Agénor, Pierre-Richard, and Blance Moreno-Dodson. 2006. “Public Infrastructure and Growth: New Channels and Policy Implications.” Policy Research Working Paper 4604. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Panel on Climate Change. Beck, Thorsten, and Ross Levine. 2001. “Stock Markets, Banks, and Growth: Correlation or Causality?” Policy Research Working Paper 2670. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C. Behrman, Jere R. 2008. “What Have We Learned and What’s Next?” In John Cockburn and Martin Valdivia, eds., Reaching the MDGs: An International Perspective.
Aminian, Nathalie, K.C. Fung, and Francis Ng. 2008. “Integration of Markets vs.
Dakar: Poverty and Economic Policy Research Network. Berg, Andrew, and Anne
Integration by Agreements.” Policy Research Working Paper 4546. World Bank,
Kruger. 2003. “Trade, Growth, and Poverty: A Selective Survey.” Working Paper
Development Research Group, Washington, D.C.
03/30. International Monetary Fund, Washington, D.C.
Anderson, Kym, Marianne Kurzweil, Will Martin, Damiano Sandri, and Ernesto
Billmeier, Andreas, and Tommaso Nannicini. 2007. “Trade Openness and Growth:
Valenzuela. 2008. “Measuring Distortions to Agricultural Incentives, Revisited.”
Pursuing Empirical Glasnost.” Working Paper 07/156. International Monetary
Policy Research Working Paper 4612. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C. Arnold, John. 2006. “Best Practices in Management of International Trade Corridors.” Transport Paper 13. World Bank, Transport Sector Board, Washington, D.C. Arvis, Jean-François, Monica Alina Mustra, Lauri Ojala, Ben Shepherd, and Daniel
Fund, Washington, D.C. Blonigen, Bruce, and Wilson, Wesley W. 2008. “Port Efficiency and Trade Flows.” Review of International Economies 16 (1): 21–36. Bourzac, Katherine. 2010. “Bacteria Make Diesel from Biomass.” Technology Review, January 28.
Saslavsky. 2010. Connecting to Compete 2010: Trade Logistics in the Global
Bown, Chad P. 2009. “The Pattern of Antidumping and Other Types of Contingent
Economy: The Logistics Performance Index and Its Indicators. Washington, D.C.:
Protection.” PREMnotes 144. World Bank, Poverty Reduction and Economic
World Bank, International Trade Department.
Management Network, Washington, D.C.
Arvis, Jean-François, Monica Alina Mustra, John Panzer, Lauri Ojala, and Tapio
Bruns, Barbara, Alain Mingat, and Ramahatra Rakotomalala. 2003. A Chance for
Naula. 2007. Connecting to Compete 2007: Trade Logistics in the Global Econ-
Every Child: Achieving Universal Primary Education by 2015. Washington, D.C.:
omy: The Logistics Performance Index and Its Indicators. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, International Trade Department. Arvis, Jean-François, Gael Raballand, and Jean-François Marteau. 2007. “The
World Bank. Buys, Piet, Uwe Deichmann, and David Wheeler. 2006. “Road Network Upgrading and Overland Trade Expansion in Sub-Saharan Africa.” Policy Research Working
Cost of Being Landlocked: Logistics Costs and Supply Chain Reliability.” Policy
Paper 4097. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C.
Research Working Paper 4258. World Bank, Development Research Group,
Caiola, Marcello. 1995. A Manual for Country Economists. Training Series 1, Vol. 1.
Washington, D.C. Asian Development Bank. 2009. “The GMS Program.” [www.adb.org/GMS/ Program]. Manila.
Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. Calderon, César. 2009. “Infrastructure and Growth in Africa.” Policy Research Working Paper 4712. World Bank, Africa Region, Washington, D.C.
Babinard, Julie, and Peter Roberts. 2006. “Maternal and Child Mortality Develop-
Calderon, César, and Luis Serven. 2008. “Infrastructure and Economic Development
ment Goals: What Can the Transport Sector Do?” Transport Paper 12. World
in Sub-Saharan Africa. Policy Research Working Paper 4712. World Bank, Develop-
Bank, Transport Sector Board, Washington, D.C.
ment Research Group, Macroeconomics and Growth Team, Washington, D.C.
Bagai, Shweta, Richard Newfarmer, and John S. Wilson. 2004. “Trade Facilitation:
Chen, Shaohua, and Martin Ravallion. 2008. “The Developing World Is Poorer
Using WTO Disciplines to Promote Development.” Trade Note 15. World Bank,
than We Thought, but No Less Successful in the Fight Against Poverty.” Policy
International Trade Department, Washington, D.C.
Research Working Paper 4703. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Bagai, Shweta, and John S. Wilson. 2006. “The Data Chase: What’s Out There
Chomitz, Kenneth M., Piet Buys, and Timothy S. Thomas. 2005. “Quantifying the
on Trade Costs and Nontariff Barriers?” Policy Research Working Paper 3899.
Rural-Urban Gradient in Latin America and the Caribbean.” Policy Research Work-
World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C.
ing Paper 3634. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C.
438
2010 World Development Indicators
CIESIN (Center for International Earth Science Information Network). 2005. Grid-
Estache, Antonio, Marianela Gonzalez, and Lourdes Trujillo. 2007. “Government
ded Population of the World. Columbia University and Centro Internacional de
Expenditures on Education, Health, and Infrastructure: A Naïve Look at Levels,
Agricultura Tropical. [http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/gpw/].
Outcomes, and Efficiency.” Policy Research Working Paper 4129. World Bank,
CIIFAD (Cornell International Institute for Food, Agriculture and Development). n.d. “The System of Rice Intensification.” [http://ciifad.cornell.edu/sri/index. html]. Ithaca, N.Y. Claessens, Stijn, Daniela Klingebiel, and Sergio L. Schmukler. 2002. “Explaining
Washington, D.C. Eurostat (Statistical Office of the European Communities). n.d. Demographic Statistics. [http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/eurostat/ home/]. Luxembourg.
the Migration of Stocks from Exchanges in Emerging Economies to International
———. Various years. Statistical Yearbook. Luxembourg.
Centers.” Policy Research Working Paper 2816. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Fankhauser, Samuel. 1995. Valuing Climate Change: The Economics of the Green-
Clark, Ximena, David Dollar, and Alejandro Micco. 2004. “Port Efficiency, Maritime Transport Costs and Bilateral Trade.” NBER Working Paper 10353. Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic Research. Commission on Growth and Development. 2008. The Growth Report: Strategies for Sustainable Growth and Inclusive Development. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Containerisation International. 2009. Containerisation International Yearbook 2009. London: Informa Maritime and Transport. Corrao, Marlo Ann, G. Emmanuel Guindon, Namita Sharma, and Dorna Fakhrabadi Shokoohi. 2000. Tobacco Control Country Profile. Atlanta, Ga.: American Cancer Society.
house. London: Earthscan. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2001. “Global Estimates of Gaseous Emissions of NH3, NO and N2O from Agricultural Land, 2001.” Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. ———. 2003. “How the World Is Fed.” In Agriculture, Food and Water. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization. ———. 2005. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization. ———. 2007. Coping with Water Scarcity: Challenge of the Twenty-First Century. Report for World Water Day 2007. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization.
De Onis, Mercedes, and Monika, Blössner. 2000. “The WHO Global Database on
———. 2008a. “Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation in the Food and Agri-
Child Growth and Malnutrition: Methodology and Applications.” International
culture Sector.” Technical background document from the expert consultation,
Journal of Epidemiology 32: 518–26.
March 5–7, Rome.
De Onis, Mercedes, Adelheid W. Onyango, Elaine Borghi, Cutberto Garza, and Hong Yang. 2006. “Comparison of the World Health Organization (WHO) Child Growth Standards and the National Center for Health Statistics/WHO International Growth Reference: Implications for Child Health Programmes.” Public Health Nutrition 9 (7): 942–47. Dennis, Allen, and Ben Shepherd. 2007. “Trade Costs, Barriers to Entry, and Export Diversification in Developing Countries.” Policy Research Working Paper 4368. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C. Demirgüç-Kunt, Asli, and Ross Levine. 1996. “Stock Market Development and Financial Intermediaries: Stylized Facts.” World Bank Economic Review 10 (2): 291–321. DHL. 2010. “DHL Express Standard Rate Guideline 2010.” Bonn, Germany. Djankov, Simeon, Caroline L. Freund, and Cong S. Pham. 2010, “Trading on Time.” Review of Economics and Statistics 92 (1): 166–73. Docquier, Frédéric, Abdeslam Marfouk, and B. Lindsay Lowell. 2007. “A Gendered Assessment of the Brain Drain.” Washington, D.C.
———. 2008b. “Climate Change and Food Security: A Framework Document.” Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. ———. 2009a. “2050: A Third More Mouths to Feed.” Press release, September 23. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. ———. 2009b. “More People Than Ever Are Victims of Hunger.” Press release, June 19. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. ———. 2010. “Water and Poverty: An Issue of Life and Livelihoods.” [www.fao.org/ nr/water/issues/scarcity.html]. Rome. ———. n.d. FAOSTAT database. [http://faostat.fao.org/default.aspx]. Rome. ———. Various years. The State of Food Insecurity in the World. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization. Faurèsa, Jean-Marc, Jippe Hoogeveena, and Jelle Bruinsmab. 2004. “The FAO Irrigated Area Forecast for 2030.” Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Filmer, Deon, Amer Hasan, and Lant Pritchett. 2006. “A Minimum Learning Goal: Measuring Real Progress in Education.” Working Paper 97. Center for Global Development, Washington, D.C.
Eckert, Erin, Neeru Gupta, Michael Edwards, Randy Kolstad, and Aliou Barry.
Finger, J. Michael, and John S. Wilson. 2006. “Implementing a WTO Agreement on
2002. “Guinea Health Facility Survey 2001.” MEASURE Evaluation Technical
Trade Facilitation: What Makes Sense?” Policy Research Working Paper 3971.
Report 11. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Carolina Population Cen-
World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C.
ter, Chapel Hill, N.C.
Foster, Vivien, and Jevgenijs Steinbuks. 2009. “Paying the Price for Unreliable
Egyptian Ministry of Health and Population, El-Zanaty Associates, and ORC
Power Supplies: In-House Generation of Electricity by Firms in Africa.” Policy
Macro. 2005. Egypt Service Provision Assessment Survey, 2004. Calverton,
Research Working Paper 4913. World Bank, Africa Region, Sustainable Develop-
Md.: Egyptian Ministry of Health and ORC Macro.
ment Front Office, Washington, D.C.
2010 World Development Indicators
439
BIBLIOGRAPHY Fredricksen, Birger. 1993. Statistics of Education in Developing Countries: An Intro-
Hausman, Warren H., Hau L. Lee, and Uma Subramanian. 2005. “Global Logistics Indi-
duction to Their Collection and Analysis. Paris: United Nations Educational, Sci-
cators, Supply Chain Metrics, and Bilateral Trade Patterns.” Policy Research Work-
entific, and Cultural Organization.
ing Paper 3773. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C.
Froese, R., and D. Pauly, eds. n.d. FishBase database. [www.fishbase.org]. Manila.
Haver Analytics. n.d. Thomson Reuters Datastream. [www.haver.com]. New York.
Gauthier, Bernard, Tessa Bold, Jakob Svensson, and Waly Wane. 2009. “Deliver-
Helble, Matthias, Catherine Mann, and John S. Wilson. 2009. “Aid for Trade Facilita-
ing Service Indicators in Africa: Education and Health.” Revised Concept Paper.
tion.” Policy Research Working Paper 5064. World Bank, Development Research
African Economic Research Consortium, Hewlett Foundation, and World Bank, Washington, D.C. Geneva Declaration. 2008. Global Burden of Armed Violence. Geneva: Geneva Declaration. Ghana Statistical Service, Ghana Ministry of Health, and ORC Macro. 2002. Ghana Service Provision Assessment Survey, 2002. Accra. Glasier, Anna, A. Metin Gulmezoglu, George P. Schmid, Claudia Garcia Moreno, and Paul F. A. van Look. 2006. “Sexual and Reproductive Health: A Matter of Life and Death.” Lancet 368 (9547): 1595–1607. Global Transport Knowledge Partnership. 2008. “Transport and the Millennium Development Goals.” [www.gtkp.com]. Geneva. Grigoriou, Christopher. 2007. “Landlockedness, Infrastructure and Trade: New Estimates for Central Asian Countries.” Policy Research Working Paper 4335. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C.
Group, Washington, D.C. Helble, Matthias, Ben Shepherd, and John S. Wilson. 2007. “Transparency and Trade Facilitation in the Asia Pacific: Estimating the Gains from Reform.” Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation and World Bank, Washington, D.C. Hertel, Thomas W., Terrie Walmsley, and Ken Itakura. 2001. “Dynamic Effects of the ‘New Age’ Free Trade Agreement between Japan and Singapore.” Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, West Lafayette, Ind. Heston, Alan. 1994. “A Brief Review of Some Problems in Using National Accounts Data in Level of Output Comparisons and Growth Studies.” Journal of Development Economics 44 (1): 29–52. Hettige, Hemamala, Muthukumara Mani, and David Wheeler. 1998. “Industrial Pollution in Economic Development: Kuznets Revisited.” Policy Research Working Paper 1876. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C. Hinz. Richard P., Montserrat Pallares-Miralles, Carolina Romero, and Edward
GTZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit). 2005. “Why
Whitehouse. Forthcoming. “International Patterns of Pension Provision II: Facts
Transport Matters: Contributions of the Transport Sector towards Achieving the
and Figures of the 2000s.” Social Protection Discussion Paper. World Bank,
Millennium Development Goals.” Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn, Germany.
Washington, D.C. Hoekman, Bernard, Will Martin, and Aaditya Mattoo. 2009. “Conclude Doha: It
Gwatkin, Davidson R., Shea Rutstein, Kiersten Johnson, Eldaw Suliman, Adam
Matters!” Policy Research Working Paper 5135. World Bank, Poverty Reduc-
Wagstaff, and Agbessi Amouzou. 2007. Socio Economic Differences in Health,
tion and Economic Management Network, International Trade Department, and
Nutrition, and Population. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Hamilton, Kirk, and Michael Clemens. 1999. “Genuine Savings Rates in Developing Countries.” World Bank Economic Review 13 (2): 333–56. ———. 2006. Where Is the Wealth of Nations? Measuring Capital for the 21st Century. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
Development Research Group, Washington, D.C. Hummels, David. 2007. “Transportation Costs and International Trade in the Second Era of Globalization,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 21 (3): 131–54. ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization). 2009. Civil Aviation Statistics of the World. Montreal: International Civil Aviation Organization.
Hamilton, Kirk, and Giovanni Ruta. 2008. “Wealth Accounting, Exhaustible
IEA (International Energy Agency). 2009. “World Energy Outlook 2009 Fact Sheet:
Resources and Social Welfare.” Environmental and Resource Economics 42
Why Is Our Current Energy Pathway Unsustainable?” International Energy
(1): 53–64. Hanushek, A. Eric. 2002. The Long-Run Importance of School Quality. NBER Working Paper 9071. Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic Research. Hanushek, A. Eric, and Wössman, Ludger. 2007. Education Quality and Economic Growth. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Happe, Nancy, and John Wakeman-Linn. 1994. “Military Expenditures and Arms Trade: Alternative Data Sources.” Working Paper 94/69. International Monetary Fund, Policy Development and Review Department, Washington, D.C. Hatzichronoglou, Thomas. 1997. “Revision of the High-Technology Sector and
Agency, Paris. ———. Various years. Energy Balances of OECD Countries. Paris: International Energy Agency. ———. Various years. Energy Statistics and Balances of Non-OECD Countries. Paris: International Energy Agency. ———. Various years. Energy Statistics of OECD Countries. Paris: International Energy Agency. ILO (International Labour Organization). 2009a. Guide to the New Millennium Development Goals Employment Indicators. Geneva: International Labour Office.
Product Classification.” STI Working Paper 1997/2. Organisation for Economic
———. 2009b. Resolution concerning statistics of child labour. Resolution II, Rpt.
Co-operation and Development, Directorate for Science, Technology, and Indus-
ICLS/18/2008/IV/FINAL, 18th International Conference of Labour Statisti-
try, Paris.
cians, Geneva.
440
2010 World Development Indicators
———. Various years. Key Indicators of the Labour Market. Geneva: International Labour Organization. ———. Various years. Yearbook of Labour Statistics. Geneva: International Labour Organization. IMF (International Monetary Fund). 1977. Balance of Payments Manual. 4th ed. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. ———. 1993. Balance of Payments Manual. 5th ed. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. ———. 1995. Balance of Payments Compilation Guide. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. ———. 1996. Balance of Payments Textbook. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. ———. 2000. Monetary and Financial Statistics Manual. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. ———. 2001. Government Finance Statistics Manual. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. ———. 2004. Compilation Guide on Financial Soundness Indicators. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. ———. 2009a. Global Financial Stability Report. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. ———. 2009b. World Economic Outlook: Sustaining the Recovery. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. ———. Various issues. Direction of Trade Statistics Quarterly. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. ———. Various issues. Government Finance Statistics Yearbook. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. ———. Various issues. International Financial Statistics. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. ———. Various years. Balance of Payments Statistics Yearbook. Parts 1 and 2. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. ———. Various years. Direction of Trade Statistics Yearbook. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. ———. Various years. International Financial Statistics Yearbook. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation. n.d. Child Mortality Estimation Info database. [www.childmortality.org]. New York.
International Working Group of External Debt Compilers. 1987. External Debt Definitions. Washington, D.C.: International Working Group of External Debt Compilers. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. IRF (International Road Federation). 2009. World Road Statistics 2009. Geneva: International Road Federation. ITU (International Telecommunication Union). 2007. ICTs and Climate Change. ITU-T Technology Watch Report 3. Geneva: International Telecommunication Union. ———. n.d. World Telecommunication Indicators database. Geneva: International Telecommunication Union. IUCN (World Conservation Union). 2008. 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Gland, Switzerland: World Conservation Union. Ivanic, Maros, and Will Martin. 2008. “Implications of Higher Global Food Prices for Poverty in Low-Income Countries.” Policy Research Working Paper 4594. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C. Kee, Hiau Looi, Alessandro Nicita, and Marcelo Olarreaga. 2006. “Estimating Trade Restrictiveness Indices.” Policy Research Working Paper 3840. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C. Kenyan National Coordinating Agency for Population and Development of Kenya, Kenyan Ministry of Health, Kenyan Central Bureau of Statistics, and ORC Macro. 2005. Kenya Service Provision Assessment Survey 2004. Nairobi: Kenyan National Coordinating Agency for Population and Development, Kenyan Ministry of Health, Kenyan Central Bureau of Statistics, and ORC Macro. Khandker, Shahidur, Zaid Bakht, and Gayatri B. Koolwal. 2006. “The Poverty Impact of Rural Roads: Evidence from Bangladesh.” Policy Research Working Paper 3875. World Bank, Washington, D.C. KPMG. 2009a. Corporate and Indirect Tax Rate Survey 2009. KPMG: New York. ———. 2009b. Individual Income Tax and Social Security Rate Survey 2009. KPMG: New York. Kremer, Michael, and Eric Maskin. 2006. “Globalization and Inequality.” Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., and Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, N.J. Kundzewicz, Zbigniew W., and Luis José Mata. 2007. “Freshwater Resources and
Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre. 2009. Internal Displacement: Global
Their Management.” In S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis,
Overview of Trends and Developments in 2008. Geneva: Internal Displacement
K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H. L. Miller, eds., Climate Change 2007: Climate
Monitoring Centre.
Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to
International Diabetes Federation. Various years. Diabetes Atlas. Brussels: International Diabetes Federation. International Institute for Strategic Studies. 2010. The Military Balance 2010. London: Oxford University Press. International Trade Centre, UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development), and WTO (World Trade Organization). n.d. The Millennium Development Goals database. [www.mdg-trade.org]. Geneva.
the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Kunte, Arundhati, Kirk Hamilton, John Dixon, and Michael Clemens. 1998. “Estimating National Wealth: Methodology and Results.” Environmental Economics Series 57. World Bank, Environment Department, Washington, D.C. Labonne, Julien, and Robert S. Chase. 2009. “The Power of Information: The Impact of Mobile Phones on Farmer’s Welfare in the Philippines.” World Bank,
2010 World Development Indicators
441
BIBLIOGRAPHY Sustainable Development Network, Social Development Department, Washington, D.C.
Working Paper 4790. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C.
Leipziger, Danny, Marianne Fay, Quentin Wodon, and Tito Yepes. 2003. “Achieving
Noumba Um, Paul, Stephane Straub, and Charles Vellutini. 2009. “Infrastructure
the Millennium Development Goals: The Role of Infrastructure.” Policy Research
and Economic Growth in the Middle East and North Africa.” Policy Research
Working Paper 3163. World Bank, Latin American and the Caribbean Region,
Working Paper 5105. World Bank, Middle East and North Africa Region, Sustain-
Finance, Private Sector, and Infrastructure Department, Washington, D.C. Lewis, Maureen. 2006. “Governance and Corruption in Public Health Care Sys-
able Development Department, Washington, D.C. Odoki, Jennaro B., Farhad Ahmed, Gary Taylor, and Sunday A. Okello. 2008.
tems.” Working Paper 78. Center for Global Development, Washington, D.C.
“Towards the Mainstreaming of an Approach to Include Social Benefits within
Limao, Nuno, and Anthony J. Venables. 2001 “Infrastructure, Geographical Disadvan-
Road Appraisal: A Case Study from Uganda.” Transport Paper 17. World Bank,
tage, Transport Cost, and Trade.” World Bank Economic Review 15 (3): 451–79. Lin, Justin Yifu. 2010. “Stimulus in a Volatile Financial World.” World Bank, Washington, D.C. Lloyd, Peter J., Johanna L. Croser, and Kym Anderson. 2009. “Global Distortions to Agricultural Markets New Indicators of Trade and Welfare Impacts,1955 to 2007.” Policy Research Working Paper 4865. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C. Loskshin, Michael, and Ruslan Yemtsov. 2004. “Evaluating the Impact of Infrastructure Rehabilitation Projects on Household Welfare in Rural Georgia.” World Bank, Washington, D.C. Luxembourg Income Study. n.d. Online database. [www.lisproject.org]. Luxembourg. Macro International. Various years. Demographic and Health Surveys. [www. measuredhs.com]. Calverton, Md.: Macro International. Manning, Richard. 2009. “Using Indicators to Encourage Development: Lessons from the Millennium Development Goals. Report 2009:01. Danish Institute for International Studies, Copenhagen. MDG Africa Steering Group. 2008. Achieving the Millennium Development Goals in Africa. New York: MDG Africa Steering Group. Melhem, Samia, Claudia Morrel, and Nidhi Tandon. 2009. Information and Communication Technologies for Women’s Socioeconomic Empowerment. Working Paper 176. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
Transport Sector Board, Washington, D.C. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2005. Guide to Measuring the Information Society. DSTI/ICCP/ISS (2005)/6. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. ———. 2009a. Agricultural Policies in OECD Countries: Monitoring and Evaluation. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. ———. 2009b. “Trading out of Poverty: How Aid for Trade Can Help.” OECD Journal on Development 10 (1): 1–38. ———. 2010a. OECD Economic Surveys: China 2010. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. ———. 2010b Restoring Fiscal Sustainability: Lessons for the Public Sector. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. ———. n.d. Producer and Consumer Support Estimates. Online database. [www. oecd.org/tad/support/psecse]. Paris. ———. Various issues. Main Economic Indicators. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. ———. Various years. National Accounts. Vol. 1, Main Aggregates. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. ———. Various years. National Accounts. Vol. 2, Detailed Tables. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. ———. Various years. OECD Health Data. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Mishra, Prachi, and David Newhouse. 2007. “Health Aid and Infant Mortality.” Work-
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) DAC (Develop-
ing Paper 07/100. International Monetary Fund, Fiscal Affairs and Research
ment Assistance Committee). 1996. Shaping the 21st Century: The Contribu-
Departments, Washington, D.C.
tion of Development Cooperation. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation
Modi, Vijay, Susan McDade, Dominique Lallement, and Jamal Saghir. 2005. Energy Services for the Millennium Development Goals. New York: Energy Sector Management Assistance Programme, United Nations Development Programme, UN Millennium Project, and World Bank. Morgenstern, Oskar. 1963. On the Accuracy of Economic Observations. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. National Science Board. 2008. Science and Engineering Indicators 2008. Arlington, Va.: National Science Foundation.
and Development. ———. Various years. Development Cooperation Report. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. ———. Various years. Geographical Distribution of Financial Flows to Developing Economies. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. ———. Various years. International Development Statistics. CD-ROM. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Pandey, Kiran D., Piet Buys, Kenneth Chomitz, and David Wheeler. 2006a. “Bio-
Netcraft. 2009. “Netcraft Secure Server Survey.” [www.netcraft.com].
diversity Conservation Indicators: New Tools for Priority Setting at the Global
Njinkeu, Dominique, John S. Wilson, and Bruno Powo Fosso. 2008. “Expand-
Environmental Facility.” World Bank, Development Economics Research Group
ing Trade within Africa: The Impact of Trade Facilitation.” Policy Research
442
2010 World Development Indicators
and Environment Department, Washington, D.C.
Pandey, Kiran D., David Wheeler, Bart Ostro, Uwe Deichmann, Kirk Hamilton, and Katie Bolt. 2006b. “Ambient Particulate Matter Concentrations in Residential and Pollution Hotspots of World Cities: New Estimates Based on the Global Model of Ambient Particulates (GMAPS).” World Bank, Development Economics Research Group and Environment Department, Washington, D.C. Pandey, Kiran D., Katharine Bolt, Uwe Deichmann, Kirk Hamilton, Bart Ostro, and David Wheeler. 2006c. “The Human Cost of Air Pollution: New Estimates for Developing Countries.” World Bank, Development Research Group and Environment Department, Washington, D.C. PARIS21 (The Partnership in Statistics for Development in the 21st Century). 2009. “PARIS21 at Ten: Improvements in Statistical Capacity since 1999.” The Partnership in Statistics for Development in the 21st Century, Paris. Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development. 2008. The Global Information Society: A Statistical View. Santiago: United Nations. Pricewaterhouse Coopers. 2009. Worldwide Summaries Online. [www.pwc.com]. New York. Raballand, Gaël, Patricia Macchi, Dino Merotto, and Carly Petracco. 2009. “Revising the Roads Investment Strategy in Rural Areas: An Application for Uganda.” Policy Research Working Paper 5036. World Bank, Africa Region, Transport Unit, Washington, D.C. RAMSI (Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands). 2010. “Fact Sheets.” [www.ramsi.org]. Honiara.
Paper 4597. World Bank, East Asia and Pacific Region, Sustainable Development Department, Washington, D.C. Shankar, Anuraj, Linda Bartlett, Vincent Fauveau, Monir Islam, and Nancy Terreri. 2008. “Delivery of MDG 5 by Active Management with Data.” Lancet 371(9620): 12–18. Shepherd, Ben, and John S. Wilson. 2007. “Road Infrastructure in Europe and Central Asia: Does Network Quality Affect Trade?” Policy Research Working Paper 4104. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C. Singh, R.B., P. Kumar, and T. Woodhead. 2002. “Smallholder Farmers in India: Food Security and Agricultural Policy.” Food and Agriculture Organization, Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok. SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute). 2009. SIPRI Yearbook 2009: Armaments, Disarmament, and International Security. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press. Smith, Lisa, and Laurence Haddad. 2000. “Overcoming Child Malnutrition in Developing Countries: Past Achievements and Future Choices.” 2020 Brief 64. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C. SPC (Secretariat of the Pacific Community). n.d. Online Statistics and Demography. [www.spc.int]. Nouméa. Srinivasan, T. N. 1994. “Database for Development Analysis: An Overview.” Journal of Development Economics 44 (1): 3–28. Standard & Poor’s. 2000. The S&P Emerging Market Indices: Methodology, Definitions, and Practices. New York: Standard & Poor’s.
Ravallion, Martin, and Shaohua Chen. 1996. “What Can New Survey Data Tell Us
———. 2009. Global Stock Markets Factbook 2009. New York: Standard & Poor’s.
about the Recent Changes in Living Standards in Developing and Transitional
Stiglitz, Joseph E., Amartya Sen, and Jean-Paul Fitoussi. 2009. Report by the
Economies?” Policy Research Working Paper 16943. World Bank, Development
Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.
Research Group, Washington, D.C.
Paris: Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social
Ravallion, Martin, Shaohua Chen, and Prem Sangraula. 2008. “Dollar a Day Revisited.” Policy Research Working Paper 4620. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C. Ravallion, Martin, Gaurav Datt, and Dominique van de Walle. 1991. “Quantifying Absolute Poverty in the Developing World.” Review of Income and Wealth 37(4): 345–61.
Progress. Straub, Stéphane. 2008. “Infrastructure and Development: A Critical Appraisal of the Macro Level Literature.” Policy Research Working Paper 4590. World Bank, East Asia and Pacific Region, Sustainable Development Department, Washington, D.C. Straub, Stéphane, Charles Vellutini, and Michael Warlters. 2008. “Infrastructure
Ruggles, Robert. 1994. “Issues Relating to the UN System of National Accounts and
and Economic Growth in East Asia.” Policy Research Working Paper 4589.
Developing Countries.” Journal of Development Economics 44 (1): 77–85.
World Bank, East Asia and Pacific Region, Sustainable Development Depart-
Rwandan National Institute of Statistics, Rwandan Ministry of Health, and Macro International Inc. 2008. Rwanda Service Provision Assessment Survey 2007. Calverton, Md.: Rwandan National Institute of Statistics, Rwandan Ministry of Health, and Macro International Inc. Ryten, Jacob. 1998. “Fifty Years of ISIC: Historical Origins and Future Perspectives.” ECA/STAT.AC. 63/22. United Nations Statistics Division, New York. Schwartz, Jordan, Luis Andres, and Georgeta Dragoiu. 2009. “Crisis in Latin America: Infrastructure Investment, Employment and the Expectations of Stimulus.” Policy Research Working Paper 5009. World Bank, Washington, D.C. Seethepalli, Kalpana, Maria Caterina Bramati, and David Veredas. 2008. “How Relevant Is Infrastructure to Growth in East Asia?” Policy Research Working
ment, Washington, D.C. Takle, Eugene, and Don Hofstrand. 2008. “Global Warming: Agriculture’s Impact on Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” Ag Decision Maker, April. Taylor, Benjamin J., and John S. Wilson. 2009. “The Crisis and Beyond: Why Trade Facilitation Matters.” Research at the World Bank: A Brief from the Development Research Group. World Bank, Washington, D.C. UCDP (Upsalla Conflict Data Program). n.d. UCDP database. [www.ucdp.uu.se/ database]. Upsalla, Sweden. UNAIDS (Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS) and WHO (World Health Organization). Various years. Report on the Global AIDS Epidemic. Geneva: Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS.
2010 World Development Indicators
443
BIBLIOGRAPHY UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development). 2001. Electronic Commerce and Development Report 2001. New York and Geneva: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. ——— 2007. Trade and Development Report 2007: Regional Cooperation for Development. New York and Geneva: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
UNHCR (The UN Refugee Agency). Various years. Statistical Yearbook. Geneva: The UN Refugee Agency. UNICEF (United Nations Children’s Fund). Various years. Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys. [www.childinfo.org]. New York. ———. Various years. The State of the World’s Children. New York: Oxford University Press.
——— 2008. Trade and Development Report 2008: Commodity Prices, Capital Flows
UNICEF (United Nations Children’s Fund), WHO (World Health Organization),
and the Financing of Investment. New York and Geneva: United Nations Confer-
World Bank, and United Nations Population Division. 2007. “Levels and
ence on Trade and Development.
Trends of Child Mortality in 2006: Estimates Developed by the Inter-Agency
———. 2009. Transport Newsletter. Issue 43. ———. Various years. Handbook of Statistics. New York and Geneva: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development) and UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). 2008. Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa. UNCTAD-UNEP Capacity Building Task Force on Trade, Environment and Development. New York: United Nations. Understanding Children’s Work (UCW). n.d. Online database. [www.ucw-project. org]. Rome. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 1990. Human Development Report 1990. New York: Oxford University Press. ———. 2005. Human Development Report 2005: International Cooperation at a Crossroads: Aid, Trade and Security in an Unequal World. New York: United Nations Development Programme. ———. 2006. Asia-Pacific Human Development Report 2006: Trade on Human Terms: Transforming Trade for Human Development in Asia and the Pacific. Colombo: Macmillan India Ltd. United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations. n.d. “Current Operations.” [www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/currentops.shtml]. New York. UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization). 1997. International Standard Classification of Education. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. ———. 2009. World Water Development Report 3: Water in a Changing World. 2009. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. ———. Various years. EFA Global Monitoring Report. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization) Institute for Statistics. 2008a. “A Typology of Out-of-School Children to Improve Policies that Address Exclusion.” Background document for the 48th Session of the International Conference on Education, November 25–28, Geneva.
York. UNIDO (United Nations Industrial Development Organization). Various years. International Yearbook of Industrial Statistics. Vienna: United Nations Industrial Development Organization. UNIFEM (United Nations Development Fund for Women). 2005. Progress of the World’s Women. New York: United Nations Development Fund for Women. United Nations. 1990. International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities, Third Revision. Statistical Papers Series M, No. 4, Rev. 3. New York: United Nations. ———. 1992. “Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. United Nations, New York. ———. 2001. UN Secretary-General’s Road Map towards the Implementation of the Millennium Declaration. New York: United Nations. ———. 2009a. The Millennium Development Goals Report 2009. New York: United Nations. ———. 2009b. “Fact Sheet: Stepping Up International Action on Climate Change: The Road to Copenhagen. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, New York. ———. 2009c. “Copenhagen Accord.” December 18. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Copenhagen. ———. 2009d. World Economic and Social Survey 2009: Promoting Development, Saving the Planet. New York: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. United Nations Population Division. 2006. World Population Prospects: The 2004 Revision. Vol. III. Analytical Report. New York: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. ———. 2009a. World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision. New York: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. ———. 2009b. Trends in Total Migrant Stock: 2008 Revision. New York: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
———. 2008b. A View Inside Primary Schools. A World Education Indicators CrossNational Study. Montreal, Canada: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization Institute for Statistics. ———. n.d. Online database. [www.uis.unesco.org]. Montreal. ———. Various years. Global Education Digest. Paris.
444
Group for Child Mortality Estimation.” Working Paper. United Nations, New
2010 World Development Indicators
———. Various years. World Urbanization Prospects. New York: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. United Nations Statistics Division. n.d. Cement Manufacturing Data Set. New York: United Nations. ———. n.d. Comtrade database. New York.
———. n.d. International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities, Third Revision. [http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/]. New York. ———. n.d. World Energy Data Set. New York: United Nations. ———. Various issues. Monthly Bulletin of Statistics. New York: United Nations. ———. Various issues. Population and Vital Statistics Report. New York: United Nations. ———. Various years. Demographic Yearbook. New York: United Nations. ———. Various years. International Trade Statistics Yearbook. New York: United Nations. ———. Various years. Energy Statistics Yearbook. New York: United Nations. ———. Various years. National Accounts Statistics: Main Aggregates and Detailed Tables. Parts 1 and 2. New York: United Nations.
———. 2008b. “Measuring Health System Strengthening and Trends: A Toolkit for Countries.” World Health Organization, Geneva. ———. 2008c. The World Health Report: Primary Health Care. Geneva: World Health Organization. ———. 2008d. Worldwide Prevalence of Anemia 1993–2005. Geneva: World Health Organization. ———. 2009. WHO Report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic 2009: Implementing Smoke-Free Environments. Geneva: World Health Organization. ———. n.d. Global Database on Child Growth and Malnutrition. [www.who.int/ nutgrowthdb]. Geneva. ———. n.d. National Health Account database. [www.who.int/nha/en/]. Geneva. ———. Various years. World Health Report. Geneva: World Health Organization.
———. Various years. National Income Accounts. New York: United Nations.
———. Various years. World Health Statistics. Geneva: World Health Organization.
———. Various years. Statistical Yearbook. New York: United Nations.
———. Various years. Global Tuberculosis Control Report. Geneva: World Health
University of California, Berkeley, and Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research. n.d. Human Mortality Database. [www.mortality.org or www. humanmortality.de]. Berkeley, Calif., and Rostock, Germany. UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime). 2007. 9th UN Survey of Crime Trends. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. ———. 2008. 10th UN Survey of Crime Trends. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. ———. 2009. International Homicide Statistics. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. ———. n.d. International Homicide Statistics database. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.
Organization. WHO (World Health Organization) and UNICEF (United Nations Children’s Fund). 2008. Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation. Geneva: World Health Organization. ———. Various years. WHO-UNICEF estimates of national immunization coverage database. [www.who.int/immunization_monitoring/routine/immunization_ coverage/en/index4.html]. Geneva. WHO (World Health Organization), UNICEF (United Nations Children’s Fund), UNFPA (United Nations Population Fund), and World Bank. 2007. Maternal Mortality in 2005: Estimates Developed by WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA, and the World Bank. Geneva: World Health Organization.
USAID (U.S. Agency for International Development). 2007. “Calculating Tariff
Willoughby, Christopher. 2004. “Infrastructure and the Millennium Development
Equivalents for Time in Trade.” U.S. Agency for International Development,
Goals.” Paper presented at the Session on Complementarity of Infrastructure
Washington, D.C. U.S. Census Bureau. n.d. International Data Base (IDB). [www.census.gov/ipc/ www/idb/]. Washington, D.C.
for Achieving the MDGs, October 27, Berlin. Wilson, John S. 2003. “Trade Facilitation: New Issues in a Development Context.” Trade Note 12. World Bank, International Trade Department, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Various years. International Repro-
Wilson, John S., Catherine L. Mann, and Tsunehiro Otsuki. 2003. “Trade Facilitation
ductive Health Surveys. [www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/Surveys/]. Atlanta,
and Economic Development: A New Approach to Measuring the Impact.” World
Ga. U.S. National Science Board. 2008. Science and Engineering Indicators 2008. Arlington, Va.: National Science Foundation. U.S. President. 2010. Economic Report of the President. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Vandermoortele, Jan. 2009. “Taking the MDGs Beyond 2015: Hasten Slowly.” European Association for Development Research and Training Institutes, Bonn, Germany.
Bank Economic Review 17(3): 367–89. ———. 2004. “Assessing the Potential Benefit of Trade Facilitation: A Global Perspective.” Policy Research Working Paper 3224. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C. Wilson , John S., and Tsunehiro Otsuki. 2007. “Regional Integration in South Asia: What Role for Trade Facilitation?” Policy Research Working Paper 4423. World Bank, Development Research Group, Washington, D.C.
Watkins, Kevin. 2008. The Millennium Development Goals: Three Proposals for
WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization). 2009. WIPO Patent Report:
Renewing the Vision and Reshaping the Future. Paris: United Nations Educa-
Statistics on Worldwide Patent Activity. Geneva: World Intellectual Property
tional, Scientific, and Cultural Organization.
Organization.
WHO (World Health Organization). 2008a. Health Metrics Network Framework
WITSA (World Information Technology and Services Alliance). 2009. Digital Planet
and Standards for Country Health Information Systems. Geneva: World Health
2009: The Global Information Economy. Vienna, Va.: World Information Technol-
Organization.
ogy and Services Alliance.
2010 World Development Indicators
445
BIBLIOGRAPHY World Bank. 1990. World Development Report 1990: Poverty. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. 2000a. Making Transition Work for Everyone: Poverty and Inequality in Europe and Central Asia. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. 2000b. Trade Blocs. New York: Oxford University Press. ———. 2001. World Development Report 2000/2001: Attacking Poverty. New York: Oxford University Press. ———. 2002. Global Economic Prospects 2002: Making Trade Work for the World’s Poor. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. 2007a. Healthy Development: The World Bank Strategy for Health, Nutrition, and Population Results. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. 2007b. Sanitation and Water Supply: Improving Services for the Poor. IDA at Work. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, Sustainable Development Network. ———. 2008a. “Brazil Country Partnership Strategy 2008–2011.” World Bank, Latin America and the Caribbean Region, Washington, D.C. ———. 2008b. “Improving Trade and Transport for Landlocked Developing Countries: World Bank Contributions to Implementing the Almaty Programme of Action: A Report for the Mid-Term Review October 2008.” World Bank, International Trade Department, Washington, D.C. ———. 2008c. “Safe, Clean, and Affordable . . . Transport for Development: The World Bank Group’s Transport Business Strategy for 2008–2012.” World Bank, Transport Sector Board, Washington, D.C. ———. 2008d. World Development Report 2009: Reshaping Economic Geography. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. 2009a. Africa’s Development in a Changing Climate: Act Now, Act Together, Act Differently. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. 2009b. “Air Freight: A Market Study with Implications for Landlocked Countries.” Transport Paper 26. World Bank, Washington, D.C. ———. 2009c. Development Outreach. October. ———. 2009d. Doing Business 2010. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. 2009e. Energy: Improving Services for the Poor. IDA at Work. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, Sustainable Development Network. ———. 2009f. “Infrastructure Financing Gap Endangers Development Goals.” Press release, April 23. World Bank, Washington, D.C. ———. 2009g. “Private Activity in Infrastructure Down, But Still Around Peak Levels.” Private Participation in Infrastructure Data Update Note 28. World Bank, Washington, D.C. ———. 2009h. Protecting Progress: The Challenge Facing Low-Income Countries in the Global Recession. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. 2009i. “Reduced Emissions and Enhanced Adaptation in Agricultural Landscapes.” Agriculture and Rural Development Notes, Issue 50. ———. 2009j. “World Bank to Invest $45 Billion in Infrastructure to Help Create Jobs and Speed Crisis Recovery.” Press release, April 23. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
446
2010 World Development Indicators
———. 2009k. World Development Report 2010: Development and Climate Change. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. 2009l. Information and Communications for Development: Extending Reach and Increasing Impact. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. 2010. Global Economic Prospects 2010: Crisis, Finance, and Growth. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. n.d. Enterprise Surveys Online. [www.enterprisesurveys.org]. Washington, D.C. ———. n.d. Performance Assessments and Allocation of IDA Resources Online database. [www.worldbank.org/ida]. Washington, D.C. ———. n.d. PovcalNet online database. [http://iresearch.worldbank.org/ PovcalNet]. Washington, D.C. ———. n.d. Private Participation in Infrastructure Database. [http://ppi.worldbank. org/]. Washington, D.C. ———. n.d. World Trade Indicators Online database. [www.worldbank.org/wti]. Washington, D.C. ———. Various issues. Commodity Market Review. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, Development Prospects Group ———. Various issues. Commodity Price Data. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, Development Prospects Group. ———. Various issues. Migration and Development Briefs. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, Development Prospects Group. ———. Various years. Global Development Finance: Volumes I and II. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. Various years. World Development Indicators. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. Various years. World Debt Tables. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. World Bank, Agence Françaisede Développement, Bundesministerium für Wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau Entwicklungsbank, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, and Department for International Development. 2005. Pro-Poor Growth in the 1990s: Lessons and Insights from 14 Countries. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. World Bank and IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute). 2006. Agriculture and Achieving the Millennium Development Goals. Report 32729-GLB. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. World Bank and IMF (International Monetary Fund). 2007. Global Monitoring Report 2007: Millennium Development Goals: Confronting the Challenges of Gender Equality and Fragile States. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. 2008. Global Monitoring Report 2008: MDGs and the Environment. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. ———. 2009a. “Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative and Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI)—Status of Implementation.” Washington, D.C. ———. 2009b. Global Monitoring Report 2009: A Development Emergency. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. World Economic Forum. 2009. The Global Competitiveness Report 2009–2010. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
World Tourism Organization. Various years. Compendium of Tourism Statistics. Madrid: World Tourism Organization. ———. Various years. Yearbook of Tourism Statistics. Vols. 1 and 2. Madrid: World Tourism Organization. WTO (World Trade Organization). n.d. Regional Trade Agreements Gateway. [www. wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/region_e.htm]. Geneva. ———. n.d. Regional Trade Agreements Information System. Online database.
———. Various years. Annual Report. Geneva. Yepes, Tito, Justin Pierce, and Vivien Foster. 2009. “Making Sense of Africa’s Infrastructure Endowment: A Benchmarking Approach.” Policy Research Working Paper 4912. World Bank, Africa Region, Sustainable Development Front Office, Washington, D.C. Zambian Ministry of Health and World Health Organization. 2006. “Service Availability Mapping.” World Health Organization, Geneva.
[http://rtais.wto.org/]. Geneva.
2010 World Development Indicators
447
INDEX OF INDICATORS References are to table numbers. Aid
A
by recipient
Agriculture agricultural raw materials commodity prices
6.6
exports as share of total exports from high-income economies as share of total exports
4.4 6.4
by high-income economies as share of total exports tariff rates applied by high-income countries
6.16
per capita
6.16
total
6.16
net concessional flows from international financial institutions
6.13
from UN agencies
6.13
official development assistance by DAC members administrative costs, as share of net bilateral ODA
imports as share of total imports
aid dependency ratios
4.4 6.4 6.4
disbursements bilateral aid
6.15a 6.15a, 6.15b, 6.17
by purpose
6.15a
by sector
cereal
6.15b
area under production
3.2
commitments
exports from high-income economies as share of total exports
6.4
debt-related aid, as share of net bilateral ODA disbursements
imports, by high-income economies as share of total imports
6.4
development projects, programs, and other resource provisions,
tariff rates applied by high-income countries
6.4
yield
3.3
employment, as share of total
3.2
fertilizer commodity prices
6.6
consumption, per hectare of arable land
3.2
6.14, 6.15b 6.15a
as share of net bilateral ODA disbursements
6.15a
for basic social services, as share of sector-allocable bilateral ODA commitments
1.4
gross disbursements
6.14
humanitarian assistance, as share of net bilateral ODA disbursements
6.15a
net disbursements
food beverages and tobacco
4.3
as share of general government disbursements
commodity prices
6.6
as share of GNI of donor country
6.14 1.4, 6.14
exports from high-income economies as share of total exports
4.4, 6.4
from major donors, by recipient
6.17
imports by high-income economies as share of total imports
4.5, 6.4
per capita of donor country
6.14
tariff rates applied by high-income countries
6.4
total
6.14, 6.15a
3.5
technical cooperation, as share of net bilateral ODA
agricultural, as share of land area
3.2
total sector allocable, as share of bilateral ODA commitments
6.15b
arable, as share of land area
3.1
untied aid
6.15b
arable, per 100 people
3.1
area under cereal production
3.2
permanent cropland, as share of land area
3.1
AIDS—see HIV, prevalence
3.2
Air pollution—see Pollution
crop
3.3
Air transport
food
3.3
air freight
5.10
livestock
3.3
passengers carried
5.10
registered carrier departures worldwide
5.10
freshwater withdrawals for, as share of total
disbursements
land
official development assistance by non-DAC members
6.15a
6.15a
machinery tractors per 100 square kilometers of arable land production indexes
value added
448
annual growth
4.1
as share of GDP
4.2
per worker
3.3
2010 World Development Indicators
Asylum seekers—see Migration; Refugees
B
corruption informal payments to public officials
5.2
crime
Balance of payments current account balance
4.15
exports and imports of goods and services
4.15
net current transfers
4.15
net income
4.15
total reserves
4.15
losses due to theft, robbery, vandalism, and arson
5.2, 5.8
customs average time to clear exports
5.2
dealing with construction permits to build a warehouse
See also Exports; Imports; Investment; Private financial flows; Trade
number of procedures
5.3
time required
5.3
employing workers Battle-related deaths
rigidity of employment index
5.8
5.3
enforcing contracts Beverages commodity prices
6.6
number of procedures
5.3
time required
5.3
finance firms using banks to finance investment
Biodiversity—see Biological diversity
5.2
gender female participation in ownership
Biological diversity assessment, date prepared, by country
3.15
GEF benefits index
firms formally registered when operations started
3.4
threatened species
value lost due to electrical outages
3.4
higher plants
5.2
innovation
3.4
treaty
5.2
infrastructure
3.4
animal
5.2
informality
ISO certification ownership
3.15
5.2
permits and licenses Birth rate, crude
time required to obtain operating license
2.1
protecting investors disclosure, index
See also Fertility rate
5.2 5.3
registering property Births attended by skilled health staff
2.19
Birthweight, low
number of procedures
5.3
time to register
5.3
regulation and tax
2.19
Bonds—see Debt flows; Private financial flows
average number of times firms spend meeting with tax officials
5.2
time dealing with officials
5.2
starting a business Brain drain—see Emigration of people with tertiary education to OECD countries
cost to start a business
5.3
number of start-up procedures
5.3
time to start a business Breastfeeding, exclusive
2.19, 2.21
5.2
C
Business environment businesses registered new
5.1
Carbon dioxide
total
5.1
damage
3.16
emissions
closing a business time to resolve insolvency
5.3
workforce, firms offering formal training
5.3
per 2005 PPP dollar of GDP per capita
3.8 1.3, 3.8
2010 World Development Indicators
449
INDEX OF INDICATORS total
1.6, 3.8
intensity
3.8
Contraceptives prevalence rate
1.3, 2.19
unmet need for
2.19
Children at work Contract enforcement
by economic activity
2.6
male and female
2.6
number of procedures
5.3
study and work
2.6
time required for
5.3
status in employment
2.6
total
2.6, 5.8
work only
Corruption, informal payments to public officials
5.2
2.6 Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (CPIA)—see Economic management; Social inclusion and equity policies; Public sector management
Cities air pollution
3.14
and institutions; Structural policies
population Credit
in largest city
3.11
in selected cities
3.14
in urban agglomerations of more than 1 million
3.11
depth of credit information index
5.5
3.11
strength of legal rights index
5.5
private credit registry coverage
5.5
public credit registry coverage
5.5
urban population
getting credit
See also Urban environment Closing a business—see Business environment Commercial bank and other lending
6.6
4.11
Computers (personal) per 100 people
5.12
distribution—see Income distribution
See also Purchasing power parity (PPP)
450
2010 World Development Indicators
Customs average time to clear
5.2
burden of procedures
6.9
DAC (Development Assistance Committee)—see Aid 4.9 4.8
Death rate, crude
2.1
See also Mortality rate
household
as share of GDP
4.15
3.16
government, general
per capita
5.2
D
Consumption
average annual growth
5.8
See also Balance of payments
Compensation of government employees
as share of GDP
intentional homicide rate losses due to Current account balance
households with
annual growth
5.1
Crime
Communications—see Internet; Newspapers, daily; Telephones; Television,
fixed capital
5.5
to private sector 6.12
See also Debt flows; Private financial flows Commodity prices and price indexes
provided by banking sector
4.9 4.9 4.8
Debt, external as share of GNI
6.11
debt ratios
6.11
debt service multilateral, as share of public and publicly guaranteed debt service total, as share of exports of goods and services and income IMF credit, use of
6.11
2.12
net, by level
2.12
adjusted net, primary
2.12
6.11
gross intake rate, grade 1
6.10
gross primary participation rate
2.13, 2.15 2.15
out of school children, male and female
long-term private nonguaranteed
gross, by level
6.10
primary completion rate
2.12, 2.15 1.2, 2.14, 2.15
male and female
public and publicly guaranteed IBRD loans and IDA credits
6.10
total
6.10
present value as share of GNI
6.11
as share of exports of goods and services and income
6.11
short-term
2.14, 2.15
progression share of cohort reaching grade 5, male and female
2.13
share of cohort reaching last grade of primary, male and female
2.13
public expenditure on as share of GDP
2.11
as share of total government expenditure
2.11
per student, as share of GDP per capita, by level
2.11
as share of total debt
6.11
as share of total reserves
6.11
pupil-teacher ratio, primary level
2.11
total
6.10
repeaters, primary level, male and female
2.13
6.10
teachers, primary, trained
2.11
transition to secondary school, male and female
2.13
total
unemployment by level of educational attainment
Debt flows bonds
6.12
commercial banks and other lending
6.12
years of schooling, average Electricity
See also Private financial flows
consumption Deforestation, average annual
2.5 2.15
3.4
5.11
production share of total
3.10
sources
Density—see Population, density
3.10
transmission and distribution losses value lost due to outages
Dependency ratio—See Population
5.11 5.2
Development assistance—see Aid
Emigration of people with tertiary education to OECD countries
Disease—see Health risks
Emissions
6.1
carbon dioxide Distribution of income or consumption—see Income distribution
E
average annual growth
3.9
intensity
3.8
per capita
3.8
total
3.8
methane
Economic management (Country Policy and Institutional Assessment) debt policy
5.9
agricultural as share of total
economic management cluster average
5.9
industrial as share of total
3.9
fiscal policy
5.9
total
3.9
macroeconomic management
5.9
nitrous oxide agricultural as share of total
Education enrollment ratio girls to boys enrollment in primary and secondary schools
1.2
3.9
3.9
industrial as share of total
3.9
total
3.9
other greenhouse gases
3.9
2010 World Development Indicators
451
INDEX OF INDICATORS Exchange rates
Employment children in employment
2.6
in agriculture
official, local currency units to U.S. dollar
4.14
ratio of PPP conversion factor to official exchange rate
4.14 4.14
as share of total employment
3.2
real effective
male and female
2.3
See also Purchasing power parity (PPP)
in industry, male and female
2.3
in services, male and female
2.3
rigidity index
5.3
to population ratio
2.4
vulnerable
2.4
Export credits private, from DAC members Exports
See also Labor force; Unemployment
arms
5.7
documents required for
6.9
goods and services
Employing workers rigidity of employment index
6.14
as share of GDP
5.3
average annual growth total
Endangered species—see Animal species; Biological diversity; Plants, higher
4.8 4.9 4.15
high-technology Energy commodity prices depletion, as share of GNI
6.6
share of manufactured exports
5.13
total
5.13
lead time
3.16
6.9
merchandise
emissions—see Pollution imports, net
3.8
annual growth
production
3.7
by high-income countries, by product
6.4
by developing countries, by partner
6.5
use
6.2, 6.3
2005 PPP dollar of GDP per unit
3.8
by regional trade blocs
6.7
average annual growth
3.8
direction of trade
6.3
combustible renewables and waste as share of total
3.7
structure
4.4
fossil fuel consumption as share of total
3.7
total
4.4
total
3.7
value, average annual growth
6.2
volume, average annual growth
6.2
See also Electricity; Fuels
services structure
Enforcing contracts—see Business environment Enrollment—see Education
4.6
transport
4.6
travel
3.15
Equity flows
F Female-headed households
foreign direct investment, net inflows
6.12
portfolio equity
6.12
See also Private financial flows
adolescent
European Commission
452
2010 World Development Indicators
desired 6.17
2.10
Fertility rate crude birth rate
distribution of net aid from
4.6, 6.19
See also Trade
Entry regulations for business—see Business environment Environmental strategy, year adopted
4.6
total
total
2.19 2.1 2.19 2.18, 2.21
Finance, firms using banks to finance investment
5.2
Fuels consumption
Financial access, stability, and efficiency bank capital to asset ratio
5.5
bank nonperforming loans
5.5
road sector
3.13
transportation sector
3.13
exports as share of total exports
from DAC members
4.5
crude petroleum, from high-income economies, as share of total
Financial flows, net
exports
6.14
6.4
from high-income economies, as share of total exports
official from bilateral sources
6.13
from international financial institutions
6.13
from multilateral sources
6.13
6.4
petroleum products, from high-income economies, as share of total exports
6.4
imports
from UN agencies
6.13
as share of total imports
total
6.13
crude petroleum, by high-income economies, as share of total
grants from NGOs
6.14
by high-income economies, as share of total imports
other official flows
6.14
petroleum products, by high-income economies, as share of total
imports
official development assistance and official aid
private
6.14
total
6.14
6.4
imports
3.13
tariff rates applied by high-income countries 6.1
See also Private financial flows
6.4 6.4
prices
See also Aid Financing through international capital markets
4.4
6.4
G GEF benefits index for biodiversity
3.4
Gender, female participation in ownership
5.2
Food—see Agriculture, production indexes; Commodity prices and price indexes Foreign direct investment, net—see Investment; Private financial flows
Gender differences in children in employment
2.6, 5.8
in education
Forest area, as share of total land area
3.1
in employment
deforestation, average annual
3.4
in HIV prevalence
net depletion
3.16
1.2, 2.12, 2.13, 2.14 2.3 2.21
in labor force participation
2.2
in life expectancy at birth
1.5
in literacy
Freshwater annual withdrawals
adult
2.14
youth
2.14
amount
3.5
as share of internal resources
3.5
for agriculture
3.5
adult
2.22
for domestic use
3.5
child
2.22
for industry
3.5
renewable internal resources
in mortality
in smoking
2.21
in survival to age 65
2.22 2.10
flows
3.5
in youth unemployment
per capita
3.5
unpaid family workers
1.5
women in nonagricultural sector
1.5
women in parliaments
1.5
See also Water, access to improved source of
2010 World Development Indicators
453
INDEX OF INDICATORS Gini index
2.9
Gross savings
Government, central cash surplus or deficit
as share of GDP
4.8
as share of GNI
3.16
4.10
debt as share of GDP
4.10
interest, as share of revenue
4.10
interest, as share of total expenses
4.11
expense as share of GDP
4.10
by economic type
4.11
H Health care children sleeping under treated bednets
2.18
children with acute respiratory infection taken to health provider
2.18
children with diarrhea who received oral rehydration and continued feeding children with fever receiving antimalarial drugs
net incurrence of liabilities, as share of GDP
2.18
domestic
4.10
hospital beds per 1,000 people
2.16
foreign
4.10
immunization
2.18
physicians, nurses, and midwives
2.16
as share of GDP
4.10
outpatient visits per capita
2.16
grants and other
4.12
physicians per 1,000 people
2.16
social contributions
4.12
reproductive
revenues, current
tax, as share of GDP tax, by source
5.6 4.12
anemia, prevalence of, pregnant women births attended by skilled health staff contraceptive prevalence rate
Gross capital formation
2.19
total
2.19
annual growth
4.9
low-birthweight babies
4.8
maternal mortality ratio unmet need for contraception
1.1, 1.6, 4.1
Gross enrollment—see Education Gross national income (GNI) per capita rank
1.3, 2.20 2.18
Health expenditure as share of GDP
2.16
out of pocket
2.16
per capita
2.16
public
2.16
total
2.16
1.1, 1.6 1.1
U.S. dollars
2.19
1.1, 1.6 4.2
PPP dollars
incidence treatment success rate
implicit deflator—see Prices total
2.20 1.3, 2.19, 5.8
tuberculosis
Gross domestic product (GDP)
per capita, annual growth
2.19 1.3, 2.19
adolescent
as share of GDP
annual growth
2.20
fertility rate
Greenhouse gases—see Emissions
1.1, 1.6
Health information census, year last completed
2.17
completeness of vital registration
rank PPP dollars
1.1
birth registration
2.17
U.S. dollars
1.1
infant death
2.17
total death
2.17
total PPP dollars
1.1, 1.6
health survey, year last completed
U.S. dollars
1.1, 1.6
national health account number completed
454
2.18
2010 World Development Indicators
2.17 2.17
year last completed
2.17
Health risks
Immunization rate, child DPT, share of children ages 12–23 months
2.18
measles, share of children ages 12–23 months
2.18
anemia, prevalence of children ages under 5
2.20
pregnant women
2.20
child malnutrition, prevalence
1.2, 2.20
Imports arms
5.7
documents required for
6.9 3.8
condom use
2.21
energy, net, as share of total energy use
diabetes, prevalence
2.21
goods and services
1.3, 2.21
as share of GDP
HIV prevalence overweight children, prevalence
2.20
average annual growth
smoking, prevalence
2.21
total
tuberculosis, incidence undernourishment, prevalence
1.3, 2.21 2.20
4.8 4.9 4.15
lead time
6.9
merchandise annual growth
Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPCs)
6.3
by high-income countries, by product
6.4 6.5
assistance
1.4
by developing countries, by partner
completion point
1.4
structure
decision point
1.4
tariffs
Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI) assistance
1.4
total
4.5
value, average annual growth
6.2
volume, average annual growth
6.2
HIV
4.5 6.4, 6.8
services
prevalence
1.3, 2.21
female
2.21
structure
population ages 15–24, male and female
2.21
total
4.7
total
2.21
transport
4.7
travel
prevention condom use, male and female Homicide rate, intentional
4.7
2.21
See also Trade
5.8
Income distribution
4.7, 6.18
Gini index
2.9
percentage of
Hospital beds—see Health care
1.2, 2.9
Industry
Housing conditions, national and urban durable dwelling units
3.12
annual growth
4.1
home ownership
3.12
as share of GDP
4.2
household size
3.12
employment, male and female
2.3
multiunit dwellings
3.12
overcrowding
3.12
vacancy rate
3.12
Inflation—see Prices Informal economy, firms formally registered when operations started
Hunger, depth
5.2
5.8 Information and communications technology expenditures
I IDA Resource Allocation Index (IRAI)
as share of GDP 5.9
5.11
Innovation, ISO certification ownership
2010 World Development Indicators
5.2
455
INDEX OF INDICATORS Integration, global economic, indicators
6.1
5.1
water and sanitation
5.1
See also Gross capital formation; Private financial flows
Interest payments—see Government, central, debt
Iodized salt, consumption of
Interest rates deposit
4.13
lending
4.13
real
4.13
risk premium on lending
5.5
spread
5.5
Internally displaced persons
transport
5.8
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD)
L Labor force annual growth
5.7
children at work
2.6
female
2.2
participation of population ages 15 and older, male and female
2.2 2.2
IBRD loans and IDA credits
6.10
total
6.13
See also Employment; Migration; Unemployment Land area
International Development Association (IDA) IBRD loans and IDA credits
6.10
arable—see Agriculture, land; Land use
net concessional flows from
6.13
See also Protected areas; Surface area Land use
International migrant stock total
2.2
armed forces
net financial flows from
as share of total population
2.20
6.1 6.18
See also Migration International Monetary Fund (IMF)
arable land, as share of total land
3.1
area under cereal production
3.2
by type
3.1
forest area, as share of total land
3.1
irrigated land
3.2
net financial flows from
6.13
permanent cropland, as share of total land
3.1
use of IMF credit
6.10
total area
3.1
Life expectancy at birth
Internet broadband subscribers
5.12
male and female
fixed broadband access tariff
5.12
total
secure servers
5.12
users
5.12
international Internet bandwidth
5.12, 6.1
1.5 1.6, 2.22
Literacy adult, male and female
1.6, 2.14
youth, male and female
1.6, 2.14
Investment Logistics Performance Index
foreign direct, net inflows as share of GDP from DAC members
6.14
total
6.12
foreign direct, net outflows as share of GDP
M Malnutrition, in children under age 5
1.2, 2.20
6.1
infrastructure, private participation in
456
6.9
6.1
Malaria
energy
5.1
children sleeping under treated bednets
2.18
telecommunications
5.1
children with fever receiving antimalarial drugs
2.18
2010 World Development Indicators
Management time dealing with officials
5.2
exports food
6.2
within regional trade blocs
6.7
imports
Manufacturing chemicals
volume, average annual growth
4.3 4.4, 6.4 4.3
agricultural raw materials
4.5
by developing countries, by partner
6.5
cereals
6.4
chemicals
6.4
4.3
crude petroleum
6.4
structure
4.3
food
4.5
textile
4.3
footwear
6.4
fuels
4.5
imports machinery
4.5, 6.4
value added annual growth
4.1
furniture
as share of GDP
4.2
information and communications technology goods
total
4.3
iron and steel
See also Merchandise
6.4 5.12 6.4
machinery and transport equipment
6.4
manufactures
4.5
ores and metals
4.5
goods admitted free of tariffs
1.4
ores and nonferrous materials
6.4
support to agriculture
1.4
petroleum products
6.4
Market access to high-income countries
textiles
6.4
1.4
total
4.5
clothing
1.4
value, average annual growth
6.2
textiles
1.4
volume, average annual growth
6.2
tariffs on exports from least developed countries agricultural products
trade Merchandise exports
as share of GDP
6.1
by developing countries, by partner
6.5
direction
6.3
by regional trade blocs
6.7
growth
6.3
by developing countries, by partner
6.5
regional trade blocs
6.7
cereals
6.4
agricultural raw materials
4.4, 6.4
chemicals
6.4
crude petroleum
6.4
food
Metals and minerals commodity prices and price index
6.6
4.4, 6.4 Methane emissions
footwear
6.4
fuels
4.4
agricultural as share of total
3.9
furniture
6.4
industrial as share of total
3.9
total
3.9
information and communications technology goods
5.12
information and communications technology services
5.12 Migration
iron and steel
6.4
machinery and transport equipment
6.4
emigration of people with tertiary education to OECD countries
manufactures
4.4
international migrant stock
ores and metals
4.4
as share of total population
ores and nonferrous materials
6.4
total
petroleum products
6.4
net
textiles
6.4
See also Refugees; Remittances
total
4.4
value, average annual growth
6.2
6.1 6.1 6.18 6.1, 6.18
2010 World Development Indicators
457
INDEX OF INDICATORS official development assistance
Military
for basic social services as share of total sector allocable
armed forces personnel as share of labor force
5.7
total
5.7
ODA commitments net disbursements as share of GNI of donor country untied commitments
arms transfers exports
5.7
poverty gap
imports
5.7
pregnant women receiving prenatal care share of cohort reaching last grade of primary
military expenditure as share of central government expenditure
5.7
as share of GDP
5.7, 5.8
support to agriculture telephone lines, fixed, per 100 people
1.4 1.4, 6.14 6.15b 2.7, 2.8 1.5, 2.19 2.13 1.4 5.11
tuberculosis case detection rate
Millennium Development Goals, indicators for access to improved sanitation facilities
1.3, 2.18, 5.8
access to improved water source
2.18, 3.5, 5.8
least developed countries
1.4
births attended by skilled health staff
2.19
carbon dioxide emissions per capita
1.3, 3.8
cellular subscribers per 100 people
5.11
children sleeping under treated bednets
2.18 1.3, 2.19
employment to population ratio enrollment ratio, net, primary
2.12 1.2
fertility rate, adolescent
2.19
goods admitted free of tariffs from least developed countries
1.4
decision point
1.4
nominal debt service relief committed
1.4
immunization measles
2.19 1.2, 2.4 1.5 3.16
claims on governments and other public entities
4.13
claims on private sector
4.13
adult, male and female
crude death rate
5.12
labor productivity, GDP per person employed
2.4
literacy rate of 15- to 24-year-olds
2.14 1.2, 2.19
malaria children under age 5 sleeping under insecticide treated bednets
2.18
children under age 5 with fever who are treated with
4.13
Mortality rate
2.18 1.2, 2.9 2.22
2010 World Development Indicators
2.20
Monetary indicators
children under age 5
Internet users per 100 people
458
Minerals, depletion of
2.18
infant mortality rate
national parliament seats held by women
women in wage employment in the nonagricultural sector
child, male and female
DPT
appropriate antimalarial drugs
vulnerable employment
Money and quasi money, annual growth
completion point
maternal mortality ratio
unmet need for contraception
2.18 1.2, 2.22, 5.8
1.4
heavily indebted poor countries (HIPCs)
malnutrition, prevalence
undernourishment, prevalence
2.18 1.3, 2.21
2.4
female to male enrollments, primary and secondary
income or consumption, national share of poorest quintile
treatment success rate under-five mortality rate
average tariff imposed by developed countries on exports of
contraceptive prevalence rate
incidence
infant maternal
2.22 2.22 1.2, 2.22, 5.8 2.1 2.22 1.3, 2.19, 5.8
Motor vehicles passenger cars
3.13
per 1,000 people
3.13
per kilometer of road
3.13
road density
3.13
See also Roads; Traffic 2.18 1.3, 2.18 1.5
MUV G-5 index
6.6
N
Peacebuilding and peacekeeping operations
Net enrollment—see Education Net national savings
3.16
Newspapers, daily
5.12
mission name
5.8
troops, police, and military observers
5.8
Pension average, as share of per capita income
Nitrous oxide emissions agricultural as share of total
3.9
industrial as share of total
3.9
total
3.9
2.10
contributors as share of labor force
2.10
as share of working age population
2.10
public expenditure on, as share of GDP
2.10
Permits and licenses, time required to obtain operating license
5.2
Physicians—see Health care
Nutrition anemia, prevalence of
Plants, higher
children ages under 5
2.20
pregnant women
2.20
species
3.4
breastfeeding
2.20
threatened species
3.4
iodized salt consumption
2.20
malnutrition, child
1.2, 2.11, 2.20
Pollution carbon dioxide
overweight children, prevalence
2.20
undernourishment, prevalence
2.20
damage, as share of GNI
vitamin A supplementation
2.20
emissions
3.16
per 2005 PPP dollar of GDP
O
3.8
per capita
3.8
total
3.8
methane emissions
Official development assistance—see Aid
agricultural as share of total Official flows net
3.9
industrial as share of total
3.9
total
3.9
6.13
nitrogen dioxide, selected cities
from international financial institutions
6.13
nitrous oxide emissions
from multilateral sources
6.13
agricultural as share of total
6.13
industrial as share of total
3.9
6.14
total
3.9
from bilateral sources
from United Nations other
3.14 3.9
organic water pollutants, emissions
P Passenger cars per 1,000 people
3.13
by industry
3.6
per day
3.6
per worker
3.6
particulate matter, selected cities Particulate matter emission damage
3.16
selected cities
3.14
urban-population-weighted PM10
3.13
Patent applications filed
5.13
3.14
sulfur dioxide, selected cities
3.14
urban-population-weighted PM10
3.13
Population age dependency ratio, young and old
2.1
average annual growth
2.1
2010 World Development Indicators
459
INDEX OF INDICATORS wholesale, annual growth
by age group, as share of total 0–14
4.14
2.11
5–64
2.1
65 and older
2.1
density
1.1, 1.6
female, as share of total
Primary education—see Education Private financial flows debt flows
1.5
rural annual growth as share of total total
3.1
bonds
6.12
commercial bank and other lending
6.12
equity flows
3.1 1.1, 1.6, 2.1
urban
foreign direct investment, net inflows
6.12
portfolio equity
6.12
as share of total
3.11
financing through international capital markets, as share of GDP
average annual growth
3.11
from DAC members
in largest city
3.11
See also Investment
in selected cities
3.14
in urban agglomerations
3.11
total
3.11
6.1 6.14
Productivity in agriculture
See also Migration
value added per worker
Portfolio—see Equity flows; Private financial flows
3.3
labor productivity, GDP per person employed
2.4
water productivity, total
3.5
Protected areas
Ports container traffic in
5.9
quality of infrastructure
6.9
marine as share of total surface area
3.4
total
3.4
Poverty Protecting investors disclosure index
international poverty line local currency population living below
Public sector management and institutions (Country Policy and Institutional
$1.25 a day
2.8
$2 a day
2.8
Assessment) efficiency of revenue mobilization
5.9
property rights and rule-based governance
5.9
2.7
public sector management and institutions cluster average
5.9
national
2.7
quality of budgetary and financial management
5.9
rural
2.7
quality of public administration
5.9
urban
2.7
transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector
5.9
national poverty line population living below
Power—see Electricity, production
Purchasing power parity (PPP) conversion factor
Prenatal care, pregnant women receiving
commodity prices and price indexes consumer, annual growth fuel
6.6 4.14 3.8
GDP implicit deflator, annual growth terms of trade
2010 World Development Indicators
gross national income
1.5, 2.19
Prices
460
5.3
2.8
4.14 6.2
4.14 1.1, 1.6
R Railways goods hauled by
5.10
lines, total
5.10
passengers carried
5.10
passengers carried
5.10
by country of asylum
5.8, 6.18
paved, as share of total
5.10
by country of origin
5.8, 6.18
total network
5.10
traffic
3.13
Refugees
Regional development banks, net financial flows from
6.13 Royalty and license fees
Regional trade agreements—see Trade blocs, regional
payments
5.13
receipts
5.13
Registering property number of procedures
5.3
time to register
5.3
Rural environment access to improved sanitation facilities
3.11, 5.8
population Regulation and tax administration management time dealing with officials
5.2
meeting with tax officials, number of times
5.2
annual growth
3.1
as share of total
3.1
S
Relative prices (PPP)—see Purchasing power parity (PPP)
S&P/EMDB Indexes
5.4
Remittances Sanitation, access to improved facilities, population with
workers’ remittances and compensation of employees 6.1
rural
3.11
paid
6.18
total
1.3, 2.18
received
6.18
urban
as share of GDP
3.11
Savings
Reproductive health anemia, prevalence of, pregnant women
2.20
gross, as share of GDP
4.8
births attended by skilled health staff
2.19
gross, as share of GNI
3.16
net
3.16
contraception prevalence rate
1.3, 2.19
unmet need for
2.19
Schooling—see Education
adolescent
2.19
Science and technology
desired
2.19
scientific and technical journal articles
total
2.19
See also Research and development
fertility rate
low-birthweight babies maternal mortality ratio pregnant women receiving prenatal care
5.13
2.20 1.3, 2.19, 5.8
Secondary education—see Education
1.5, 2.19, Services
Research and development
employment, male and female
2.3
expenditures
5.13
researchers
5.13
structure
4.6
technicians
5.13
total
4.6
exports
imports structure
Reserves, gross international—see Balance of payments
4.7
total goods hauled by
4.7
trade, as share of GDP
Roads
6.1
5.10
2010 World Development Indicators
461
INDEX OF INDICATORS simple mean bound rate
6.8
annual growth
4.1
simple mean tariff
6.8
as share of GDP
4.2
weighted mean tariff
6.8
value added
applied rates on imports from low- and middle-income economies Smoking, prevalence, male and female
2.21
Social inclusion and equity policies (Country Policy and Institutional Assessment)
6.4
manufactured products simple mean tariff
6.8
weighted mean tariff
6.8
building human resources
5.9
on exports of least developed countries
equity of public resource use
5.9
primary products
1.4
gender equity
5.9
simple mean tariff
6.8
policy and institutions for environmental sustainability
5.9
weighted mean tariff
6.8
social inclusion and equity cluster average
5.9
social protection and labor
5.9
Taxes and tax policies business taxes
Starting a business—see Business environment Stock markets listed domestic companies
5.4
average number of times firms spent meeting tax officials
5.2
number of payments
5.6
time to prepare, file, and pay
5.6
total tax rate, percent profit goods and services taxes, domestic
market capitalization
5.6 4.12
highest marginal tax rate
as share of GDP
5.4
total
5.4
corporate
5.6
market liquidity
5.4
individual
5.6
S&P/EMDB Indices
5.4
income, profit, and capital gains taxes
4.12
turnover ratio
5.4
international trade taxes
4.12
other taxes
4.12
social contributions
4.12
Steel products, commodity prices and price index
6.6
tax revenue, as share of GDP
5.6
Structural policies (Country Policy and Institutional Assessment) business regulating environment
5.9
financial sector
5.9
structural policies cluster average
5.9
trade
5.9
Technology—see Computers; Exports, high-technology; Internet; Research and development; Science and technology Telephones fixed line per 100 people
Sulfur dioxide emissions—see Pollution
residential tariff Surface area
1.1, 1.6
international voice traffic per 100 people
See also Land use
5.11 5.11 5.11, 6.1 5.11
mobile cellular Survival to age 65, male and female
2.22
Suspended particulate matter—see Pollution
T
per 100 people
5.11
prepaid tariff
5.11
mobile cellular and fixed-line subscribers per employee
5.11
total revenue
5.11
Television, households with
Tariffs
1.3, 5.11
population covered
5.12
all products binding coverage
462
2010 World Development Indicators
6.8
Terms of trade index, net barter
6.2
Tertiary education—see Education Threatened species—see Animal species; Biological diversity; Plants, higher
total exports, by bloc
6.7
type of agreement
6.7
year of creation
6.7
year of entry into force of the most recent agreement
6.7
Tourism, international Trademark applications filed
expenditures in the country
5.13
as share of exports
6.19
total
6.19
Trade policies—see Tariffs
as share of imports
6.19
Traffic
total
6.19
road traffic
3.13
inbound tourists, by country
6.19
road traffic injury and mortality
2.18
outbound tourists, by country
6.19
See also Roads
expenditures in other countries
Transport—see Air transport; Railways; Roads; Traffic; Urban environment
Trade arms
5.7 Travel—see Tourism, international
facilitation burden of customs procedures
6.9
documents
Treaties, participation in
to export
6.9
biological diversity
3.15
to import
6.9
CFC control
3.15
6.9
climate change
3.15
Convention on International Trade on Endangered Species (CITES)
3.15
freight costs to the United States lead time to export
6.9
Convention to Combat Desertification (CCD)
3.15
to import
6.9
Kyoto Protocol
3.15
liner shipping connectivity index
6.9
Law of the Sea
3.15
logistics performance index
6.9
ozone layer
3.15
quality of port infrastructure
6.9
Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants
3.15
merchandise as share of GDP
6.1
direction of, by developing countries
6.5
direction of, by region
6.3
high-income economy with low- and middle-income economies, by product
6.4
Tuberculosis, incidence
1.3, 2.20
U UN agencies, net official financial flows from
6.13
6.7
Undernourishment, prevalence of
2.20
6.1
Unemployment
nominal growth, by region
6.3
regional trading blocs services as share of GDP computer, information, communications, and other
4.6, 4.7
incidence of long-term, total, male, and female
2.5
insurance and financial
4.6, 4.7
by level of educational attainment, primary, secondary, tertiary
2.5
transport
4.6, 4.7
total, male, and female
travel
4.6, 4.7
youth, male, and female
2.5 1.3, 2.10
See also Balance of payments; Exports; Imports; Manufacturing; Merchandise; Terms of trade; Trade blocs Trade blocs, regional exports within bloc
UNHCR, refugees under the mandate of
6.18
UNICEF, net official financial flows from
6.13
6.7
2010 World Development Indicators
463
INDEX OF INDICATORS UNTA, net official financial flows from
6.13
per worker in agriculture
3.3
total, in manufacturing
UNRWA net official financial flows from
6.13
refugees under the mandate of
6.18
Urban environment access to sanitation employment, informal sector
3.11, 5.8 2.8
Vulnerable employment
Water
3.11
pollution—see Pollution, organic water pollutants
average annual growth
3.11
productivity
in largest city
3.11
in urban agglomerations
3.11
total
3.11
as share of total
1.2, 2.4
W access to improved source of, population with
population
4.3
1.3, 2.18, 5.8 3.5
Women in development female-headed households
2.10
female population, as share of total
selected cities
1.5
nitrogen dioxide
3.14
life expectancy at birth
particulate matter
3.14
pregnant women receiving prenatal care
population
3.14
teenage mothers
1.5
sulfur dioxide
3.14
unpaid family workers
1.5
See also Pollution; Population; Sanitation; Water
V
1.5 1.5, 2.19
vulnerable employment
2.4
women in nonagricultural sector
1.5
women in parliaments
1.5
Workforce, firms offering formal training
Value added
5.2
as share of GDP World Bank commodity price index
in agriculture
4.2
in industry
4.2
energy
in manufacturing
4.2
nonenergy commodities
6.6
in services
4.2
steel products
6.6
6.6
growth
464
in agriculture
4.1
in industry
4.1
in manufacturing
4.1
in services
4.1
2010 World Development Indicators
World Bank, net financial flows from See also International Bank for Reconstruction and Development; International Development Association
6.13
The world by region
Classified according to World Bank analytical grouping
Low- and middle-income economies East Asia and Pacific
Middle East and North Africa
High-income economies
Europe and Central Asia
South Asia
OECD
Latin America and the Caribbean
Sub-Saharan Africa
Other
No data
Greenland (Den)
Iceland
Isle of Man (UK)
Canada
Sweden
Finland Russian Federation
Estonia Russian Latvia Fed. Lithuania United Belarus Germany Poland Kingdom Belgium Ukraine Moldova Romania France Italy Denmark
Ireland Channel Islands (UK)
Luxembourg Liechtenstein Switzerland Andorra United States
Norway
Faeroe Islands (Den)
The Netherlands
Portugal
Spain Monaco Tunisia Algeria
Cayman Is.(UK)
Cuba Belize Jamaica Guatemala Honduras El Salvador Nicaragua Costa Rica
Cape Verde
Mali
Niger
The Gambia Guinea-Bissau R.B. de Venezuela
Guyana Suriname
Sierra Leone Liberia
Sudan Benin
Côte Ghana d’Ivoire
Togo Equatorial Guinea São Tomé and Príncipe
Cameroon
Congo
Malawi
Bolivia Zimbabwe Namibia Paraguay
U.S. Virgin Islands (US)
St. Kitts and Nevis Netherlands Antilles (Neth) Aruba (Neth)
Uruguay Argentina
Martinique (Fr)
St. Lucia St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Barbados Grenada Trinidad and Tobago
N. Mariana Islands (US)
Sri Lanka
Guam (US)
Philippines
Federated States of Micronesia
Brunei Darussalam Malaysia
Marshall Islands
Palau
Maldives Nauru
Singapore
Botswana
South Africa
Poland
Kiribati
Comoros
Solomon Islands
Papua New Guinea
Indonesia
Tuvalu
Mayotte (Fr)
Madagascar
Vanuatu
Fiji
Mauritius Réunion (Fr)
Australia
New Caledonia (Fr)
Lesotho
Czech Republic Ukraine Slovak Republic Austria
Guadeloupe (Fr)
Dominica
Lao P.D.R.
Seychelles
Mozambique
Swaziland Germany
Chile
Myanmar
Timor-Leste
Tonga
Puerto Rico (US)
India
Vietnam Cambodia
Kenya
Rwanda Dem.Rep.of Burundi Congo Tanzania
Zambia
American Samoa (US)
Bangladesh
Thailand
Somalia Uganda
Gabon
Japan
Bhutan
Nepal
Rep. of Yemen
Ethiopia
Central African Republic
Angola
Antigua and Barbuda
Pakistan
Brazil
French Polynesia (Fr)
Dominican Republic
Afghanistan
United Arab Emirates Oman
Rep.of Korea
China
Djibouti Nigeria
Kiribati
Peru
Dem.People’s Rep.of Korea
Tajikistan
Bahrain Qatar Saudi Arabia
Eritrea
Burkina Faso
Guinea
French Guiana (Fr)
Colombia
Fiji
Jordan
Arab Rep. of Egypt
Chad
Senegal
Ecuador
Samoa
West Bank and Gaza
Turkmenistan
Islamic Rep. of Iran Kuwait
Iraq
Mongolia Kyrgyz Rep.
Uzbekistan
Azerbaijan
Mauritania
Haiti
Panama
Syrian Arab Rep.
Libya
Former Spanish Sahara
Georgia Armenia
Cyprus Lebanon Israel
Malta
Morocco
Mexico
Turkey
Greece
Gibraltar (UK) Bermuda (UK)
The Bahamas
Kazakhstan
Bulgaria
Romania
Bosnia and Herzegovina San Marino Italy Montenegro Vatican City
New Zealand
Hungary
Slovenia Croatia
Serbia
Kosovo Bulgaria FYR Macedonia Albania Greece
R.B. de Venezuela
Antarctica
IBRD 37655 MARCH 2010
The World Bank 1818 H Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20433 USA Telephone: 202 473 1000 Fax: 202 477 6391 Web site: www.worldbank.org Email:
[email protected]
ISBN 978-0-8213-8232-5
SKU 18232
The World Development Indicators • Includes more than 800 indicators for 155 economies • Provides definitions, sources, and other information about the data • Organizes the data into six thematic areas
WORLD VIEW
PEOPLE
ENVIRONMENT
Living standards and development progress
Gender, health, and employment
Natural resources and environmental changes
ECONOMY
STATES & MARKETS
GLOBAL LINKS
New opportunities for growth
Elements of a good investment climate
Evidence on globalization
Saved: 116 trees 37 million Btu of total energy 11,069 pounds of net greenhouse gases 53,312 gallons of waste water 3,237 pounds of solid waste
