Global Justice Index Report 2020

Abstract

The Global Justice Index is a multiyear research project conducted at the Fudan-IAS to conceptualize and measure each country’s contribution to achieving greater global justice. In 2019, we completed our research project on first-year achievements, with the rankings of nation-states at the global level based on data from 2010 to 2017. This was published titled the “Global Justice Index Report” in Chinese Political Science Review (Vol. 5, No. 3, 2020). The “Global Justice Index Report 2020” is the second annual report based on our work analyzing data from 2010 to 2018, which was concluded in 2020. In order to better measure each country’s performance and contribution to achieving greater global justice, compared to the first edition published in 2020, we have improved the model, added the refugee issue to expand the issue areas to 10, and added new indicators, regional analysis and comparison in this report. The report comprises five main sections. In the introduction, we discuss the development of the conceptual framework and evaluative principles to justify our selection of dimensions and indicators for measurement. Next, in the section of methodology, we discuss the production, normalization, and aggregation of the raw data and the generation of the final results. In the findings section, we report the data, indicators and our results for the ten issues, and provide regional comparisons. And then, in the following section we present the main results, and report the ranking of each country’s contribution to achieving greater global justice. In the final section, we discuss the applications and limitations of the index, and its potential further research trajectories.

China’s Rise as an Advanced Technological Society and the Rise of Digital Orientalism

“…The concern that China aims to take over the world, and so on, seems little more than a hyperbolic speaking point belabored endlessly as the new Red Scare rhetoric, girding decoupling. In fact, despite mounting empirical evidence that China is a major contributor to global justice [23], a more dangerous concern at present is that China might choose to decouple itself. It's not farfetched to suggest that we may have reached an inflection point, one in which China increasingly views the world outside its borders as ungovernable.…”

Scientific Denialism during the Covid-19 Pandemic: Science, Policy and Ethics

“…In addition, it is necessary to raise awareness among scientists of the importance of the ethics of scientific research, which is essential to its quality; to promote ethical conduct in all phases of the research; to adopt suitable tools for the preliminary identification of ethical issues in order to ensure respect for human rights and the biological ecosystem of Planet Earth; to safeguard and promote the autonomy and political and economic independence of scientific research; and to facilitate the dissemination and interpretation of scientific results among the wider public (Gu, Qin, Wang, Zhang, & Guo, 2021).…”

Forging a New Security Order in Eurasia: China, the SCO, and the Impacts on Regional Governance

“…The emerging gap between existing institutional structures and changing power distribution can result in contested multilateralism, which describes strategies pursued by states or, increasingly also non-state actors designed either to seek changes within institutional arrangements or set up alternative institutions to address specific issues (Morse and Keohane 2014;Zürn 2018;Lisk and Šehović 2020;Ullah et al 2021). Since the 2007-2008 global financial crisis (GFC), governance issues have become ever more important in terms of coordinating global (and also regional) issues and challenges through multilateral efforts that engage and bring in emerging powers to allow them a say in recognition of their growing power, as well as to address normative questions of the what and how of governance (Gu et al 2021;Tsingou 2020;Breslin 2020;Deciancio and Tussie 2020). One key motivation in engaging in contested multilateralism is the dissatisfaction with the presence or the lack thereof, the ability, and the willingness of existing institutional arrangements to address issues of serious concern to a particular party.…”