EXPLORE CHAPTERS
Chapters
01. Introduction
The Green Growth Index measures a country’s performance in achieving sustainability targets, including Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Paris Climate Agreement, and Aichi Biodiversity Targets. It consists of four green growth dimensions, including efficient and sustainable resource use, natural capital protection, green economic opportunities, and social inclusion. The Green Growth Index scores range from 1 to 100, classifying 1-20 as very low, 20-40 as low, 40-60 as moderate, 60-80 as high, and 80-100 as very high green growth performance. The highest score of 100 indicates that sustainability targets were achieved because the green growth indicators were benchmarked against these targets. The 40 green growth indicators in this fourth edition of the Green Growth Index were reviewed and validated to be policy relevant by over a hundred experts from 2019 to 2021.
In the following years, the experts will continue to review the green growth indicators to replace proxy variables with SDG indicators and to fill in the eight missing indicators for green economic opportunities due to a need for more data. Twenty-nine out of the 40 indicators are from the SDGs. The data sources for the indicators were published online by international organizations. Analysis of the databases downloaded from these sources in 2021 and 2022 showed some degree of divergences for some indicators in several countries. For this reason, the Index scores published in this report are not directly comparable with those in the 2021 Green Growth Index Report.
02. Global Review
The 2022 Green Growth Index presents scores for 186 countries in efficient and sustainable resource use (ESRU), 197 countries in natural capital protection (NCP), 151 countries in green economic opportunities (GEO), and 174 countries in social inclusion (SI). Between 42 and 43 percent of the 186 countries with ESRU scores have either high (80 countries) or moderate (78 countries) performance. The NCP is dominated by high scores, with 122 countries, or 62 percent of the 197 countries with scores for this dimension. GEO has the highest number of countries with a very low score, 43 percent of the 151 countries. Moreover, it is the only dimension where no country scores either high or very high. With 40 countries scoring above 80, SI has the highest number of countries with very high scores.
The geometric aggregation of the dimension scores resulted in 147 countries with Green Growth Index scores. The four green growth dimensions are equally important, so Index scores were not computed for countries with missing scores for at least one dimension. No countries score very low or very high on the 2022 Green Growth Index. Of the 147 countries, 43 countries (29 percent) have high scores, and 89 countries (61 percent) have moderate scores. The remaining 15 countries have a low Green Growth Index score, mainly in Asia. The highest-scoring country is Austria, with a score of 77.78, which still needs to reach the sustainability target of 100. The lowest-scoring country is Syria, with only a 25.86 score. Between 2010 and 2021, the countries showing above five percent increase in scores were predominantly in Asia (21 countries) and Europe (18 countries).
Chapters
Chapters
03. Regional Outlook
The regional distribution of the 147 country scores are 39 countries in Africa, 22 countries in the Americas, 41 countries in Asia, 38 countries in Europe, and four countries in Oceania. The Green Growth Index scores in the five African subregions, i.e., Eastern, Middle, Northern, Southern, and Western, were moderate, ranging between 42.40 and 52.15 in 2021. Between 2010 and 2021, the score gain was highest for social inclusion, particularly in Northern Africa, with at least 7 points increase. The Americas and its four subregions, including the Caribbean, Central America, Northern America, and South America, also showed moderate scores between 54.37 and 60.89 in 2021. But the most significant score increase was in green economic opportunities, with a 4.43 score gain in the Caribbean from 2010 to 2021. The subregions of Central, Eastern, South-eastern, Southern, and Western Asia scored between 42.51 to 57.06 on the Green Growth Index in 2021. Green economic opportunities also showed the most significant score gain, as high as 9 points in Eastern Asia. Europe’s Eastern, Northern, Southern, and Western subregions performed best on the Green Growth Index, with high scores that range from 63.93 to 71.12 in 2021. Europe’s gain in the score is highest in natural capital protection, with Western Europe increasing by 7.78 points in this dimension between 2010 and 2021. Data for green economic opportunities indicators remains insufficient in many Oceania countries, with Green Growth Index scores available only for Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, and Tonga. The scores for these Oceania countries ranged from 50 and 60 in 2021, with Australia gaining the highest score of about 5.5 in natural capital protection and social inclusion from 2010. Overall, social inclusion scores across all regions have risen from 2010 to 2021, particularly in many developing countries like Asia and Africa.
Looking into regional economic groups, including the European Union (EU), North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Mercado Común del Sur (MERCOSUR), Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), the EU scored the highest in Green Growth Index, mainly due to its high performance in natural capital protection and very high performance in social inclusion. However, with an overall score of about 70, the EU’s performance remained in the moderate range in 2021. NAFTA had a slightly higher score than the EU in green economic opportunities due to higher scores for green employment in the United States of America and Canada. MERCOSUR and ASEAN remained to have moderate scores from 2010 to 2021, with ASEAN’s scores in social inclusion lagging behind those of MERCOSUR. COMESA and SAARC were the leastperforming economic groups with low scores in the last decade.
Chapters
04. Country Performance
The country-level scatter analysis of the Green Growth Index scores by region showed that European countries’ scores gather around the high range, between 60 and 80, in 2021. This contrasts with the African and Asian countries, whose scores gather around the moderate range, between 40 and 60. There were three African countries with scores below 40, including Niger, Sudan, and Libya. Compared with Africa, more countries in Asia had scores below 40. These Asian countries include Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bahrain, Uzbekistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Qatar. Gabon was the only African country with a score above 60, showing a high green growth performance. In Asia, Japan and Thailand were the countries reaching high scores. The scores for the Americas and Oceania countries tended to split above and below 60, corresponding to high and moderate performance, respectively. In Oceania, Tonga’s score was located farther away from the other scores in the scatter diagram. Trinidad and Tobago and Guatemala were farthest from the other countries in the Americas. Nonetheless, these countries in Oceania and the Americas performed moderately, unlike many countries in Africa and Asia, which showed low performance.
In the 2021 Green Growth Index, the top-ranking countries by region were Austria in Europe with a score of 77.78, Japan in Asia with a score of 65.03, Paraguay in the Americas with a score of 62.47, New Zealand in Oceania with a score of 62.37, and Gabon in Africa with a score of 61.56. All countries’ scores for green economic opportunities were the lowest in 2021. In Europe, Austria, with a score of 93.45 in social inclusion, occupied the second rank in this dimension. Although Sweden occupies the first rank with a score of 94.71 in social inclusion, Austria surpassed Sweden’s very high performance in the other three green growth dimensions. Like Austria, Japan performed best in social inclusion, almost reaching the social equity target with a score of 95.69 in 2021. Although Japan’s scores in access to basic services and resources and social protection were also very high, it scored only moderate in gender balance. Paraguay performs best in natural capital protection, occupying the top ranks for cultural and social value and environmental quality in the Americas, with scores of 96.12 and 91.06, respectively, in 2021. New Zealand scored 87.11 for social inclusion in 2021, with very high scores for all pillars in this dimension. Although Australia’s social inclusion score was higher, New Zealand performed better in natural capital protection, occupying 1st rank in cultural and social value and 2nd rank in biodiversity and ecosystems protection in Oceania. Gabon’s Green Growth Index score was close to New Zealand’s due to its relatively high scores in efficient, sustainable resource use and natural capital protection. Performance in social inclusion was only moderate due to low scores in universal health coverage and equal gender pay in Gabon.
Methodology
Methodology
The 2022 Green Growth Index features Zambia’s national Green Growth Index. The GGGI supports the Government of Zambia through a collaborative project to benchmark the country’s green growth performance and establishes its readiness to transition to a green economy growth model using GGGI’s Green Growth Performance Measurement (GGPM) framework and tools, including the Green Growth Index. The Zambia Green Growth Index includes 80 green growth indicators, which were identified by experts from government, non-government, and academic institutions as policy-relevant for the country. The indicators were aligned with the green growth framework, representing 20 indicators (5 for every four pillars) in each dimension. Of the 80 indicators, 34 are part of the global Green Growth Index (i.e., this report), including 11 in efficient and sustainable resource use, 10 in natural capital protection, 3 in green economic opportunities, and 10 in social inclusion. And 45 are SDG indicators, with 8 in efficient and sustainable resource use, 13 in natural capital protection, 8 in green economic opportunities, and 16 in social inclusion. The indicators that are SDGs and no sustainability targets, the experts agreed to use the top five performers among developing countries instead of global to benchmark Zambia’s green growth performance.
Zambia’s national Green Growth Index showed a moderate score in 2021. It scored very high in GHG emissions reduction and high in gender balance, environmental quality, efficient and sustainable energy, and waste and material use efficiency. However, its performance in green trade was very low, and green employment was low. The trend in Green Growth Index scores increased from 2010 to 2021, with social inclusion and green economic opportunities mainly contributing to this development. The Zambian experts identified opportunities to improve the country’s green growth performance further. For example, in green trade, the Zambian experts emphasized diversifying their export base because extracting and exporting copper is not sustainable. Moreover, they considered it essential to evaluate trade barriers, improve exports’ added value, and impose product standards. In green employment, local skills development in light manufacturing presents an opportunity for jobs. Youth unemployment is very high, so local innovation technologies must be exploited to create jobs. The renewable energy and eco-tourism sectors could provide employment opportunities. Other opportunities related to innovation were also identified. With the government’s plan to gradually expand irrigated areas throughout the country to boost agricultural production and productivity, water use efficiency could be enhanced by introducing affordable water-saving technologies and infrastructures, e.g., harvest rainfall. Moreover, while productivity is essential, it is also crucial to consider adopting new practices such as climate-smart and organic agriculture, which need proper education and training as well as change in farmers’ lifestyles.
Chapters
The design process for developing the national Green Growth Index followed the same systematic and participatory approaches applied to the global Green Growth Index. It is systematic because the output from each activity feeds in as input into the following activity. It is participatory because the Zambian experts, identified before the process, were not only recipients but also sources of knowledge for developing the Index. Throughout the consultation process, the experts discussed, suggested, and selected the indicators that are policy relevant – with GGGI providing the needed technical support and expertise. The process combined different forms and mediums to allow interactive participation with and among the experts, including seminars/webinars, participatory workshops, online surveys, and dissemination (e.g., global conference). The dissemination of the Zambia Green Growth Index dealt with the presentation of the results in the session on Approaches, Experiences, & Opportunities for Measuring Performance in Green Growth Transition at the Global, Regional & National Levels during the Global Green Growth Week 2022, which was held virtually on 24-28 October 2022. Mr. John Msimuko, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Green Economy and Environment, provided the opening remarks for this session, and Mr. Francis Mpampi, the National Coordinator for the Green Climate Fund’s National Designated Authority, shared his experiences in participating in the development of the Zambia Green Growth Index. Other speakers and panelists in the session included experts from the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) Commission, Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (UN-ECLAC), African Development Bank Group (AfDB), Asian Development Bank (ADB), and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
No new indicator was added in this year’s global Green Growth Index edition. Moreover, none of the proxy variables was replaced due to inadequate data for several countries and years of the relevant SDG indicators. The international experts will continue to support the Global Green Growth Index, providing feedback on the policy relevance of the 80 indicators for the Zambia Green Growth Index. The international experts’ ratings on the Zambia Green Growth Index indicators were generally high and very high, with very few exceptions. In the following years, international experts will support the review of additional indicators of green economic opportunities, which is the only dimension that needs to meet the target number of indicators (12 per dimension). Moreover, several indicators in the other dimensions are only proxy variables, which will need to be replaced when data for relevant SDG indicators become available. Here, international experts will also be consulted.
Chapters
07. Statistical Tables
In addition to the Zambia Green Growth Index, the GGPM framework and tools were applied to different projects. The Green Growth Simulation Tool (GGSim), which is closely linked to the Green Growth Index, was applied to the Low Emission Development Strategies (LEDS) in Ethiopia and Burkina Faso and to the Green Emerging Senegal Plan (PSE) in Senegal to assess the SDG co-benefits of the policy interventions in these policy documents. The SDG indicators included in the co-benefit assessments include SDG 7.3.1 energy intensity level of primary energy supply and SDG 7.2.1 renewable energy share in the total final energy consumption for the energy sector, SDG 6.4.1 water use efficiency, SDG 6.4.2 level of water stress, and SDG 6.3.1 proportion of wastewater safely treated for the water and waste sector, SDG 12.3.1 food loss and food waste and SDG 15.3.1 nutrient balance per unit area for the agriculture sector, SDG 15.1.1 forest area as a percent of total land area, SDG 15.2.1 above-ground biomass stock in the forest, and SDG 15.3.1 proportion of (forest) land that is degraded over the total land area for the forest sector. The SDG coverage for the assessment will be expected to increase in upcoming projects with the development of the framework for applying network science tools to complement GGSim’s system dynamics models.
Other ongoing applications of the GGPM framework and tools include the development of the national Green Growth Index for Lao PDR and Qatar in collaboration with government partners. A collaborative project with the ADB was initiated last year to assess Azerbaijan and Central Asian countries’ inclusive and green growth transition. Across the Central Asian subregion, governments recognize the urgent need to reduce fiscal dependency on oil revenues and diversify the economy by finding new drivers of non-oil growth to achieve macroeconomic stability and more sustainable development. A central question of interest for the ADB is to take stock of the ongoing efforts towards green growth and the opportunities, challenges, and options for Azerbaijan and selected Central Asian countries as they move towards a net zero economy.
Chapters
Appendix 2
The international expert group
Chapters
Appendix 4
The GGPM Team
