The Global Justice Index Report 2022 provides comprehensive data on global justice across 10 key issue areas, guiding international efforts for a more equitable world.

What does the Global Justice Index Report say?

The Global Justice Index Report 2022 provides comprehensive data on global justice across 10 key issue areas, guiding international efforts for a more equitable world.

Global Justice Index (GJI) is a multiyear research project founded as a director’s strategic initiative of the Fudan Institute for Advanced Study in Social Sciences to “conceptualize and measure each country’s contribution to achieving greater global justice across the world.”

GJI Report has been published annually by Chinese Political Science Review under Springer Nature since 2019. Based on its conceptualization and measurement of global justice, Global Justice Index Report currently provides data on ten dimensions of global justice and quantitatively measures the performance and contribution of nation-states around the world in ten issue areas: (1) climate change (global warming), (2) peacekeeping, (3) humanitarian aid, (4) terrorism and armed conflicts, (5) cross-national criminal police cooperation, (6) refugees, (7) anti-poverty, (8) education, (9) public health, and (10) the protection of women and children


Firstly, the conceptualization of global justice synthesizes multiple theories and intellectual traditions from different social, cultural, and political contexts. We recognize three main approaches—rights-based, goods-based, and virtue-based—as the foundation for a coherent theoretical framework with a normative basis for measurement. A rights-based approach focuses on the principles, rules, and sources of legitimacy. A goods-based approach concentrates on the material and institutional support provided by governments or institutions.

A virtue-based approach considers justice to be something an individual must pursue rather than comply with. The relationship between these three is interdependent, forming one holistic whole. They all work together as follows: the rights-based conceptualization provides the basic structure (the bones), the goods-based conceptualization provides substantial material support (the muscles), and the virtue-focused conceptualization provides personal motivation and internalized willingness (the heart).

Gloabl Justics Index provides comprehensive data on global justice and quantitatively measures nation-states’ contribution to global justice across 10 key issue areas, guiding international efforts for a more just and equitable world.

Sujian Guo

Evaluative principles

Secondly, based on the above theoretical framework, the report proposes two evaluative principles to better understand and justify the selection of issue areas for evaluation. These are Common but Differentiated and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC) and Cosmopolitan but Due-diligent Responsibilities (CDDR). CBDR-RC addresses the issues “for which no single nation-state can be held directly accountable or responsible, matters that can only be tackled through the globally concerted efforts of all stakeholders.” For example, issues such as climate change require a collective effort on the part of all countries to be adequately addressed, and this effort cannot be undertaken by one nation alone.

The second principle, CDDR, asserts that “all-nation-states are morally obligated to provide cosmopolitan aid, in which context the least advantaged will have a due-diligent responsibility.” This principle is based on the concept of mutual accountability as proposed in the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, adopted in 2005 at the Second High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness to promote better cooperation between actors in aid and development. According to this principle, anti-poverty and education policies are part of domestic affairs, and nation-states are expected to provide material and institutional assistance to their citizenry within their territories. Approximately 100 indicators from international organizations, including the United Nations, World Bank, and WHO, are used to assess countries’ performances and contributions in these areas.

Rankings of the Global Justice Index

Figure 1. Ranking of the Global Justice Index
Credit. Author

 Table 1. Global justice index (including all 10 issues)

Country RankingCountry Ranking
United States of America1Thailand32
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland4Iceland35
Switzerland13South Africa44
Russian Federation18Ecuador49
Republic of Korea23Estonia54
Greece24Iran (Islamic Republic of)55
Egypt29Sri Lanka60
Indonesia30Viet Nam61

Lastly, based on these evaluations, the report generates a Global Justice Index, ranking countries’ performances and contributions in global justice and providing regional comparisons for Asia, Europe, North America, Latin America, Africa, and Oceania. In the Global Justice Index for all the 10 issue areas, the top 10 countries, in order, are the United States, China, Germany, the United Kingdom, Sweden, France, Canada, Italy, Brazil, and India, which are closely followed by Finland, Norway, and Switzerland.

The list has not changed much from 2019, except for the obvious rises in the rankings of Brazil and India. India’s ranking in the top 10 is driven primarily by its excellent performance in the issue areas of terrorism and armed conflict (due to the latest peace agreements), poverty governance, and climate change in 2020. Brazil’s rise in the ranking can largely be attributed to its progress in the areas of humanitarian aid and refugee governance. This is reflected in the growing activism of developing powers to take on the shared responsibility of global justice. The overall performance of top-ranked countries in the 10 issue areas is outstanding and sustainable, significantly enhancing global justice.

The findings reveal a strong correlation among countries’ economic performance, population size, and their rankings on the global justice index. This correlation is closely tied to their outstanding performance in issue areas related to the CDDR principle. In other words, developed countries have the capacity to provide public goods to their citizens that exceed the global average, such as education, public health, protection of women and children, and poverty reduction. They also have the ability to participate in international affairs related to the CBDR-RC principle, such as climate change, peacekeeping, humanitarian aid, terrorism, armed conflict, and cross-national criminal police cooperation.


In conclusion, the Global Justice Index Report 2022 is a valuable tool for international organizations, decision-makers, researchers, and advocates. The report aims to foster dialogue and inspire action to create a more just and equitable world, deepen our understanding of the complex nature of global justice, and emphasize the need for collaborative efforts. The findings encourage nation-states to prioritize global justice, strengthen cooperation, and work towards achieving a more just and sustainable future for all.

The most recent performance and contribution of nation-states in global justice across 10 key issue areas can serve as a call to action, urging nation-states to pay additional attention to global justice and undertake due diligence obligations by putting aside their differences, ending their self-serving political agenda, and engaging in more international and regional collaborations.


Journal reference

Gu, Y., Guo, S., Qin, X., Qu, W., Wang, Z., & Zhang, T. (2023). Global justice index report 2022. Chinese Political Science Review, 1-107.

Sujian Guo (Ph.D. in Political Science) is an Honorary Professor at the Fudan Institute for Advanced Study in Social Sciences. He serves as the Principal Investigator of the Global Justice Index and as a Professor of Political Science at San Francisco State University. Formerly, he held the position of President at the Association of Chinese Political Studies and currently serves as the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Chinese Political Science, the Journal of Chinese Governance, the Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, and the Chinese Political Science Review. His research areas encompass comparative politics and Chinese politics, comparative political economy, sustainable energy and environment, and democratic transition. With over 80 academic journal articles published, he has also authored and edited nearly 40 books.