Booklet WCY 2024
Booklet WCY 2024
Booklet WCY 2024
Competitiveness
Booklet
2024
World Competitiveness
Center
June 2024
ISBN-13 978-2-940485-64-2
ISSN 1026-2628
Copyright © 2024
IMD – International Institute for Management Development
23, Ch. de Bellerive
P.O. Box 915
CH-1001 Lausanne
Switzerland
e-mail: [email protected]
Internet: www.imd.org/wcc
Database: https://worldcompetitiveness.imd.org/
IMD, IMD REAL LEARNING. REAL IMPACT, and IMD WORLD COMPETITIVENESS YEARBOOK
are trademarks of IMD – International Institute for Management Development
2
Table of Contents
Preface 4
The IMD World Competitiveness Center 5
Partner Institutes 6
Analysis 17
The macroview: 2024 18
Highlights and trends in the 2024 World Competitiveness Ranking 28
Rankings in a Nutshell 49
The 2024 IMD World Competitiveness Ranking 50
Methodology in a Nutshell 52
What is the IMD World Competitiveness Ranking? 53
Selected Breakdowns 54
Factor Rankings 60
Competitiveness Country Profiles 73
Statistical Tables 143
Factor I: Economic Performance 144
Factor II: Government Efficiency 146
Factor III: Business Efficiency 148
Factor IV: Infrastructure 150
3
Preface
I am delighted to present the 2024 IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook. In the years
since the pandemic, we have seen increasing relevance to providing nations with the
inspiration to optimize their financial strategies and the prosperity of their people, while
having a significant impact on global collective efforts.
The challenges governments and businesses face across the board in 2024 – a historic
year for the number of elections across the globe – span the stalemate in the war between
Russia and Ukraine, heightened tensions in the Middle East, the integration of emerging
markets into the world economy, and dogged efforts to address global warming.
The carbon crisis is costly; we can’t reduce our carbon footprint and enjoy the same level
of prosperity we’re used to. Add to today’s challenges a constant need to keep on the
hamster wheel of digital transformation (despite the fact it’s helping the rich get richer
and the poor get poorer), and the scene of our 2024 rankings is set.
There is good news, however. International organizations are happily broadening their
competitiveness focus from the mere productivity of an economy to the way its economic
growth not only considers social equity and environmental integrity but actively enhances
them.
I do not want to be a doom-monger, but as we witness the transition to a low-carbon
and circular economy, plenty of private companies in the largest markets in the world
have no net-zero or emission reduction targets in place. The private sector is demanding
coinvestment in new technologies to governments, so they can de-risk the projects
and guarantee returns. At the same time, public funds are not enough to finance the
transtition, meaning cooperation between public and private sectors is paramount.
For now, doing so well is largely the realm of small economies that often operate as a bloc,
as our rankings continue to show. Not only do they “do net-zero better” but they also excel
in equality, sustainability, quality of life, and safety measures. The biggest economies in
the world have much to learn from them in this sense.
Companies and countries alike want to be profitable and to grow and expand, to do the
right thing for the planet, and to bestow prosperity on their people. But the inherent
contradictions these entail must result in trade-offs. The most competitive economies of
the future will be those that embrace the delayed gratification of “my loss today, your gain
tomorrow” while economic powerhouses that don’t adapt will suffer.
Reading our 2024 rankings requires both a macro and a micro lens. I have gone heavy
on the former, but now for the latter: put simply, our rankings help attract investment,
inform policy decisions, and foster a competitive spirit among nations. Translated into the
day-to-day this includes, but is not limited to, improved living standards, more and better
job creation, and sustainable development.
Competitiveness measures the extent to which a nation generates the prosperity of its
citizens. I do not like predicting the future. But if anything, I will say it is going to get more
competitive.
4
The IMD World
Competitiveness Center
For more than thirty years, the IMD World Competitiveness Center has
pioneered research on how countries and companies compete to lay the
foundations for sustainable value creation. The competitiveness of nations is
probably one of the most significant developments in modern management
and IMD is committed to leading the field. The World Competitiveness Center
conducts its mission in cooperation with a network of 58 Partner Institutes
worldwide to provide the government, business and academic communities with
the following services:
• Competitiveness Special Reports
• Competitiveness Prognostic Reports
• Workshops/Mega Dives on competitiveness
• IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook
• IMD World Digital Competitiveness Ranking
• IMD World Talent Ranking
• Hinrich-IMD Sustainable Trade Index
• Smart City Index
We also have the privilege of collaborating with a unique network of Partner Institutes, and other
organizations, which guarantees the relevance of the data gathered.
Contact
e-mail: [email protected]
Internet: www.imd.org/wcc
Database: https://worldcompetitiveness.imd.org/
5
Partner Institutes
We would like to express our deep appreciation for the contribution of our
Partner Institutes, enabling an extensive coverage of competitiveness in
their home countries. The following Institutes and people supplied data
from national sources and helped distribute the survey questionnaires:
Argentina Belgium
Shaw Institute for Business Research Federation of Enterprises in Belgium
Catholic University of Argentina, Buenos www.feb.be
Aires Dries Vantomme, Attaché Economie &
http://www.uca.edu.ar Conjoncture
Dr. Carlos Newland, Dean
Dr. Marcelo F. Resico, Senior Economist Botswana
Blas E. Menéndez, Research Assistant Botswana National Productivity Centre
(BNPC), Botswana
Australia Letsogile Batsetswe, Experienced
CEDA – Committee for Economic Research Consultant
Development of Australia Mr Jacob Mmola, Executive Director
www.ceda.com.au
Cassandra Winzar, Chief Economist Brazil
Justine Parker, Media Manager and Fundação Dom Cabral, Innovation and
Content Specialist Entrepreneurship Center
https://www.fdc.org.br/
Austria Hugo Tadeu, Professor and Director of
Federation of Austrian Industries, Vienna FDC Innovation and Digital Strategies
Austrian Institute of Economic Research, Center
Vienna Bruna Diniz, Research Intern
www.iv.at
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Christian Helmenstein,
Chief Economist
Mag. Michael Oliver, Economist
Bahrain
Ministry of Finance and National Economy
https://www.mofne.gov.bh/
Dr. Faisal Hammad, Assistant
Undersecretary for Competitiveness &
Economic Indicators
6
Bulgaria Ms. Huang Suyuan, Research Assistant,
Center for the Study of Democracy, Sofia Ms. Sun Xiao, PhD Candidate, Tsinghua
www.csd.bg University
Ruslan Stefanov, Program Director and Ms. Zhu Siyao, PhD Candidate, Tsinghua
Chief Economist University
Daniela Mineva, Senior Analyst, Economic Mr. Bi Shiyao, Graduate Student, Tsinghua
Program University
Vanya Petrova, Senior Analyst, Economic Ms. Yu Hanying, Graduate Student,
Program Tsinghua University
Mr. Jin Shiyao, Research Assistant
Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce and Dr. Lang Yu, Postdoctoral fellow, Tsinghua
Industry University
https://www.bcci.bg/ Ms. Tang Yuwen, Graduate Student,
Boryana Abadzhieva, Chief Expert, Tsinghua University
Economic Analysis and Policy Department
Yana Atanasova, Junior Expert, Economic Colombia
Analysis and Policy Department National Planning Department
https://www.dnp.gov.co
Canada Alexander Lopez Maya, General Director,
Information and Communications Department of National Planning (DNP)
Technology Council (ICTC) Mónica Lorena Ortíz Medina, Technical
www.ictc-ctic.ca Director, Innovation and Private Sector
Alexandra Cutean, Chief Research Officer Development (DNP)
Chile
Universidad de Chile
Facultad de Economía y Negocios (FEN)
www.fen.uchile.cl
Dr. Enrique Manzur, Vice Dean
Dr. Sergio Olavarrieta, Vice President
Dr. Pedro Hidalgo, Associate Professor
China
China Institute for Development Planning,
Tsinghua University
Prof. Yang Yongheng
Prof. Wang Youqiang, Professor
Dr. Gong Pu, Assistant Professor
7
Partner Institutes
Croatia Finland
National Competitiveness Council ETLA Economic Research
Ivan Mišetić, Acting President www.etla.fi
Biserka Sladović, Advisor Ville Kaitila, Researcher
Hrvoje Stojić, Chief Economist Päivi Puonti, Head of Forecasting
Aki Kangasharju, Managing Director
Croatian Employers’ Association
https://www.hup.hr/en/ Ghana
Iva Tomic, PhD, Chief Economist Management Development and
Productivity Institute
Cyprus Ghana (MPDI)
Economics Research Centre, University of www.mdpi.gov.gh
Cyprus Madam Bernice Adjei, Director General,
http://ucy.ac.cy/erc/en/ MDPI
Sofronis Clerides, Professor of Economics Stephen Asirifi Essel, Ph.D., Ag. Director,
Nicoletta Pashourtidou, Assistant Director Consultancy, MDPI
8
Hong Kong SAR Mr. Arza Faldy Prameswara, Senior
Hong Kong Trade Development Council Researcher
Mr. Wing Chu, Principal Economist Mr. Taufiq Nur, Senior Researcher
Ms Cherry Yeung, Senior Economist Ms. Shona Kamila Laily, Analyst
Ms Cathy Kwan, Senior Research Mr. Yendra Emirsyah Kivatra, Analyst
Executive
NuPMK Consulting, Jakarta
Hungary http://nupmk.co.id
ICEG European Center, Budapest Tini Moeis, Managing Director
http://icegec.org Devi RD Hamdani, Senior Business
Renata Anna Jaksa, Director Manager
Dr. Oliver Kovacs, Senior Research Fellow
Ireland
University of Public Service IDA Ireland
Dr. Magdolna Csath, Research Professor www.idaireland.com
in competitiveness Michael Lohan, CEO
Karen Law, Planning Executive
Iceland
Icelandic Chamber of Commerce, Israel
Reykjavik The Federation of Israeli Chambers of
www.chamber.is Commerce, Tel-Aviv
Gunnar Ulfarsson, Economist www.chamber.org.il
Israela Many, Deputy Managing Director
India of Economy and Tax
National Productivity Council, New Delhi Liran Avitan, Economist
https://www.npcindia.gov.in/
Mr. B. Pravin Bhandary, Group Head (ES)
Mr. Rajesh Sund, Director (ES)
Indonesia
Lembaga Management, Faculty of
Economics and Business, Universitas
Indonesia (LM FEB UI), Jakarta
https://www.lmfebui.com/
Dr. Willem A. Makaliwe, Managing
Director
Mr. Bayuadi Wibowo, Group Head of
Research and Consulting
9
Partner Institutes
Japan Kuwait
Mitsubishi Research Institute, Inc., Tokyo Kuwait Anti-Corruption Authority
Research Centre for Policy and Economy (Nazaha)
www.mri.co.jp https://www.nazaha.gov.kw
Dr. Hirotsugu Sakai Dhari Buyabes, Head of International
Organizations and Conferences
Jordan International Cooperation Dept.
Ministry of Planning and International
Cooperation Latvia
www.mop.gov.jo University of Latvia Centre for European
Omar Fanek, National Policies Support and Transition Studies, LU CETS
Department Director http://www.lu.lv/cets
Mira Mango, Head of the Competitiveness Dr. Zane Zeibote, Director
and International Indices Division Prof. Dr. Tatjana Muravska, Chairperson of
the Board
Kazakhstan
Economic Research Institute, JSC of Lithuania
the Ministry of National Economy of the Innovation Agency Lithuania
Republic of Kazakhstan, Astana https://innovationagency.lt
https://economy.kz Toma Lankauskienė, Head of Research
Aidana Terlikbayeva, Leading Expert, and Analysis Unit
Center for Strategic Analysis Indrė Žebrauskaitė, Senior Analyst
Aimira Sabugaliyeva, Senior Expert,
Center for Strategic Analysis
Korea Rep.
Korea Institute for International Economic
Policy
Dr. Sang-Ha Yoon, Team Head,
International Macroeconomics Team
Ms. Jiyun Lee, Researcher, International
Macroeconomics Team
10
Luxembourg Mongolia
Luxembourg Chamber of Commerce Economic Policy and Competitiveness
www.cc.lu Research Center - www.ecrc.mn
Christel Chatelain, Director Economic Mr. Tsagaan Puntsag, Founder and
Affairs Chairman of Board
Jean-Baptiste Nivet, Senior Economist Ms. Lakshmi Boojoo, Director General
Sidonie Paris, Economist Ms. Odonchimeg Ikhbayar, Deputy
Director, Head of Research
Malaysia Mr. Ganbat Chuluun, Research Economist
Malaysia Productivity Corporation (MPC), Ms. Tungalag Erdenebat, Research
Petaling Jaya, Selangor Economist
www.mpc.gov.my Mr. Mungunjiguur Battsolmon, Research
Mr. Zahid Ismail, Director General MPC Economist
Dr. Mazrina Mohamed Ibramsah, Deputy
Director General MPC Netherlands
Dr. Mohamad Norjayadi Tamam, Deputy Confederation of Netherlands Industry
Director General MPC and Employers (VNO-NCW), Netherlands
Ms. Wan Fazlin Nadia Wan Osman, www.vno-ncw.nl
Director MPC Thomas Grosfeld
Mr. Mohammed Alamin Rehan, Tim Zandbergen
Director MPC
New Zealand
Mexico Auckland Business Chamber
Center for Strategic Studies for Simon Bridges, Chief Executive Officer
Competitiveness (CSSC)
www.ceec.edu.mx Nigeria
Carlos Maroto Espinosa, General Manager National Productivity Centre, Nigeria
Dr. Nasir Olaitan Raji-Mustapha, Director-
General
Engr. Adejoh David Onuche, Director,
Productivity Measurement & Index
11
Partner Institutes
Peru Portugal
CENTRUM PUCP Porto Business School, University of
https://centrum.pucp.edu.pe/ Porto, Porto
Percy Marquina, General Director https://www.pbs.up.pt/
Beatrice Avolio, Head of the Graduate Prof. Álvaro Almeida
Business Department Prof. Daniel Bessa
Luis Del Carpio, Director of CENTRUM Prof. Filipe Grilo
Competitiveness Center Prof. José Luís Alvim
Victor Fajardo, Researcher of CENTRUM Prof. João Loureiro
Competitiveness Center Prof. Patrícia Teixeira Lopes
Prof. José Esteves
Philippines
Asian Institute of Management Puerto Rico
Rizalino S. Navarro Policy Center for Puerto Rico Department of Economic
Competitiveness (AIM RSN PCC) Development and Commerce
https://aim.edu/research-centers/rizalino- (Departamento de Desarrollo
s-navarro-policy-center-competitiveness
Jamil Paolo Francisco, Ph.D. Económico y Comercio de Puerto Rico).
Executive Director, AIM RSN PCC Invest Puerto Rico.
Christopher Caboverde, Research
Manager, AIM RSN School of Business and Entrepreneurship
Hauvre Somova – Economist, AIM RSN (Escuela de Negocios y Empresarismo,
PCC UAGM Gurabo).
Poland Qatar
SGH Warsaw School of Economics Department of Strategic Planning
https://www.sgh.waw.pl/en General Secretariat of the National
Prof. Marzenna Weresa Planning Council
Dr. Anna Dzienis www.psa.gov.qa
Hissa Alassiry, Project Manager
Dr. Hasan Mahmoud Omari, Economic
Development Expert
12
Romania Slovenia
CIT-IRECSON Center of Technological Institute for Economic Research, Ljubljana
Information, Bucharest, http://www.ier.si/
www.cit-irecson.ro Peter Stanovnik, PhD, Associate Professor
Bogdan Ciocanel, PhD, Director Sonja Uršič, M.A.
Dan Grigore, Economist
University of Ljubljana,
Saudi Arabia School of Economics and Business
National Competitiveness Center http://www.ef.uni-lj.si/en
https://www.ncc.gov.sa/en/Pages/default. Ms. Mateja Drnovsek, PhD, Full Professor
aspx
H.E. Dr Eiman AlMutairi, CEO of National South Africa
Competitiveness Center Productivity SA
Waleed AlRudaian, Vice President www.productivitysa.co.za
Salman M. AlTukhaifi, General Manager of Ms Juliet Sebolelo Mashabela,
Analytics & Business Intelligence Acting Chief Economist
Singapore Spain
Economics Division, Ministry of Trade and Spanish Confederation of Employers,
Industry, Singapore Spain
https://www.mti.gov.sg/ Edita Pereira, Head of Economic
Research Unit
Singapore Business Federation, Paloma Blanco, Economic Research Unit
Singapore
Solomon Alan Huang, Deputy Director, Taiwan (Chinese Taipei)
Advocacy and Policy Division National Development Council, Taipei
http://www.ndc.gov.tw
Slovak Republic Ms. Kao, Shien-Quey, Deputy Minister
Inštitút slobody a podnikania Ms. Wu, Ming-Huei, Director of Economic
Ján Oravec Development Department
Mr. Wang, Chen-Ya, Executive Officer
13
Partner Institutes
Thailand
Thailand Management Association (TMA),
Bangkok
www.tma.or.th
Ms. Wanweera Rachdawong,
Chief Executive Officer, TMA
Ms. Pornkanok Wipusanawan, Director,
TMA Center for Competitiveness
Ms. Tossanun Preratipoomsret, Manager,
TMA Center for Competitiveness
Turkey
TUSIAD, Turkish Industry and Business
Association
Economic Research Department
www.tusiad.org
Gizem Öztok Altınsaç, Chief Economist
İsmet Tosunoğlu, Economist
İrem Sipahi, Expert
Batuhan Esen, Expert
UAE
Federal Competitiveness and Statistics
Centre (FCSC)
http://fcsc.gov.ae/
Venezuela
National Council to Investment Promotion
(CONAPRI)
www.conapri.org
Juan Cabral, Executive Director
Jennyn Osorio, Manager of Economic
Affairs
Lilian Zambrano, Manager of Legal Affairs
14
This booklet is just a summary.
The complete Yearbook with full profiles and all the
statistics is available digitally and in print.
18
Competitiveness: more critical each year
The World Economic Forum has decided to 1. The rise of emerging markets and their
stop publishing its Global Competitiveness increasing integration into the world
Ranking. IMD, as an academic institution economy
with no political agenda, is therefore very Countries such as China, India, Brazil, Indo-
well positioned as it has become the only nesia, and Turkey have experienced rapid
institution in the world to assess the overall
growth and development in past decades
competitiveness of nations and how well and have become essential players in trade,
their digital and talent management feeds investment, innovation, and geopolitics.
national policy agendas. These countries offer new opportunities
and markets for businesses and consumers
Our responsibility has grown, in this sense, but also pose new risks and uncertainties.
and we are committed to providing an unbi- Governments and firms must adapt to the
ased and research-based assessment of distinct cultural, institutional, and regulatory
19
GDP, 2017-2023
(2020=100, local currency)
Switzerland Hong Kong SAR Euro Area Thailand United States China
130
120
110
100
90
80
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Figure 1
Source: World Bank Development Indicators
Note: GDP index, in local currency
environments of these markets to succeed (USA), China, and the European Union (EU)
within them, while also sticking to global – have recovered their pre-pandemic levels
quality and sustainability standards. with accumulated growth in GDP of 20%
or more in a period of three years. On the
Figure 1 below illustrates the performance other hand, other Asian economies – both
of a selected sample of countries since the large and small –such as Thailand and Hong
beginning of the pandemic in 2020. The three Kong have not yet managed to relaunch
biggest global powers – the United States themselves. Switzerland is one among a
160
140
120
100
80
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Figure 2
Source: World Bank Development Indicators
Note: GDP per capita index, constant 2015 USD
20
Forecast number of mobile 5G subscriptions
2019-2028
India, Nepal, Bhutan South East Asia & Oceania North East Asia Central & Eastern Europe
Western Europe North America Latin America Middle East & Africa
2022
2023*
2024*
2025*
2026*
2027*
2028*
0.00 500.00 1,000.00 1,500.00 2,000.00 2,500.00 3,000.00 3,500.00 4,000.00 4,500.00 5,000.00
Figure 3
Source: Ericsson
Note: Mobile 5G subscriptions, 2022 to 2028 (expected)
group of countries with disappointing GDP 2. Digital transformation and the advent of
recovery performances despite continually the Fourth Industrial Revolution
good standings in the rankings. Rapid technological advances such as arti-
ficial intelligence, robotics, biotechnology,
So, what is behind this? Absolute GDP figures nanotechnology, and the Internet of Things
hide the potential of world economies to (IoT) create new possibilities and challenges
converge on a per capita basis; given GDP for economies and societies. These technol-
measures aggregate output, it makes sense ogies can boost productivity, efficiency, and
that a bigger country would have a higher innovation and disrupt existing industries,
GDP than a smaller one, meaning dividing occupations, and skills. They can also create
GDP as per the population figure gives a new ethical, legal, and social dilemmas like
slightly better sense of how prosperous a data privacy, cybersecurity, inequality, and
nation is. governance. To leverage the benefits of
these technologies, countries and firms must
Figure 2 below shows the impressive devel- invest in digital infrastructure, human capital,
opment of South Asia and East Asia, with and innovation ecosystems while ensuring
GDP per capita increases in the period inclusiveness, trust, and resilience.
2009-2023 of 72% and 66%, respectively.
With a world average of 25% over the period, Ericsson (see Figure 3) has predicted that
other regions (particularly the Middle East 5G subscriptions will increase drastically
and Africa) have fared much worse. As we worldwide from 2019 to 2028, from over
see in Figure 2, when adjusted by inflation, 12 million to over 4.5 billion, respectively.
the growth rates of the USA and the EU are Northeast Asia, Southeast Asia, India, Nepal,
not that different. Criticisms that the EU has and Bhutan are expected to have the most
failed to catch up with the USA have failed subscriptions by region. This variable is a
to consider this. proxy for the comparative level of tech-
21
Global CO2 emission intensity in kilograms per USD
2000-2022
2000 2022
CIS
Middle East
Asia
Pacific
North America
Africa
Latin America
Europe
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90
Figure 4
Source: Statista
nology development across regions. The data services. This implies moving from a linear
suggests that Asia will continue to dominate economy – based on extraction, production,
technology development and innovation. consumption, and disposal – to a circular
one, based on reduction, reuse, recycling,
According to Ericsson, 5G connectivity will and regeneration. It also implies adopting
boost the IoT market in the future as the cleaner and more efficient energy sources
new mobile technology will link machines (such as renewables) and reducing green-
and devices with faster data speeds, very house gas emissions and waste. To achieve
low latency, and better availability. By 2023, this transition, countries and firms must
connected cars will be the largest group of implement green policies, incentives, and
5G IoT endpoints worldwide, with more than regulations while fostering green innovation
19 million endpoints installed. Outdoor secu- and entrepreneurship.
rity cameras and fleet telematics devices are
essential for the 5G IoT endpoint installed The reduction in emissions has been domi-
base.1 nating discussions on the world economy in
the last decade, and the Middle East is the
3. The transition to a low-carbon and circular only region where no country has ignored the
economy importance of environmental responsibility.
The growing awareness and urgency of the As Figure 4 illustrates, emission reductions
environmental crisis, such as climate change, worldwide over the last 22 years have been
biodiversity loss, and resource depletion aggressive and significant in some cases
drive the need for a fundamental shift in (CIS region, North America).
how we produce and consume goods and
22
Seen in the context of these three major this changing global context while simulta-
challenges and their multiple ramifications, neously creating value and well-being for
we believe the economies of the future will their people.
be those able to anticipate and adapt to
The WCC provides a comprehensive and and diversification. Some examples of these
objective assessment of different econo- economies are China, India, Malaysia, Thai-
mies’ strengths and weaknesses and best land, and Chile.
practices and benchmarks for improvement.
Using our data and analysis, policymakers, National competitiveness rankings are an
business leaders, and academics can gain essential ingredient in the formation of
insights and guidance on enhancing their national strategies because they provide
economies’ competitiveness and resilience comprehensive and objective assessments
and preparing for future challenges and of countries’ strengths and weaknesses vis
opportunities. à vis other countries. They also serve as a
benchmark for measuring progress and
In 2024, the WCC ranked the competitive- identifying areas for improvement.
ness of 67 economies across four factors:
economic performance, government effi- Competitiveness rankings can also help
ciency, business efficiency, and infrastruc- countries attract foreign investment, stim-
ture. These factors capture various aspects ulate innovation, enhance productivity, and
of competitiveness, such as macroeconomic foster social well-being. Moreover, they can
stability, fiscal policy, institutional quality, promote healthy competition and cooperation
market openness, business dynamism, inno- among nations and increase their visibility
vation, education, health, and environmental and reputation in the global arena. There-
performance. The 2024 ranking shows that fore, national competitiveness rankings are
the most competitive economies combine valuable tools for guiding policymaking and
solid economic performance with efficient enhancing national performance.
and effective public and private sectors,
high-quality infrastructure, and human and Nations utilize competitiveness rankings as
social capital. These economies also balance crucial benchmarks in their national blue-
productivity and prosperity, meaning they prints. Take Saudi Arabia as an example:
can therefore generate elevated levels of the OECD (Organization for Economic Coop-
income and quality of life for their citi- eration and Development) has reported
zens while preserving the environment and substantial strides in its world competitive-
social cohesion. Some examples of such ness standings, a feat that can be credited
economies are Singapore, Switzerland, to advancements in governmental efficiency,
Denmark, Sweden, and the Netherlands. The the performance of the private sector, and
ranking also shows that emerging markets the development of infrastructure.
are catching up with more advanced econo-
mies, especially in innovation, digitalization,
23
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is another tion, support startups, and encourage the
nation that diligently tracks a range of adoption of advanced technologies in various
competitiveness indices as a key compo- sectors, from manufacturing to services.
nent of its national agenda2. These indices
encompass a wide spectrum of areas such If competitiveness rankings are integrated
as human capital, trade, finance, digitization, into nations’ strategic frameworks to drive
and societal well-being. policymaking and measure progress toward
economic and social goals, a fundamental
Additionally, Kazakhstan3 has been working part of this is equipping the workforces of
towards improving its position in world national economies with the skills needed to
competitiveness rankings to be among the thrive in the digital age and to contribute to
top 50 most competitive nations. This ambi- the country’s economic progress. It’s hard to
tion is supported by strategic programs and find a country today not keen on attracting
partnerships to enhance governance, finance, global talent to boost their human capital,
and talent management within the country. and this boils down to implementing policies
to make the country more attractive to skilled
Oman’s Vision 2040 aims to place the country professionals worldwide, such as creating
among the top 30 most competitive countries an environment conducive to research and
by 2030 and among the top 20 by 2040.4 development, offering competitive incentives,
and ensuring a high standard of living.
Slovakia’s5 national policies are oriented
towards improving the country’s positioning In addition, education policies focus on
in international rankings, with a special focus nurturing homegrown talent through quality
on infrastructure, technology, and talent education and training programs, particularly
attraction. These efforts are part of a broader in STEM fields. Georgia’s country strategy for
strategy to foster economic growth, enhance 2021-2026 mentions its ultimate objective as
competitiveness, and ensure sustainable being to “improve productivity and resilience
development. of the economy through enhanced compet-
itiveness and access to finance.”8
In Sweden, the USA6, and Romania7, – to cite
a few examples –the government is investing
heavily in modernizing the country’s infra-
structure, including transportation networks
and digital connectivity, to facilitate business
operations and improve the quality of life
for its citizens. In the realm of technology,
initiatives are underway to promote innova-
24
Productivity per employee, 1990-2023
(2000=100)
Productivity per employee, 1990-2023 (2000=100)
Global Eurozone United States
160
140
120
100
80
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2023
Figure 5
Source: Conference Board
Note: Labor productivity index, constant 2015 USD
In conclusion, the shift in focus from mere path to a sustainable and inclusive global
productivity to a more holistic view of economy and is also the true essence of
competitiveness by major international orga- competitiveness.
nizations such as the World Bank and the
World Economic Forum marks a significant Our readers might initially be confused
milestone in global economic policymaking. when observing that the countries that top
It underscores the understanding that true our ranking are predominantly Ecouropean,
competitiveness is not just about produc- which is at odds with the fact that –as Figure
tivity but also quality of life: economic pros- 5 illustrates –the Eurozone has lagged behind
perity, happiness, social inclusion, fairness, the USA and the global economy in labor
and environmental sustainability. Such a productivity growth since 1990. However, as I
perspective aligns with the WCC’s long-held hope to have shown, we encourage a reading
belief that competitiveness is a multifaceted of competitiveness that goes beyond GDP
concept, within which productivity is a crucial growth, and into the realms of prosperity.
component, but not the sole determinant.
Compared to China, the Middle East, and
As we move forward, nations must embrace a Africa, European productivity growth rates
comprehensive approach to competitiveness, have been very disappointing (see Figure
ensuring that economic growth does not 6). Yet these regions have been less able to
compromise social equity and environmental translate such economic gains into higher
integrity but enhances them. This is the salaries, more international investment,
better infrastructure and healthcare, and
scientific development.
25
Productivity per hour increase
2020-2023
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
-2.0
-4.0
-6.0
-8.0
Figure 6
Source: Conference Board
Note: Labor productivity growth
For example, salary data shows a different ness. Readers will need to understand the
development irrespective of productivity 2024 IMD World Competitiveness Ranking
levels. While China’s GDP has developed through this lens.
impressively (see Figure 7), the country’s
position in the 2024 IMD World Competitive- As we incorporate new economies into
ness Ranking is easily explained by the fact the WCC competitiveness ranking family
that, in absolute terms, the monthly earnings (competitiveness, digital, and talent rankings)
of the average Chinese worker are one-fifth we are acutely aware of our responsibility
of those of the USA, Singapore, Switzerland, to provide fair and unbiased assessments
and Singapore. that allow policymakers to make what they
consider to be the right choices and to pursue
So, while productivity is an essential aspect economic agendas that improve citizens’
of competitiveness, it’s just one piece of prosperity.
the puzzle. A genuinely competitive entity
excels in productivity and areas like quality, In this vein, we strive to ensure that our
innovation, talent, and a good regulatory methodology is transparent, robust, and
environment. This is why focusing solely reflective of the multifaceted nature of
on productivity is not enough to ensure economic competitiveness. We continuously
competitiveness. It’s the combination of all refine our indicators and metrics to capture
these factors that leads to true competitive- the evolving dynamics of the global economy,
26
Salaries in selected world economies
2013-2021
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
United States China Germany Japan Singapore Switzerland
Figure 7
Source: International Labor Organization
Note: Average monthly earnings of employees in US dollars, 2013-2021
27
Highlights and trends in the 2024
IMD World Competitiveness Ranking
José Caballero
Senior Economist
IMD World Competitiveness Center
The 2024 IMD World Competitiveness Ranking has been built in the context of
several ongoing global issues that present challenges to the competitiveness
of the economies we assess. For instance, the constant tensions between the
US and China and the resulting trade disruptions. Another example of such
challenges is the continuous armed conflicts that compound existing economic
trends such as inflation and poverty. Geopolitical tensions also exacerbate
supply-chain disruptions affecting global production. Furthermore, the
explosion of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has the potential to enhance
efficiency and productivity significantly. There are, however, several challenges
associated with it, including the effective implementation of AI-based systems
and costs.
This year’s results show fluctuations at the top of the rankings. Singapore
returns to the top spot, Switzerland returns to second, and Denmark drops to
third place.
Singapore owes its comeback to a robust performance across all four
competitiveness factors, particularly government efficiency and business
efficiency.
Switzerland has made progress thanks to its improved economic performance
and business efficiency as well as its retained lead in government efficiency and
infrastructure.
Denmark has dropped to third due to its diminishing economic performance.
More specifically, its floundering performance in employment and international
trade.
The 2024 edition of the IMD World Competitiveness Ranking and accompanying
Yearbook features 67 economies. We are thrilled to incorporate Ghana, Nigeria,
and Puerto Rico for the first time.
In this essay, we delve into the challenges facing businesses in today’s economic
competitiveness panorama. First, however, we assess the 2024 performance of
the economies that display high levels of competitiveness.
28
Top 10 economies in 2024
Singapore reached the top of the ranking for performance, it remains well-positioned in
the first time since 2020. Switzerland also international trade (second) and improves
improved, regaining the second spot, while in international investment (second from
Denmark and Ireland dropped to third and fourth), although there is a decline in employ-
fourth positions, respectively. While Hong ment (fifth from second). In infrastructure,
Kong SAR improved two positions moving Singapore’s highest position is in techno-
up to fifth place, Sweden gained the same logical infrastructure in which it reaches the
number of spots to sixth. The UAE increases top spot. Its performance in health and the
three ranks returning to the seventh place. environment, however, continues to slightly
Taiwan (Chinese Taipei) dropped two posi- decline dropping to 28th from 26th.
tions, falling back into eighth place, with
the Netherlands also experiencing a decline At the indicator level, Singapore pres-
and dropping to ninth. Norway gains four ents a robust performance. For instance,
positions to return to the top 10. under business efficiency, it reaches the
top position in several indicators including
1. Singapore overall productivity (PPP), the availability
Singapore returns to the top spot with a of skilled labor, and regulatory compliance.
robust performance across all competi- At the same time, according to executives,
tiveness factors, reaching the second spot it improves in criteria such as the priority
in government and business efficiency (up that the private sector assigns to attracting
from seventh and eighth, respectively), and retaining highly skilled talent (ninth), the
the fourth position in infrastructure (up level of motivation of its labor force (sixth),
from ninth), and remaining in third place in and the efficiency of its SMEs sector (ninth).
economic performance. At the sub-factor In government efficiency, Singapore fares
level, its strongest performance is in business strongly in the adaptability of government
efficiency, ranking in the top five spots in policy, the effectiveness of its bureaucracy,
all relevant sub-factors. It reaches the top and the credit rating index, reaching the top
position in the labor market and attitudes and position in all. For survey participants, under
values sub-factors. Singapore’s performance the management practices sub-factor, there
in government efficiency is also robust. In are several steep improvements including the
the latter, to different degrees, it bolsters agility of companies (fourth), the effective-
its position through a strong performance ness of corporate boards in performing their
in the business legislation and institutional fiduciary duties (fourth), and the adequate
framework sub-factors, ranking second implementation of auditing and accounting
and third, respectively. Under economic practices (eighth). There are, however, some
29
feeble performances at the indicator level. under labor market in which it remains in
For instance, real GDP growth per capita is 13th. Moreover, the country ranks top in the
at 63rd representing a decline from 59th, total public finance sub-factor (improving from
general government debt (as a percentage the fourth spot) and remains first under
of GDP) at 65th (down from 61st), total health institutional framework. Switzerland ranks
expenditure (as a percentage of GDP) drops fifth in the business legislation and societal
from 49th to 54th and Singapore’s GINI coef- framework sub-factors. While in the former
ficient (a measure of economic inequality) such a position represents an improvement
slightly declines from 44th to 45th. Moreover, of two spots, the latter demonstrates no
there is a significant decrease in Singapore’s changes in rank compared to 2023. Under
standing in the stock market index from economic performance, the country fares
28th to 46th and in its high-tech exports (as a best in the domestic economy sub-factor
percentage of manufactured exports) from improving from eighth to fourth. Although
third to 13th. Total public expenditure on Switzerland’s performance is less robust
education drops from 62nd to 65th as does in international trade and employment, it
the quality of education (as measured by advances in both sub-factors (16th from 20th,
the pupil-teacher ratio) from 28th to 34th in and 23rd from 34th, respectively).
primary education and from 26th to 36th in
secondary school. At the indicator level, in economic perfor-
mance, Switzerland performs robustly in the
2. Switzerland GDP per capita and the economic complexity
Switzerland regains the second position index ranking third in both. This represents
following advances in economic performance a slight increase in the former and a slight
(12th from 18th) and business efficiency (fifth decrease in the latter. The country greatly
from seventh) while remaining in the top advances in the growth of exports of goods
position in the government efficiency and (from 47th to eighth) but its performance in
infrastructure factors. At the sub-factor the terms of trade index continues to decline
level, Switzerland’s strongest performance is (from 21st to 37th). Similarly, improvements
under infrastructure, ranking in the top five in in direct investment flows inward (as a
all its components. While it improves in basic percentage of GDP) from 51st to 43rd are
infrastructure (fourth from seventh), techno- accompanied by a decline in direct invest-
logical infrastructure (third from seventh), ment flows abroad (as a percentage of
and scientific infrastructure (second from GDP) from 56th to 64th. In the public finance
fourth), it remains in the top position in sub-factor, it improves under general govern-
both health and environment and education ment expenditure (as a percentage of GDP)
sub-factors. Under government efficiency, from 31st place to the 23rd. Despite remaining
Switzerland’s performance is similar; ranking stable in the females in parliament indicator
in the top five in all sub-factors except (14th) and gender equality (third), Switzerland
30
declines in the gender ratio of the unemploy- concentration by partner worsens from 14th
ment rate (from 33rd to 40th). In relation to to 21st, as does the terms of trade index from
business efficiency, it remains in the top spot 36th to 42nd. In terms of investments, Denmark
for the efficiency of its SME sector, however experiences steep declines in direct invest-
overall productivity (PPP) slightly declines ment flows abroad (as a percentage of GDP)
from eighth to ninth and its real growth drops from seventh to 33rd, and direct investment
from 35th to 44th. According to executives, flows inward (as a percentage of GDP) from
while Switzerland prioritizes talent attraction 21st to 48th. Both portfolio investment assets
and retention (first) and the implementation (29th to 59th) and liabilities (32nd to 60th),
of apprenticeship by the private sector is steeply drop. In addition, under the employ-
highly effective (first), its labor force remains ment sub-factor, Denmark experiences a
highly motivated (second) and the impact decrease in several indicators including
of brain drain in the competitiveness of the unemployment rate (27th to 34th) and youth
economy remains minimal (first). Although unemployment (25th to 32nd) with the more
the quality of education remains relatively significant drop observed in employment
low (38th in primary education and 31st in growth (37th to 52nd).
secondary), there is a significant increase in
the students’ (15 years of age) achievements Across other competitiveness factors,
in PISA educational assessment (from 22nd Denmark remains stable in the fifth position
to 12th in students who are not low achievers, in government efficiency, first in business
PISA). efficiency, and second in infrastructure. With
respect to government efficiency, the country
3. Denmark remains at the top of the ranking in the
After two years in the top position, Denmark societal framework and in second place in
drops to third position. This is mainly due the institutional framework. While there is a
to a decline in the economic performance slight decline in business legislation (second
factor (from 15th to 22nd). More specifically, to third), the public finances sub-factor
to different degrees, the country drops in improves (fifth to third). Denmark remains top
all economic sub-factors except for prices, in business productivity and efficiency and
which improve (from 49th to 47th) but remain in management practices. It experiences a
lowly placed. The largest declines among slight decline in the labor market sub-factor
economic sub-factors are in employment (seventh to eighth) and in finance (fourth to
(19th to 30th) and international trade (10th fifth) but improves in attitudes and values
to 20th). At the indicator level, in parallel to (fifth to third). In relation to infrastructure,
improvements in the export of goods as a Denmark improves (12th to ninth) in scientific
percentage of GDP (34th to 29th), exports infrastructure. It remains in second place in
of commercial services as a percentage of technological infrastructure and education
GDP decline (ninth to sixth). Similarly, export sub-factors, and third in health and the
31
environment. There is, however, a decline abroad and direct investment flows inward
(third to sixth) in basic infrastructure. Under (both as a percentage of GDP) decline from
government efficiency, Denmark tops the first to 31st and fifth to 59th, respectively.
rankings in several indicators including the There is also a greater threat of relocation
country’s credit rating, the fair administration of businesses (20th to 34th), according to
of justice, and the existence of bribery and survey participants. Within the government
corruption. Although Denmark ranks first in efficiency factor, the tax policy (18th to 21st)
gender equality, it ranks 43rd in the share of and business legislation (third to fourth)
females in senior and middle management decline. In terms of tax policy, to different
(as a percentage of management), which degrees, all the indicators that compose
represents an improvement from 46th. Within the sub-factor experience declines, except
the infrastructure factor, there are significant for corporate tax rates on profit (fifth) and
fluctuations in some indicators including the collected personal income tax (40th) which
universal health coverage index (15th to 28th), remain stable. Within business legislation,
ecological balance (total biocapacity minus the steepest decline is in executives’ opin-
total footprint in global hectares per capita; ions about labor regulations (whether such
39th to 50th), and total public expenditure on regulation hinders business activities) which
education (eighth to 17th). falls from eighth to 31st.
34
7. UAE to 11th) and real growth of gross fixed capital
Moving up from the 10th position, the UAE formation (first to 23rd), however, signifi-
reaches the seventh place. To different cantly decline. In the international trade
degrees, it improves in all competitiveness sub-factor (first to third), measures of export
factors with the steepest increase in busi- concentration by partner (11th to 20th) and by
ness efficiency (16th to 10th) followed by product (40th to 45th) also drop. The long-
government efficiency (eighth to fourth) and term employment growth improves from
economic performance (fourth to second). 57th to 41st and long-term unemployment
It slightly improves in infrastructure (26th to from eighth to fourth, although, youth unem-
25th). At the sub-factor level, in economic ployment slightly falls (sixth to seventh). In
performance, the UAE improves in interna- terms of government efficiency, government
tional investment (26th to 22nd), employment budget (surplus/deficit, as a percentage of
(sixth to second), and prices (25th to 16th). In GDP) sharply improves from 64th to third.
government efficiency, it sharply increases According to executives, the transparency
in public finance (31st to second) with other of government policy increases (17th to
advancements in institutional and societal 12th) and the adaptability of those policies
frameworks (both from 16th to 13th) and busi- slightly declines (first to second) – as does
ness legislation (ninth to eighth). In business bribery and corruption (11th to 12th) – but
efficiency, the UAE improves in all relevant remains in a strong position. In addition,
sub-factors with the largest increase in while tariff barriers improve from 52nd to
productivity and efficiency (22nd to 13th) 49th, government subsidies decline from
followed by management practices (33rd fourth to 43rd. For survey participants, several
to 25th). Under infrastructure, it progresses aspects of business efficiency improve. The
in technological infrastructure (20th to 15th) latter includes the prioritization of employee
and health and environment (36th to 35th), training (44th to 37th), the effective imple-
remaining at 35th in scientific infrastructure mentation of apprenticeship programs (36th
but declining in basic infrastructure (second to 27th), worker motivation (27th to 17th), the
to eighth) and education (25th to 27th). The private sector’s awareness of changing
UAE’s rankings in health and environment, market conditions (28th to 22nd), and the
and scientific infrastructure (both at 35th) level of regulatory compliance (51st to 41st).
are its lowest positions among sub-factors. In infrastructure, total expenditure on R&D
and business expenditure on R&D (both as a
At the indicator level, in the domestic percentage of GDP) fall from 27th to 35th and
economy sub-factor (fourth to sixth), 30th to 36th, respectively. The UAE remains
the gross fixed capital formation (as a in the leading position in student mobility
percentage of GDP) improves from 28th to inbound, while slightly improving in higher
11th as does real GDP growth (per capita)
from 20th to 13th. The real GDP growth (fifth
35
education achievement (the percentage of Taiwan’s GDP per capita falls from 27th to 31st.
the population with at least tertiary educa- In measures of international trade, Taiwan
tion, persons of age 25-34; 19th to 18th). declines in the growth of exports of goods
(41st to 52nd) and of commercial services
8. Taiwan (Chinese Taipei) (40th to 61st), and to a lesser extent in tourism
Taiwan drops two places to eighth mainly due receipts (60th to 65th) and export concentra-
to a sluggish economic performance (20th to tion by partner (55th to 59th). Export concen-
26th). It also drops in government efficiency tration by product, however, slightly improves
(sixth to eighth) and business efficiency from 43rd to 41st. For survey respondents, the
(fourth to sixth) which greatly contributes level of relocation threat of business worsens
to its decline in the overall ranking. Taiwan, with the relevant indicator dropping from
however, improves in infrastructure (12th to 43rd to 52nd. Executives, however, perceived
10th). At the sub-factor level, it experiences the economy as resilient (the resilience of
a decline in domestic economy (ninth to the economy indicator remains in fifth). In
13th), international trade (45th to 48th), and government efficiency, the government
prices (10th to 14th). Such trends underline budget (surplus/deficit, as a percentage
the downturn in economic performance. In of GDP) declines (ninth to 15th) as does the
government efficiency, only public finance general government expenditure (second
drops from sixth to seventh. While business to fourth) and the efficient management
legislation remains in 22nd, the other sub-fac- of public finance (12th to 17th). According
tors improve with institutional framework to executives, the impact of the legal and
showing the largest increase (10th to sixth). regulatory framework on competitiveness
The trend is similar in business efficiency, in improves (29th to 23rd) as does the impact of
which productivity and efficiency (seventh the bureaucracy on business practices (21st to
to ninth), the labor market (25th to 26th), and 17th) and bribery and corruption (28th to 23rd).
management practices (third to fifth) drop, While tariff barriers slightly improve (41st to
but finance remains stable (sixth) and atti- 40th), government subsidies decline (10th to
tudes and values increase slightly (seventh to 15th) as do immigration laws as a hindrance to
sixth). Under infrastructure, Taiwan improves employing foreign labor (31st to 39th). Taiwan
from 37th to 30th in the basic infrastructure experiences a downturn in the real growth of
sub-factor but declines in the technological overall productivity (PPP) from fifth to 18th, in
and scientific infrastructure sub-factors, worker motivation (fourth to seventh), and the
from eighth to 10th and from fifth to sixth implementation of apprenticeship schemes
respectively. It remains 24th in health and (11th to 18th). Although, for survey participants
environment and improves (17th to 14th) in Taiwan’s attractiveness for foreign highly
education. skilled staff declines (44th to 49th), the effect
of brain drain in the economy improves (41st
to 35th). Respondents, however, perceive a
36
fall in the availability of skilled labor (29th In international trade, the Netherlands expe-
to 36th) and digital/technological skills (32nd riences a downturn in export concentration
to 42nd). In terms of health and environment, by partner (38th to 44th) and by product (fifth
Taiwan experiences a decline in energy to ninth), terms of trade index (44th to 49th),
intensity (total energy consumed for each and tourism receipts (27th to 33rd). There is
$1,000 of GDP in MTOE) from 33rd to 40th also an increasing threat of business relo-
and in exposure to particle pollution (mean cation (18th to 33rd). In addition, employment
population exposure to PM2.5, micrograms growth (26th to 31st) and unemployment rate
per cubic meter) from 28th to 41st. Under (11th to 18th) decreased, although employment
education, Taiwan progresses in secondary as a percentage of the population remains
school enrollment (29th to 22nd) but the strong despite a slight decline (11th to 13th).
quality of secondary education (measured The gender ratio of the unemployment rate
by pupil-teacher ratio) remains relatively low shows a downward trend (35th to 43rd). In
despite improvements (29th to 22nd). gender equality, however, the Netherlands
remains in the fifth position and, furthermore,
9. The Netherlands considerably improves its standing in the
The Netherlands declines four ranks to Gini coefficient (13th to fourth). According
ninth position. Such a decline is driven by a to executives, the effectiveness of the
downturn in business (second to eighth) and implementation of digital transformation in
government (12th to 14th) efficiency as well as companies (14th to 19th) and the availability
in infrastructure (fifth to eighth). The Neth- of digital/technological skills (fifth to ninth)
erlands improves in economic performance and qualified engineers (25th to 44th) decline.
(11th to ninth). Within government efficiency, Likewise, the Netherlands’ attractiveness for
the public finance (10th to 12th), institutional foreign highly skilled staff (second to sixth)
framework (fourth to ninth), and business and the effect of ‘brain-drain’ in the economy
legislation (fourth to seventh) sub-factors (third to seventh) show a downturn. Further-
drop. While societal framework slightly more, there are similar trends in the support
improves (10th to ninth), tax policy remains that the legal environment provides to the
at 63rd. In business efficiency, all sub-factors development and application of technology
decline with the steepest decrease in atti- (eighth to 17th), in whether scientific research
tudes and values (fourth to 17th), followed by legislation encourages innovation (fourth
the labor market (second to 11th) and finance to 11th), and in the availability of funding for
(second to seventh). In infrastructure, except technological development (eighth to 21st).
for health and environment (19th to 17th) which At the same time, investment in telecommu-
advances, all other sub-factors decline with nications (as a percentage of GDP, 45th to
the largest drops in basic infrastructure (sixth 52nd) declines. There are also decreases in
to 18th) and technological infrastructure the universal health coverage index (eighth
(first to 11th). to 15th) and total public expenditure on
37
education (22nd to 25th). The Netherlands several indicators including the growth of
declines in the PISA educational assessment exports of goods (second to 64th) and of
(of 15-year-old students) from 16th to 25th. commercial services (29th to 54th), and in
export concentration by partner (48th to 61st)
10. Norway and by product (56th to 62nd). The long-term
Norway rounds up the top ten with an growth of employment sharply decreases
improvement from the 14th position. Such (11th to 26th) with youth unemployment also
progress is driven by its performance in busi- dropping (34th to 37th). There is a downturn
ness efficiency (18th to ninth) and infrastruc- in the total general government debt (as
ture (eighth to fifth). It remains in a strong a percentage of GDP) from 14th to 21st and
position in government efficiency (ninth) but in general government expenditure (as a
sharply drops in economic performance (17th percentage of GDP) from 33rd to 47th, but
to 30th). The latter is mainly the result of slug- the government budget surplus/deficit (as a
gish performance in international trade (11th percentage of GDP) remains strong in second
to 45th) and to a lesser extent in the domestic place. Institutionally, Norway remains in the
economy (17th to 20th), employment (17th to top spot in the democracy index, and despite
21st), and prices (46th to 50). Norway improves slight declines in the rule of law (second
in international investment (21st to 17th). In to fifth) and the sustainable development
government efficiency, despite a downturn, it goals (fourth to seventh), its positions remain
remains in a robust position in public finance robust. In business regulation, according to
(first to eighth) improving in institutional executives, labor regulations as a hindrance
(sixth to fifth) and societal (fourth to third) to business activities (28th to 17th), access to
frameworks, and in business legislation (24th capital markets (foreign and domestic, 32nd
to 17th). Under business efficiency, Norway to 18th), and the effectiveness of competition
advances in all sub-factors, experiencing the legislation (25th to 13th) improve. For survey
steepest increases in management practices respondents, the fair implementation of
(29th to 18th) and attitudes and values (27th to justice (22nd to 13th) and equal opportunities
19th). In infrastructure, except for health and (23rd to 11th) also advance. Norway remains in
environment which remains in the sixth spot, the second position in gender equality but
all other sub-factors improve with the largest experiences a decline in disposable income
increase in technological Infrastructure (26th (female/male ratio, sixth to seventh) and
to 13th) followed by education (12th to eighth). drops from seventh to 10th place in the Gini
coefficient. With respect to technological
Norway’s declining performance in domestic infrastructure, investment in telecommuni-
economy sub-factor is mainly underlined by cations (30th to 16th) and the availability of
a drop in GDP (25th to 31st) accompanied by a funding for technological development (32nd
slowdown in real GDP growth (38th to 47th). In to 18th) increase.
international trade, Norway declines across
38
Global competitiveness highlights and trends in 2024
At the macro level, rising geopolitical ities. Another challenge is ensuring their
tensions are directly challenging the stability chosen AI system’s accuracy; inaccurate
of the global economy. Such tensions can systems lead to inefficiencies and reduced
greatly exacerbate existing economic issues productivity. Furthermore, there is a cost-re-
such as inflation, extreme poverty, and food lated challenge given that initial investments
insecurity by increasing uncertainty and in AI technology can be substantial. In addi-
volatility in global markets. Geopolitical tion, the ongoing costs of maintenance and
tensions can also impact international trade upgrades to the systems can be significant.
and investment flows. For instance, the
continuous trade frictions between the US With this context in mind, we used our IMD
and China have the potential to disrupt global Executive Opinion Survey to ask corporate
trade deeply and to damage public finances leaders to select the trends they perceive
in third-party countries. Trade fragmenta- to be the most relevant to their businesses
tion, furthermore, can disrupt the stability in 2024.
of the global economy thus bringing about
socio-political tensions and polarization. Figure 1 shows executives’ views from all 67
countries included in the IMD World Compet-
In this context, the risk of a global economic itiveness Ranking about major business
slowdown is adding to the challenges facing trends for 2024. Respondents to our survey
businesses. An economic slowdown could could select up to three trends from the
lead to the contraction of global production. 10 options provided. The three trends that
In addition, a slowdown in major economies respondents consider as having the greatest
would impact their external demands for impact on businesses in 2024 are: AI adop-
goods and services. An economic deceler- tion (55.1%), the risk of a global economic
ation would thus endanger the economic slowdown in economic activities (52%), and
growth of emerging and developing econ- geopolitical conflicts (36.1%). The breakdown
omies that satisfy such demands. of these results by different sub-regions
reveals a largely consistent clustering of
At the micro level, the recent surge in arti- views about such concerns among execu-
ficial intelligence (AI)-based technologies tives residing and operating in all regions
could boost efficiency and productivity analyzed. The fear of AI-technology-led
significantly. It does, however, pose further transformation is the top concern for exec-
challenges to businesses. One of the key utives from Western Europe, Western Asia
challenges for companies is how to imple- & Africa, Ex-CIS and Central Asia, Southern
ment AI systems that improve efficiency Asia & the Pacific, North America, and South
without causing disruption to business activ- America. Global recession tops the concerns
39
The most important trends impacting
business in 2024
Figure 1
Source: IMD Executive Opinion Survey, 2024
Note: The IMD Executive Opinion Survey was conducted between March and May 2024 among C-level and mid-level managers
from the 67 economies included in the rankings. The total number of responses was 6,612
of executives from Eastern Asia and Eastern The equifinality of the competitiveness path
Europe. As with last year, environmental Interestingly, only 17.5% of executives
issues and climate change remain low as consider socioeconomic disparities as an
concerns for executives; well behind the important issue. This is surprising because
technology, macroeconomic trends, and of the profound impact that such disparities
geopolitical issues affecting the global can have on economic activities. For instance,
economy. While 27% of executives surveyed high levels of socioeconomic disparity can
consider the transition to zero emissions drive social unrest thus eroding social cohe-
to be an important trend in the short term, sion and eventually exacerbating political
just 12.2% highlighted the impact of global stability leading to socio-political polariza-
warming as relevant. These results highlight tion. Such conditions can disrupt business
a matter of priorities; executives need to operations and create an uncertain business
balance short-term priorities with long-term environment. Disparities can also affect
ones. Environmental risks, being in the latter consumer spending. Lower socioeconomic
category, are given less relevance. groups might have limited disposable income,
which can reduce the overall demand for
40
Labor productivity (5-year average) and
overall competitiveness
120
Luxembourg Correlaticoef.
Correlation on co0.692
ef. = 0.692
100
Norway
GDP (PPP) per person employed, per hour, US dollar
Canada
Turkey Spain Hong Kong SAR
60 Kuwait New Zealand Qatar
Slovenia Israel Saudi Arabia
Japan Taiwan, China
Slovak Republic Cyprus Lithuania
Bahrain
Estonia
Romania Latvia Portugal Korea Rep.
Hungary UAE
Croatia Poland Czech Republic
40 Greece
Bulgaria Chile Kazakhstan
Argentina
Mexico Malaysia
South Africa
Jordan
20 Colombia Puerto Rico
Brazil Thailand
Indonesia China
Peru Botswana
Ghana Philippines
Venezuela Nigeria India
0
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Overall competitiveness (Score: 0-100), IMD WCY 2024
Figure 2
Source: IMD World Competitiveness Center (2024)
non-essential goods and services. In turn, Figure 2 presents the relationship between
lower demand impacts economic perfor- labor productivity (GDP PPP, per person
mance by lowering businesses’ sales and employed, per hour; 5 years average) and
profitability. Ultimately, excessive disparities overall competitiveness. It shows a positive
can be detrimental to long-term growth and correlation. As the value of labor produc-
lead to lower competitiveness capabilities. tivity increases, we notice a corresponding
increase in the value of competitiveness. This
With this in mind, we explore the relationship implies that higher values of labor produc-
between competitiveness and socioeconomic tivity are associated with higher values of
disparities. Given that such disparities affect competitiveness. Most countries with lower
individuals, we do so through indicators levels of disparities, as measured by the Gini
that capture the economic performance coefficient (see table 2.5.06 in the Statis-
of individuals. The aim of this exercise is to tical Tables section), such as Denmark and
observe the performance of economies with Norway, have higher labor productivity than
lower levels of inequalities vis-à-vis those economies with higher levels of disparities
with higher disparities. such as Qatar and Singapore. Nevertheless,
all four economies rank in the top 20 percen-
tile of competitiveness. Such results suggest
41
Average working hours per worker
and overall competitiveness
2,750
"Type A - Organization focus"
2,500 UAE
Qatar
India China
Kuwait Taiwan (Chinese Taipei)
Bahrain Saudi Arabia
Jordan Malaysia Singapore
2,250 Peru
Average working hours per worker
South Africa
Philippines Hong Kong SAR
Thailand
1,000
750
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Overall competitiveness
Figure 3
Source: IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook, 2024
that there are different but convergent paths, robust work-life balance of their workforce.
in terms of disparities, to reach high levels For example, the Netherlands and Finland
of competitiveness. reach high levels of competitiveness while
their labor force work an average of 1,500
Figure 3 better illustrates such equifinality hours yearly. Conversely, in the figure, we
of the competitiveness path. It shows the observe that economies with higher dispari-
relation between the average number of ties can reach high levels of competitiveness
working hours per person and the overall on the back of a greater number of working
competitiveness score. We use the working hours for their respective labor force. For
hours indicator as a proxy for lower levels instance, in Qatar, the average number of
of disparities: while a lower number of hours working hours is close to 2,500 and in Singa-
means a better work-life balance for the pore about 2,300 hours; both economies
individual, economies with lower disparities enjoy high levels of competitiveness.
strive to provide higher levels of such balance
for their citizens. Therefore, there seem to be two groups of
economies that follow divergent approaches
We note that most economies with lower to competitiveness in terms of socioeconomic
levels of disparities are able to achieve high disparities. The type A group or organi-
levels of competitiveness while maintaining a zation-focused economies (for lack of a
42
better label), achieve high levels of compet- group, for example, Japan, Latvia, and New
itiveness despite the presence of higher Zealand. From these examples, the presence
levels of disparities. The type B group, or of socioeconomic disparities seems not to
individual-focused economies, reach robust affect the level of competitiveness per se
competitiveness levels while minimizing but may highlight an unexplored aspect of
disparities. There are some exceptions. For competitiveness, the quality of the value-
instance, Figure 3 locates Taiwan and the added it brings. For instance, individuals
UAE in the area populated by most econ- in Type B economies may enjoy a better
omies belonging to the type A group. Both quality of life.
economies, however, perform strongly in the
Gini coefficient. The equifinality of the competitiveness
path captured by Figures 2 and 3 may be
Figure 3 also shows the presence of a the reason behind the low percentage of
two-pronged competitiveness path. As coun- corporate leaders considering socioeconomic
tries move along this path, their socioeco- disparities as relevant. Yet, disparities have
nomic policy choices determine which type the potential to significantly destabilize
(i.e., organization or individual-focused) of global markets. Perhaps, in the short-term
competitiveness they reach. For instance, the their impact on competitiveness is absorbed
figure presents several economies that align by, for instance, rapid and high economic
with the type A group including Malaysia, growth. However, the presence of high
the Philippines, and South Africa. Other levels of disparities may negatively affect
economies appear to align with the type B the viability of long-term competitiveness.
Figure 4 presents the overall average improves, Western Europe remains rather
competitiveness rankings trend for 2020 stagnant reaching its lowest average position
to 2024 by sub-regions. In the past year, since 2020.
Eastern Asia, Southern Asia & the Pacific,
and Ex-CIS and Central Asia increased their In Southern Asia & the Pacific, competitive-
overall competitiveness average positions. ness levels continue to rise for the second
While Western Europe remained somewhat year in a row, reaching an average 28th place
stable, other sub-regions declined. in 2024. Likewise, in the past year, economies
in Ex-CIS and Central Asia display a slight
Eastern Asia (17th) and Western Europe increase in average competitiveness levels
(22nd) continue to be the most competitive (from 49th to 48th).
regions in the world, but they differ in their
2024 performances. While Eastern Asia
43
Average ranking positions by region in overall competitiveness
2020-2024
10
Average Competitiveness Ranking (1-67)
20 Eastern Asia
Western Europe
North America & the Caribbean
30 Southern Asia & the Pacific
Western Asia & Africa
Eastern Europe
40 Ex-CIS and Central Asia
South America
50
60
Figure 4
Source: IMD World Competitiveness Center (2024)
North America and the Caribbean economies economic performance factor. Southern Asia
drop to the 34th position in 2024. Western & the Pacific also overcomes Western Europe
Asia and Africa’s average ranking also expe- in government efficiency to join Eastern Asia
at the top. Similarly, in business efficiency,
riences a fall to 38th place. Similarly, Eastern
Europe declines three points in its overall Eastern Asia tops Western Europe. In infra-
competitiveness, reaching an average 45th structure, Eastern Asia and Western Europe
position in 2024 and therefore reaching its remain at the top. Such strong performance
lowest competitiveness levels of the past in Eastern Asia and Southern Asia & the
five years. Finally, South American econo- Pacific may be the result of stronger and
mies continue to decline in competitiveness. faster economic growth with those sub-re-
The sub-region is down to an average 60th gions achieving greater productivity growth.
position, representing its lowest average Conversely, as a result of slower regional
ranking since 2020. growth, Western Asia and Africa and Eastern
Europe experience a drop in their average
Figure 5 shows the 2024 average ranking ranking across all four competitiveness
positions at the competitiveness factor level factors compared to 2023.
by sub-regions. This year, Eastern Asia and
the Southern Asia & the Pacific sub-re-
gions surpass North America in leading the
44
Average factor-ranking position
by sub-region, 2024
20
16
Average Factor Ranking
19
23
24
30 26
27
31
34
36
40 39
41
43 42
44
50
57
58
60
50
20 14
Average Factor Ranking
18
20
40
23
30 26
30
33 33
36
40 37
40
20
44
45
50 50
10
57 57 57
58
60 0
Figure 5
Source: IMD World Competitiveness Center (2024)
45
Concluding remarks
Eastern Asia and Western Europe remain the Norway) reach high levels of competitiveness.
most competitive regions and South America Nevertheless, economies with higher levels
continues to decline in its competitiveness. of disparities (e.g., Qatar and Singapore)
A key highlight among 2024 sub-regional also achieve high levels of competitiveness.
trends is that the Southern Asia & the Pacific This implies that economies may adopt
sub-region outperformed Western Europe in different types of policies with respect to
government efficiency. socioeconomic disparities which seem not
to have an impact on their short-term level
We found differences in the global trends of competitiveness. However, considering
that executives consider to be the most the acute effects that disparities can have
important for their business practices. In in the long-term, for example, the erosion of
most sub-regions, the main concern is the social cohesion and political instability, such
AI technology-led transformation currently policies may put the sustainability of compet-
underway in many industries and sectors. itiveness at risk. Such findings, we proposed,
Corporate leaders from Eastern Asia and affect the quality of competitiveness.
Eastern Europe, however, are most uneasy
about global recession.
46
This booklet is just a summary.
The complete Yearbook with full profiles and all the
statistics is available digitally and in print.
The IMD World Competitiveness Ranking presents the 2024 overall ranking for the 67
economies covered by the WCY. The economies are ranked from the most to the least
competitive. The Scores shown to the right are actually indices (0 to 100) generated for
the unique purpose of constructing charts and graphics. The final column shows the
improvement or decline from the previous year.
50
31 France 69.67 k 2
32 New Zealand 68.18 l 1
33 Estonia 68.17 l 7
34 Malaysia 68.13 l 7
35 Kazakhstan 66.03 k 2
36 Portugal 65.15 k 3
37 Kuwait 65.03 k 1
38 Japan 64.96 l 3
39 India 62.86 k 1
40 Spain 62.76 l 4
41 Poland 61.65 k 2
42 Italy 61.43 l 1
43 Cyprus 60.95 k 2
44 Chile 59.71 -
45 Latvia 59.13 k 6
46 Slovenia 57.99 l 4
47 Greece 56.83 k 2
48 Jordan 55.51 k 6
49 Puerto Rico 54.85 -
50 Romania 53.47 l 2
51 Croatia 52.83 l 1
52 Philippines 52.64 -
53 Turkey 52.39 l 6
54 Hungary 52.10 l 8
55 Botswana 50.31 k 4
56 Mexico 49.88 -
57 Colombia 47.37 k 1
58 Bulgaria 47.35 l 1
59 Slovak Republic 46.94 l 6
60 South Africa 46.33 k 1
61 Mongolia 46.30 k 1
62 Brazil 43.77 l 2
63 Peru 43.44 l 8
64 Nigeria 39.81 -
65 Ghana 39.25 -
66 Argentina 35.89 l 3
67 Venezuela 28.85 l 3
51
Methodology in a Nutshell
The IMD World Competitiveness Ranking analyzes and ranks the capacity
of countries to create and maintain an environment that sustains the
competitiveness of enterprises.
It means that we assume that wealth creation takes place primarily at an
enterprise level level (whether private or state-owned). This field of research is
called “competitiveness of enterprises”.
However, enterprises operate in a national environment which enhances or
hinders their ability to compete domestically or internationally . This field of
research is called “competitiveness of countries” and is covered by the World
Competitiveness Ranking.
Based on analyses made by leading scholars and by our own research and
experience, the methodology of the World Competitiveness Ranking thus
divides the national environment into four main factors:
• Economic Performance
• Government Efficiency
• Business Efficiency
• Infrastructure
In turn, each of these factors is divided into 5 sub-factors which highlight every
facet of the areas analyzed. Altogether, the World Competitiveness Ranking
features 20 such sub-factors.
These 20 sub-factors comprise 336 criteria, although each sub-factor does not
necessarily have the same number of criteria (for example, it takes more criteria
to assess Education than to evaluate Prices).
Each sub-factor, independently of the number of criteria it contains, has the
same weight in the overall consolidation of results, that is 5% (20x5 =100).
Criteria can be hard data, which analyzes competitiveness as it can be measured
(e.g. GDP), or soft data, which analyzes competitiveness as it is perceived (e.g.
availability of competent managers). Hard criteria represent a weight of 2/3 in
the overall ranking whereas the survey data represent a weight of 1/3.
In addition, some criteria are for background information only, which means
that they are not used in calculating the overall competitiveness ranking (e.g.
population under 15).
Finally, aggregating the results of the 20 sub-factors makes the total
consolidation, which leads to the overall ranking of the IMD World
Competitiveness Ranking.
52
What is the IMD World
Competitiveness Ranking?
53
The 2024 IMD World
Competitiveness Rankings
Selected Breakdowns
Asia - Pacific
Score
01 Singapore 100.00
02 Hong Kong SAR 91.49
03 Taiwan (Chinese Taipei) 88.50
04 Australia 81.86
05 China 81.04
06 Korea Rep. 75.92
07 Thailand 72.51
08 Indonesia 71.52
09 New Zealand 68.18
10 Malaysia 68.13
11 Japan 64.96
12 India 62.86
13 Philippines 52.64
14 Mongolia 46.30
The Americas
Score
01 USA 83.48
02 Canada 77.69
03 Chile 59.71
04 Puerto Rico 54.85
05 Mexico 49.88
06 Colombia 47.37
07 Brazil 43.77
08 Peru 43.44
09 Argentina 35.89
10 Venezuela 28.85
54
Europe - Middle East - Africa
Score
01 Switzerland 97.55
02 Denmark 97.07
03 Ireland 91.86
04 Sweden 90.30
05 UAE 89.75
06 Netherlands 86.94
07 Norway 86.22
08 Qatar 85.33
09 Finland 80.26
10 Saudi Arabia 79.83
11 Iceland 78.93
12 Belgium 77.87
13 Bahrain 75.27
14 Israel 74.98
15 Luxembourg 73.70
16 Germany 72.74
17 Austria 72.13
18 United Kingdom 70.82
19 Czech Republic 70.21
20 Lithuania 69.89
21 France 69.67
22 Estonia 68.17
23 Kazakhstan 66.03
24 Portugal 65.15
25 Kuwait 65.03
26 Spain 62.76
27 Poland 61.65
28 Italy 61.43
29 Cyprus 60.95
30 Latvia 59.13
31 Slovenia 57.99
32 Greece 56.83
33 Jordan 55.51
34 Romania 53.47
35 Croatia 52.83
36 Turkey 52.39
37 Hungary 52.10
38 Botswana 50.31
39 Bulgaria 47.35
40 Slovak Republic 46.94
41 South Africa 46.33
42 Nigeria 39.81
43 Ghana 39.25
55
The 2024 IMD World
Competitiveness Rankings
Selected Breakdowns
56
GDP per capita less than $20,000
Score
01 China 81.04
02 Thailand 72.51
03 Indonesia 71.52
04 Malaysia 68.13
05 Kazakhstan 66.03
06 India 62.86
07 Chile 59.71
08 Jordan 55.51
09 Romania 53.47
10 Philippines 52.64
11 Turkey 52.39
12 Botswana 50.31
13 Mexico 49.88
14 Colombia 47.37
15 Bulgaria 47.35
16 South Africa 46.33
17 Mongolia 46.30
18 Brazil 43.77
19 Peru 43.44
20 Nigeria 39.81
21 Ghana 39.25
22 Argentina 35.89
23 Venezuela 28.85
57
The 2024 IMD World
Competitiveness Rankings
Selected Breakdowns
58
Population under 20 million
Score
01 Singapore 100.00
02 Switzerland 97.55
03 Denmark 97.07
04 Ireland 91.86
05 Hong Kong SAR 91.49
06 Sweden 90.30
07 UAE 89.75
08 Netherlands 86.94
09 Norway 86.22
10 Qatar 85.33
11 Finland 80.26
12 Iceland 78.93
13 Belgium 77.87
14 Bahrain 75.27
15 Israel 74.98
16 Luxembourg 73.70
17 Austria 72.13
18 Czech Republic 70.21
19 Lithuania 69.89
20 New Zealand 68.18
21 Estonia 68.17
22 Portugal 65.15
23 Kuwait 65.03
24 Cyprus 60.95
25 Chile 59.71
26 Latvia 59.13
27 Slovenia 57.99
28 Greece 56.83
29 Jordan 55.51
30 Puerto Rico 54.85
31 Romania 53.47
32 Croatia 52.83
33 Hungary 52.10
34 Botswana 50.31
35 Bulgaria 47.35
36 Slovak Republic 46.94
37 Mongolia 46.30
59
The 2024 IMD World
Competitiveness Factor Rankings
ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE
Macro-economic evaluation of the domestic economy
Score
01 USA 75.05 k
02 UAE 1 k
k73.48
03 Singapore k70.85
2
04 Qatar 66.52
- k
05 Thailand k64.32
1 k
06 China k63.35
11 k
07 Australia k63.07
2 k
08 Malaysia k62.52
3
l
l62.48
1
09 Netherlands
k 2
k
10 Ireland 60.50
l 9 l
11 Hong Kong SAR k60.20
25 k
12 Switzerland k59.13
6 k
13 Germany l 1
58.34 l
14 Canada l58.08
5 l
15 Saudi Arabia l57.22
9 l
16 Korea Rep. l56.71
2 l
17 Belgium l56.71
4
l
k56.67
5
18 Bahrain
k 6 k
19 Poland k55.52
13 k
20 India k55.50
5 k
21 Japan l55.15
7 k
22 Denmark k54.37
5 l
23 Sweden k54.36
5 k
24 Indonesia k54.31
5 k
25 Mexico l54.18
6
k
k53.96
5
26 Taiwan (Chinese Taipei)
k 19
l
27 Spain 53.26
l 5 k
28 Cyprus l53.19
13 k
29 France l53.02
12 l
30 Norway k52.60
3 l
31 Kuwait l51.04
11 l
32 United Kingdom k51.00
9 k
33 Austria l50.26
8 l
34 Turkey l50.01
15
k
l 3
k 3 l
k 3 l
- l
l 10 k
k 18 k
k 14
- l
k 3
k
k 4
k 4
k
k 1
l 3 k
l 11 k
- k
k 6 k
l 8 l
- l
l 3
60 -
l 19 k
l 21 l
l 4
7 l
l
l
k
k
k
k
l
k
k
k
l
k
k
l
l
l
k
33 Austria 50.26 l
34 Turkey 50.01 k
35 Czech Republic 49.97 l
36 Hungary 49.96 l
37 Slovenia 49.85 l
38 Brazil 49.39 k
39 Portugal 48.88 k
40 Philippines 48.86
41 Israel 48.07 l
42 Mongolia 47.17 k
43 Kazakhstan 46.66 k
44 Italy 46.48
45 Bulgaria 46.37 k
46 New Zealand 45.92 k
47 Romania 44.42 k
48 Lithuania 43.78 k
49 Croatia 43.60 l
50 Finland 43.54 l
51 Puerto Rico 43.40
52 Greece 42.59 k
53 Iceland 41.50 l
54 Estonia 40.36
55 Chile 39.73 l
56 Slovak Republic 39.42
57 Luxembourg 39.32 l
58 Colombia 38.37 l
59 Latvia 38.26 l
60 Peru 34.43 l
61 South Africa 34.22
62 Argentina 30.38 l
63 Jordan 29.72
64 Botswana 25.95 l
65 Ghana 24.53
66 Venezuela 24.31 l
67 Nigeria 23.71
61
The 2024 IMD World
Competitiveness Factor Rankings
GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY
Extent to which government policies are conducive to competitiveness
Score
01 Switzerland 89.97
02 Singapore 87.80
- k
03 Hong Kong SAR k85.25
5 l
04 UAE l83.37
1 k
05 Denmark k81.27
4
06 Ireland -
80.60 l
07 Qatar l79.59
3 l
08 Taiwan (Chinese Taipei) l77.48
3
l
09 Norway l70.86
2
-
10 Sweden 69.83
k 4 k
11 Luxembourg 69.57
l 1 l
12 Saudi Arabia l69.07
1 l
13 Australia k67.06
5 k
14 Netherlands l66.55
2 l
15 New Zealand k64.87
6 k
16 Finland l63.08
3 l
17 Iceland k61.72
2
k
k59.73
5
18 Kazakhstan
l 3 k
19 Canada 59.72
l 5 l
20 Estonia l59.51
1 l
21 Bahrain k59.23
4 l
22 Kuwait k58.47
8 k
23 Indonesia -
57.51 k
24 Thailand l55.14
8
25 Czech Republic k54.65
7
l
k54.36
8
26 Lithuania
k 2
k
27 China 53.41
k 5 k
28 Cyprus k52.56
2 k
29 Israel l51.81
3 k
30 Chile l51.47
5 k
31 United Kingdom l50.78
4 l
32 Germany l50.52
9 l
33 Malaysia l50.41
13 l
34 USA k49.80
3
l
k 4
l 1 l
l 1 k
l 4 k
k 2 l
- l
k 4 l
k 10 k
l 1
l 1
k 2
k
l 2 k
k 3 l
- l
l 11 k
k 1 l
k 5 k
-
l 5 l
62 l 1
l 1 k
l 7 k
-
- l
l
k
k
l
l
l
k
k
l
k
k
k
k
k
l
l
33 Malaysia 50.41 l
34 USA 49.80 l
35 Belgium 49.57 l
36 Latvia 49.15 k
37 Jordan 47.77 k
38 Botswana 47.38 l
39 Korea Rep. 47.33 l
40 Austria 46.36 l
41 Portugal 44.69 k
42 Japan 42.34
43 France 42.13 k
44 Poland 40.63 k
45 India 38.85 l
46 Slovenia 38.80 l
47 Croatia 38.08 k
48 Romania 37.02 l
49 Philippines 36.66 k
50 Puerto Rico 36.64
51 Hungary 35.42 l
52 Greece 35.32 k
53 Mongolia 35.03 k
54 Nigeria 34.91
55 Peru 34.13 l
56 Bulgaria 33.97 l
57 Italy 32.12 l
58 Spain 30.12 l
59 Ghana 29.82
60 Mexico 28.95
61 South Africa 28.40 l
62 Slovak Republic 26.45 l
63 Turkey 24.30 l
64 Colombia 21.91 l
65 Brazil 10.95 l
66 Venezuela 3.88 l
67 Argentina 3.37 l
63
The 2024 IMD World
Competitiveness Factor Rankings
BUSINESS EFFICIENCY
Extent to which enterprises are performing in an innovative, profitable and responsible manner
Score
01 Denmark 100.00
02 Singapore 95.96
- k
03 Ireland k89.61
6
04 Sweden 86.93
- k
05 Switzerland k84.37
2 k
06 Taiwan (Chinese Taipei) k82.28
2 l
07 Hong Kong SAR l79.50
2 k
08 Netherlands k77.39
4
l
l76.06
6
09 Norway
k 9
k
10 UAE 75.40
k 6 k
11 Qatar k75.11
1 k
12 Saudi Arabia k74.48
1 k
13 Iceland l 3
73.77 l
14 Indonesia k71.38
6 k
15 China k70.33
6 k
16 Bahrain k70.11
6 k
17 Belgium l69.25
12
l
l69.10
9
18 Finland
l 5 l
19 USA 67.08
k 3 l
20 Thailand k62.04
3 k
21 Israel k61.68
8 k
22 Australia k61.22
10 k
23 Korea Rep. k59.46
3 k
24 Lithuania k57.76
3 k
25 India l57.67
7
k
l56.34
10
26 Luxembourg
k 3
l
27 Canada
l56.12
3 l
28 Kazakhstan l54.20
15 k
29 Austria l 6
53.59 l
30 Czech Republic k52.53
7 l
31 Estonia k50.38
1 l
32 France k49.84
2 k
33 United Kingdom l48.80
6 k
34 Jordan k48.25
6
k
k 1
l 1 l
k 2 k
l 8 k
k 4 l
l 7 k
l 3 l
k 4 k
-
l
l 3
k 3
l
k 6 k
k 8
k 9 l
l 4 k
l 8 k
l 2 k
l 5 k
-
-
l
64 l
l 11
- l
l 3 l
7
k
l
l
l
k
k
k
k
k
k
l
l
k
l
l
l
k
33 United Kingdom 48.80 k
34 Jordan 48.25 k
35 Germany 46.58 l
36 Kuwait 46.17 k
37 Italy 44.18 k
38 Spain 43.10 l
39 Portugal 42.32 k
40 Malaysia 41.55 l
41 Chile 41.30 k
42 New Zealand 39.08 l
43 Philippines 38.01 l
44 Greece 37.28 k
45 Puerto Rico 35.02
46 Poland 34.59 l
47 Botswana 33.39 k
48 South Africa 33.38 k
49 Latvia 32.81 k
50 Colombia 31.80 k
51 Japan 30.83 l
52 Turkey 30.82 l
53 Mexico 30.42 l
54 Romania 29.52 l
55 Cyprus 29.41
56 Ghana 27.92
57 Slovenia 27.02 l
58 Nigeria 26.95
59 Croatia 22.60 l
60 Peru 21.68 l
61 Brazil 20.74
62 Mongolia 20.28 k
63 Venezuela 18.90 l
64 Slovak Republic 18.52 l
65 Bulgaria 15.80 l
66 Argentina 14.12 l
67 Hungary 12.93 l
65
The 2024 IMD World
Competitiveness Factor Rankings
INFRASTRUCTURE
Extent to which basic, technological, scientific and human resources meet the needs of business
Score
01 Switzerland 88.42
02 Denmark 84.32
-
03 Sweden 81.77
- k
04 Singapore k77.08
1 k
05 Norway k77.06
5 k
06 Finland k77.01
3 l
07 USA l73.67
3 l
08 Netherlands l73.04
1
l
l72.69
3
09 Hong Kong SAR
k 4
k
10 Taiwan (Chinese Taipei) 71.96
k 2 k
11 Korea Rep. k71.86
5 k
12 Iceland l70.41
5 l
13 Israel k 5
70.05 k
14 Austria k70.01
1 k
15 China k68.79
6 k
16 Canada l68.54
5 l
17 Ireland k68.43
2
k
k67.79
2
18 Australia
l 9 k
19 Belgium 67.62
l 6 l
20 Germany l67.19
4 l
21 France 65.37
- l
22 United Kingdom -
64.41
23 Japan k63.22
1
24 Luxembourg k61.29
1 k
25 UAE k58.43
6
k
-
26 Portugal 56.40
l 4
k
27 Spain 56.26
k 2
28 Czech Republic 55.38
- l
29 Lithuania l55.34
3 k
30 Italy l54.63
3
31 New Zealand -
54.54 l
32 Estonia -
54.14 l
33 Qatar -
51.77
34 Saudi Arabia k50.24
5
l 1
k 1
l 2 k
- l
l 3 k
- l
-
k 1 l
k 1
k 3
k 1
- k
l 2 k
l 6 k
l 1 k
l 1
l 1 l
k 3 l
l 2 l
66 -
k 4 l
l 3 l
l 5 k
2 l
l
k
k
l
l
l
k
k
k
l
k
l
l
33 Qatar 51.77
34 Saudi Arabia 50.24
35 Malaysia 49.71
36 Latvia 47.99 k
37 Slovenia 47.97 l
38 Poland 47.55 k
39 Bahrain 46.78 l
40 Greece 43.83
41 Hungary 41.77 l
42 Cyprus 40.31
43 Thailand 40.22
44 Croatia 38.72 k
45 Chile 38.04 k
46 Kuwait 36.13 k
47 Turkey 36.11 k
48 Puerto Rico 36.05
49 Kazakhstan 35.22 l
50 Slovak Republic 35.06 l
51 Romania 34.62 l
52 Indonesia 34.59 l
53 India 31.11 l
54 Colombia 29.09 k
55 Jordan 28.02 l
56 Argentina 27.39
57 Botswana 26.22 k
58 Brazil 25.72 l
59 Bulgaria 24.94 l
60 South Africa 21.02 k
61 Philippines 18.71 l
62 Mexico 17.65 l
63 Peru 15.22 l
64 Mongolia 14.42 l
65 Ghana 6.42
66 Nigeria 5.37
67 Venezuela 0.00 l
67
Factor Rankings: Five-year Overview
ECONOMIC
OVERALL PERFORMANCE
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Argentina 62 63 62 63 66 60 59 57 59 62
Australia 18 22 19 19 13 23 19 16 10 07
Austria 16 19 20 24 26 15 20 24 22 33
Bahrain - - 30 25 21 - - 39 23 18
Belgium 25 24 21 13 18 25 24 14 13 17
Botswana - 61 58 59 55 - 62 60 62 64
Brazil 56 57 59 60 62 56 51 48 41 38
Bulgaria 48 53 53 57 58 34 41 49 48 45
Canada 08 14 14 15 19 10 14 10 09 14
Chile 38 44 45 44 44 50 53 50 52 55
China 20 16 17 21 14 07 04 04 08 06
Colombia 54 56 57 58 57 52 56 45 37 58
Croatia 60 59 46 50 51 45 50 32 46 49
Cyprus 30 33 40 45 43 13 13 38 47 28
Czech Republic 33 34 26 18 29 16 23 18 27 35
Denmark 02 03 01 01 03 21 17 13 15 22
Estonia 28 26 22 26 33 35 29 33 54 54
Finland 13 11 08 11 15 43 34 44 39 50
France 32 29 28 33 31 32 28 17 24 29
Germany 17 15 15 22 24 05 03 05 12 13
Ghana - - - - 65 - - - - 65
Greece 49 46 47 49 47 55 52 51 58 52
Hong Kong SAR 05 07 05 07 05 28 30 15 36 11
Hungary 47 42 39 46 54 19 08 08 21 36
Iceland 21 21 16 16 17 58 55 56 45 53
India 43 43 37 40 39 37 37 28 33 20
Indonesia 40 37 44 34 27 26 35 42 29 24
Ireland 12 13 11 02 04 12 22 07 01 10
Israel 26 27 25 23 22 39 36 36 31 41
Italy 44 41 41 41 42 42 39 41 44 44
Japan 34 31 34 35 38 11 12 20 26 21
Jordan 58 49 56 54 48 62 63 62 63 63
Kazakhstan 42 35 43 37 35 48 45 58 57 43
Korea Rep. 23 23 27 28 20 27 18 22 14 16
Kuwait - - - 38 37 - - - 19 31
Latvia 41 38 35 51 45 53 44 54 55 59
Lithuania 31 30 29 32 30 33 33 43 49 48
Luxembourg 15 12 13 20 23 08 10 01 38 57
Malaysia 27 25 32 27 34 09 15 12 07 08
Mexico 53 55 55 56 56 38 49 27 30 25
Mongolia 61 60 61 62 61 59 58 61 60 42
Netherlands 04 04 06 05 09 01 02 19 11 09
New Zealand 22 20 31 31 32 40 32 47 50 46
Nigeria - - - - 64 - - - - 67
Norway 07 06 09 14 10 30 25 25 17 30
Peru 52 58 54 55 63 51 60 40 53 60
Philippines 45 52 48 52 52 44 57 53 40 40
Poland 39 47 50 43 41 29 27 29 25 19
Portugal 37 36 42 39 36 41 43 46 42 39
Puerto Rico - - - - 49 - - - - 51
Qatar 14 17 18 12 11 06 11 09 05 04
Romania 51 48 51 48 50 46 40 55 51 47
Saudi Arabia 24 32 24 17 16 20 48 31 06 15
Singapore 01 05 03 04 01 03 01 02 03 03
Slovak Republic 57 50 49 53 59 49 47 52 56 56
Slovenia 35 40 38 42 46 36 31 26 34 37
South Africa 59 62 60 61 60 61 61 59 61 61
Spain 36 39 36 36 40 31 42 35 32 27
Sweden 06 02 04 08 06 22 16 21 28 23
Switzerland 03 01 02 03 02 18 07 30 18 12
Taiwan (Chinese Taipei) 11 08 07 06 08 17 06 11 20 26
Thailand 29 28 33 30 25 14 21 34 16 05
Turkey 46 51 52 47 53 57 46 37 43 34
UAE 09 09 12 10 07 04 09 06 04 02
United Kingdom 19 18 23 29 28 24 26 23 35 32
USA 10 10 10 09 12 02 05 03 02 01
Venezuela 63 64 63 64 67 63 64 63 64 66
68
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
EFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY INFRASTRUCTURE
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
63 64 63 64 67 62 63 63 63 66 52 56 54 56 56 Argentina
15 16 16 18 13 21 34 26 30 22 18 23 19 20 18 Australia
25 29 34 36 40 16 18 18 26 29 10 12 10 15 14 Austria
- - 20 20 21 - - 24 22 16 - - 39 37 39 Bahrain
35 37 33 22 35 22 20 19 05 17 19 19 20 10 19 Belgium
- 42 41 37 38 - 61 57 50 47 - 63 61 61 57 Botswana
61 62 61 62 65 47 49 52 61 61 53 52 53 55 58 Brazil
39 47 49 55 56 53 59 59 62 65 50 54 51 54 59 Bulgaria
10 15 18 16 19 10 16 13 17 27 08 08 11 11 16 Canada
20 22 30 32 30 37 40 41 45 41 45 45 47 46 45 Chile
37 27 29 35 27 18 17 15 21 15 22 18 21 21 15 China
56 58 59 61 64 52 51 60 59 50 56 53 56 57 54 Colombia
59 57 46 49 47 63 64 49 56 59 48 50 45 45 44 Croatia
21 25 24 30 28 35 43 44 55 55 38 41 40 42 42 Cyprus
36 36 22 17 25 38 41 29 15 30 32 31 28 24 28 Czech Republic
04 07 06 05 05 01 01 01 01 01 02 03 02 02 02 Denmark
19 18 15 15 20 27 31 22 25 31 33 30 27 29 32 Estonia
16 14 10 13 16 13 12 05 09 18 04 05 04 03 06 Finland
46 39 40 47 43 43 36 35 39 32 13 15 15 17 21 France
24 23 21 27 32 25 23 21 29 35 11 10 09 14 20 Germany
- - - - 59 - - - - 56 - - - - 65 Ghana
52 52 55 53 52 51 44 46 48 44 39 39 41 40 40 Greece
01 01 02 02 03 02 03 07 11 07 14 16 14 13 09 Hong Kong SAR
47 40 37 40 51 59 56 48 58 67 41 37 36 38 41 Hungary
17 17 14 19 17 15 14 08 10 13 17 09 08 07 12 Iceland
50 46 45 44 45 32 32 23 28 25 49 49 49 52 53 India
31 26 35 31 23 31 25 31 20 14 55 57 52 51 52 Indonesia
13 13 11 03 06 05 11 11 03 03 23 20 23 19 17 Ireland
27 33 32 34 29 26 29 27 24 21 20 21 17 18 13 Israel
57 55 54 56 57 45 35 34 38 37 30 29 31 30 30 Italy
41 41 39 42 42 55 48 51 47 51 21 22 22 23 23 Japan
45 35 44 41 37 46 33 45 36 34 58 55 55 53 55 Jordan
29 21 25 23 18 34 28 32 31 28 51 47 46 47 49 Kazakhstan
28 34 36 38 39 28 27 33 33 23 16 17 16 16 11 Korea Rep.
- - - 26 22 - - - 42 36 - - - 49 46 Kuwait
32 32 28 39 36 44 42 37 57 49 37 35 35 41 36 Latvia
33 31 23 33 26 24 30 25 27 24 34 34 32 31 29 Lithuania
12 10 13 10 11 17 13 20 19 26 24 24 24 25 24 Luxembourg
30 30 38 29 33 29 24 38 32 40 31 32 37 35 35 Malaysia
55 59 60 60 60 48 47 47 51 53 57 58 58 59 62 Mexico
53 54 57 58 53 57 60 61 64 62 62 62 62 63 64 Mongolia
11 12 12 12 14 04 04 03 02 08 09 07 05 05 08 Netherlands
08 11 17 21 15 30 22 36 35 42 25 25 29 28 31 New Zealand
- - - - 54 - - - - 58 - - - - 66 Nigeria
06 04 05 09 09 08 06 10 18 09 06 04 06 08 05 Norway
40 48 52 50 55 50 53 53 53 60 60 60 59 60 63 Peru
42 45 48 52 49 33 37 39 40 43 59 59 57 58 61 Philippines
43 56 56 54 44 40 57 58 43 46 35 42 43 39 38 Poland
34 38 43 43 41 41 38 42 41 39 27 27 30 32 26 Portugal
- - - - 50 - - - - 45 - - - - 48 Puerto Rico
07 06 07 04 07 11 15 14 12 11 40 40 38 33 33 Qatar
49 44 47 46 48 54 52 50 49 54 47 48 48 50 51 Romania
22 24 19 11 12 19 26 16 13 12 36 36 34 34 34 Saudi Arabia
05 05 04 07 02 06 09 09 08 02 07 11 12 09 04 Singapore
60 51 51 48 62 61 55 54 52 64 46 44 42 44 50 Slovak Republic
38 43 42 45 46 39 45 43 46 57 29 33 33 36 37 Slovenia
54 61 53 59 61 56 58 56 54 48 61 61 60 62 60 South Africa
44 49 50 51 58 42 39 40 37 38 26 26 25 27 27 Spain
14 09 09 14 10 03 02 02 06 04 01 02 03 04 03 Sweden
02 02 01 01 01 09 05 04 07 05 03 01 01 01 01 Switzerland
09 08 08 06 08 12 07 06 04 06 15 14 13 12 10 Taiwan (Chinese Taipei)
23 20 31 24 24 23 21 30 23 20 44 43 44 43 43 Thailand
51 60 58 57 63 36 46 55 44 52 43 46 50 48 47 Turkey
03 03 03 08 04 07 08 17 16 10 28 28 26 26 25 UAE
18 19 26 28 31 20 19 28 34 33 12 13 18 22 22 United Kingdom
26 28 27 25 34 14 10 12 14 19 05 06 07 06 07 USA
62 63 62 63 66 60 62 62 60 63 63 64 63 64 67 Venezuela
69
Sub-factor ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY
Public Finance
Rankings
ce
Employment
International
International
Institutional
Framework
Framework
Investment
Legislation
Trade al
al
Tax Policy
Domestic
Economy
Business
Societal
Prices
Argentina 63 64 54 34 63 65 65 66 66 56
Australia 09 31 05 11 38 17 29 15 12 15
Austria 36 15 37 35 37 39 64 29 36 14
Bahrain 43 38 38 31 01 52 04 35 09 49
Belgium 18 09 16 43 25 53 66 14 19 10
Botswana 60 67 65 64 04 16 16 47 41 59
Brazil 37 54 18 37 20 66 50 62 65 67
Bulgaria 48 28 59 56 09 43 24 54 62 57
Canada 30 49 04 24 15 28 27 16 24 19
Chile 54 63 21 59 24 21 36 33 23 50
China 01 43 13 19 28 31 23 34 33 28
Colombia 66 61 32 62 06 44 47 58 64 66
Croatia 50 19 43 63 23 41 53 45 49 36
Cyprus 42 42 08 45 13 30 17 48 29 26
Czech Republic 38 21 27 36 40 34 44 19 35 17
Denmark 16 20 23 30 47 03 51 02 03 01
Estonia 64 34 45 49 31 23 40 27 11 23
Finland 45 46 30 42 51 29 59 08 14 04
France 12 24 10 38 58 50 67 18 30 21
Germany 15 11 15 12 53 27 62 21 38 18
Ghana 67 66 63 44 56 56 19 64 52 53
Greece 53 33 55 47 36 60 57 49 31 40
Hong Kong SAR 25 01 03 25 65 09 02 12 01 30
Hungary 55 07 42 27 30 63 37 52 46 41
Iceland 49 59 60 08 60 26 41 28 21 02
India 03 37 25 41 44 55 33 40 44 54
Indonesia 10 50 36 32 12 18 12 25 42 39
Ireland 19 14 06 14 46 06 21 07 04 06
Israel 24 52 26 22 57 33 31 23 34 38
Italy 17 27 41 58 52 67 61 43 37 33
Japan 05 44 34 06 55 64 43 26 40 27
Jordan 59 40 56 66 19 42 25 36 27 51
Kazakhstan 29 55 40 29 41 20 07 44 28 34
Korea Rep. 07 47 35 04 43 38 34 30 47 29
Kuwait 58 30 61 15 07 11 03 41 54 48
Latvia 57 39 52 55 45 32 42 37 32 32
Lithuania 52 22 62 50 32 24 35 32 26 24
Luxembourg 34 05 67 20 49 13 45 10 13 08
Malaysia 35 17 28 18 02 35 11 31 50 42
Mexico 22 57 19 09 35 48 20 61 63 58
Mongolia 33 51 50 61 05 40 28 60 56 44
Netherlands 23 04 11 07 54 12 63 09 07 09
New Zealand 51 56 47 17 27 25 32 17 10 12
Nigeria 56 65 64 40 67 19 14 63 59 64
Norway 20 45 17 21 50 08 52 05 17 03
Peru 65 62 46 53 29 36 30 56 53 60
Philippines 27 58 44 10 48 49 15 53 60 55
Poland 40 13 39 13 22 47 46 38 45 37
Portugal 44 25 29 39 34 37 58 42 25 25
Puerto Rico 46 60 49 52 08 15 26 59 55 62
Qatar 14 18 48 01 10 05 01 11 16 31
Romania 28 41 53 60 21 45 38 50 48 52
Saudi Arabia 31 32 20 26 11 10 09 20 15 46
Singapore 08 02 02 05 62 04 10 03 02 11
Slovak Republic 47 36 66 57 39 62 54 55 61 45
Slovenia 41 08 57 46 18 46 55 46 51 20
South Africa 62 53 31 67 03 58 22 57 57 63
Spain 32 12 14 54 26 59 60 51 58 35
Sweden 21 23 09 48 42 14 56 04 06 07
Switzerland 04 16 07 23 61 01 13 01 05 05
Taiwan (Chinese Taipei) 13 48 33 33 14 07 06 06 22 16
Thailand 39 06 24 03 17 22 08 39 39 47
Turkey 11 29 51 51 33 57 39 65 43 61
UAE 06 03 22 02 16 02 05 13 08 13
United Kingdom 26 26 12 28 64 51 48 22 18 22
USA 02 35 01 16 59 61 18 24 20 43
Venezuela 61 10 58 65 66 54 49 67 67 65
70
BUSINESS EFFICIENCY INFRASTRUCTURE
Technological
Productivity &
Infrastructure
Infrastructure
Infrastructure
Labor Market
Management
Environment
l
&
et
t
Attitudes &
Education
Efficiency
Practices
Scientific
Health &
Finance
Values
Basic
60 54 66 58 65 57 61 53 51 47 Argentina
gentina
28 17 08 33 23 16 23 21 08 13 Australia
alia
15 23 32 19 59 17 28 14 07 17 Austria
tria
20 06 39 16 05 12 21 63 39 37 Bahrain
ahrain
10 27 14 08 27 39 18 17 19 07 Belgium
lgium
52 21 59 54 43 49 62 62 58 46 Botswana
ana
65 55 46 55 61 59 60 39 46 64 Brazil
azil
57 67 53 61 64 65 54 54 53 52 Bulgaria
lgaria
31 25 15 30 30 15 22 19 15 15 Canada
anada
62 42 31 34 38 34 31 58 43 49 Chile
Chile
18 10 21 21 13 21 05 08 32 28 China
ina
54 44 63 26 47 40 53 52 50 60 Colombia
bia
46 66 47 63 62 50 51 49 38 42 Croatia
oatia
44 43 49 64 56 63 49 55 33 22 Cyprus
prus
24 41 33 29 28 24 38 24 27 34 Czech Republic
epublic
01 08 05 01 03 06 02 09 03 02 Denmark
ark
39 33 35 27 32 31 40 43 26 16 Estonia
onia
17 20 12 13 20 13 06 16 05 11 Finland
Finland
23 37 20 31 51 29 19 15 16 29 France
rance
25 36 18 39 60 35 37 05 11 26 Germany
any
55 35 64 60 42 54 66 65 64 66 Ghana
ana
37 58 45 51 36 48 47 36 36 39 Greece
eece
11 16 04 06 16 03 08 23 10 04 Hong Kong SAR
AR
56 63 50 67 66 37 52 33 45 45 Hungary
ungary
14 18 26 07 09 07 12 30 04 09 Iceland
land
43 15 23 41 14 42 44 26 65 61 India
ndia
30 02 25 10 12 22 32 45 61 57 Indonesia
ndonesia
06 07 11 03 02 38 07 20 09 12 Ireland
land
19 22 28 22 21 36 09 04 23 23 Israel
rael
26 56 27 52 39 51 42 22 18 32 Italy
Italy
58 51 19 65 57 41 35 10 12 31 Japan
apan
41 29 54 23 25 58 58 47 47 55 Jordan
dan
50 19 40 12 24 32 50 57 57 41 Kazakhstan
tan
33 31 29 28 11 14 16 01 30 19 Korea Rep.
ep.
49 38 37 37 31 46 46 51 54 43 Kuwait
ait
48 49 56 49 45 28 30 59 31 30 Latvia
Latvia
22 30 41 17 22 26 20 41 29 25 Lithuania
huania
16 24 17 40 34 11 39 34 21 05 Luxembourg
bourg
53 34 36 42 40 10 29 31 42 44 Malaysia
sia
47 48 62 50 48 61 63 56 56 62 Mexico
xico
67 64 55 66 37 55 57 67 66 56 Mongolia
ongolia
08 11 07 14 17 18 11 12 17 10 Netherlands
nds
63 53 34 36 35 27 43 28 14 33 New Zealand
land
61 50 65 38 46 64 64 61 67 67 Nigeria
igeria
05 09 10 18 19 02 13 18 06 08 Norway
ay
64 57 57 53 58 56 65 64 59 59 Peru
eru
51 32 51 47 33 62 55 60 60 63 Philippines
ines
36 46 42 59 55 45 41 29 40 35 Poland
land
45 45 44 46 26 33 24 27 25 21 Portugal
ugal
27 52 58 45 52 67 34 42 37 51 Puerto Rico
ico
07 12 38 11 10 01 17 50 41 40 Qatar
atar
34 61 61 62 41 52 36 44 52 53 Romania
ania
21 05 22 20 04 09 33 38 48 38 Saudi Arabia
abia
04 01 03 02 01 05 01 13 28 03 Singapore
apore
32 65 60 48 67 47 48 48 44 48 Slovak Republic
epublic
38 59 48 56 63 53 45 32 34 24 Slovenia
nia
59 40 43 43 50 60 59 46 63 58 South Africa
rica
35 47 30 32 53 25 26 25 22 36 Spain
pain
03 04 09 04 08 20 04 07 02 06 Sweden
eden
02 13 02 09 15 04 03 02 01 01 Switzerland
land
09 26 06 05 06 30 10 06 24 14 Taiwan (Chinese Taipei)
Taipei)
42 14 24 15 18 23 25 40 55 54 Thailand
and
40 60 52 57 49 43 56 37 49 50 Turkey
key
13 03 16 25 07 08 15 35 35 27 UAE
UAE
29 39 13 44 44 44 27 11 13 20 United Kingdom
dom
12 28 01 24 29 19 14 03 20 18 USA
USA
66 62 67 35 54 66 67 66 62 65 Venezuela
uela
71
This booklet is just a summary.
The complete Yearbook with full profiles and all the
statistics is available digitally and in print.
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
34
47
54 56 54 53 51
60 58 57
63 64 63 65 65 66 66 61
66 65
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
8 8 8 8 27 27 27 27
9 29
74
Australia
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
5
9 8 8
11 12 13
15 15 16
17 17
21
23 23
29 28
31
33
38
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
4 4 4 3
6 5 5 6 5
7
75
Austria
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
7
15 14 15 17 14 17
19
23
29 28
32
36 37 35 37 39 36
59
64
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
11 13 13 13 13 14
17 17 17 17
76
Bahrain
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
1 4 6 5
9 12
16
20 21
31
35
38 38 39 39 37
43
52 49
63
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
13 14
22 18 20 18
77
Belgium
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
9 10 10 8 7
16 14 14
18 19 18 17 19
25 27 27
39
43
53
66
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
9 11
14 12 13
16 15 16 16 15
78
Botswana
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
4
16 16
21
41 43
47 49 46
52 54
60 59 59 58
62 62
67 65 64
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
38 38 34 34 34
39
40 35
79
Brazil
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
18 20
37 37 39
46 46
50
54 55 55
62 65 61 59 60 64
66 67 65
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
6 24
7 7 7 7 25 25 25 25
80
Bulgaria
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
9
24
28
43
48
54 53 54 54 53 52
59 56 62
57 57
61 64
67 65
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
32 36 37 27
39 39 31 32 34 35
81
Canada
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
4
15 16 15 15 15 15
19 19
24 24 22
25
30 28 27 30 30
31
49
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
1
1 3 3 3
2 2 2 2 6
82
Chile
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
21 24 21 23
31 34 34 31
36 33 38
42 43
50 49
54
59 58
63 62
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
24 25 25
26 27
3 3 3 3 3
83
China
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
1
5
10 8
13 13
19 18
23 21 21 21
28 28 28
31 32
34 33
43
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
5 4 4 5 5 5 5 4
7 6
84
Colombia
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
26
32
40
44 47 44 47
54 53 52 50
61 58 60
62 64 66 63
66
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
5 23 23
6 6 6 6 24 24 24
85
Croatia
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
19
23
36 38
43 41 42
45 46 47
50 49 50 51 49
53
63 66 63 62
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
28
30
31 32 32 32
38 37 35 35
86
Cyprus
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
8
13
17
22
30 29 26
33
42 42 45 44 43
48 49 49
56 55
64 63
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
19 21 19 20
27 25 26 24
30 29
87
Czech Republic
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
19 17
21
24 24 24
27 29 28 27
34 35 33 34
38 36 38
40 41
44
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
13 14
22 22 19 19 21 21 18 18
88
Denmark
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
3 2 3 1 1 1 3 2 3 2
5 6
8 9
16
20
23
30
47
51
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
1 1 1 1 1
2 2
3 3 3
89
Estonia
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
11
16
23 23 26
27 27
34 31 33 35 32 31
40 39 40 43
45
49
64
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
18 16 15 19 18 17 16 19
22 21
90
Finland
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
4 6 5
8 11
14 12 13 13
17 20 16
20
30 29
45 46 42
51
59
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
9 7 9
5 10 11
8 7 7
9
91
France
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
12 10
18 15 16
21 23 20 19
24
30 31 29 29
38 37
50 51
58
67
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
10
21 18 20 22 21 11
12 12 12
92
Germany
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
5
11 11
15 15 12 18 18
21
27 25 26
38 36 35 37
39
53
62 60
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
10 10 4 4 4
12 7
15 16 8
93
Ghana
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
19
35
44 42
52 53 55 54
56 56
63 60
67 66 64 64 66 65 64 66
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
28
43
94
Greece
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
2023
49 49 Population - market size (millions) 10.48 38
2023
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (US$ billions) 238.2 48
2023
CHALLENGES IN 2024 GDP (PPP) per capita (US$) 39,266 46
• Increase investments aimed at expanded the production Real GDP growth (%) 2.0
2023
27
base of the country. 2023
• Reform the vocational education and training system in Consumer price inflation (%) 4.16 25
order to address labor shortages and skills mismatches. 2023
63
Unemployment rate (%) 11.10
• Introduce policies that support the green and digital
2023
transition of enterprises. Labor force (millions) 4.72 42
• Reform the judiciary system in order to speed up the overall 2023
Current account balance (% of GDP) -6.94 64
time for reaching decisions.
2022
• Simplify the regulatory framework concerning Direct investment stocks inward ($bn) 49.2 52
entrepreneurship. 2022
Direct investment flows inward (% of GDP) 3.49 21
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
33 31
36 36 36 36 39
40 37
47 45 48 47
49 51
53 55
60 57 58
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
27
30 28 28
33 32 32 29 29
34
95
Hong Kong SAR
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
1 3 2 1 4 3 4
9 6 8
12 11 10
16 16
25 25 23
30
65
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
2 2 2 2 5 5 6 5
3 7
96
Hungary
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
27 30
33
37 37
42 41
46 45 45
52 50 52
55 56
63 63
67 66
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
26 26 25 24 27
31 29 31 33
37
97
Iceland
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
2 4
8 7 9 7 9
14 12
21 18
26 28 26
30
41
49
59 60 60
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
11 11 11 12 13 12
14 14 14 15
98
India
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
3
15 14
25 23 26
33
37 40
41 44 44 43 41 42 44
55 54
61
65
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
11
15 16
12 12 12 12 17
18 18
99
Indonesia
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
2
10 12 12 10 12
18
25 25 22
32 30 32
36
42 39 45
50
57
61
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
10 8 10
11 11 12 13
16 15
18
100
Ireland
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
4 3 2
6 6 7 6 6 7 7
11 9
14 14 12
19 21 20
38
46
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
2 2 4
3
9 11 9
7 7
9
101
Israel
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
4
9
19
24 22 23 22 22 21 23 23
26 28
33 31 34
38 36
52
57
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
16 15
16 14 17 18 17
17 17 18
102
Italy
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
17 18
22
27 26 27
33 32
37 39
41 43 42
52 52 51
58 56
61
67
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
27
28 28 28 16
29 17 18
19 19
103
Japan
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
5 6
10 12
19
26 27
34 31
35
43 40 41
44
51
55 58 57
64 65
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
10 10 10
11 11 13 12 13 14 15
104
Jordan
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
19
25 23 25
27 29
36
40 42 41
47 47
51 54
56 58 58 55
59
66
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
33 33 29 29
36 31
38 38 33 33
105
Kazakhstan
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
7
12
20 19
24
29 29 28
34 32
40 41 40 41
44
50 50
55 57 57
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
23 24 23
28 30 14 16 14
17 17
106
Korea Rep.
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
1
4
7
11
14 16
19
30 29 29 28 30
35 34 33 31
38
43
47 47
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
6 6
7 7 7 7
8 8 9 9
107
Kuwait
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
2023
Exchange rate (per $) 0.307
38 Population - market size (millions) 4.96
2023
54
2023
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (US$ billions) 161.8 50
2023
CHALLENGES IN 2024 GDP (PPP) per capita (US$) 52,822 29
• Oil export dependence: reduce vulnerability to international Real GDP growth (%) -2.2
2023
65
oil market fluctuations. 2023
• Correct the slow implementation of economic reforms that Consumer price inflation (%) 3.64 19
leave the economy at risk if oil demand decreases in the 2023
03
Unemployment rate (%) 1.11
future.
2023
• Address political deadlock which hinders economic reform Labor force (millions) 2.95 50
and debt financing. 2023
Current account balance (% of GDP) 32.79 01
• Tackle cumbersome bureaucracy weighing on the
2022
investment environment. Direct investment stocks inward ($bn) 15.1 64
• Ballooning public sector and over-generous subsidies: a 2022
significant portion of the workforce is employed in the public Direct investment flows inward (% of GDP) 0.41 57
sector, negatively impacting public infrastructure investment.
PROVIDED BY: Kuwait Anti-Corruption Authority (Nazaha)
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
3
7
11
15
30 31
41 38 37 37
46 46 43
48 49 51 54
54
58 61
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
22
25 25 23
108
Latvia
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
28 30 31 30
32 32 32
39 37
45 42 45
48 49 49
52 55
57 56 59
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
25 23 25 23 22 26
27 30 31
36
109
Lithuania
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
17 20
22 24 22 22
26 24 26 29
25
32 30
35 32
41 41
52 50
62
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
19 19 19 19
20 20 20
21 21 21
110
Luxembourg
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
5 8 5
13 10 13 11
16 17
20 21
24
34 34 34
40 39
45
49
67
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
10 8 9 10
12 11
14 15 15 16
111
Malaysia
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
2
11 10
17 18
28 29 31
31
35 35 34 36
42 42 40 42 44
50
53
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
8 8 8 6 8
10 10 9 11 13
112
Mexico
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
9
22 19 20
35
48 47 48 50 48
57 58 56 56
61 63 62 61 63 62
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
4 22 22
5 5 5 5
23 23 23
113
Mongolia
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
28
33
40 37
44
51 50
56 55 55 57 56
61 60
67 64 66 67 66
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
33 33
35 36
14 14 14 14 14 37
114
Netherlands
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
4 7 7 7
11 9 9 8 11 11 12 10
12 14 17
18 17
23
54
63
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
3 4 4 4 4 4
6 6 5
8
115
New Zealand
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
10 12
17 17 14
27 25 27 28
32 34 36 35 33
43
47
51 53
56
63
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
15 14
6 5 21 20 20
7
9 9
116
Nigeria
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
14
19
40 38
46
50
56 59
65 64 67
63 64 61 65 64 64 61 67 67
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
27
42
117
Norway
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
3 2
5 5 6
8 9 10 8
13
17 17 18 19 18
20 21
45
50 52
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
5 5 6 7 7 6
10 8 9
12
118
Peru
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
29 30
36
46
53 56 53 53
60 57 57 58 56 59 59
65 62 64 65 64
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
22 22 22
4 4 4 25
7 26
8
119
Philippines
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
10
15
27
32 33
44 47
48 49 51 51
53 55 55
58 60 60 60 63
62
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
19
20 20
13 13 13 13 13 21 21
120
Poland
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
13 13
22
29
38 37 36 35
40 39 42 41 40
47 46 45 46 45
55
59
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
15 19 19 18
20
26 29 27
31 34
121
Portugal
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
25 25 25 26 24 27 25 21
29
34 37 33
39 42
44 45 45 44 46
58
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
23 22 23 22
25 24 26 24 26
29
122
Puerto Rico
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
8
15
26 27
34 37
45 42
46 49 52 52 52 51
55 58
60 59 62
67
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
4 30
123
Qatar
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
1 1 1
5 7
10 11 12 11 10
14 16
18 17
31
38
41 40
48 50
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
9 8 8 10 10
11 12 11 12 13
124
Romania
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
21
28
34 36
41 38 41
45 44
53 50 48 52 52 52 53
60 61 61 62
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
32 33 28 28
34 35 34 29
31 31
125
Saudi Arabia
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
5 4
11 10 9 9
15
20 20 21 22 20
26
31 32 33
38 38
46 48
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
12 10 4 5
15 17 9 8
20
13
126
Singapore
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
2 2 4 3 2 4 1 3 2 1 1 3
8 5 5
10 11 13
28
62
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
1 1
3 4
1 1 1 1 1 5
127
Slovak Republic
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
32
36 39
47 45 48 47 48 48 44 48
57 54 55
62 61 60
66 65 67
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
30 30 30
32
35 34 33 37 36
40
128
Slovenia
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
8
18 20
24
32 34
41 38
46 46 46 48 45
51 53
57 55 56
59
63
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
23 25 22 24 23 24
27 28 31 27
129
South Africa
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
22
31
40 43 43
46
53 50
58 57 57 59 60 59 58
62 63 63
67
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
37
39 24
40 41 41 26 26 26 26
130
Spain
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
2023
39 Exchange rate (per $) 0.925
40 Population - market size (millions) 48.23
2023
19
2023
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (US$ billions) 1,580.7 14
2023
CHALLENGES IN 2024 GDP (PPP) per capita (US$) 49,994 33
• Reduce the tax burden and generate a stable regulatory Real GDP growth (%) 2.5
2023
21
framework for companies. 2023
• Invest European funds efficiently, reinforcing productivity, Consumer price inflation (%) 3.40 17
and configuring a more resilient economy. 2023
64
Unemployment rate (%) 12.11
• Promote the digitalization of companies, especially SMEs.
2023
• Adapt the educational framework to the new needs of Labor force (millions) 23.90 19
companies. 2023
Current account balance (% of GDP) 2.60 22
• Increase investment in R&D (both in the public and private
2022
sectors), strengthen coordination between the different Direct investment stocks inward ($bn) 787.3 14
actors, and promote knowledge transfer. 2022
Direct investment flows inward (% of GDP) 2.46 32
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
12 14
26 25 26 25 22
32 30 32
35 35 36
47
54 51 53
59 60 58
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
24 24 23
26 26 14 14
16 15 17
131
Sweden
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
4 3 4 4 4 2
6 7 8 7 6
9 9
14
21 23 20
42
48
56
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
2 3 2
4 5 4 4
6 7 6
132
Switzerland
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
4 1 1 2 2 4 3 2 1 1
7 5 5
9
16 13 13 15
23
61
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
1 1 1
2 2 2 2
3 3 3
133
Taiwan (Chinese Taipei)
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
7 6 6 6 5 6 6
9 10
13 14 14
16
22 24
26
30
33 33
48
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
1 1 1 1
2
3 3 3 3 3
134
Thailand
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
3
6 8
14 15
17 18
24 22 24 23 25
39 39 39 40
42
47
55 54
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
11 10 11 9
7 12
9 9 9 8
135
Turkey
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
11
29
33
39 40 37
43 43
51 51 52 49 49 50
57 57 56
61 60
65
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
30 20 20
32
35 36 36 21 21 21
136
UAE
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
3 2 2 3
6 5
8 7 8
13 13 13
16 16 15
22
25
27
35 35
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
8 8 8 7
6 6 6 5 10
8
137
United Kingdom
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
12 13 11 13
18 20
22 22
26 26 28 29 27
39
44 44 44
51 48
64
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
13 12 16 6 6 7
20 18 10 11
138
USA
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
2 1 1 3
12 14
16 18 20 19 20 18
24 24
28 29
35
43
59 61
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2 2
139
Venezuela
Competitiveness Trends – Overall
2023
Population - market size (millions) 33.73 25
67
2023
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (US$ billions) 97.1 53
2023
CHALLENGES IN 2024 GDP (PPP) per capita (US$) 6,250 66
• Strengthen regulatory framework investors require Real GDP growth (%) 4.0
2023
09
confidence in the law and public institutions. 2023
• Low wages and high inflation restrict private consumption Consumer price inflation (%) 337.46 67
and destabilize the economy. The easing of US sanctions 2021
57
Unemployment rate (%) 7.90
could be a stimulus for the oil sector and the economy.
2021
• Solve problem of basic services and infrastructure for Labor force (millions) 14.32 27
homes and industries. 2023
Current account balance (% of GDP) 3.41 21
• Simplify administrative procedures and reduce high tax
2022
burden. Direct investment stocks inward ($bn) 21.9 62
• Lack of access to financing for good projects and 2022
companies eager to expand production capacity. Direct investment flows inward (% of GDP) 1.02 53
COMPETITIVENESS LANDSCAPE
Economic Performance Government Efficiency Business Efficiency Infrastructure
Technological Infrastructure
International Investment
Management Practices
Scientific Infrastructure
Societal Framework
Domestic Economy
Basic Infrastructure
International Trade
Labor Market
Employment
Tax Policy
Education
Finance
Prices
10
35
49
54 54
61 58
65 66 62 62 65
67 67 65 66 67 66 67 66
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
9 9 9 9 28 28 28 28
10 30
140
This booklet is just a summary.
The complete Yearbook with full profiles and all the
statistics is available digitally and in print.
144
1.2.15 [B] Exports of goods & commercial serv. US$ billions
1.2.16 [B] Exports breakdown by economic sector Percentage of total exports
1.2.17 Export Concentration by Partner Exports to top 5 countries, percentage of total exports
1.2.18 Export concentration by product Top 5 products, percentage of total exports
1.2.19 [B] Imports of goods & commercial serv. ($bn) US$ billions
1.2.20 [B] Imports of goods & commercial serv. (%) Percentage of GDP
1.2.21 [B] Imports of goods & commercial serv. growth US$ values
1.2.22 [B] Imports breakdown by economic sector Percentage of total imports
1.2.23 Trade to GDP ratio (Exports + Imports) / GDP
1.2.24 Terms of trade index Unit value of exports over unit value of imports
1.2.25 Tourism receipts (%) International tourism receipts as a percentage of GDP
1.5 Prices
1.5.01 Consumer price inflation Average annual rate
1.5.02 Cost-of-living index Index of a basket of goods & services in the main city, including housing
(New York City = 100)
1.5.03 [B] Apartment rent 3-room apartment monthly rent in major cities, US$
1.5.04 Office rent Total occupation cost in the main city (US$/Sq.M. per year)
1.5.05 Food costs Percentage of household final consumption expenditures
1.5.06 Gasoline prices Premium unleaded gasoline (95 Ron) US$ per litre
145
Factor II: Government Efficiency
[S] Survey data
[B] Background data
146
2.4 Business Legislation
Openness
2.4.01 Tariff barriers Tariffs on imports: Applied weighted mean tariff rate for all products
2.4.02 [S] Protectionism Protectionism does not impair the conduct of your business
2.4.03 [S] Public sector contracts Public sector contracts are sufficiently open to foreign bidders
2.4.04 [S] Foreign investors Foreign investors are free to acquire control in domestic companies
2.4.05 [S] Capital markets Capital markets (foreign and domestic) are easily accessible
2.4.06 [S] Investment incentives Investment incentives are attractive to foreign investors
Competition and Regulations
2.4.07 Government subsidies To private and public companies as a percentage of GDP
2.4.08 [S] Subsidies Subsidies do not distort fair competition and economic development
2.4.09 [S] State ownership of enterprises State ownership of enterprises is not a threat to business activities
2.4.10 [S] Competition legislation Competition legislation is efficient in preventing unfair competition
2.4.11 [S] Parallel economy Parallel (black-market, unrecorded) economy does not impair
economic development
2.4.12 New business density Registered new businesses per 1’000 people aged 15-64
2.4.13 [S] Creation of firms Creation of firms is supported by legislation
2.4.14 Start-up days Number of days to start a business
2.4.15 Start-up procedures Number of procedures to start a business
Labor Regulations
2.4.16 [S] Labor regulations Labor regulations (hiring/firing practices, minimum wages, etc.) do not hinder
business activities
2.4.17 [S] Unemployment legislation Unemployment legislation provides an incentive to look for work
2.4.18 [S] Immigration laws Immigration laws do not prevent your company from employing foreign labor
2.4.19 Redundancy costs Number of weeks of salary
147
Factor III: Business Efficiency
[S] Survey data
[B] Background data
148
3.3 Finance
Bank Efficiency
3.3.01 Banking sector assets Percentage of GDP
3.3.02 [B] Financial cards in circulation Number of cards per capita
3.3.03 Financial card transactions US$ per capita
3.3.04 Access to financial services Proportion of adults with a bank account or mobile-money-service provider
3.3.05 Access to financial services - gender ratio Difference between the female and male access to a bank account or
mobile-money-service provider
3.3.06 [S] Banking and financial services Banking and financial services do support business activities efficiently
3.3.07 [S] Regulatory compliance (banking laws) Regulatory compliance is sufficiently developed
Stock Market Efficiency
3.3.08 [S] Stock markets Stock markets provide adequate financing to companies
3.3.09 [B] Stock market capitalization ($bn) US$ billions
3.3.10 Stock market capitalization (%) Percentage of GDP
3.3.11 [B] Value traded on stock markets US$ per capita
3.3.12 Listed domestic companies Number of listed domestic companies
3.3.13 Stock market index Percentage change on index in national currency
3.3.14 [S] Shareholders’ rights Shareholders’ rights are sufficiently implemented
3.3.15 Initial public offerings By acquiror nation (average 2021-2023) US$ millions
Finance Management
3.3.16 [S] Credit Credit is easily available for business
3.3.17 [S] Venture capital Venture capital is easily available for business
3.3.18 M&A activity Deals per listed company (average 2021-2023)
3.3.19 [S] Corporate debt Corporate debt does not restrain the ability of enterprises to compete
150
4.3 Scientific Infrastructure
4.3.01 Total expenditure on R&D ($) US$ millions
4.3.02 Total expenditure on R&D (%) Percentage of GDP
4.3.03 [B] Total expenditure on R&D per capita ($) US$ per capita
4.3.04 Business expenditure on R&D ($) US$ millions
4.3.05 Business expenditure on R&D (%) Percentage of GDP
4.3.06 Total R&D personnel Full-time work equivalent (FTE thousands)
4.3.07 Total R&D personnel per capita Full-time work equivalent (FTE) per 1000 people
4.3.08 [B] Total R&D personnel in business enterprise Full-time work equivalent (FTE thousands)
4.3.09 [B] Total R&D personnel in business per capita Full-time work equivalent (FTE) per 1000 people
4.3.10 Researchers in R&D per capita Full-time work equivalent (FTE) per 1000 people
4.3.11 Graduates in sciences Percentage of total % of graduates in ICT, Engineering, Math & Natural Sciences
4.3.12 Scientific articles Scientific articles published by origin of author
4.3.13 [B] Nobel prizes Awarded in physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine and economics since 1950
4.3.14 Nobel prizes per capita Awarded in physics, chemistry, etc and economics since 1950 per million people
4.3.15 Patent applications Number of applications filed by applicant’s origin
4.3.16 Patent applications per capita Number of applications filed by applicant’s origin, per 100,000 inhabitants
4.3.17 Patents grants Number of patents granted by applicant’s origin (average 2018-2020)
4.3.18 Number of patents in force By applicant’s origin, per 100,000 inhabitants
4.3.19 Medium- and high-tech value added Proportion of total manufacturing value added, expressed as a percentage
4.3.20 [S] Scientific research legislation Laws relating to scientific research do encourage innovation
4.3.21 [S] Intellectual property rights Intellectual property rights are adequately enforced
4.3.22 [S] Knowledge transfer Knowledge transfer is highly developed between companies and universities
151
4.4.21 [B] Ecological footprint Global hectares per person
4.4.22 Ecological balance (reserve/deficit) Total biocapacity minus total footprint in global hectare per capita
4.4.23 Environment-related technologies Development of environment-related technologies, % inventions worldwide
4.4.24 Environmental agreements Multilateral agreements on hazardous waste, proportion fulfilled
4.4.25 [S] Sustainable development Sustainable development is a priority in companies
4.4.26 [S] Pollution problems Pollution problems do not seriously affect your economy
4.4.27 [S] Environmental laws Environmental laws and compliance do not hinder the competitiveness
of businesses
4.4.28 [S] Quality of life Quality of life is high
4.5 Education
4.5.01 Total public expenditure on education Percentage of GDP
4.5.02 [B] Total public exp. on education per capita US$ per capita
4.5.03 Total public expenditure on education per student Spending per enrolled pupil/student, all levels
4.5.04 Pupil-teacher ratio (primary education) Ratio of students to teaching staff
4.5.05 Pupil-teacher ratio (secondary education) Ratio of students to teaching staff
4.5.06 Secondary school enrollment Percentage of relevant age group receiving full-time education
4.5.07 Higher education achievement Percentage of population that has attained at least tertiary education
for persons 25-34
4.5.08 Women with degrees Share of women who have a degree in the population 25-65
4.5.09 Student mobility inbound Foreign tertiary-level students per 1000 inhabitants
4.5.10 [B] Student mobility outbound National tertiary-level students studying abroad per 1000 inhabitants
4.5.11 Educational assessment - PISA PISA survey of 15-year olds
4.5.12 [B] Students who are not low achievers - PISA % of students who are not low achievers in maths, sciences and reading
4.5.13 [B] English proficiency - TOEFL TOEFL scores
4.5.14 [S] Primary and secondary education Primary and secondary education meets the needs of a competitive economy
4.5.15 [S] University education University education meets the needs of a competitive economy
4.5.16 [S] Management education Management education meets the needs of the business community
4.5.17 University education index Country score calculated from Times Higher Education university ranking
4.5.18 Illiteracy Adult (over 15 years) illiteracy rate as a percentage of population
4.5.19 [S] Language skills Language skills are meeting the needs of enterprises
152
Challenging what is and inspiring what could be,
we develop leaders and organizations that
contribute to a more prosperous, sustainable and
inclusive world.
IMD, IMD REAL LEARNING. REAL IMPACT, and IMD WORLD COMPETITIVENESS YEARBOOK
are trademarks of IMD – International Institute for Management Development