Through its Green Growth Performance Measurement (GGPM) Program, the Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI) has developed the first benchmarked Green Growth Index that provides policymakers with a metric to measure green growth performance and on which to base their decisions.
This report discusses the conceptual and methodological frameworks of the Green Growth Index, the process for developing these frameworks, and the rationale for pursuing an inclusive and collaborative process. It also presents key results highlighting differences in green growth performance across dimensions and top-ranking countries in different regions.
03. Design Process
GGGI’s Green Growth Index pioneered an inclusive and rigorous process that is concept-driven, expert-guided, and policy-relevant.
More than 300 experts representing different organizations from various regions around the world participated in the review of the green growth framework for the Index. Expert feedback was assessed through iterative steps during three phases of Index development since 2017. This feedback was collected through workshops, expert group meetings, consultations, and an online survey.
A stepwise approach was applied on the Green Growth Index to enhance its transparency, replicability, and credibility.
The approach conforms to “good practices” in developing composite index, following the rigorous steps of concept building, empirical analysis and validation, and score presentation. Sustainability targets are integrated in the rescaling methods, allowing the Green Growth Index to measure distance to targets.
6.1 Green Growth dimensions by regions
Europe performs significantly better than the rest of the regions in social inclusion, with an overall score of 80. The largest discrepancies in scores are evident for this dimension, with Africa scoring the lowest, with below 40. The regional scores for natural capital protection are relatively close, at around 60, with only Asia scoring below 60. Oceania slightly performs better than Europe in efficient and sustainable resource use. The scores for African and American regions are at par at 40, which are significantly lower than for Oceania and Europe. The lowest performing region for this dimension is Asia. Only Europe performs relatively well in green economic opportunities, albeit the score is still low, at 40.
08. Comparison with other Green Growth Indices
Few other green growth related indices exist. It is thus important to understand similarities and differences between major global and regional green growth concepts through a comparative analysis of the frameworks and design process.
The green growth frameworks of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), African Development Bank (AfDB), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and Dual Citizen LLC (DC) were considered for the comparative assessments with the Green Growth Index. ADB’s concept was designed to develop a regional green growth index and measure green growth performance of developing countries in the Asia-Pacific region, but it can be applied to all countries and regional settings and for all levels of development. AfDB’s concept of green growth was piloted to support its 2013- 2022 strategy, which focuses on inclusive growth and the transition to green growth across Africa. DC’s concept of green economy was also applied in a global index that is updated every two years. UNEP’s concept was developed to measure green economy progress at the global level, using both an index and a dashboard of sustainability indicators.