Skip to content
NCBNational Capability Benchmark
Navigate with โ†‘ โ†“Enter to openEsc to close

Challenge the benchmark

Choose a score and give the benchmark a specific reason to reconsider it.

When you submit, the form attaches the current score and confidence for the country and capability you chose.

Submissions are public and start as awaiting review. A maintainer can add a response and signature after review.

All capabilities

Shared Purpose

To what extent can people imagine themselves as participants in a common project?

The country comparison, the indicators and the documented cases below show how much of this capability the current data can capture.

125 countries in the frame7 indicators in the registry3 indicators with data118 countries with a score

Compare every country on one scale

The table starts in alphabetical order. Sort by score, confidence, coverage, or trend. A score needs two observed indicators; a trend uses indicators observed at both ends.

Scores use one 0 to 100 scale for all countries. Each flag is a country, and the ring around it shows how strong the evidence behind that score is. Point at a flag to read the country, click it to open the profile.

0255075100
  • Solid ring: usable or good evidence
  • Broken ring: thin evidence, opening further as confidence falls
  • The shaded band is the middle half of the field and the line inside it is the median.
  • Indonesia: 83.6
  • New Zealand: 82.0
  • Netherlands: 81.7
  • Belgium: 76.8
  • Ukraine: 75.7
  • Slovakia: 75.5
  • Armenia: 75.1
  • United Kingdom: 74.7
  • Denmark: 74.4
  • Sweden: 72.7
  • Czechia: 72.1
  • Iran: 72.1
  • Moldova: 70.8
  • Slovenia: 70.5
  • Australia: 70.3
  • Serbia: 69.9
  • Lesotho: 69.7
  • Norway: 68.9
  • Ireland: 66.6
  • Kenya: 65.2
  • Finland: 65.0
  • Nigeria: 64.9
  • India: 64.8
  • Thailand: 64.8
  • Romania: 63.0
  • Morocco: 62.0
  • Cyprus: 61.4
  • Israel: 61.3
  • Pakistan: 60.9
  • Jamaica: 59.7
  • Myanmar: 59.6
  • Mauritius: 59.5
  • Nepal: 59.4
  • Mongolia: 58.1
  • Canada: 57.4
  • Austria: 57.1
  • El Salvador: 57.1
  • Burkina Faso: 56.0
  • Uruguay: 56.0
  • Kyrgyzstan: 55.5
  • Malaysia: 55.3
  • Croatia: 54.9
  • North Macedonia: 54.6
  • United States: 53.9
  • Greece: 52.5
  • France: 52.3
  • Philippines: 52.0
  • Hungary: 51.2
  • Italy: 51.0
  • Russia: 50.9
  • Cรดte d'Ivoire: 50.8
  • Laos: 50.3
  • Malawi: 50.0
  • Germany: 49.9
  • Tunisia: 49.9
  • Iraq: 49.4
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina: 48.9
  • Guatemala: 48.7
  • Mali: 48.7
  • Tajikistan: 48.7
  • Estonia: 48.2
  • Dominican Republic: 48.1
  • Poland: 48.1
  • Nicaragua: 47.9
  • Namibia: 47.8
  • Georgia: 47.5
  • Burundi: 47.2
  • Switzerland: 47.1
  • Uzbekistan: 46.7
  • Guinea-Bissau: 46.6
  • Colombia: 46.3
  • Bolivia: 46.2
  • Uganda: 46.2
  • Portugal: 46.1
  • Kazakhstan: 45.8
  • Albania: 45.7
  • Madagascar: 45.7
  • United Arab Emirates: 45.3
  • Belarus: 45.2
  • Ethiopia: 45.2
  • Mexico: 44.8
  • Rwanda: 44.6
  • Chile: 44.3
  • Sudan: 44.2
  • Spain: 44.1
  • Egypt: 43.9
  • Lithuania: 43.7
  • Mozambique: 43.6
  • Vietnam: 43.6
  • South Africa: 43.2
  • Sri Lanka: 42.9
  • Latvia: 42.6
  • Tanzania: 42.5
  • Japan: 40.8
  • South Korea: 40.1
  • Bulgaria: 39.8
  • Honduras: 39.3
  • Ecuador: 39.1
  • Ghana: 38.5
  • Costa Rica: 37.3
  • Lebanon: 37.2
  • Botswana: 37.1
  • Peru: 37.1
  • Zambia: 36.7
  • Bangladesh: 36.6
  • Paraguay: 36.0
  • Zimbabwe: 35.5
  • Turkey: 35.4
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo: 34.3
  • Argentina: 33.1
  • Singapore: 32.3
  • Jordan: 31.3
  • Brazil: 30.4
  • China: 29.4
  • Azerbaijan: 23.9
  • Republic of the Congo: 22.6
  • Panama: 22.4
  • Angola: 20.8
Shared Purpose scores by country
Albania45.70.383 of 6no trend
Angola20.80.242 of 6no trend
Argentina33.10.433 of 6-2.5(2)
Armenia75.10.322 of 6+8.6(2)
Australia70.30.363 of 6no trend
Austria57.10.423 of 6-0.6(2)
Azerbaijan23.90.282 of 6no trend
Bangladesh36.60.373 of 6+2.5(2)
Belarus45.20.383 of 6no trend
Belgium76.80.302 of 6+1.2(2)
Bolivia46.20.282 of 6no trend
Bosnia and Herzegovina48.90.403 of 6+4.3(2)
Botswana37.10.182 of 6no trend
Brazil30.40.433 of 6+6.7(2)
Bulgaria39.80.423 of 6+2.0(2)
Burkina Faso56.00.282 of 6+3.6(2)
Burundi47.20.222 of 6no trend
Canada57.40.413 of 6+3.4(2)
Chile44.30.433 of 6+4.3(2)
China29.40.413 of 6+0.7(2)
Colombia46.30.433 of 6-2.5(2)
Costa Rica37.30.322 of 6+4.4(2)
Cรดte d'Ivoire50.80.262 of 6+10.9(2)
Croatia54.90.413 of 6+0.1(2)
Cubanot measured. No score. 0 indicators are observed here; this model needs two before it can average a dimension score.0.000 of 6. Below the coverage floor: this model needs 2 observed rows before it publishes a score.no trend
Cyprus61.40.423 of 6+2.1(2)
Czechia72.10.302 of 6-1.9(2)
Democratic Republic of the Congo34.30.242 of 6no trend
Denmark74.40.423 of 6-2.5(2)
Dominican Republic48.10.322 of 6+11.8(2)
Ecuador39.10.413 of 6-3.3(2)
Egypt43.90.283 of 6no trend
El Salvador57.10.302 of 6+6.6(2)
Estonia48.20.423 of 6+2.1(2)
Ethiopia45.20.403 of 6-1.4(2)
Finland65.00.423 of 6+5.8(2)
France52.30.423 of 6-0.4(2)
Gambianot measured. No score. One indicator is observed here; this model needs two before it can average a dimension score.0.111 of 6. Below the coverage floor: this model needs 2 observed rows before it publishes a score.no trend
Georgia47.50.433 of 6+5.5(2)
Germany49.90.292 of 6-4.7(2)
Ghana38.50.202 of 6no trend
Greece52.50.423 of 6+2.7(2)
Guatemala48.70.423 of 6+6.0(2)
Guineanot measured. No score. One indicator is observed here; this model needs two before it can average a dimension score.0.081 of 6. Below the coverage floor: this model needs 2 observed rows before it publishes a score.no trend
Guinea-Bissau46.60.282 of 6no trend
Haitinot measured. No score. One indicator is observed here; this model needs two before it can average a dimension score.0.021 of 6. Below the coverage floor: this model needs 2 observed rows before it publishes a score.no trend
Honduras39.30.262 of 6no trend
Hungary51.20.343 of 6no trend
India64.80.403 of 6+1.9(2)
Indonesia83.60.282 of 6no trend
Iran72.10.262 of 6no trend
Iraq49.40.363 of 6no trend
Ireland66.60.302 of 6+4.3(2)
Israel61.30.292 of 6+1.2(2)
Italy51.00.423 of 6+2.0(2)
Jamaica59.70.222 of 6no trend
Japan40.80.232 of 6no trend
Jordan31.30.262 of 6no trend
Kazakhstan45.80.383 of 6+0.1(2)
Kenya65.20.403 of 6+1.9(2)
Kyrgyzstan55.50.433 of 6+2.8(2)
Laos50.30.292 of 6+0.6(2)
Latvia42.60.423 of 6+1.0(2)
Lebanon37.20.413 of 6-8.5(2)
Lesotho69.70.222 of 6no trend
Lithuania43.70.423 of 6+10.2(2)
Madagascar45.70.282 of 6+10.5(2)
Malawi50.00.252 of 6no trend
Malaysia55.30.403 of 6-1.1(2)
Mali48.70.222 of 6no trend
Mauritius59.50.222 of 6no trend
Mexico44.80.433 of 6+8.4(2)
Moldova70.80.322 of 6+2.7(2)
Mongolia58.10.413 of 6+9.2(2)
Morocco62.00.293 of 6no trend
Mozambique43.60.292 of 6+8.6(2)
Myanmar59.60.283 of 6no trend
Namibia47.80.202 of 6no trend
Nepal59.40.282 of 6+26.5(2)
Netherlands81.70.282 of 6+7.7(2)
New Zealand82.00.282 of 6no trend
Nicaragua47.90.313 of 6no trend
Nigeria64.90.252 of 6no trend
North Macedonia54.60.373 of 6no trend
Norway68.90.423 of 6+7.5(2)
Pakistan60.90.282 of 6no trend
Panama22.40.322 of 6-3.2(2)
Papua New Guineanot measured. No score. One indicator is observed here; this model needs two before it can average a dimension score.0.161 of 6. Below the coverage floor: this model needs 2 observed rows before it publishes a score.no trend
Paraguay36.00.322 of 6+7.7(2)
Peru37.10.403 of 6+7.9(2)
Philippines52.00.423 of 6+9.2(2)
Poland48.10.423 of 6+5.5(2)
Portugal46.10.423 of 6+1.4(2)
Republic of the Congo22.60.132 of 6no trend
Romania63.00.302 of 6+5.1(2)
Russia50.90.302 of 6+7.6(2)
Rwanda44.60.302 of 6+3.2(2)
Serbia69.90.282 of 6+10.4(2)
Singapore32.30.282 of 6no trend
Slovakia75.50.302 of 6+3.6(2)
Slovenia70.50.423 of 6-1.5(2)
South Africa43.20.292 of 6+8.4(2)
South Korea40.10.403 of 6+3.2(2)
Spain44.10.423 of 6+5.1(2)
Sri Lanka42.90.242 of 6no trend
Sudan44.20.082 of 6no trend
Sweden72.70.423 of 6-1.2(2)
Switzerland47.10.423 of 6-0.4(2)
Tajikistan48.70.433 of 6-2.2(2)
Tanzania42.50.242 of 6no trend
Thailand64.80.433 of 6+3.4(2)
Trinidad and Tobagonot measured. No score. One indicator is observed here; this model needs two before it can average a dimension score.0.091 of 6. Below the coverage floor: this model needs 2 observed rows before it publishes a score.no trend
Tunisia49.90.263 of 6no trend
Turkey35.40.423 of 6-3.5(2)
Uganda46.20.302 of 6+8.6(2)
Ukraine75.70.262 of 6no trend
United Arab Emirates45.30.242 of 6no trend
United Kingdom74.70.282 of 6+3.3(2)
United States53.90.433 of 6-0.8(2)
Uruguay56.00.433 of 6-6.0(2)
Uzbekistan46.70.423 of 6no trend
Venezuelanot measured. No score. One indicator is observed here; this model needs two before it can average a dimension score.0.121 of 6. Below the coverage floor: this model needs 2 observed rows before it publishes a score.no trend
Vietnam43.60.252 of 6no trend
Zambia36.70.292 of 6+13.9(2)
Zimbabwe35.50.293 of 6no trend

A score from 0 to 100 is a position inside the frame that all the benchmark countries set: zero is the weakest on a dimension and 100 is the strongest. A score of 10 puts a country near the floor of that frame and does not mean 10 percent of a capability.

Shared Purpose indicators

7 indicators define this capability. Gaps and retired rows remain because they lower confidence. Click a heading to sort.

  • direct capability measuredirect capability measure Measures the thing itself.
  • capability inputcapability input Measures something that supports the capability.
  • downstream outcomedownstream outcome Measures a result that usually follows from the capability.
  • perception proxyperception proxy Records what people or experts say, not what they did.

Shared Purpose

Shared Purpose indicators
Note
Civic participationdirect capability measure% mentioninghigher is betterJoint EVS/WVS0.10A reported behaviour: the publisher-weighted share of respondents mentioning membership of a humanitarian or charitable organisation, the membership item closest to acting for strangers, in the official Joint EVS/WVS 2017-2022 results table, release 5.0.0. Religious membership is left out because it reads religiosity, and a count of any membership is not published in the aggregate table. The two programmes ask differently: EVS shows a list and asks which the respondent belongs to, WVS reads each type aloud and asks about active or inactive membership, and the joint file counts both kinds of WVS member as mentioned. Where one country has both samples, the WVS share is higher in eight of ten, so part of the spread is question format. Membership is not activity. China reads 2.7% and Vietnam 9.4%, so state mass organisations do not inflate this item. Fieldwork runs from 2017 to 2023 and every value carries the release year 2022. Germany, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands are held, as for interpersonal trust. See D128 and A15.
Income inequalitydownstream outcomeGini 0-100lower is betterWorld Bank0.20Included as a structural constraint on seeing yourself in a common project, not as a value judgement. Contested and worth challenging.
Political polarisationno datasetperception proxyindex 0-4lower is betterV-Dem0.05V-Dem political polarization (v2cacamps) is published beside this dimension as a behavioral check and is not scored, because a regime with no organized opposition reads as calm (D121, A13). The gap stays open for a measure that can tell calm between competing camps from calm where no camp may compete. Pluralism is the target, so only hostile polarization should count against a country.
Sense of national belongingno datasetperception proxy% expressing belonginghigher is betterJoint EVS/WVS0.05A declared gap again since 2026-10-02 (D151, which supersedes the retirement in D143). The project still wants to know whether people count themselves members of the community whose common project this capability asks about, so the row stays even though no series can fill it. The only cross-national item aimed at it, national pride (G006) in the Joint EVS/WVS, is not wired: pride is not belonging, and it fails the regime test of artefact A13, with electoral autocracies at 75 percent very proud against 47 in liberal democracies. ISSP 2023 asks about closeness to the country in 16 countries. Wireable on an item that reads the same in every regime class, or on a behaviour of belonging, for half the frame or more. High national pride must never be read as the capacity for collective action.
Tax revenuedownstream outcome% of GDPhigher is betterWorld Bank0.30Revealed willingness to fund public goods, confounded by federal structure and by resource revenue. Treat with suspicion.
Voice and accountabilityretiredperception proxyz-score -2.5 to 2.5higher is betterWorld Bank0.35Retired 2026-08-26. Artefact A5: it measures the democratic channel while Shared Purpose asks whether people can see themselves in a common project. Singapore scored 20.9 while being one of the most effective collective actors in the set. Volunteering and civic participation are the observable replacements and are declared gaps; voter turnout is published beside Shared Purpose as a check, because it reads the same democratic channel and compulsory voting (D129). See D23 and A5.
Volunteeringno datasetdirect capability measure% of adultshigher is betterGallup World Poll / CAF0.10CAF publishes country figures but the underlying Gallup microdata is proprietary, so it fails the inspectability rule.

A check beside the score

This check measures something real about the capability, but it does not meet the model's test for scoring. Country pages show its value.

  • Political polarizationV-Dem (v2cacamps_osp), 125 of 125 countries, latest 2025

    Whether supporters of opposing political camps generally meet in a friendly or a hostile manner, rated by V-Dem country experts from 0, friendly, to 4, hostile.

    The question counts hostility and leaves disagreement alone, which is what pluralism asks for. It is not scored because a low reading has two causes the number cannot tell apart. Where camps compete openly, a calm reading means people who disagree still meet as fellow citizens. Where no opposition may organize, it means there is no camp left to be hostile to. In 2025 the five closed autocracies in the frame average 2.18 and the liberal democracies 1.67, while electoral democracies and electoral autocracies sit near 2.8 and 3.3. Scored, the reading would have lifted the United Arab Emirates about 11 points on this capability for a uniformity the benchmark does not count as shared purpose. Income is not why it is left out: richer countries read only somewhat calmer, at about -0.41 against log GDP per capita.

  • Voter turnoutV-Dem (v2eltrnout), 124 of 125 countries, latest 2025

    Share of registered voters who cast a vote in the latest national election up to 2025, according to official results, as coded by V-Dem from IDEA, IPU and IFES sources. Where executive and legislative elections fall on the same day, the executive turnout is coded.

    Turnout is the one act in which a whole population takes part in a common decision, so it is the closest behavioral reading of shared purpose the benchmark has. It is not scored for three reasons the number cannot separate. It reads the democratic channel, which is why voice and accountability was retired from this capability (A5): a country with no competitive elections cannot score well for reasons unrelated to whether its people see themselves in a common project. Compulsory voting turns it into a reading of the law: Brazil enforces it, and the eight countries that enforce sanctions average 83 percent against 65 where voting is voluntary. And closed and electoral autocracies manage it: Vietnam reads 95.6, Rwanda 98.2 and Singapore 92.8, which is mobilization, not participation (A13). The year shown is the latest national election, because elections are coded only in the year they happen.

Documented examples

These records describe something a country has done that this capability should capture. They stay outside the score because one case is not a comparable series.

Evidence for missing indicators

Each record describes a case the indicators above cannot see. It does not affect the score or confidence because one case is not comparable across countries. A gap can become an indicator when a comparable series covers at least two countries.

  • Rwandalinked to Volunteeringstarted 2007still operating

    Umuganda community work

    Rwanda requires a morning of community work on the last Saturday of each month, and the government's own assessment reports average participation of 91.3 percent of adults countrywide in fiscal year 2015-2016, up from 87.8 percent two years earlier.

    91.3 % of adults 18-65, umuganda participation rate, 2016. 87.8 % of adults 18-65, umuganda participation rate two years earlier, 2014. Rwanda Governance Board, impact assessment of umuganda 2007-2016, citing MINALOC annual reports, retrieved 2026-08-27.

    How it worked: The state fixed a single national morning each month, closed roads and shops for it, assigned works through the lowest administrative level, and had officials up to the president participate visibly, converting an old rural practice into a synchronised national institution.

    Limits: The number is the state assessing its own compulsory programme in a country where declining to participate carries social and administrative cost, so it cannot be read as volunteering in the survey sense the indicator intends, and no independent measurement exists. Participation is legally required, which is the opposite of the construct's voluntariness. The record is filed anyway because the indicator is a gap and the case is the strongest documented instance of state-organised mass civic labour, provided the compulsion is read alongside the number.

  • Germanylinked to Volunteeringstarted 1950still operating

    THW, volunteer civil protection as a federal institution

    Germany's federal civil-protection agency trains and equips a volunteer force that reached about 88,000 people across 669 local units in May 2025, supported by about 2,200 paid staff.

    88,000 people, volunteer thw members, 2025-05. 669 local units, local thw units, 2025-05. Bundesanstalt Technisches Hilfswerk, agency overview, retrieved 2026-08-30.

    How it worked: The federal government supplies equipment, doctrine and a small professional backbone while local volunteer units recruit, train and retain the people who operate it, turning civic participation into standing disaster-response capacity.

    Limits: Membership in one emergency-service organisation is not the share of adults who volunteered in the last month, which is what the indicator asks for, and it cannot be compared directly with countries that organise civil protection through paid services. The agency reports its own membership, the count includes more than 17,000 youth members, and it does not show how often each member trains or deploys.

  • Japanlinked to Volunteeringstarted 1965operating below its peak

    Volunteer fire corps, and its membership erosion

    Japan's Fire and Disaster Management Agency reported 732,223 volunteer fire-corps members on 1 April 2025, a fall of 14,458 in one year in the local disaster-response corps that it describes as a core of community resilience.

    732,223 members, volunteer fire-corps members, 2025-04-01. 14,458 members lost, one-year membership decline, 2025-04-01. Japan Fire and Disaster Management Agency, 2025 White Paper on Fire Service, retrieved 2026-08-31.

    How it worked: Japan embeds trained local volunteers in municipal fire organisations, gives them equipment and a formal role in prevention and disaster response, and is now adding function-specific and student units as the general membership base shrinks. The erosion shows that a long-standing civic institution needs an active recruitment and role-design strategy to remain deployable.

    Limits: Membership is a capacity proxy, not the number of volunteers who turn out, hours trained, response quality or lives and property protected. The agency reports a one-year decline but this record does not identify its causes or establish a long-run causal trend; local corps differ in duties, age structure and recruitment, and the national total can hide uneven resilience.

  • United Stateslinked to Political polarisationstarted 1977operating below its peak

    Federal funding gaps and the 2019 shutdown

    The Congressional Research Service records 20 federal funding-gap shutdowns with at least one full day between FY1977 and FY2019, including the 35-day partial shutdown from 21 December 2018 to 25 January 2019, the longest in the period it surveys.

    35 days, longest partial federal shutdown, 2019-01-25. 20 shutdowns, funding-gap shutdowns with at least one full day, 1977-2019. Congressional Research Service, Past Government Shutdowns: Key Resources, retrieved 2026-08-31.

    How it worked: The US appropriations process allows a lapse in budget authority to stop or furlough parts of the federal government, turning unresolved political conflict into an interruption of administration. Continuing resolutions and contingency plans soften the shock but do not remove the incentive or the coordination cost of brinkmanship.

    Limits: Shutdown duration and frequency are institutional consequences that can reflect constitutional rules, divided government and bargaining strategy, not a direct measure of public attitudes or latent polarisation. The CRS series ends in FY2019 for this historical resource, and a shutdown's operational cost varies with which agencies lose budget authority.

Read how the benchmark turns an indicator into a score on the method page. The limits page records where this capability is still poorly observed.