Dashboard map for 2022 SDG Index Goal #16 ratings. Data source: sdgindex.com
Homicides (per 100,000 population)
The 2030 aim is for the homicide rate to be below 0.3 per 100,000 population, excluding deaths in the context of armed conflict.
Summary: Don’t commit homicide.
Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population)
This measure considers those in the prison population in remand, awaiting trial on criminal charges about whether the legal system will acquit or convict them. Being in remand, from a legal standpoint, is different from imprisonment. Rather than a punishment from a conviction, it instead is a means to ensure the presence of the person charged at their eventual trial.
Yet in some countries, authorities can take liberties with how long they hold a detainee in detention, contrary to Article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states: “no one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.” Unsentenced detainees include those detained or arrested with little evidence. This can also ignore due process, whereby the state must observe the legal rights of a citizen while charging and prosecuting a citizen. Often this entails the issuing of a warrant by a judge or magistrate, giving officers of the law the authority to carry out orders which otherwise may subvert the rights of the person. To be under arrest, with criminal charges placed by a law enforcement agency of a government, is different from a conviction. An arrest or detention may be necessary by the police upon passing a threshold of evidence for prosecutors to pursue its potential, otherwise the legal system exonerates the accused. Depending upon the context and jurisdiction, indefinite detention is contrary to international law, human rights agreements, and even the laws of war.
The 2030 aim for this indicator is for those unsentenced among a prison population to be 7% or less. If your line of work is part of the prison and judicial system in a country scoring red, you could consider seeking a new occupation, if you believe you're participating in a system perpetuating a contradiction of human rights and international law.
A reason for such a large part of prison populations held in remand could very well be due to backlogs in the courts, in which instance quitting one's job would be counterproductive. Is leaving detainees unsentenced intentional, or is there a genuine bottleneck in the flow of prosecutions due to lack of resources? If you sense the latter is closer to the truth, then you could consider retraining. You might parlay your experience from the prison side of the justice system to the judicial side, allowing prosecutions and sentencing to flow at a greater pace.
Each country scoring red in the 2022 Index is a developing country, where the state may be short of the resources to subsidise job retraining, making these suggestions more challenging. If you believe you’re perpetuating the high rate of detainees unsentenced in your country, I encourage you to excuse yourself from your present field of work.
Summary: For readers in countries off-track:
For employees of prisons or the court system, seek re-training to help clear the sentencing of detainees, or cease your current employment if you believe the prison or justice system is perpetuating indefinite detention.
For citizens, contact your government to voice your support for the reduction of unsentenced detainees to 7% or less of the prison population by 2030.
Population who feel safe walking alone at night in the city or area where they live (%)
This indicator is based upon a poll asking survey respondents, "Do you feel safe walking alone at night in the city or area where you live?" The 2030 aim is for those responding “Yes” to be 90%, with a red score resulting from less than 50% of a population answering “Yes”.
For readers from countries with major challenges for this indicator, we’re considering what you can do to assist others to feel safe walking alone at night. The first consideration is to refrain from engaging in violent or criminal behaviour, including vandalism or anti-social behaviour. The reality is the effect it has on the feeling of others’ sense of personal security in their community is adverse. The first task for readers from countries off-track for this measure is to cultivate prosocial behaviours.
Women will feel more unsafe at night than men, therefore males ought to be mindful when in proximity to women walking alone at night. It's a tricky balancing act, whereby creating distance and being proactive about the situation can sometimes seem a bit erratic, though it’s a good policy, nevertheless. Refrain from any chat, even under the guise of seeming more familiar. Maintain your behaviours and appearances highest in mind when walking at night, if you sense these may have an unwanted effect on others, which you have a civic duty to consider.
This is very much a social issue, which can take time to change, yet individuals can change now. You can acknowledge that to live alongside others in a peaceful community, it’s necessary to cultivate a sense of safety for others. All it takes is one person, affected by drugs or alcohol, or suffering mental illness, for which again, society has a responsibility for their care. We need to resource law enforcement, as well as ensure it's competent and free of corruption, which the limited resources of poorer countries could hamper. The main thing you can do is ensure you’re one less person posing a potential threat to others, instead radiating prosocial behaviour, fostering an aura of safety to others.
Summary: Ensure you adopt prosocial behaviours when walking at night.
Property rights (worst 1-7 best)
The data for this indicator is from a survey composed of questions to the respondents on property rights, including intellectual property. A score of 1 is the worst possible answer, and 7 the best.
Article 17 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights stipulates:
Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
The government has the task of upholding property rights, via the courts, as well as law enforcement. As such, there’s little use attempting to assign individual responsibility for a task belonging to governments.
What if you live in a country with major challenges ahead to reach the 2030 aim of scoring 6.3 in this indicator’s property rights survey? Take the time to find out what the property rights are in your country, which may be less than straightforward depending on your access to the internet, or knowing where to find such information. If you can find out which government department deals with land registrations, this would be a good start. But it’s possible that accessing the necessary information will be difficult for you, either in dealing with the government to proffer the desired information, or requiring a trip to visit a government ministry in the city.
In your own attempt to uphold your property rights, if the government response turns menacing, please exercise caution.
Summary: For readers in countries off-track, contact your government to express your desire for the strengthening of property rights.
Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under 5)
This measure aims for 100% of children under five-years-old to have their births registered with the national civil authority. Most governments have systems in place for civil registration for certificates of birth, marriage, and death, ensuring recognition of official citizenship and residency. With this, comes the rights and access to social services.
The correlation with LDCs and lack of birth registration may reflect the capacity of some country’s governments to record births. Remote access to such civil authorities for residents in rural areas may further hinder registration of births.
The correlation between low-income countries and lack of birth registration reflects capacity. What a government is unable to provide to citizens living in remote, rural conditions is outside our focus, though aid given from high-income countries will help to integrate citizens of low-income countries.
If you’re a reader from a country scoring red, with an unregistered child under 5, and have reasonable means to access the civil authorities, register the birth of your child, to ensure the benefits of the child’s full citizenship.
Summary: For readers in countries off-track, register your child with a civil authority at birth.
Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0-100 best)
This is a measure of the perception of dishonesty or criminality in the public sector. Denmark, Finland, and New Zealand share top billing in the 2021 Corruption Perceptions Index for their perception as the least corrupt. Each scored 88, equal to the 2030 aim of the indicator. By contrast, of the countries surveyed, South Sudan comes last, with a score of 11.
What actions can readers take to remedy this? Readers from OECD countries scoring green should resist taking advantage of public sector corruption in developing countries. Rich countries enjoying the absence of honesty and justice in other countries would be a spillover effect. But for readers of countries scoring red, the responsibility lies in those working in the public sector who may be endemic to the problem. Parties must disengage from dishonest and criminal actions and behaviours - likewise with partaking in steps which may have the optics of dishonesty and criminality. Though perceptions are subjective, making such adjustments may be difficult in an environment where corruption is embedded in the culture. Yet you, as an individual, must excuse yourself. The corrosive effect of even the perception of corruption perpetuates itself, acting as a template others will emulate, leaving the group at large to assume only through graft can anything occur. This pattern undermines the prospect of foreign investment, which developed countries would otherwise consider making.
The task for readers is to excuse themselves from such corrupt cultures to instead act with honesty, in accordance with the law.
Summary: For readers in countries off-track, act with honesty, within the law and ethics.
Children involved in child labour (% of population aged 5 to 14)
The definition of child labour for this indicator equates to, within the surveyed reference week:
for children aged 5 to 11
an hour or more of economic activity
28 hours or more of unpaid household chores
for children aged 12 to 14:
14 hours or more of economic activity
28 hours or more of household chores
Given this threshold of child labour, the 2030 aim is for countries to end children performing this amount of labour, a reduction at the time of writing of one in 10 children, inclusive of hazardous forms of work, as well as trafficking.
From the demand side, if you’re aware child labour is a part of a supply chain, you can boycott a particular producer. Better yet, you can leverage the relationship as a customer with such producers to encourage the elimination of child labour. This may invite greater input costs for businesses, which is the actual cost the supply chain needs to bear, inclusive of end-use customers.
What for citizens of countries scoring red? The obligation is to keep below the above-mentioned threshold of child labour - applicable to parents and employers. The developed world must work in tandem with the LDCs to eliminate child labour from the supply and demand sides by 2030.
The labour circumstances in these poverty-stricken countries are far from ideal. For many households, it may seem as though the labour of an able child is a necessity for daily survival. It’d be rich of me to implore parents to remove their children from labour at the expense of destitution for the household, so you'll need to exercise discretion in individual circumstances. If you could instead enrol them in schooling, this is the path encouraged for the well-being of the child, which will later pay dividends to the household. The challenges of subsistence living mean an outlook with a brief time horizon able to impute such longer-term hopes, all of which parents of a household need to weigh.
Summary:
For parents of children aged 5 to 14, keep below the threshold of child labour for economic activity or chores.
For employers, ensure employees are above the age ranges for economic activity.
Use suppliers observing the child labour thresholds.
Exports of major conventional weapons (TIV constant million USD per 100,000 population)
This indicator excludes small arms and other light weapons and ammunition (e.g., guns, landmines, grenades, explosives), and includes military vehicles and planes, naval ships, artillery, and weapons of mass destruction.
Only a handful of countries are responsible for such exports, yet the spillover effects of these exports on other countries can be damaging to the extreme. The two major exporters are the US and Russia, still caught in a Cold War arms race. Other countries in red are France, the Netherlands, and Israel.
These countries need to demobilise their footing away from defence industries, as they’re promoting a lack of global security by flooding the world with arms. For readers from countries scoring red who work for the arms industry, you need to leave your job, as you’re participating in this obvious affliction. Rather than weapons ensuring security, they have the opposite effect - a sentiment evading the sensibilities of foreign policy in the exporting countries. The military-industrial complex continues to characterise the identity of the US, in an ongoing state of mobilisation of a war economy. This prescription applies to anyone designing and manufacturing the many components of the arms industry, extending to research and development for military applications.
Should you take part in such exports, you’re sowing the seeds of war at the opportunity cost of sustainable development. Every million dollars spent by the customer of the exporting country is a million dollars which could feed someone, give them access to fresh drinking water, educate them, and provide health care. Who on the planet is going to war with met needs, when sustainable development prevails?
Summary: For readers in countries off-track, end employment or ownership of shares of businesses exporting major conventional weapons, aiming to end such exports by 2030.
Press Freedom Index (best 0-100 worst)
Reporters Without Borders has produced the World Press Freedom Index, of which the top country for 2021 is Finland. The score reflects the freedom afforded to journalists in the country, based on the responses of experts to a questionnaire. The 2030 aim is for countries to score 10 or less on the World Press Freedom Index.
Reporters Without Borders upholds the values of freedom of information and freedom of the press, ensuring the observation of the human rights of journalists, as well as the independence of the media. In some countries, state monopoly of the media may complicate this, whereby the state may smother controls on the internet, and there may be perceived pressure from the government to self-censor one’s communications.
For this indicator, the government is acting upon journalists, whether employed by private media organisations, state-owned media or freelance. As the government can be responsible for curtailing freedom of the press, readers who may be instruments of the state can make a change at the individual level.
In each country’s context, rights for freedom of the press may be absent altogether. In this case, rather than government workers muzzling journalists in contradiction of the country’s law, they are instead upholding it. But the Universal Declaration of Human Rights enumerates freedom of the press under Article 19.
Given this, you have a choice: to abide by your country’s laws, or those of a morality simpatico to the will of the global citizenry. Is the credibility of the nation-state as sensitive as crêpe paper, unable to withstand critique? How narrow-minded could your investment in such a state be if unable to appraise its legitimacy without violent reproach?
Summary: For readers in countries off-track, end employment within an agency of the government curtailing journalistic freedom.
Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0-1 best)
This indicator measures access to, and affordability of, civil courts and legal counsel. This includes awareness of legal avenues which one could take, ensuring the lowering of barriers from cost, and the intricacies of legal procedure, allowing for accessibility for citizens, inclusive of hindrances due to linguistic and physical barriers.
Different countries have different legal systems, the civil law system characterising much of Continental Europe, whereas the UK and its offshoots have common law legal systems. Whatever the legal system, the average citizen is subject to a body of law they may be unfamiliar with. They may be less than well-versed in the country’s constitution, or unfamiliar with the country's judicial precedents, legislation, and regulations. The same may go for those living under a religious law. Countries have subdivisions (e.g., states, provinces), which have their own laws, adding to this the body of international treaties between countries.
How do we serve justice? It’s fair all parties have equal ease of access to what is lawful. We should assist citizens to be aware of their lawful rights, with special application for the disadvantaged, whether on the grounds of physical and mental disability, or relative poverty.
For poorer countries, we need to ensure we keep the populace apprised of their legal rights. If the country is unable to feed its people and keep them healthy, legal aid seems a distant possibility. Yet with greater economic means, there will be greater means of lowering the barriers to justice.
For American readers, as the only developed country to score red for this indicator, you should donate to, or support in some form, access to legal aid within your country. Change will be intransigent, but justice is both sides beginning on an unequal footing. Insider trading is a crime occurring when one party has information unavailable to the other, thus cheating the stock market - in effect, the same is true when someone who is disadvantaged appears before the court without the means of information to make their case.
Elsewhere, the only hope may be for aid dollars to provide the recourse necessary to ensure justice operates in such lagging countries.
Summary:
For OECD country readers, affirm your annual commitment to give 0.7% of your gross income as aid.
For readers in OECD countries off-track, donate to a legal aid charity operating in your country.
Persons held in prisons (per 100,000 population) *
This indicator has a long-term aim of less than 25 persons per 100,000 population held in prison. The United States has scored red, alongside Turkey.
This is an indicator reflecting a state’s criminal justice system, mirroring attitudes toward political freedoms and punishment. Different countries have different standards of guilt, due process, and sentencing guidelines. These factors are within the control of a reader to influence in the form of advocacy for judicial or prison reform in your respective countries or states.
What to do if you’re American or Turkish for this indicator? Take whatever steps you deem prudent to prevent finding yourself deprived of your liberty. The rest of the world sees how taking such steps to mitigate such an outcome may be insufficient for many Americans, due to overrepresentation of certain races in the country's prisons. I’m unsure what Turkey’s compulsion is with prisons either.
It’s unfair to all other countries and indicators to focus on the challenges of one or two countries among 193 on one indicator. Yet it has more pertinence in the face of the US representing 4% of the global population, yet a fifth of all inmates worldwide, on par with the population of Houston, the fourth-largest US city by population.
American readers should focus on decriminalisation and reducing incarceration. Alternatives to imprisonment include the theories of restorative justice and transformative justice, compared to the retributive justice observed most across the US. The issue goes to the beating heart of the US as an idea of itself as a republic, its roots existing well before the republic’s founding. Why has the US allowed its society to fester to the point where trust has broken down enough to commit so many crimes? Why have lawmakers designed laws affecting the poor and non-white? This latter point, if anything, is the important aspect, without which the US will be unable to redress the effects.
Summary: For readers in countries off-track, contact your government representative, highlighting your desire as a citizen to reduce incarceration rates or seek alternatives to imprisonment.