These rankings aggregate the data from virtually all the prominent indexes. As far as I know, this is the only site on the web that surveys so many indexes. I present my conclusions at the end of this post.

Let me say first that the question “what countries are objectively best?” is relatively easy to answer. Most would agree that such countries, among other things, guard personal safety and allow free expression, provide quality health care, economic prosperity, clean air and water, good education and a fair justice system, have minimal government corruption, respect the rule of law, etc.

The question “which country is best for me?” is a more difficult one. Do you prefer a country where your family lives, where a specific language is spoken or one with certain geography or climate? Do you want to live in the countries most immune from climate change, most likely to survive a nuclear war or one with a low cost of living? Given such subjective concerns, we can’t say definitely which country is best for an individual.

1)  The UN Human Development Index

(The best countries are in dark green)

The United Nations HDI considers three dimensions: 1) health – assessed by life expectancy at birth, 2) education – measured by mean of years of schooling for adults and expected years of schooling for children entering school, and 3) wealth – measured by gross national income per capita. The major flaw of this index is that it focuses on only three measures and it doesn’t consider inequality in how these dimensions are distributed. According to the 2018 HDI the top countries were:

1. Norway 2. Switzerland 3. Australia 4. Ireland 5. Germany
6. Iceland 7. Hong Kong 7. Sweden 9. Singapore 10. Netherlands
11. Denmark 12. Canada 13. USA 14. UK 15. New Zealand
16. Finland 17. Belgium 17. Liechtenstein 19. Japan 20. Austria
21. Luxembourg  22. Israel 23. South Korea 23. France 25. Slovenia

In response to the claim that the HDI doesn’t take into account the unequal distribution of health, education, and wealth in a country the United Nations introduced:

2) The UN Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index

(The best countries are in dark green)

The UN states: “The IHDI combines a country’s average achievements in health, education, and income with how those achievements are distributed among country’s population by “discounting” each dimension’s average value according to its level of inequality.” The main deficiency of the index is that it still only uses three categories. Nonetheless, in my view, it is a better measurement than the HDI. Surely you would prefer a country with little inequality and a strong social safety net to one in which you might be either extraordinarily rich or extraordinarily poor. (For more see, John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice.)  According to the 2018 IHDI, the top countries were:

1. Iceland 2. Japan 2. Norway 4. Switzerland 5. Finland
6. Sweden 7. Australia 7. Germany 9. Denmark 10. Netherlands
11. Ireland 12. Canada. 13. New Zealand 13. Slovenia 15. Check Republic
16. Belgium 17. Austria 17. UK 19. Singapore 20. Luxembourg
21. Hong Kong 22. France 23. Malta 24. Slovakia 24. USA

3) The Social Progress Index

The index of the Social Progress Imperative defines “social progress as the capacity of a society to meet the basic human needs of its citizens, establish the building blocks that allow citizens and communities to enhance and sustain the quality of their lives, and create the conditions for all individuals to reach their full potential.” (This definition reminds me of Aristotle’s idea of what good governments do.)

This is one of the most detailed indexes. Social Progress Imperative evaluated hundreds of possible indicators while developing the Social Progress Index, including engaging researchers at MIT to determine what indicators best differentiated the performance of nations. The index combines three basic dimensions each with four components,

1. Basic human needs – 1) nutrition and basic medical care, 2) water and sanitation, 3) shelter, and 4) personal safety. Do people have enough food to eat and are they receiving basic medical care? Can people drink clean water and keep themselves clean without getting sick? Do people have adequate housing and utilities? Do people feel safe?

2. Foundations of well-being – 1) access to basic knowledge, 2) access to information and communication, 3) health and wellness, and 4) environmental quality. Do people have access to an educational foundation? Can people freely access ideas and information from anywhere around the world? Do people live long and healthy lives? Is society using its basic resources so that they will be available to future generations?

3. Opportunity – 1) personal rights, 2) personal freedom and choice, 3) inclusiveness, and 4) access to advanced education. Are people’s rights as individuals protected? Are people free to make their own life choices? Is no one excluded from the opportunity to be a contributing member of society? Do people have access to the world’s most advanced knowledge?

Each component was then measured by three to five specific outcome indicators. This index offers one of the most comprehensive determinations of how well societies promote the flourishing of their citizens. According to the 2019 index, the top countries were:

1. Norway 2. Iceland 3. Switzerland 4. Denmark 5. Finland
6. Japan 7. Netherlands 8. Luxembourg 9. Germany 10. New Zealand
11. Sweden 12. Ireland 13. UK 14. Canada 15. Australia
16. France 17. Belgium 18. South Korea 19. Spain 20. Austria
21. Italy 22. Slovenia 23. Singapore. 24. Portugal 25. USA

4) The Legatum Prosperity Index

(The best countries are in the darker green)

The Legatum Institute is a London-based think-tank whose index “is a framework that assesses countries on the promotion of their citizens’ flourishing, reflecting both wealth and wellbeing. It captures the richness of a truly prosperous life, moving beyond traditional macro-economic measurements of a nation’s prosperity, which rely solely on indicators of wealth such as average income per person …” This too is an excellent assessment.

The criteria used by the LPI are: 1) Economic Quality, 2) Business Environment, 3) Governance, 4) Education, 5) Health, 6) Safety & Security, 7) Personal Freedom, 8) Social Capital, and 9) Natural Environment. According to its 2018 index, the top countries were:

1. Norway 2. New Zealand 3. Finland 4. Switzerland 5. Denmark
6. Sweden 7. UK 8. Canada 9. Netherlands 10. Ireland
11. Iceland 12. Luxembourg 13. Australia 14. Germany 15. Austria
16. Belgium 17. USA 18. Slovenia 19. Malta 20. France
21. Singapore 22. Hong Kong 23. Japan 24. Portugal 25. Spain

5) The Corruption Perceptions Index

(The best countries are in the darker blue)

This index, published annually since 1995 by Transparency International, ranks countries “by their perceived levels of public level corruption, as determined by expert assessments and opinion surveys.” The Corruption Perceptions Index defines corruption as “the misuse of public power for private benefit”. This index is excellent because it recognizes that higher levels of government corruption decrease the possibility of living well. Here are their 2018 rankings:

1. Denmark 2. New Zealand 3. Finland 3. Sweden 3. Switzerland
3. Singapore 7. Norway 8. Netherlands 9. Canada 9. Luxembourg
11. Germany 11. UK 13. Australia 13. Iceland 13. Hong Kong
13. Austria 17. Belgium 18. Ireland 18. Japan 18. Estonia
21. France 22. USA 23. Uruguay 23. UAE 25. Bhutan

6) The Global Peace Index 

(The best countries are in dark green)

The Global Peace Index measures and ranks 163 independent states and territories according to their levels of peacefulness. It investigates the extent to which countries are involved in ongoing domestic and international conflicts. The assertion is that low crime rates, minimal incidences of terrorist acts and violent demonstrations, harmonious relations with neighboring countries, a stable political scene, and a small proportion of the population that are internally displaced or refugees can be suggestive of peacefulness.

In 2017, 23 indicators, reviewed annually by a panel of experts, were used to establish each country’s peacefulness score. In addition to the ones mentioned above, this index includes indicators such as: 1) military expenditures as a percentage of GDP, 2) the number of military personnel as a percentage of the population, 3) nuclear weapons capability, 4) volume of arms exports and imports of weapons per capita, and 5) ease of access to small arms. The index provides an excellent assessment of a country’s peacefulness. Here are the top countries in their 2019 rankings.

1. Iceland  2. New Zealand 3. Portugal 4. Austria  5. Denmark
6. Canada Sweden 7. Singapore UK 8. Slovenia 9. Japan 10. Switzerland
11. The Czech Republic  12. Ireland 13. Australia 14. Finland 15. Bhutan
16. Malaysia 17. Netherlands 18. Belgium 18. Sweden 20. Norway
21. Hungary 22. Germany 23. Slovakia 24.Romania 25. Mauritius

(The USA ranks 128^th. Israel ranks 146^th.)

7) The UN World Happiness Report

10) Press Freedom Index

The Press Freedom Index is an annual ranking of countries compiled and published by Reporters Without Borders based upon the organization’s own assessment of the countries’ press freedom records in the previous year. It intends to reflect the degree of freedom that journalists, news organizations, and netizens have in each country, and the efforts made by authorities to respect this freedom. Having a free press to expose government corruption and ensure the free flow of ideas is obviously crucial to have a good society.

1. Norway 2. Finland 3. Sweden 4. Netherlands 5. Denmark
6. Switzerland 7. New Zealand 8. Jamaica 9. Belgium 10. Costa Rica
11. Estonia 12. Portugal 13. Germany 14. Iceland 15. Ireland
16. Austria 17. Luxembourg 18. Canada 19. Uruguay South 20. Suriname
21. Australia 22. American Somoa 23. Namibia 24. Latvia 25. Cape Verde

11) Notre Dame Global Adaptation Initiative

The ND-GAIN Country Index is a measurement tool that helps governments, businesses, and communities examine risks exacerbated by climate change, such as over-crowding, food insecurity, inadequate infrastructure, and civil conflicts. Free and open-source, the Country Index uses 20 years of data across 45 indicators to rank 181 countries annually based on their level of vulnerability, and their readiness to successfully implement adaptation solutions. An array of analytic tools allows users to examine trends, play out scenarios, and investigate components over time. This may be the most important index of all. Here is their 2019 list.

1.Norway 2. New Zealand 3. Finland 4. Sweden 5. Australia
6. Switzerland 7. Denmark 8. Austria 9. Germany 9. Iceland
9. Singapore 12. UK 13. Canada 14. Luxembourg 15. USA
16. South Korea 17. France 18. Netherlands 19. Slovenia 20. Japan
21. Ireland 22. The Czech Republic 23. Poland 24. Spain 25. Estonia

12) Freedom House (Global Freedom Scores)

Freedom House works to defend human rights and promote democratic change, with a focus on political rights and civil liberties. Their Global Freedom Scores rates people’s access to political rights and civil liberties—ranging from the right to vote to freedom of expression and equality before the law— in 210 countries and territories through its annual Freedom in the World  Report. Here are the top countries in the 2020 rankings.

1. Finland 1. Norway 1. Sweden 4. Netherlands 5. Luxembourg
5. Uruguay 5. Canada 8. Denmark 8. Australia 8. Ireland
8. New Zealand 12. Switzerland 12. Japan 12. Belgium 12. Portugal
16. San Marino 16. Barbados 18. Slovenia 18. Germany 18. Cyprus
18. Iceland 18. UK 18. Andorra 18. Estonia 25. Austria

13) OECD Better Life Index

The OECD Better Life Index was developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The recommendations made by this Commission sought to address concerns that standard macroeconomic statistics like GDP failed to give a true account of people’s current and future well-being.

A major problem with this index is that it omits dimensions like free speech, poverty, economic inequality, access to health insurance, and pollution. The other issue is that it covers only 40 countries making it the most incomplete index. While this has little effect on the top 15 or so countries—who probably would have been high there regardless—it elevates other countries into the top 40 simply because they were among the few considered. Here are their 2017 rankings:

1. Norway 2. Australia 3. Iceland 4. Canada 5. Denmark
6. Switzerland 7. Netherlands 8. Sweden 9. Finland 10. USA
11. Luxembourg 12. New Zealand 13. Belgium 14. UK 15. Germany
16. Ireland 17. Austria 18. France 19. Spain 20. Slovenia
21. Estonia 22. The Czech Republic 23. Israel 24. Italy 25. Japan

14) The Human Life Indicator HLI

This indicator also addresses deficiencies in the HDI. It “looks at life expectancy at birth but also takes the inequality in longevity into account. If two countries had the same life expectancy, the country with the higher rate of infant and child deaths would have a lower HLI.” Its main deficiency is the index’s use of longevity as the sole component for its rankings. Measuring countries on a single criterion skew the rankings of individual countries compared to other indexes. Here is its 2018 list:

1. Hong Kong 2. Japan 3. Iceland 4. Singapore 5. Spain
6. Italy 7. Switzerland 8. Sweden 9. Norway 10. Australia
11. Israel 12. France 13. Netherlands 14. South Korea 15. Luxembourg
16. Finland 17. Canada 18. Austria 19. Ireland 20. Slovenia
21. New Zealand 22. UK 23. Germany 24. Belgium 25. Denmark

15) US News & World Report Best Countries to Live In 

In my opinion, this is the worst index. It’s both incomplete, considering only 80 countries, and considers categories not used in any other indexes such as:

UR = Unrated

Further remarks

1. If you don’t see your country on the list it’s because I focused on the top 30 or 40 countries and then added a few more select ones for comparison. In addition, for some very small countries, like Andorra and Liechtenstein, I couldn’t find enough data.

2. Obviously, these rankings are subject to continual change. If the UK leaves the European Union, (Brexit), or if the USA continues on its present course of undermining democracy and the rule of law their rankings will go down considerably. On the other hand, some countries may become more prosperous or peaceful and move up in the rankings.

3. Don’t place too much confidence that the 1^st ranked country is better than 2^nd which is better than the 3^rd and so on. This is because the indexes disagree on exactly which evaluative criteria should be used and the relative weight given to them. But you can be relatively confident the 5^th ranked country is better than the 15^th, or that the 25^th is better than the 35^th. Overall, the rankings paint a good picture of the various countries.

4. One can quibble with the methodology of the individual indexes themselves. However, for the most part, they measure objective factors like longevity, per capita income, levels of education, and have teams of researchers analyzing data. Furthermore, since the same countries do well or poorly in all or most of them, we can be relatively confident that the rankings provide a good way to measure countries.

5. Remember that the average rating for a country is an amalgam of many (often quite different) places in that country. For example, the ranking of the USA includes exclusive, prosperous suburbs and poverty-stricken ghettos—which often coexist in the same metropolitan areas. Obviously, the quality of life in these places varies significantly.

6. Moreover, in the USA for example, there is a vast difference between living in rural Louisiana, Mississippi, or Oklahoma compared to living in New York, Boston, San Francisco, or Seattle. These differences are especially significant for countries with vast economic inequality like the USA. They would also be significant for geographically large countries like Canada where the difference between living in Vancouver or Toronto is so dissimilar from living in the Yukon. The above suggests that perhaps city rankings would be better than country rankings, especially for large, populous countries like the USA. Of course, even in cities, the quality of life would depend on different neighborhoods within that city.

7. We could go even further and claim that your quality of one’s life depends, in large part, on who you are. Thus the adage “wherever you go, there you are.” This explains why some rich and powerful persons are miserable, while others with far lesser means are content. It also explains the phenomena of people being unhappy while vacationing in exotic locales. They are miserable or happy there because they took their own psyches with them.

8. Of course, I don’t mean to imply that the quality of your life is entirely up to you. In some places in the world it would be impossible to live well—places where you don’t have access to food or fresh water, you are incarcerated unjustly, can’t receive an education, have no access to health care, etc. Other places—the top-rated countries above—provide the conditions under which their citizens can flourish. Thus the value of ranking countries.

9. To reiterate, your own rankings would combine consideration of the objective criteria above with the subjective criteria that matter to you. So the rankings provide, as far as possible, an objective foundation as a starting point for your consideration.

10. In conclusion, if you have the opportunity and desire to move to a better country than you live in now, you should probably do it. Hopefully, the planet itself won’t be rendered uninhabitable from a runaway greenhouse effect, nuclear holocaust, pandemics, or other existential threats. Let us hope that the future will indeed be better than the past.

Final Thoughts/ Food For Thought

The characteristics that the very best countries share, among other things, are: relatively low populations (most have less than 10 million); a sustained governmental effort to provide clean air and water and fight climate change; relatively limited economic inequality; strong social safety nets, including universal healthcare; respect for individual rights, the United Nations, a free press, democracy, and the rule of law; and, for the most part, few firearms and relatively little religious belief. 

Liked it? Take a second to support Dr John Messerly on Patreon!