↑ Scroll to top

Human Development Report 2013

Published: March 14, 2013 | 4:21 pm
Text size: -A +A

The Rise of the South:

Human Progress in a Diverse World

Explanatory note on 2013 HDR composite indices


HDI values and rank changes in the 2013 Human Development Report


The 2013 Human Development Report presents Human Development Index (HDI) values and ranks for 187 countries and UN-recognized territories, along with the Inequality-adjusted HDI for 132 countries, the Gender Inequality Index for 148 countries, and the Multidimensional Poverty Index for 104 countries.

Country rankings and values in the annual Human Development Index (HDI) are kept under strict embargo until the global launch and worldwide electronic release of the Human Development Report.

It is misleading to compare values and rankings with those of previously published reports, because the underlying data and methods have changed. Readers are advised in the Report to assess progress in HDI values by referring to table 2 (‘Human Development Index Trends’) in the Statistical Annex of the report. Table 2 is based on consistent indicators, methodology and time-series data and thus shows real changes in values and ranks over time reflecting the actual progress countries have made. Caution is requested when interpreting small changes in values because they may not be statistically significant due to the sampling variation. Generally speaking, changes in third decimal of all composite indices are considered insignificant.

For further details on how each index is calculated please refer to Technical Notes 1-4 and the associated background papers available on the Human Development Report website.

Human Development Index (HDI)

The HDI is a summary measure for assessing long-term progress in three basic dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, access to knowledge and a decent standard of living. As in the 2011 HDR a long and healthy life is measured by life expectancy. Access to knowledge is measured by: i) mean years of schooling for the adult population, which is the average number of years of education received in a life-time by people aged 25 years and older; and ii) expected years of schooling for children of school-entrance age, which is the total number of years of schooling a child of school-entrance age can expect to receive if prevailing patterns of age-specific enrolment rates stay the same throughout the child’s life. Standard of living is measured by Gross National Income (GNI) per capita expressed in constant 2005 international dollars converted using purchasing power parity (PPP) rates.

To ensure as much cross-country comparability as possible, the HDI is based primarily on international data from the United Nations Population Division, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Institute for Statistics (UIS) and the World Bank. As stated in the introduction, the HDI values and ranks in this year’s report are not comparable to those in past reports (including the 2011 HDR) because of a number of revisions done to the component indicators by the mandated agencies. To allow for assessment of progress in HDIs, the 2013 report includes recalculated HDIs from 1980 to 2012.

Georgia’s HDI value and rank

Georgia’s HDI value for 2012 is 0.745—in the high human development category—positioning the country at 72 out of 187 countries and territories. The rank is shared with Dominica, Lebanon and Saint Kitts and Nevis. Between 2005 and 2012, Georgia’s HDI value increased from 0.713 to 0.745, an increase of 5 percent or average annual increase of about 0.6 percent.

The rank of Georgia’s HDI for 2011 based on data available in 2012 and methods used in 2012 was– 75 out of 187 countries. In the 2011 HDR, Georgia was ranked 75 out of 187 countries. However, it is misleading to compare values and rankings with those of previously published reports, because the underlying data and methods have changed.

Table A reviews Georgia’s progress in each of the HDI indicators. Between 1980 and 2012, Georgia’s life expectancy at birth increased by 4.2 years and expected years of schooling increased by 0.3 years. Mean years of schooling was estimated from the UNICEF’s 2005 MICS. Georgia’s GNI per capita decreased by about 27 percent between 1980 and 2012.

Table A: Georgia’s HDI trends based on consistent time series data, new component indicators and new methodology

Life expectancy at birth Expected years of schooling Mean years of schooling GNI per capita (2005 PPP$) HDI value
1980 69.7 12.9   6,849  
1985 70 12.9   8,136  
1990 70.5 12.9   6,134  
1995 70.7 10.9   1,684  
2000 71.8 11.7   2,604  
2005 72.8 12.5 12.1 3,650 0.713
2010 73.5 13.2 12.1 4,460 0.735
2011 73.7 13.2 12.1 4,727 0.740
2012 73.9 13.2 12.1 5,005 0.745

Figure 1 below shows the contribution of each component index to Georgia’s HDI since 2005.

Assessing progress relative to other countries

Long-term progress can be usefully assessed relative to other countries–both in terms of geographical location and HDI value. For instance, during the period between 2005 and 2012 Georgia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Ukraine experienced different degrees of progress toward increasing their HDIs (see figure 2).

Figure 2: Trends in Georgia’s HDI 2005-2012

Georgia’s 2012 HDI of 0.745 is below the average of 0.758 for countries in the high human development group and below the average of 0.771 for countries in Europe and Central Asia. From Europe and Central Asia, countries which are close to Georgia in 2012 HDI rank and population size are Bosnia and Herzegovina and Armenia, which have HDIs ranked 81 and 87 respectively (see table B).


Table B:  Georgia’s HDI indicators for 2012 relative to selected countries and groups

HDI value HDI rank Life expectancy at birth Expected years of schooling Mean years of schooling GNI per capita (PPP US$)
Georgia 0.745 72 73.9 13.2 12.1 5,005
Bosnia and Herzegovina 0.735 81 75.8 13.4 8.3 7,713
Armenia 0.729 87 74.4 12.2 10.8 5,540
Europe and Central Asia 0.771 71.5 13.7 10.4 12,243
High HDI 0.758 73.4 13.9 8.8 11,501

Inequality-adjusted HDI (IHDI)

The HDI is an average measure of basic human development achievements in a country. Like all averages, the HDI masks inequality in the distribution of human development across the population at the country level. The 2010 HDR introduced the Inequality Adjusted HDI (IHDI), which takes into account inequality in all three dimensions of the HDI by ‘discounting’ each dimension’s average value according to its level of inequality. The HDI can be viewed as an index of ‘potential’ human development and the IHDI as an index of actual human development. The ‘loss’ in potential human development due to inequality is given by the difference between the HDI and the IHDI, and can be expressed as a percentage. (For more details see technical note 2).

Georgia’s HDI for 2012 is 0.745. However, when the value is discounted for inequality, the HDI falls to 0.631, a loss of 15.3 percent due to inequality in the distribution of the dimension indices. Bosnia and Herzegovina and Armenia, show losses due to inequality of 11.5 percent and 10.9 percent respectively. The average loss due to inequality for high HDI countries is 20.6 percent and for Europe and Central Asia it is 12.9 percent.


Table C:  Georgia’s IHDI for 2012 relative to selected countries and groups

IHDI value Overall Loss (%) Loss due to inequality in life expectancy at birth (%) Loss due to inequality in education (%) Loss due to inequality in income (%)
Georgia 0.631 15.3 15.1 3.3 25.9
Bosnia and Herzegovina 0.65 11.5 9.6 5.2 19.2
Armenia 0.649 10.9 14.9 3.7 13.9
Europe and Central Asia 0.672 12.9 11.7 10.5 16.3
High HDI 0.602 20.6 12.4 19.9 28.6

Gender Inequality Index (GII)

The Gender Inequality Index (GII) reflects gender-based inequalities in three dimensions – reproductive health, empowerment, and economic activity. Reproductive health is measured by maternal mortality and adolescent fertility rates; empowerment is measured by the share of parliamentary seats held by each gender and attainment at secondary and higher education by each gender; and economic activity is measured by the labour market participation rate for each gender. The GII replaced the previous Gender-related Development Index and Gender Empowerment Index. The GII shows the loss in human development due to inequality between female and male achievements in the three GII dimensions. (For more details on GII please see Technical note 3 in the Statistics Annex).


Georgia has a GII value of 0.438, ranking it 81 out of 148 countries in the 2012 index. In Georgia, 6.6 percent of parliamentary seats are held by women, and 89.7 percent of adult women have reached a secondary or higher level of education compared to 92.7 percent of their male counterparts. For every 100,000 live births, 67 women die from pregnancy related causes; and the adolescent fertility rate is 39.5 births per 1000 live births. Female participation in the labour market is 55.8 percent compared to 74.2 for men.


In comparison Armenia is ranked at 59 on this index.


Table D:  Georgia’s GII for 2012 relative to selected countries and groups

GII value GII Rank Maternal mortality ratio Adolescent fertility rate Female seats in parliament (%) Population with at least secondary education (%) Labour force participation rate (%)
Female Male Female Male
Georgia 0.438 81 67 39.5 6.6 89.7 92.7 55.8 74.2
Armenia 0.34 59 30 33.2 10.7 94.1 94.8 49.4 70.2
Europe and Central Asia 0.28 28 23.1 16.7 81.4 85.8 49.6 69
High HDI 0.376 47 45.9 18.5 62.9 65.2 46.8 75.3

Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI)

The 2010 HDR introduced the Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI), which identifies multiple deprivations in the same households in education, health and standard of living. The education and health dimensions are based on two indicators each while the standard of living dimension is based on six indicators. All of the indicators needed to construct the MPI for a household are taken from the same household survey. The indicators are weighted, and the deprivation scores are computed for each household in the survey. A cut-off of 33.3 percent, which is the equivalent of one-third of the weighted indicators, is used to distinguish between the poor and nonpoor. If the household deprivation score is 33.3 percent or greater, that household (and everyone in it) is multidimensionally poor. Households with a deprivation score greater than or equal to 20 percent but less than 33.3 percent are vulnerable to or at risk of becoming multidimensionally poor.


The most recent survey data available for estimating MPI figures for Georgia were collected in 2005. In Georgia 0.8 percent of the population lived in multidimensional poverty (the MPI ‘head count’) while an additional 5.3 percent were vulnerable to multiple deprivations. The intensity of deprivation – that is, the average percentage of deprivation experienced by people living in multidimensional poverty – in Georgia was 35.2 percent. The country’s MPI value, which is the share of the population that is multi-dimensionally poor adjusted by the intensity of the deprivations, was 0.003. Bosnia and Herzegovina and Armenia had MPI values of 0.003 and 0.001 respectively.


Table E compares income poverty, measured by the percentage of the population living below PPP US$1.25 per day, and multidimensional deprivations in Georgia. It shows that income poverty only tells part of the story. The multidimensional poverty headcount is 14.5 percentage points lower than income poverty. This implies that individuals living below the income poverty line may have access to non-income resources. Table E also shows the percentage of Georgia’s population that live in severe poverty (deprivation score is 50 percent or more) and that are vulnerable to poverty (deprivation score between 20 and 30 percent). The contributions of deprivations in each dimension to overall poverty complete a comprehensive picture of people living in poverty in Georgia. Figures for Bosnia and Herzegovina and Armenia are also shown in the table for comparison.

Table E:  The most recent MPI figures for Georgia relative to selected countries

Survey year MPI value Headcount (%) Intensity of deprivation (%) Population Contribution to overall poverty of deprivations in
Vulnerable to poverty (%) In severe poverty (%) Below income poverty line (%) Health Education Living Standards
Georgia 2005 0.003 0.8 35.2 5.3 0 15.3 33.8 23.2 43
Bosnia and Herzegovina 2006 0.003 0.8 37.2 7 0.1 0 51.8 29.2 19
Armenia 2010 0.001 0.3 35.2 3 0 1.3 64.8 25.8 9.4
VN:F [1.9.10_1130]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
More posts in category: Azerbaijan,Local Business News
  • Georgian Billionaire to Look at State Expenditures
  • Prime Minister of Georgia Visited the Avchala Refrigeration System
  • Bank of Georgia further Strengthens Its Management Team
  • Trade Mission from Belgium and Netherlands Visited Georgia