2014 GLOBAL PEACE INDEX

Transcription

1 2014 GLOBAL PEACE INDEX Steve Killelea, Executive Chairman Institute for Economics and Peace Royal Military Academy, Brussels Tuesday, 24th June, 2014

2 INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMICS AND PEACE The Institute for Economics and Peace is an independent, not-for-profit, think tank dedicated to building a greater understanding of the key drivers and measures of peace and to identifying the economic benefits that increased peacefulness can deliver. Sydney, New York, Oxford

3 Agenda 2014 Global Peace Index Results The Global Costs of Violence Seven Year Trends in Peace Assessing Country Risk

4 Many Unprecedented Challenges Facing Humanity Challenges are global, urgent and require unparalleled co-operation Peace is the prerequisite for solving these problems

5 DEFINING PEACE Peace is more than the absence of war Defined peace as the Absence of Violence This definition allows for measurements of both internal and external peacefulness Positive Peace is uncovered via the correlation of other data sets and indexes

6 Defining and Measuring Peace The perfect state would have no Police, Jails or Crime Actual peace Measures Crime Suppression Military War GPI Positive Peace Derived through statistical analysis of datasets, indices and attitudes with the GPI Positive Peace Index

7 THE GLOBAL PEACE INDEX Now in its eight year Ranks 162 countries According to their relative states of peace Using 22 indicators weighted on a 1-5 scale Developed by the Institute for Economics & Peace Guided and overseen by a Panel of International Experts With data collected and collated by the Economist Intelligence Unit

8 INDICATORS 5 measures of ongoing domestic and international conflict including: number of conflicts fought and number of deaths from organised conflict 10 measures of societal safety and security including: number of displaced people, number of terrorist acts, number of homicides, number of jailed population 7 measures of militarization including: military expenditure, number of armed service personnel, ease of access to small weapons

9 2014 GPI HIGHLIGHTS Records a slight deterioration in the level of peace for the seventh year in a row Deterioration primarily driven by increases in: Terrorist activity Number of internal and external conflicts fought Deaths from internal conflicts Number of refugees and displaced people Counteracting these falls were improvements in Political terror Number of armed service personnel Number of homicides

10 2014 GPI HIGHLIGHTS, cont d. Syria displaces Afghanistan as the world s least peaceful nation Iceland maintains its status as the most peaceful Georgia shows the largest improvement South Sudan has largest drop Europe s peace improves Europe most peaceful region in the world South Asia is again the least peaceful region Deterioration due to MENU and Sub-Saharan Africa

11 GPI 2014 RESULTS The 10 Most Peaceful Countries Rank Country Score 1 Iceland Denmark Austria New Zealand Switzerland Finland Canada Japan Belgium Norway 1.371

12 GPI 2014 RESULTS The 10 Least Peaceful Countries Rank Country Score 162 Syria Afghanistan South Sudan Iraq Somalia Sudan Central African Rep Dem. Rep. of Congo Pakistan North Korea 3.071

13 RISERS AND FALLERS BIGGEST RISERS 2014 SCORE CHANGE IN SCORE, RANK CHANGE IN RANK, Georgia Cote d'ivoire Libya Burundi Mongolia BIGGEST FALLERS 2014 SCORE CHANGE IN SCORE, RANK CHANGE IN RANK, South Sudan Egypt Central African Republic Ukraine Syria

14 TRENDS BY CATEGORY BIGGEST DETERIORATIONS IN PEACE SAFETY & SECURITY Score Change ONGOING CONFLICT Score Change MILITARISATION Score Change Syria Syria Afghanistan South Sudan Ukraine Syria Central African Rep South Sudan Norway BIGGEST IMPROVEMENTS IN PEACE SAFETY & SECURITY Score Change ONGOING CONFLICT Score Change MILITARISATION Score Change Saudi Arabia Chad Montenegro Burundi Georgia Georgia Georgia Israel Armenia

15 POPULATION DYNAMICS AND PEACE 2,500 2,300 2,100 1,900 1,700 1,500 Very Large (>100 million) Large (Up to 100 million) Medium (up to 25 Million) Small (<5 million)

16 GLOBAL POPULATION BY PEACE GPI Rank Least Peaceful Countries 560 million people 200 million live on less than $2 a day ,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 GPI Score

17 EVEN WHEN CONTROLLING FOR POPULATION, PEACE HAS DECLINED Less Peaceful Overall GPI Score 2,25 2,2 2,15 2,1 2,05 2 1,95 1,9 1,85 1,8 Per Person Average Country Average

18 SEVEN YEAR TRENDS IN PEACE Safety and Security score 5.3% decline, major reason for deterioration Militarisation Score No Change Ongoing Conflict Score 4.7% Terrorist activity and Homicide largest declines 53 countries improved, 103 countries deteriorated Greatest deterioration in the MENA and Sub- Saharan Africa regions

19 DEATHS FROM TERRORISM The deaths from terrorism increased between It then plateaued for but has increased again since Increase is mostly due to Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakista n and Nigeria Worldwide fatalities from Terrorist Acts

20 DEATHS FROM TERRORISM The following countries lost over 50 lives to terrorist acts in IEP estimates for fatalities in 2013 show terrorist activity remains high in these countries COUNTRY 2011* 2012* 2013** Iraq Afghanistan Pakistan Nigeria Syria Philippines Yemen Somalia India Thailand Kenya Russia Colombia Turkey Dem. Republic of the Congo *Source: START Global Terrorism Database (GTD) **IEP estimates of fatalities in 2013 using the GTD in conjunction with secondary sources.

21 GLOBAL HOMICIDE RATES The average country homicide rate has been increasing since Average Country Homicide Rate Intentional Homicide killed 437,000 people across the world in UNODC

22 Changes in GDP related to Conflict

23 The Violence Crisis The case of El Salvador Civil war: (UNDP, 2008) Data: Top panel: population (in 000s) Bottom panel: real per capita GDP (I$) Base year = 2005 Source: computed from Penn World Tables 6.3 Charts courtesy of Prof. Jurgen Brauer

24 The Violence Crisis El Salvador was lucky => here is the case of Nicaragua The case of Nicaragua Data: ; real per capita GDP (I$); base year = 2005 Source: computed from Penn World Tables 6.3 Chart courtesy of Prof. Jurgen Brauer

25 The Violence Crisis And here is the case of a country that had no war => but its neighbors did The case of Costa Rica Data: ; real per capita GDP (I$); base year = 2005 Source: computed from Penn World Tables 6.3 Chart courtesy of Prof. Jurgen Brauer

26 The Violence Crisis Blue line: ppp-gdp The case of the Dominican Republic Data: ; real per capita GDP (I$); base year = 2005 Source: computed from Penn World Tables 6.3; UNODC (2007) Red line: UNODC projection assuming that DOM s homicide rate were cut in half (to the level of Costa Rica s homicide rate). Chart courtesy of Prof. Jurgen Brauer

27 The Violence Crisis Per capita GDP Trend line of potential GDP Cumulative GDP losses Index = 100 violence post-violence Actual GDP time Real per capita GDP (I$); base year = 2005 Source: computed from Penn World Tables 6.3 The pothole diagram Charts courtesy of Prof. Jurgen Brauer

28 GLOBAL COST OF VIOLENCE Estimated to be US$9.8 trillion or 11.3% of Gross World Product in 2013 Individual Estimates for 162 Countries Allows cost benefit analysis Thirteen dimensions measured Increase of 3.8% from 2013

29 GLOBAL COST OF VIOLENCE IN BROKEN DOWN DIRECT VIOLENCE TYPE COST ($ BILLION) Military expenditure $ 2,535 Homicides $ 720 Internal security $ 625 Violent crime $ 325 Private security $ 315 Incarceration $ 185 GDP losses from conflict $ 130 Deaths from internal conflict $ 30 Fear $ 25 Terrorism $ 10 UN Peacekeeping $ 5 IDPs and refugees $ 2 Deaths from external conflict $ 1 Total (direct only) $4,908 Total (including 1x1 peace multiplier) $9,816 One of the large areas of increase is related to Chinese military expenditure

30 10 HIGHEST COUNTRIES ON VIOLENCE EXPENDITURE RANK COUNTRY COST IN USD 2013 ($ MIL PPP) COST PER PERSON (USD 2013 PPP) % Of GDP 1 North Korea $10,205 $ % 2 Syria $25,960 $1, % 3 Afghanistan $8,305 $ % 4 Liberia $625 $ % 5 South Sudan $3,120 $ % 6 Honduras $7,525 $ % 7 Zimbabwe $1,425 $ % 8 Iraq $43,970 $1, % 9 Somalia $1,015 $ % 10 Cote d' Ivoire $6,660 $ %

31 IEP RISK TOOL

32 The Pillars of Peace Framework provides an fluid environment for the achievement of many of the gaols that civil societies consider important Framework Correlates with: Higher GDP Lower inflation More ecologically sound Strong business environment Higher levels of human capital Perform well on human development indicators Source: Pillars of Peace, Institute for Economics and Peace, 2013

33 Weak Pillars = Greater Vulnerability Big fallers with positive peace deficits in 2008: Syria Rwanda Madagascar Egypt

34

35 Acceptance of the Rights of Others States which are more accepting tend to be more peaceful.

36 Good Relations with Neighbours More peaceful countries tended to have better regional relationships and a higher level of integration.

37 Corruption and Peace High Peace, Low Corruption Corruption Perceptions Index Tipping Point Thailand India Phillipines Nigeria Yemen Russia Afghanistan Iraq Somalia 0 1,0 1,5 2,0 Global Peace Index 2,5 3,0 3,5 Low Peace, High Corruption

38 Importance of rule of law In the last year % who see the institution as corrupt or extremely corrupt GPI Internal Peace Corruption Perceptions Index Global Peace Index % Believe corruption has stayed the same % Believe corruption has increased Political Parties Parliament Police Business Medical Services Civil Servants Judiciary Military Educational System Paid a bribe in the last year

39 Violence and GDP per Capita Growth Countries that have improved levels of internal peace since 1996 have had larger GDP per Capita growth than countries that have deteriorated. 3 rd Quartile Median 1st Quartile 3 rd Quartile Median 1st Quartile The distribution of GDP per Capita growth since 1996 is much higher in those countries that have also improved peace. Data Sources: World Bank, IEP.

40 Positive Peace and GDP Countries that improved in positive peace since 1996 have had larger GDP per Capita growth than countries that have deteriorated. Azerbaijan 3 rd Quartile Median 1st Quartile 3 rd Quartile Median 1st Quartile The distribution of GDP per Capita growth since 1996 is much higher in those countries that have also improved positive peace. Data Sources: World Bank, IEP

41 Inflation and Violence The most peaceful countries consistently tended to have lower variability in inflation. Most Violent countries = higher inflation Most Peaceful countries = lower inflation Source: Pillars of Peace, Institute for Economics and Peace, 2013

42 OVERALL VISION IEP s Risk Tool uses a Risk and Opportunity approach to assess country risk Improving Positive Peace Opportunity Likelihood of higher long term rates of GDP growth and improved human satisfaction Increased Violence Risk Higher likelihood of drops in GDP and decreasing human satisfaction

43 CONCEPTUAL BASIS OF RISK TOOL Measure Violence Understand Positive Peace Measure Positive Peace Differences Equals Risk or Opportunity Positive Peace and Actual peace align over the longer term Pillars of Peace is the contextual framework underlining Positive Peace

44 RISK AND RESILIENCE Strong link between violence and positive peace 140 POSITIVE PEACE INDEX RANK Croatia Qatar Portugal Chile 20 CanadaGermany Iceland Sweden Denmark 0 Laos Zambia Vietnam Indonesia Mongolia Argentina Malaysia Jordan Oman Costa Rica Uruguay Italy South Korea France United Kingdom Yemen DRC Haiti Sierra Leone Liberia Mauritania Ethiopia Pakistan Nepal Uganda Iran Madagascar Bangladesh Rwanda Cambodia Syria Mali Belarus Tanzania Egypt Ghana Senegal Ecuador Algeria Philippines China Saudi Arabia Ukraine Turkey Colombia Kazakhstan Thailand Georgia Peru Brazil Mexico South Africa Macedonia (FYR) Bahrain Greece United States of America India Russia GLOBAL PEACE INDEX RANK 2014 Israel

45 Countries at Most Risk in 2008 Using Positive Peace Model Most countries with institutions weaker than their peace in 2008 deteriorated by 2012 Countries with weak institutions in 2008 Red = Deteriorated Green = No Deterioration Bangladesh Bolivia Cameroon Egypt Ghana Iran Kazakhstan Madagascar Malaysia Mozambique Rwanda Syria Tunisia Vietnam Zambia Belarus Burkina Faso China Gabon Indonesia Jordan Laos Malawi Morocco Nicaragua Romania Senegal Tanzania Ukraine Yemen Source: IEP

46 IEP RISK MODELS IEP presents two risk models in GPI 2014 report Positive Peace Deficit Model Analyses global outliers based on the difference between positive and actual peace Like Country Model Analyses historical peace trends of a country and compares them to the history of other countries of similar positive peace levels

47 IEP RISK COMPARISON Prominent fragility measures compared to IEP risk models for 2008 to Largest Falls Change in GPI Score World Bank as Fragile in 2008 Failed States Index 2008 State Fragility Index 2008 IEP Models Syria -70% No Yes No Yes Libya -39% No No No Yes Rwanda -31% No No No Yes Madagascar -27% Yes No No Yes Oman -23% No No No Yes Tunisia -21% No No No Yes Cote d'ivoire -19% No Yes No Yes Yemen -18% No Yes No Yes Mexico -18% No No No No Bahrain -17% No No No Yes Identified 1/10 3/10 0/10 9/10

48 RESULTS OF RISK TOOL ANALYSIS 2014 Countries most at risk of small to medium deteriorations in peace COUNTRY GOVERNMENT INCOME Zambia Hybrid regime Lower middle income IEP COUNTRY RISK SCORE (OUT OF 100) 86 Haiti Hybrid regime Low income 78 Argentina Chad Bosnia And Herzegovina Flawed democracy Authoritarian regime Hybrid regime Upper middle income 76 Low income 74 Upper middle income 72 Nepal Hybrid regime Low income 70 Burundi Hybrid regime Low income 70 Georgia Hybrid regime Lower middle income 70 Liberia Hybrid regime Low income 67 Qatar Authoritarian regime High income 65

49 POVERTY, RISK AND IMPACT COUNTRY IEP RISK SCORE PER PERSON IMPACT OF MINOR RISE IN VIOLENCE ($ PPP) PER CAPITA RISK ($ PPP) (LIKELIHOOD X IMPACT) PEOPLE WHO COULD DROP BELOW $1.25 A DAY Chad 74/100 $10.2 $ M Myanmar 59/100 $10.6 $6.2 * Angola 19/100 $31.0 $ M Zambia 86/100 $ 5.5 $4.7 * Papua New Guinea 41/100 $10.3 $4.2 * Haiti 78/100 $ 4.7 $3.7 * Nepal 70/100 $ 4.8 $ M Kenya 42/100 $ 7.0 $ M Benin 41/100 $ 6.0 $ M Uganda 32/100 $ 6.0 $ M

50 IEP RESEARCH OUTPUTS

51 Summary Measure and Analyse Peace Measure and Analyse Peace Factors that create peace ACTION Better Prediction Better Cost/Benefit Analysis Better Program Outcomes $$ Lost opportunity cost

52