&w=3840&q=100)
India enters top 100 in global SDG rankings of nations for first time
According to the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network's 10th and latest Sustainable Development Report (SDR), India ranks 99th on the 2025 SDG Index with a score of 67
Press Trust of India New Delhi
India has for the first time secured a place among the top 100 out of 193 countries ranked for their progress in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), according to a report published on Tuesday.
According to the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network's 10th and latest Sustainable Development Report (SDR), India ranks 99th on the 2025 SDG Index with a score of 67, while China ranks 49th with 74.4 and the US 44th with 75.2 points.
Among India's neighbours, Bhutan takes 74th place with 70.5 points, Nepal ranks 85th with 68.6, Bangladesh 114th with 63.9 and Pakistan 140th with 57 points.
India's maritime neighbours, Maldives and Sri Lanka, stood at 53rd and 93rd places, respectively.
The report's authors said that SDG progress has stalled at the global level, with only 17 per cent of the 17 targets adopted by the UN member countries in 2015 projected to be achieved by 2030.
"Conflicts, structural vulnerabilities and limited fiscal space impede SDG progress in many parts of the world," the report, with world-renowned economist Jeffrey Sachs as its lead author, said.
European countries, especially the Nordic nations, continue to top the SDG Index, with Finland ranking first, Sweden second and Denmark third.
A total of 19 out of the top 20 countries are in Europe.
Yet even these countries face significant challenges in achieving at least two goals, including those related to climate and biodiversity, largely due to unsustainable consumption, the authors said.
East and South Asia have outperformed all other global regions in terms of SDG progress since 2015 largely due to rapid socioeconomic development.
The countries in East and South Asia that have demonstrated the fastest progress since 2015 (in points) include Nepal (+11.1), Cambodia (+10), the Philippines (+8.6), Bangladesh (+8.3) and Mongolia (+7.7).
The other countries showing rapid progress among their peers include Benin (+14.5), Peru (+8.7), the United Arab Emirates (+9.9), Uzbekistan (+12.1), Costa Rica (+7) and Saudi Arabia (+8.1).
Though only 17 per cent of the targets are on track to be achieved worldwide, most UN member states have made strong progress on targets related to access to basic services and infrastructure, including mobile broadband use (SDG 9), access to electricity (SDG 7), internet use (SDG 9), under-five mortality rate (SDG 3) and neonatal mortality (SDG 3).
Five targets show significant reversals in progress since 2015. These are obesity rate (SDG 2), press freedom (SDG 16), sustainable nitrogen management (SDG 2), the Red List Index (SDG 15) and the Corruption Perceptions Index (SDG 16).
The report said the top three countries most committed to the UN multilateralism are Barbados (1), Jamaica (2) and Trinidad and Tobago (3).
Among G20 nations, Brazil (25) ranks highest, while Chile (7) leads among OECD countries.
The United States, which recently withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement and the World Health Organization (WHO) and formally declared its opposition to the SDGs and the 2030 Agenda, ranks last (193rd) for the second year in a row.
The report, which comes ahead of the 4th International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD4) in Seville, Spain, (June 30-July 3) noted the global financial architecture (GFA) is broken.
"Money flows readily to rich countries and not to the emerging and developing economies (EMDEs) that offer higher growth potential and rates of return. At the top of the agenda at FfD4 is the need to reform the GFA so that capital flows in far larger sums to the EMDEs," it said.
(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
an hour ago
- The Print
Why India needs to play hardball on UNSC reform
Efforts have been made in the past by the G4 nations—Germany, Japan, Brazil, and India—to become permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). But why would the five powers—China, France, Russia, the UK, and the US—would want to weaken themselves by accommodating the rising powers? China got into the Security Council, thanks to the Cold War, as the US wanted to poke Russia in the eye, and Russia, being a brother Communist nation, did not protest. China got Taiwan's seat in the UNSC after the latter was formally expelled from the UN in 1971. Ideally, India should have replaced the UK, seemingly the weakest member of the post-war permanent powers, but that didn't happen. Unlike in the past, where Indian diplomacy played a very small role in shaping institutions, this time we should be among the key rule-makers, and not just in name. The world order that emerged after World War 2 was largely influenced by America, and, to some extent, by Europe and Russia. Whether it is the United Nations, World Trade Organization, World Bank, or the International Monetary Fund, India does not significantly influence decisions of any of these bodies in any way, despite being the most populous country in the world, and, by some accounts, the fourth-largest economy. It wasn't only India that lost out. The two defeated nations in that war, Germany and Japan, despite becoming major powers a few decades later, did not get their due in the power structure either. In a crumbling world order, where the so-called rules-based institutions have been mangled out of shape by recalcitrant big powers, why shouldn't India take its own little hammer and knock some portions off the edifice? When a structure is creaking, isn't it better to accelerate its fall rather than seeking temporary shelter under it? While four of the five permanent members agree that India must join the UNSC, China has been against it. The US may not formally object, but is willing to let China be the bad guy in this case. Time to gatecrash When the powerful are not willing to open the gates for the deserving, it is time to gatecrash and make oneself heard. A few things can be done, one with the partners, and the other on our own. The G4 foreign ministers meeting, held at the margins of the 79th Session of the UN General Assembly in September last year, made another pitch for changes in the UNSC, both by expanding its permanent and rotating memberships. The appeal has, as always, fallen on deaf ears, as China has no interest in allowing India or Japan to join the league of permanent members. It is now time to start forcing the issue. But the question is how? Three things can be done fairly quickly, in sequence. One, a summit of the G4 prime ministers must endorse the call for UNSC reform and set a deadline for change in its structure, failing which they will act. It must force the P5 to listen and change. Two, to signal serious intent, secretariats for the G4 outlining UN reform can be created in Delhi and Bonn (Germany), with the purpose of engaging not only among themselves, but also to consult more members who want change. Pressure must be built to create a new charter for the UNSC, where it has wider powers to stop small wars and where no single power can veto action. A graded majority of veto-wielding powers would be needed to stop (or start) action. At least two of the five current members may object to that, but we must start piling the pressure on the P5. Three, even if it is not joined by the other three in the G4, India should prepare for unilateral action by saying that it will no longer be bound by UNSC decisions unless it is part of the process. This could, in fact, lead to temporary sanctions, but merely talking and doing nothing is not an option. The US imposed sanctions on India soon after the Pokhran 2 nuclear tests in 1998. But within a few years, it was forced to change course. Today, there is even less chance that the US or China can even jointly enforce any sanctions, given how poorly sanctions have worked against Iran and even Russia. Also read: No more lip service on UNSC reforms—it's time to form an implementation roadmap 'Netaji redux' Kishore Mahbubani, a former Singapore diplomat, who is usually an expert on Chinese affairs and critical of Western policies toward China, says that India can, and should, force the issue. He pointed out, in an interview with The Times of India last year, that the UNSC was forced to back off when unfair resolutions were imposed on Libya in 1998. When the Organisation of African Unity declined to accept it, the Council backtracked. 'The UNSC will also blink if India were to defy UN resolutions,' Mahbubani said. India needs to play hardball on UN reform from now on. Thanks to Donald Trump's shenanigans, where both friends and foes have been treated badly, and China's growing military power and dominance in manufacturing and tech economy, most countries feel threatened enough to seek change. Germany and Japan are remilitarising. They are looking beyond an unpredictable US to widen military cooperation and build economic partnerships that will gradually reduce over-dependence on China. India should be offering co-development, joint ownership, and even outright purchases of military and other equipment to force change. German and Japanese investments in India must be fast-tracked. Let's call this Netaji redux. In the 1940s, when India was still under British rule, Subhas Chandra Bose struck up links with Germany and Japan to help free India. It was doomed to fail, as it happened when the war was beginning to turn in favour of the Allies, and most Indian leaders balked at the idea of supporting warmongers like Hitler and Hideki Tojo. Today, neither Germany nor Japan, both solid democracies, belong in the 'League of the Bad'. It is time to rebuild this partnership for both defence and economic development. The G4 must rise for the P5 misrule, based purely on narrow interests, to end. R Jagannathan is the former editorial director, Swarajya magazine. He tweets @TheJaggi. Views are personal. (Edited by Aamaan Alam Khan)
Hans India
2 hours ago
- Hans India
AI set to transform retirement planning
ArtificialIntelligence, AI, the buzzword these days is seen as both blessing and anathema depending on how one would look at or use it. AI isn't just transforming or would be transforming how we work but also how we plan for retirement. The consensus is the disruption of traditional career paths. The earlier norm of working till 60 or 65, while accumulating a decent corpus to consume for the next 20 or 25 years is now defunct. The changing landscape on the work and career has deep impact on how we retire into the future. Job displacement at the initial stages is the biggest risk till adaptation gains ground. As job switches frequent, the continuity for investing for long could take a back seat. Also, fragmented careers could alter the proportion of savings towards short term to relatively higher levels than the current norm. This could increase the share of unproductive or underproductive savings particularly by those who're beginning their careers. With career path remaining hazy, the other goals could be either delayed or less prioritised, altering the whole financial planning. Another silent demographic revolution is the increased lifespan, thanks to the advancement inhealthcare and medicines. The current life expectancy of close to 71 is projected to reach over 75 by 2050 (UN). This could turn double whammy as retirement savings shrink pushing the retirement age further. Here, the blessings of AI could act in our favor. McKinsey estimates up to 30 per cent of tasks could be automated by 2030 which could allow us to free up time for pursuing interests, hobbies, etc. As AI automates the mundane activities, it could help individuals to focus more on human-centric skills like creativity, emotional intelligence, negotiations and leadership. The culture of gig-work could come in handy as many find ways to generate additional sources of income through these vocations and so the traditional retirement concept is broken, allowing to participate in semi-work force beyond the retirement age. This could mean fewer employer-sponsored retirement benefits, though the govt. is trying to adjust laws to the changing reality. Only 6 per cent of India's workforce has formal pension coverage (EPFO/NPS). Passive income through side hustles and freelancing now find more in priorities as we explore to diversify the income streams. A phased retirement where one could transition to part-time or consulting roles instead of full retirement is one solution. So, a more flexible approach to retirement helps rather than a fixated age-based approach. A 2023 PGIM MF study found that 72 per cent of the urban Indians fear outliving their savings. Maxing out on the tax-advantaged instruments like NPS, PPF, PF and other retirement-oriented solutions turns critical than ever, even as a higher proportion is locked for contingency. Use of some of these avenues especially to compensate for the lack of employer plans is essential now. Also, structuring the investments beyond the traditional markets i.e., alternatives could help along with an exposure to AI oriented businesses/stocks. With limited social security net, it's highly imperative for the current and next generations to build a formidable nest-egg to have a relaxed retirement. Even post-retirement savings or corpus management becomes crucial as avenues for senior citizens are limited. According to a Crisis study of '22, the average Indian's retirement corpus lasts 8-12 years post-retirement (assuming retirement at 60 and life expectancy of 70-75) A steep medical expense could devastate the entire retirement planning. Though, the govt. recently brought down the universal age for medical insurance cover, the extent of cover may not be sufficient. So, a proper health insurance should be availed at a younger age to gain the vintage (to cover preexisting diseases). While hope can't be a strategy, AI could possibly benefit us in reducing the health care costs. With urbanisation gaining momentum, assumption to have govt or family support is flawed. A self-reliant solution is the need of the hour. Be psychologically prepared that unlike our grandparents or many of our parents, a stable post-retirement income is difficult. The author is a partner with 'Wealocity Analytics', a SEBI registered Research Analyst firm and could be reached at [email protected]
India.com
3 hours ago
- India.com
Born After The War, Raised By Hope – Meet The World's Youngest Nations
New Delhi: A border gets redrawn. A flag goes up. A national anthem echoes for the first time. Somewhere, a country is born. In the last 30 years, the world has seen some of its most dramatic breakups, secessions and fresh starts. From Africa's red dust plains to the icy heart of the Balkans, people have stepped away from old empires, broken unions and fallen regimes. They chose something else. They chose their own flag. But who came last to the global family table? Here's a look at the youngest countries still carving their names into history: South Sudan (Born in 2011) A war-scarred land. Generations fought and bled for this piece of Africa. Then, in 2011, South Sudan stepped away from Sudan. Its people voted. The world watched. A new country took shape. Its journey? Still raw, still uncertain. But the flag flies. Kosovo (Born in 2008) Tanks rolled in the 90s. Bombs fell. Cities wept. Then came a slow and stubborn push for freedom. In 2008, Kosovo declared it. Serbia still disagrees. Some countries look the other way. But Kosovars vote, govern and call their soil their own. Montenegro (Born in 2006) A quiet vote. A clean split. Montenegro walked out of its union with Serbia without a shot fired. Coastal, proud and ancient, this small Balkan nation found its own rhythm and kept walking toward Europe. Timor-Leste (Born in 2002) An island with a history of foreign boots. First Portugal. Then Indonesia. Then the people said 'enough'. A referendum changed everything. In 2002, they stood free. Their past is jagged, but their resolve is firm. Serbia (Reborn in 2006) After Montenegro's exit, Serbia stood alone. Not new in spirit, but reborn in law. With deep roots and a complicated past, it remains both survivor and successor. Palau (Born in 1994) A Pacific paradise. Palau shook off its UN trusteeship and walked into the world on its own feet. The United States remains close, but the voice in international halls now belongs to Palau. Eritrea (Born in 1993) A bitter war. Years of silence. Then came independence. Eritrea broke away from Ethiopia with scars and pride. What followed has been difficult, but the flag remains a testament to the price paid. Slovakia (Born in 1993) No violence. No blood. Just a velvet goodbye. Slovakia parted ways with the Czech Republic and claimed its space. It grew fast, found its place in Europe and held its head high. Czech Republic (Born in 1993) From Bohemia to the present. The Czech Republic kept its elegance, its old-world charm and started again. A split without war. A transition with grace. Croatia (Born in 1991) The Adriatic coast trembled. Then it burned. Croatia fought for every inch. It bled for sovereignty. Years later, it found peace. Today, it stands proud, a European nation with salt in its air and steel in its spine. Nations don't come into the world gently. Each one here was born from friction – war, votes or weariness. They chose identity over comfort. They picked their flag and faced the consequences. They may be young. But they are real. They are sovereign. They are home to millions who refused to stay voiceless.
