Viewing Collection: indicators

{
  "indicator": {
    "label": "Transparent, participatory and sensitiviness in expropiation indicators",
    "description": "This group of indicators assesses whether national laws comply with Section 16.1 of the VGGTs. Section 16.1 of the VGGTs states States should ensure that the planning and process for expropriation are transparent and participatory. Anyone likely to be affected should be identified, and properly informed and consulted at all stages. Consultations, consistent with the principles of these Guidelines, should provide information regarding possible alternative approachesto achieve the public purpose, and should have regard to strategies to minimize disruption of livelihoods. States should be sensitive where proposed expropriations involve areas of particular cultural, religious or environmental significance, or where the land, fisheries and forests in question are particularly important to the livelihoods of the poor or vulnerable. If the national laws assessed fully adopt the VGGT principle, then a score of \"A\" is given. If the national laws assessed partially adopt the VGGT principle, then a score of \"B\" is given. If the national laws assessed do not adopt the VGGT principle, then a score of \"C\" is given.",
    "id": "VGGT-16-2",
    "dataset": "NKT-VGGT16",
    "measurement_unit": "",
    "picture": "",
    "related_landvoc_concepts": "land rights;land use;security of tenure (land);land tenure;food security;",
    "related_themes": "Land Stakeholders & Institutions;",
    "related_overarching_categories": ""
  }
}

{
  "source_url": "VGGT-16-2"
}

{
  "indicator": {
    "label": "Resource Governance Index (mining)",
    "description": "The Resource Governance Index (mining) assesses policies and practices that authorities employ to govern their countries mining industries. Extractive industries are one of the drivers of land use change. These activities, typically have a strong impact on the environment, but also affect the livelihood of local populations. The indexprovidesa composite score for each assessment. For each assessment, NRGI has calculated the composite score using the scores of three index components. Two of the components comprise new research based on expert answers to a detailed questionnaire, and directly measure governance of countries extractive resources. The first componentvalue realizationcovers the governance of allocating extraction rights, exploration, production, environmental protection, revenue collection and state-owned enterprises. The second revenue managementcovers national budgeting, subnational resource revenue sharing and sovereign wealth funds. The indexs third component assesses a countrys enabling environment. This component draws on pre-existing research to measure the broader governance context. The score for each of these three components is based on the scores given to its subcomponent policy areas. Each of the subcomponents within value realization and revenue management focuses on distinct areas of governance and relates to a precept in NRGIs Natural Resource Charter and its benchmarking frameworkanalytical and diagnostic tools that represent the chain of decisions that governments and societies must make to benefit from their resources. Scores are on a scale of zero to 100 at each level of the index, allowing users to benchmark the quality of resource governance across the composite, components and subcomponentsboth within and between countries. As with any exercise of this type, there is some inherent uncertainty around the indexscores. In practical terms, this means it may not be sensible to make conclusions based on small differences in scores. For this reason, results are grouped into performance bands: good, satisfactory, weak, poor and failing.   75 = Good. A country has established laws and practices that are likely to result in extractive resource wealth benefiting citizens, although there may be some costs to society. 60-74 = Satisfactory. A country has some strong governance procedures and practices, but some areas need improvement. It is reasonably likely that extractive resource wealth benefits citizens, but there may be costs to society. 45-59 = Weak. A country has a mix of strong and problematic areas of governance. Results indicate that resource extraction can help society, but it is likely that the eventual benefits are weak. 30-44 = Poor. A country has established some minimal procedures and practices to govern resources, but most elements necessary to ensure society benefits are missing. < 30 = Failing. A country has almost no governance framework to ensure resource extraction benefits society. It is highly likely that benefits flow only to some companies and elites More information at: http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/",
    "id": "NRGI-RGI-MINING",
    "dataset": "NRGI-RGI",
    "measurement_unit": "",
    "picture": "",
    "related_landvoc_concepts": "natural resources management;mining;",
    "related_themes": "Land & Investments;Land, Climate Change & Environment;",
    "related_overarching_categories": ""
  }
}

{
  "source_url": "NRGI-RGI-MINING"
}

{
  "indicator": {
    "label": "Resource Governance Index (oil&gas)",
    "description": "The Resource Governance Index (oil&gas) assesses policies and practices that authorities employ to govern their countries oil&gas industries. Extractive industries are one of the drivers of land use change. These activities, typically have a strong impact on the environment, but also affect the livelihood of local populations. The indexprovides a composite score for each assessment. For each assessment, NRGI hias calculated the composite score using the scores of three index components. Two of the components comprise new research based on expert answers to a detailed questionnaire, and directly measure governance of countries extractive resources. The first componentvalue realizationcovers the governance of allocating extraction rights, exploration, production, environmental protection, revenue collection and state-owned enterprises. The second revenue managementcovers national budgeting, subnational resource revenue sharing and sovereign wealth funds. The indexs third component assesses a countrys enabling environment. This component draws on pre-existing research to measure the broader governance context. The score for each of these three components is based on the scores given to its subcomponent policy areas. Each of the subcomponents within value realization and revenue management focuses on distinct areas of governance and relates to a precept in NRGIs Natural Resource Charter and its benchmarking frameworkanalytical and diagnostic tools that represent the chain of decisions that governments and societies must make to benefit from their resources. Scores are on a scale of zero to 100 at each level of the index, allowing users to benchmark the quality of resource governance across the composite, components and subcomponentsboth within and between countries. As with any exercise of this type, there is some inherent uncertainty around the indexscores. In practical terms, this means it may not be sensible to make conclusions based on small differences in scores. For this reason, results are grouped into performance bands: good, satisfactory, weak, poor and failing.   75 = Good. A country has established laws and practices that are likely to result in extractive resource wealth benefiting citizens, although there may be some costs to society. 60-74 = Satisfactory. A country has some strong governance procedures and practices, but some areas need improvement. It is reasonably likely that extractive resource wealth benefits citizens, but there may be costs to society. 45-59 = Weak. A country has a mix of strong and problematic areas of governance. Results indicate that resource extraction can help society, but it is likely that the eventual benefits are weak. 30-44 = Poor. A country has established some minimal procedures and practices to govern resources, but most elements necessary to ensure society benefits are missing. < 30 = Failing. A country has almost no governance framework to ensure resource extraction benefits society. It is highly likely that benefits flow only to some companies and elites More information at: http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/",
    "id": "NRGI-RGI-OIL-GAS",
    "dataset": "NRGI-RGI",
    "measurement_unit": "",
    "picture": "",
    "related_landvoc_concepts": "natural resources management;",
    "related_themes": "Land & Investments;Land, Climate Change & Environment;",
    "related_overarching_categories": ""
  }
}

{
  "source_url": "NRGI-RGI-OIL-GAS"
}

{
  "indicator": {
    "label": "Global Ranking in Social Institution and Gender Index (SIGI)",
    "description": "Global ranking by country for the SIGI - Social Institutions and Gender Index.",
    "id": "OECD-SIGI-1",
    "dataset": "OECD-SIGI",
    "measurement_unit": "Index (0; 1)",
    "picture": "",
    "related_landvoc_concepts": "land governance;women;gender equity in access to land;land inheritance rights;security of tenure (land);",
    "related_themes": "Land & Gender;",
    "related_overarching_categories": ""
  }
}

{
  "source_url": "OECD-SIGI-1"
}

{
  "indicator": {
    "label": "Discriminatory Familiy Code - Inheritance Rights of Widows",
    "description": "This indicator is a sub-component of the Discriminatory Family Code Indicator and measures whether widows and widowers have equal inheritance rights. It ranges from 0 to 1 and the interpretation is as follows: 0: The law guarantees the same inheritance rights to both widows and widowers. 0.5: The law guarantees the same inheritance rights to both widows and widowers, but there are some customary, traditional or religious practices that discriminate against widows. 1: The law does not guarantee the same inheritance rights to widows and widowers, or widows have no inheritance rights at all.",
    "id": "OECD-SIGI-10",
    "dataset": "OECD-SIGI",
    "measurement_unit": "Index (0; 1)",
    "picture": "",
    "related_landvoc_concepts": "land governance;women;gender equity in access to land;land inheritance rights;security of tenure (land);",
    "related_themes": "Socio-Economic & Institutional Context;Land & Gender;",
    "related_overarching_categories": ""
  }
}

{
  "source_url": "OECD-SIGI-10"
}

{
  "indicator": {
    "label": "Restricted Resources and Entitlements - Woman Access to Land",
    "description": "This indicator is a sub-component of the Restricted Resources and Entitlements Indicator and measures whether women and men have equal and secure access to land use, control and ownership. It ranges from 0 (equal access for women and men) to 1 (The law does not guarantee the same rights to own, use and control land to women and men, or women have no legal rights to own, use and control land).",
    "id": "OECD-SIGI-11",
    "dataset": "OECD-SIGI",
    "measurement_unit": "Index (0; 1)",
    "picture": "",
    "related_landvoc_concepts": "land governance;women;gender equity in access to land;land inheritance rights;security of tenure (land);",
    "related_themes": "Land Stakeholders & Institutions;Land & Gender;",
    "related_overarching_categories": ""
  }
}

{
  "source_url": "OECD-SIGI-11"
}

{
  "indicator": {
    "label": "Discriminatory Familiy Code",
    "description": "The indicator is a component of the SIGI - Social Institutions and Gender Index and captures social institutions that limit womens decision-making power and undervalue their status in the household and the family. These formal and informal laws, social norms and practices co-exist in different types of legal systems including civil or common law, customary law, and religious laws and cover areas such as marriage, parental authority and inheritance. Womens decision-making power and status determine both their ability to choose their own development pathways and the well-being of their families. It ranges from 0 (no discrimination between women and men in both the formal and the customary family code) to 1 (Women are discriminated with respect to men both by the formal and the customary family code).",
    "id": "OECD-SIGI-2",
    "dataset": "OECD-SIGI",
    "measurement_unit": "Index (0; 1)",
    "picture": "",
    "related_landvoc_concepts": "land governance;land rights;women;gender equity in access to land;land inheritance rights;",
    "related_themes": "Socio-Economic & Institutional Context;Land & Gender;",
    "related_overarching_categories": ""
  }
}

{
  "source_url": "OECD-SIGI-2"
}

{
  "indicator": {
    "label": "Global Ranking of Discriminatory Family Code",
    "description": "Global Ranking in Discriminatory Family Code, a sub-index of the Social Insititution and Gender Index (SIGI).",
    "id": "OECD-SIGI-3",
    "dataset": "OECD-SIGI",
    "measurement_unit": "Rank",
    "picture": "",
    "related_landvoc_concepts": "land governance;women;gender equity in access to land;land inheritance rights;security of tenure (land);land policies;",
    "related_themes": "Land & Gender;",
    "related_overarching_categories": ""
  }
}

{
  "source_url": "OECD-SIGI-3"
}

{
  "indicator": {
    "label": "Restricted Civil Liberties",
    "description": "This indicator is a component of the SIGI - Social Institutions and Gender Index captures discriminatory laws and practices that restrict womens access to public space, their political voice and their participation in all aspects of public life. This includes a lack of freedom of movement, the inability to vote or run for election, and negative attitudes toward women as public figures or as leaders. This sub-index highlights the importance of womens participation in community actions and public decision making for a range of development outcomes such as governance, health and education.",
    "id": "OECD-SIGI-4",
    "dataset": "OECD-SIGI",
    "measurement_unit": "Index (0; 1)",
    "picture": "",
    "related_landvoc_concepts": "land governance;women;gender equity in access to land;security of tenure (land);land access;",
    "related_themes": "Land Stakeholders & Institutions;Land & Gender;",
    "related_overarching_categories": ""
  }
}

{
  "source_url": "OECD-SIGI-4"
}

{
  "indicator": {
    "label": "Global Ranking of Restricted Civil Liberties",
    "description": "Global Ranking of Restricted Civil Liberties, a sub-index of the Social Insititution and Gender Index (SIGI).",
    "id": "OECD-SIGI-5",
    "dataset": "OECD-SIGI",
    "measurement_unit": "Index (0; 1)",
    "picture": "",
    "related_landvoc_concepts": "land governance;land rights;women;",
    "related_themes": "Land & Gender;",
    "related_overarching_categories": ""
  }
}

{
  "source_url": "OECD-SIGI-5"
}