Support the benchmark
52 countries, nine capabilities, public data, open code. What it still needs is use, evidence and time. Ways to help are below, cheapest first.
The benchmark is free to read, free to quote and free to fork. Nothing on this page is a condition of using it.
Start here if you have five minutes
You know something the data does not. These take one message and no commitment beyond it.
Argue with a score
Tell us where a number is wrong about the country you know.
- It needs.
- The country, the capability and what the score misses.
- Usually.
- Anyone who knows a country better than a global dataset does.
- What it changes.
- The objection is published beside the score it targets, so the disagreement travels with the number.
Name a dataset for a gap
Point us at a published series that covers a capability we cannot measure.
- It needs.
- A comparable series over at least two countries, with an open URL, a publisher, a reference period and a stated method.
- Usually.
- Statisticians, researchers, anyone who works with a national source.
- What it changes.
- A gap becomes a scored indicator, which raises confidence for every country at once.
The fastest useful thing is to close a gap. 26 indicators in the registry have no dataset behind them, and each one lowers confidence for every country at once. The open gaps list says what each is trying to measure and what a usable series would look like.
These take a piece of work
You have a case, a series or a decision to test the benchmark against. These take real work and change what the benchmark can measure.
File an evidence record
Document something a country actually delivered where the benchmark can only record a gap.
- It needs.
- One published number, the period it covers, the publisher, and a statement of what it does not show.
- Usually.
- Public servants, journalists, researchers with a case in front of them.
- What it changes.
- The record is published against the indicator it answers. It never moves a score, and it is how a capability with no dataset can still be read.
Use it against a real decision
Put the benchmark next to a decision your institution is already making, and tell us where it broke.
- It needs.
- The decision, the capability you read, and what the number failed to answer.
- Usually.
- Policy teams, development banks, schools of government, newsrooms.
- What it changes.
- A measure nobody applies stays a hypothesis. Several of the registry gaps came from exactly these conversations.
Fix the code or the data
Send a source adapter, a broken series, a wrong label or a bug.
- It needs.
- A reproducible case, or a pull request against the repository.
- Usually.
- Developers and data engineers.
- What it changes.
- A source adapter raises confidence across every country in one change.
These need funding
The work is modular on purpose, so a funder backs a named piece with a scope and a stated effect.
Build a country layer
Read one country in its own language, at its own depth, beside the English benchmark.
- It needs.
- A lexicon, an institution map for that country, and somebody who can keep both current.
- Usually.
- Institutions inside the country being read.
- What it changes.
- That country gets its shape, its agenda, its institutions and its subnational spread in the language its decisions are made in.
Fund a named piece
Back one capability, one country layer, one source adapter or one reviewed expert panel.
- It needs.
- A scope and a window. The work is modular so a funder backs a piece, not a promise.
- Usually.
- Research grants, public procurement, philanthropic funds, multilateral research budgets.
- What it changes.
- Each piece has a stated deliverable and a stated effect on the published numbers.
What funding pays for
Each piece names its scope and what changes in the published data once it is done.
One capability
- Scope.
- One of the nine dimensions: its indicator set reviewed, its declared gaps closed where a dataset exists, and its evidence corpus built out across the country set.
- Effect.
- That dimension stops resting on two or three indicators. Its confidence rises for every country, and the ones below the coverage floor start publishing a score.
- Funded by.
- Most research grants are already this size.
One country layer
- Scope.
- One country read in its own language: the lexicon, the institution map, the subnational spread and the agenda, kept current for a defined period.
- Effect.
- That country's institutions can argue with the benchmark in the language they make decisions in, and the map shows who would have to act.
- Funded by.
- Development banks, schools of government and public foundations inside the country.
One source adapter
- Scope.
- One publisher wired into the ingest, validated against every country in the registry, and kept current through their release cycle.
- Effect.
- Confidence rises across all countries at once, because coverage and recency are two of the three things confidence is made of.
- Funded by.
- Statistical agencies, data philanthropies, research infrastructure funds.
One reviewed expert panel
- Scope.
- A full Delphi run across the country set with named panelists, published dissent and a documented review.
- Effect.
- The estimate layer stops being a session artifact and becomes evidence, which is the difference between a labeled guess and a second reading of a capability.
- Funded by.
- Research programmes and foresight units.
If you hold one of those windows, or you know which one this fits, write to us and say which piece.
Read the limits first
Do not fund it or quote it without knowing where it fails.
- The thesis states the claim under test and shows how far the data supports it today.
- The known limits name the numbers that say more about a missing dataset than about the country.
- The objections are published beside the scores they argue with.
- Brasil is the first country layer, and the shape it uses works for any country whose institutions want to build the same thing.
The code and the data are at the repository on GitHub.
If none of that fits
Several of the gaps in the registry came out of a conversation with somebody who measures a country for a living.
Tell us what your institution measures, what it cannot measure, and which decision it would want this to inform. Write to us.