Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 8

Third World Countries in terms of political rights and civil liberties

The most repressive regimes in the world.

List of countries with the worst records for political rights and civil liberties. Within these
countries and territories, state control over daily life is pervasive and wide-ranging,
independent organizations and political opposition are banned or suppressed, and fear
of retribution for independent thought and action is part of daily life.
According to the Freedom House report Freedom in the World 2007, there are
eight countries judged to have the worst records: Burma (Myanmar), Cuba, Libya, North
Korea, Somalia, Sudan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan.
Also included are two territories, Chechnya (Russian Federation) and Tibet, whose
inhabitants suffer intense repression. These states and regions received the Freedom
House survey’s lowest rating: 7 for political rights and 7 for civil
The report also includes nine more countries near the bottom of Freedom House's
list of the most repressive countries: Belarus, China, Cote d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea,
Eritrea, Laos, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Zimbabwe.
The territory of Western Sahara (most of the territory is controlled by Morocco) is
also included in this group.
While these states scored slightly better than the “worst of the worst,” they offer
very limited scope for private discussion while severely suppressing opposition political
activity, impeding independent organizing, and censoring or punishing criticism of the

Most Repressive Regimes Resistant to Change

Sudan, North Korea and Uzbekistan are prominent among the most repressive
regimes in the world, according to a report released by Freedom House.
The study, “The Worst of the Worst: The World's Most Repressive Societies 2007,”
named seventeen countries with the worst records for political rights and civil liberties,
and pointed to thirteen countries which have been on the list for five years or more.
“Repressive regimes can be incredibly resilient, as this year’s list demonstrates,”
said Arch Puddington, Director of Research at Freedom House. “Some of the countries
on this list are global bullies; others are responsible for unspeakable humanitarian crises.
In practically every case, these regimes are resistant to change and are indifferent to their
citizens’ political rights, civil liberties and basic human needs.”
The report includes detailed summaries of political and human rights conditions in
Belarus, Burma, China, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Laos, Libya,
North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and
Zimbabwe. Also included are three territories: Chechnya, Tibet and Western Sahara.
Except for Cote d’Ivoire, which is new to the list this year, and Belarus, Equatorial Guinea
and Zimbabwe, all have been rated the “worst of the worst” since 2002 or earlier.
Within these countries and territories, state control over daily life is pervasive and
wide-ranging, independent organizations and political opposition are banned or
suppressed, and fear of retribution for independent thought and action is part of daily life.
“This study reminds us of the enormous challenges that confront the advocates of
democracy in pressing for reform in these critical cases,” said Aili Piano, managing editor
of the report. “These regimes have toughened and refined their techniques of control over
the years, and are determined to suppress the opposition, no matter how small. It is thus
essential for those who champion freedom to recognize that contributing to change in
these settings will require commitment and a great deal of patience.”
The "Worst of the Worst" report is excerpted from Freedom House's forthcoming
annual global survey, Freedom in the World 2007. The countries deemed the most
repressive earn some of the worst numerical ratings according to the survey's
methodology, which measures the state of political rights and civil liberties worldwide, and
classifies countries as Free, Partly Free or Not Free.
Source: One World Nations Online,
Source: Freedom House,
Third World Countries in terms of Gross National Income
Countries with the least gross national income based on purchasing-power-parity
(PPP) per capita in int'l Dollars. Simplified the GNI PPP is the average annual income
earned by a citizen of a country.

Gross National Income (GNI) per Capita

Rank Country GNI Per Capita (USD)

1 Burundi 730

2 Central African Republic 730

3 Democratic Republic of the Congo 870

4 Niger 990

5 Liberia 1,160

6 Malawi 1,180

7 Mozambique 1,210

8 Sierra Leone 1,500

9 Madagascar 1,510

10 The Gambia 1,660

Source: , . "Countries With the Lowest Incomes." WorldAtlas, Mar. 14, 2019,
Third World Countries in terms of their Human Development
What is the Human Development Index (HDI)?
The Human Development Index (HDI) is a tool developed by the United Nations to
measure and rank countries' levels of social and economic development. Four principal
areas of interest are used to rank countries: mean years of schooling, expected years of
schooling, life expectancy at birth, and gross national income per capita. This index
makes it possible to follow changes in development levels over time and to compare the
development levels of different countries.

Understanding Human Development Index (HDI)

The Human Development Index (HDI) was established to place emphasis on individuals,
more precisely on their opportunities to realize satisfying work and lives. Evaluating a
country's potential for individual human development provides a supplementary metric for
evaluating a country's level of development besides considering standard economic
growth statistics, such as gross domestic product(GDP).

This index can also be used to examine the various policy choices of nations; if, for
example, two countries have approximately the same gross national income (GNI) per
capita, then it can help to evaluate why they produce widely disparate human
development outcomes. One goal of the proponents of the HDI is to stimulate such public
policy debate.

How Is the HDI Measured?

The HDI is a summary measurement of basic achievement levels in human development.
The computed HDI of a country is an average of indexes of each of the life aspects that
are examined: knowledge and understanding, a long and healthy life, and an acceptable
standard of living. Each of the four components is normalized to scale between 0 and 1,
and then the geometric mean of the three components is calculated.

The health aspect of the HDI is measured by the life expectancy, as calculated at the time
of birth, in each country, normalized so that this component is equal to 0 when life
expectancy is 20 and equal to 1 when life expectancy is 85.

Education is measured on two levels: the mean years of schooling for residents of a
country and the expected years of schooling that a child has at the average age for
starting school. These are each separately normalized so that 15 mean years of schooling
equals one, and 18 years of expected schooling equals one, and a simple mean of the
two is calculated.
The metric chosen to represent the standard of living is GNI per capita based
on purchasing power parity (PPP), a common metric used to reflect average income. The
standard of living is normalized so that it is equal to 1 when GNI per capita is $75,000
and equal to 0 when GNI per capita is $100. The final Human Development Index score
for each country is calculated as a geometric mean of the three components by taking the
cube root of the product of the normalized component scores.

Limitations of the Index

The HDI is a simplification and an admittedly limited evaluation of human development.
The HDI does not specifically reflect quality of life factors, such as empowerment
movements or overall feelings of security. In recognition of these facts, the Human
Development Report Office (HDRO) provides additional composite indices to evaluate
other life aspects, including inequality issues such as gender disparity or racial inequality.
Examination and evaluation of a country's HDI are best done in concert with examining
these and other factors, such as the country's rate of economic growth, expansion of
employment opportunities, and the success of initiatives undertaken to improve the
overall quality of life within a country.

Several economists have raised the serious criticism of the HDI that it is essentially
redundant as a result of the very high correlations between the HDI, its components, and
simpler measures of income per capita. GNI per capita (or even GDP per capita)
correlates very highly with both the overall HDI and the other two components in both
values and rankings. Given these strong and consistent correlations, it would be simpler
and clearer to just compare per capita GNI across countries than to spend time and
resources collecting data for the additional components that provide little or no additional
information to the overall index.

Indeed, a fundamental principle of the composite index design is to not include multiple
additional components that are strongly correlated in a way that suggests that they might
reflect the same underlying phenomenon. This is to prevent inefficient double counting
and to avoid introducing additional sources of potential errors in the data.

In the example of HDI, the inclusion of the components is problematic because it is easily
plausible that higher average incomes directly lead to both more investment in formal
education and better health and longevity, and definitions and measurement of years of
schooling and life expectancy can vary widely from country to country.

Source: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/human-development-index-hdi.asp
Third World Countries in Terms of Poverty

The world´s most impoverished countries.

The least developed countries (LDCs) are a group of countries that have been identified
by the UN as "least developed".
United Nations used the following three criteria for the identification of the LDCs

1. a low-income estimate of the gross national income (GNI) per capita.

2. their weak human assets and

3. their high degree of economic vulnerability.

Source: https://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/third_world.htm#Poverty

Third World Countries in Terms of Press Freedom

Reporters Without Borders is publishing annually an index of the countries of the world
according to their respect for press freedom.

Below the list of countries, you can call them Third World of Press Freedom, the "black
holes" for news where the privately-owned media is not allowed and freedom of
expression does not exist. A list of countries right at the bottom of the fourth World
Press Freedom Index.

Countries & Abuse Underlying Global Diff. score Diff. Position

regions score situation score score 2018 2018

180 Turkmenistan 0 85.44 85.44 1.24 -2

179 North Korea 51.93 82.73 83.40 -5.47 1

178 Eritrea 72.18 80.15 80.26 -3.98 1

177 China 80 78.01 78.92 0.63 -1

176 Vietnam 64.20 74.93 74.93 -0.12 -1

175 Sudan 40.94 72.45 72.45 1.32 -1

174 Syria 81.46 68.31 71.78 -7.44 3

173 Djibouti 0 71.36 71.36 0.59 0

172 Saudi Arabia 65.53 64.48 65.88 2.75 -3

171 Laos 56.35 64.49 64.49 -1.92 -1