Blasé Capital GLOBAL No. 1

For a decade or so, India has strived to climb up the ranking in important and renowned global indices. It achieved some success, as it considerably improved the standing in the World Bank’s Ease-of-Doing-Business index, which was stopped in 2021 due to “data irregularities,” largely highlighted by India. The country is the fastest-growing economy in terms of GDP growth, and is emerging as one of the largest economies in terms of GDP value. However, despite several achievements, schemes, efforts, and initiatives, India lags in indices related to social and socio-economic parameters. Thus, the country’s official think tank, NITI Aayog, developed local indices to measure disparities and differences between the states. This led to the development of several indices, which induced, or aimed to influence, states to improve their respective rankings. However, there was always an aim to develop a global index, which would rank India high, and be taken seriously by the rest of the world.

Recently, India launched a new, first-of-its-kind global index, Responsible Nations Index (RNI), to grade nations “beyond their economic muscle, and geopolitical dominance.” It is designed to evaluate economies on “ethical governance, social wellbeing, environmental stewardship, and international responsibility.” It presents an inclusive approach to rank national successes. Unveiled by the World Intellectual Foundation, the first RNI ranked India at 16, ahead of world’s superpowers like the US (Rank: 66), and China (68). The 2026 index, which covers 154 nations, ranked Singapore at the top, followed by Switzerland and Denmark. None of the known global powers were in the top 10. Most were below India’s rank. Germany was at 12, France 17, Poland 19, South Korea 21, Thailand 24, the UK 25, Spain 28, Italy 34, Japan 38, Canada 45, Indonesia 50, Australia 62, the Philippines 73, Brazil 81, South Africa 88, Russia 96, and Saudi Arabia 128. Clearly, India among BRICS ruled the highest. India was the best among the Asian Tigers. India was better than the European and North American giants.

According to the methodology behind RNI, it examines three kinds of responsibility, which justifies its name. The first relates to internal responsibility within a nation, which measures how the respective governments safeguard the rights and welfare of its citizens. The second pinpoints environmental responsibility, or the sustainability outcomes, and resource protection in the respective nations. Finally, RNI measures indicators related to external responsibility, or contributions to global peace, diplomacy, and international public goods. The 58 sub-indicators, which add to the overall ranking under RNI, are linked to social parameters like life expectancy, and infant mortality. They are related to government policies on welfare such as physical health, sports, mental health, education, food, housing, electricity, and sanitation. In addition, they explore freedom in terms of e-government, social media use and limits, data sovereignty, rule of law, and right to religious freedom. Of course, there are some economic indicators like corruption, forest area, air quality, and Climate Change. Finally, they are about global sanctions, and pacts.

According to a commentator, the RNI “marks a shift in how global leadership is evaluated, recognising that prosperity without responsibility is unsustainable in an interconnected world.” Others warned that the future success, and the seriousness with which RNI will be looked at, will depend on crucial factors such as transparency in methodology, indicator weightings, and independent review. Hence, one will need to wait for a detailed disclosure of meta and detailed data, as per each of the 58 sub-indicators, along with their weights, and peer review by global experts. At first stretch, while some of the rankings seem genuine and clearcut, like the top ranks by nations such as Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden, and Ireland, apart from Singapore and Croatia. Others seem a bit stretched like the rankings for some of the European nations. It seems incongruous that a country like Canada is ranked 45, and Poland is below India. Critics are likely to contend that given the sub-indicators, it seems even surprising that India emerges as No. 16.

One of the problems with global rankings, say experts, is what is called the “tyranny of averages,” which hide massive inequality within a country while averaging out the disparities. In large nations like the US, Canada, Russia, China, and India, this is more so, as a few extremely prosperous and evolved regions more than compensate for the dismal affairs in most regions. “Global standards are often applied without considering local contexts” and, hence, using western or Asian or some other standards can skew the data, leading to either overestimation or underestimation. In some cases, the value of the inputs, like higher budgets, rather than the efficacy of expenditure, become more important in the ranking methodologies. India and other emerging nations have consistently accused global west-oriented entities of underestimating their development indicators. Now, the West can accuse the East of the same. Similarly, India claims that the existing prosperity rankings do not account for natural resources. The West can say similar things about media, social media, privacy, and religious freedom in the East. Hence, over the next few months, and few years, the RNI will go be dissected, and analysed carefully on these and other factors. Otherwise, it can easily be discredited like the World Bank’s ‘Ease-of-Doing-Business.’