A typical Dashboard view, showing several pie charts with a series of indicators. Colours represent relative performance for each indicator. The index (central circle) is calculated as the weighted average of the indicator points.

B   Three panes view for comparing countries - dashboard Millennium Development Goals Index

Colours represent relative performance for each indicator. The index (central circle) is calculated as the weighted average of the indicator points. The composition of indices with a "*" differs from the original.

C   Analysis view - World map: Millennium Development Goals Index

On top Iceland for Millennium Development Goals Index, at the bottom Chad. India scores 515 points, or rank 136 among all 178 countries, which is considered "average" (China: 773 points = "good").

D   Analysis view - map of Africa: Secure tenure

On top Martinique for Slum population as percentage of urban (secure tenure index), at the bottom Sierra Leone. Egypt scores 841 points, or rank 17 among all 91 countries, which is considered "very good".

E   Zoom view - distribution of "Reproductive health"

On the Y-axis, the number of points is shown, while the X-axis shows the respective rank. China scores 954 points for Reproductive health, or rank 15 among all 185 countries, which is considered "excellent" (India: 610 points = "fair"). The points are calculated as follows: 1000*(x-worst)/(best-worst). Example: Best=987 (Sweden), worst=185 (Somalia); with 478 points, Mozambique receives 365 points: P=1000*(478-185)/(987-185). In contrast, India receives 610 points for 674 points: P=1000*(674-185)/(987-185).

F   Analysis view - distribution of "Maternal mortality"

On the Y-axis, the number of points is shown, while the X-axis shows the respective rank. Ethiopia scores 370 points for Maternal mortality, or rank 63 among all 66 countries, which is considered "bad" (Congo, Dem. Rep.: 676 points = "good"). The score of the index is the weighted average of the component indicator scores.

G   Analysis view - scatterplot Births attended vs Maternal mortality

A simple scatterplot may reveal interesting insights - for example, how is Births attended by skilled health personnel linked to "Maternal mortality"? Congo, Dem. Rep. scores "good" for Births attended by skilled health personnel (Y axis, 725 points for 74 %) and "fair" for Maternal mortality (X axis, 628 points). In contrast, Ethiopia gets a "critical" for Births attended by skilled health personnel (Y=1 points for 5.7 %) and "good" for Maternal mortality (X=628 points).

H   Analysis view - map of Africa: CMR

On top Seychelles for Children under five mortality rate, at the bottom Mali. Gabon scores 706 points, or rank 14 among all 53 countries, which is considered "good" (Kenya: 648 points = "fair").

I   Analysis view - map of Africa: Youth literacy

On top Libyan Arab Jamahiriya for Literacy rates, aged 15-24, both sexes, at the bottom Niger. Mali scores 289 points, or rank 51 among all 52 countries, which is considered "very bad" (Equatorial Guinea: 977 points = "excellent").

J   Analysis view - time series Reproductive health

Shows the trend from 1990 to 2009 for the indicator Reproductive health and the countries Paraguay and Egypt (try pressing "G" to fill gaps). The score of the index is the weighted average of the component indicator scores.

K   Zoom view - World map: Gender equality and empowerment of women

On top Cook Islands for Gender equality and empowerment of women, at the bottom Somalia. Myanmar/Burma scores 598 points, or rank 62 among all 205 countries, which is considered "fair" (France: 592 points = "fair"). The score of the index is the weighted average of the component indicator scores.

L   Analysis view - distribution of "Gender equality and empowerment of women"

On the Y-axis, the number of points is shown, while the X-axis shows the respective rank. Southern America scores 778 points for Gender equality and empowerment of women, or rank 5 among all 17 countries, which is considered "good" (Least DC: 385 points = "bad"). The score of the index is the weighted average of the component indicator scores. Here, the averages of groups of countries are shown in exclusive mode.

M   Analysis view - time series Decent work

Shows the trend from 1990 to 2009 for the indicator Decent work and the countries Least DC and EU-15 (try pressing "G" to fill gaps). The score of the index is the weighted average of the component indicator scores. Here, the averages of groups of countries are shown in exclusive mode.

N   Analysis view - scatterplot Adult malnutrition vs Child malnutrition

Valuing the trend for Nutrition, undernourished is difficult: How to judge a large improvement (21 % of total population per year) in India against a small gain (57 % of total population) in Haiti? How is Nutrition, undernourished linked to "Child malnutrition"? India scores "good" for Nutrition, undernourished (Y axis, 754 points for 21 % of total population) and "very bad" for Child malnutrition (X axis, 324 points). In contrast, Haiti gets a "serious" for Nutrition, undernourished (Y=200 points for 57 % of total population) and "good" for Child malnutrition (X=324 points).

O   Analysis view - scatterplot Improve maternal health vs HIV/AIDS

How is Improve maternal health linked to "HIV/AIDS"? Namibia scores "good" for Improve maternal health (Y axis, 770 points) and "very good" for HIV/AIDS (X axis, 801 points). In contrast, Mali gets a "bad" for Improve maternal health (Y=398 points) and "bad" for HIV/AIDS (X=801 points).

P   Analysis view - distribution of "Persons living with HIV/AIDS"

On the Y-axis, the number of points is shown, while the X-axis shows the respective rank. Botswana scores 16 points for Persons living with HIV/AIDS, or rank 145 among all 146 countries, which is considered "critical" (Swaziland: 0 points = "critical"). The points are calculated as follows: 1000*(x-worst)/(best-worst). Example: Best=0 (Hungary), worst=25.9 (Swaziland); with 24.8 %, Botswana receives 16 points: P=1000*(24.8-25.9)/(0-25.9). In contrast, Swaziland receives 0 points for 25.9 %: P=1000*(25.9-25.9)/(0-25.9).

Q   Analysis view - scatterplot Millennium Development Goals Index vs Income per capita (ca. 2005)

How is Millennium Development Goals Index linked to "Income per capita (ca. 2005)"? Tanzania scores "fair" for Millennium Development Goals Index (Y axis, 560 points) and "critical" for Income per capita (ca. 2005) (X axis, 1 points). In contrast, Chad gets a "very bad" for Millennium Development Goals Index (Y=248 points) and "critical" for Income per capita (ca. 2005) (X=1 points). "Income per capita (ca. 2005)" was imported from the common indicators pool.

R   Analysis view - scatterplot Millennium Development Goals Index vs Life expectancy (ca. 2007)

How is Millennium Development Goals Index linked to "Life expectancy (ca. 2007)"? Swaziland scores "fair" for Millennium Development Goals Index (Y axis, 586 points) and "critical" for Life expectancy (ca. 2007) (X axis, 0 points). In contrast, United States gets a "good" for Millennium Development Goals Index (Y=765 points) and "very good" for Life expectancy (ca. 2007) (X=0 points). "Life expectancy (ca. 2007)" was imported from the common indicators pool.

S   Analysis view - linkage analysis Millennium Development Goals Index

The linkage analysis uses scatterplots to show how Millennium Development Goals Index is linked to all other indicators of the set, e.g. to "Life expectancy (ca. 2007)". Indonesia scores "fair" for Millennium Development Goals Index (Y axis, 658 points) and "good" for Life expectancy (ca. 2007) (X axis, 721 points). In contrast, Swaziland scores "fair" for Millennium Development Goals Index (Y axis, 586 points) and "critical" for Life expectancy (ca. 2007) (X axis, 0 points; settings: embedded mode, group: NAFTA+OECD+Least DC). Note that the upper listbox shows positive linkages ("synergies"), while the lower box show negative correlations ("goal conflicts"), in the order of the strength of correlations, expressed as 1000*r. "Life expectancy (ca. 2007)" was imported from the common indicators pool.

T   Zoom view - World map: MDG Inequality Index

On top Cuba for MDG Inequality Index, at the bottom Somalia. Mauritius scores 905 points, or rank 12 among all 104 countries, which is considered "excellent" (Chad: 312 points = "very bad"). The composition of indices with a "*" differs from the original.

U   Zoom view - time series Net ODA

Shows the trend from 1990 to 2009 for the indicator ODA, net and the countries Europe and United States (try pressing "G" to fill gaps). The points are calculated as follows: 1000*(x-worst)/(best-worst). Example: Best=1.12 (Sweden), worst=0.1 (South Korea); with -7650000 % of OECD/DAC donors' GNI, Anguilla receives - points: P=1000*(-7650000-0.1)/(1.12-0.1). In contrast, United States receives 165 points for 0.21 % of OECD/DAC donors' GNI: P=1000*(0.21-0.1)/(1.12-0.1). Here, the averages of groups of countries are shown in embedded mode.

V   Analysis view - time series Millennium Development Goals Index

Press "G" to see how the gap filler changes the time series! Shows the trend from 1990 to 2009 for the indicator Millennium Development Goals Index and the countries OECD and Least DC (try pressing "G" to fill gaps). The score of the index is the weighted average of the component indicator scores. Here, the averages of groups of countries are shown in exclusive mode.

W   Analysis view - time series Universal primary education

Shows the trend from 1990 to 2009 for the indicator Universal primary education and the countries Asia and Africa (try pressing "G" to fill gaps). The score of the index is the weighted average of the component indicator scores. Here, the averages of groups of countries are shown in exclusive mode.

X   Analysis view - distribution of "Millennium Development Goals Index"

CAUTION: This trend is calculated, for each indicator and country, on the basis of the difference between the first and last year for which data were available, divided by the span of these two years (e.g. 1992 and 2003 ->10 years). The message of the trend is not totally wrong, but errors are significant! Check the time series view for true data availability. On the Y-axis, the number of points is shown, while the X-axis shows the respective rank. Least DC scores 714 points for Millennium Development Goals Index, 1990-2009, or rank 1 among all 16 countries, which is considered "good" (Africa: 517 points = "average"). The score of the index is the weighted average of the component indicator scores. Here, the averages of groups of countries are shown in exclusive mode.

Y   Zoom view - index tree Asia

Displays the structure of the overall index (with colour codes for Asia) Here, the averages of groups of countries are shown in exclusive mode.

Z   Zoom view - index tree Asia

Displays the structure of the overall index (with colour codes for Asia) Here, the averages of groups of countries are shown in exclusive mode.

0   Analysis view - distribution of "Global partnership for development"

On the Y-axis, the number of points is shown, while the X-axis shows the respective rank. New Zealand scores 605 points for Global partnership for development, or rank 7 among all 29 countries, which is considered "fair" (United States: 575 points = "fair"). The score of the index is the weighted average of the component indicator scores.

1   Analysis view - index tree India

Displays the structure of the overall index (with colour codes for India)

2   Analysis view - scatterplot Millennium Development Goals Index vs HDI

How is Millennium Development Goals Index linked to "HDI"? Cuba scores "very good" for Millennium Development Goals Index (Y axis, 859 points) and "very good" for HDI (X axis, 823 points). In contrast, Haiti gets a "average" for Millennium Development Goals Index (Y=487 points) and "very bad" for HDI (X=823 points). "HDI" was imported from the common indicators pool.

3   Analysis view - time series Millennium Development Goals Index

CAUTION: This trend is calculated, for each indicator and country, on the basis of the difference between the first and last year for which data were available, divided by the span of these two years (e.g. 1992 and 2003 ->10 years). The message of the trend is not totally wrong, but errors are significant! Check the time series view for true data availability. Shows the trend from 1990 to 2009 for the indicator Millennium Development Goals Index and the countries Africa and Least DC (try pressing "G" to fill gaps). The score of the index is the weighted average of the component indicator scores. Here, the averages of groups of countries are shown in exclusive mode.

4   Analysis view - distribution of "Poorest 20%"

Valuing the trend for Poorest quintile's share in national income or consumption is difficult: How to judge a large improvement (5.8 % per year) in Uganda against a small gain (6.1 %) in Sierra Leone? On the Y-axis, the number of points is shown, while the X-axis shows the respective rank. Uganda scores 580 points for Poorest quintile's share in national income or consumption, or rank 21 among all 38 countries, which is considered "fair" (Sierra Leone: 614 points = "fair"). The points are calculated as follows: 1000*(x-worst)/(best-worst). Example: Best=9.3 (Ethiopia), worst=2 (Angola); with 5.8 %, Uganda receives 580 points: P=1000*(5.8-2)/(9.3-2). In contrast, Sierra Leone receives 614 points for 6.1 %: P=1000*(6.1-2)/(9.3-2).

5   Analysis view - distribution of "Millennium Development Goals Index"

On the Y-axis, the number of points is shown, while the X-axis shows the respective rank. Mauritius scores 766 points for Millennium Development Goals Index, or rank 40 among all 179 countries, which is considered "good" (Italy: 745 points = "good"). The score of the index is the weighted average of the component indicator scores.

6   Analysis view - distribution of "Millennium Development Goals Index"

On the Y-axis, the number of points is shown, while the X-axis shows the respective rank. Mauritius scores 778 points for Millennium Development Goals Index, or rank 3 among all 77 countries, which is considered "good" (Chad: 232 points = "very bad"). The score of the index is the weighted average of the component indicator scores.

7   Analysis view - distribution of "Income poverty"

On the Y-axis, the number of points is shown, while the X-axis shows the respective rank. South Africa scores 666 points for Income poverty, or rank 18 among all 47 countries, which is considered "fair" (Tanzania: 475 points = "average"). The score of the index is the weighted average of the component indicator scores.

8   Analysis view - scatterplot Millennium Development Goals Index vs CO2 per GDP

How is Millennium Development Goals Index linked to "CO2 per GDP"? China scores "very good" for Millennium Development Goals Index (Y axis, 783 points) and "very good" for CO2 per GDP (X axis, 780 points). In contrast, South Africa gets a "fair" for Millennium Development Goals Index (Y=618 points) and "very good" for CO2 per GDP (X=780 points).

The Millennium Development Goals Indicators Dashboard is an attempt to show how the official UN Millennium Development Goals set could be used for assessing progress, or lack of progress, towards Sustainable Development. The MDG data have been compiled by the United Nations Statistics Division. Please bear in mind that such databases often do not reflect the latest state-of-the-art, especially for OECD countries. Our objective was a good country coverage, and a close match to the MDG "Roadmap", and often accuracy had to be given a lower priority to reach this goal. Please note that aggregation of indicators to overall indices, as presented here with the MDG Dashboard, is still controversial. The authors believe that aggregation can greatly enhance communication with non-expert audiences. However, the indices presented here are NOT endorsed by those who bear official political responsibility for the MDGs.