In the realm of global rankings and indices, a few seemingly authoritative and flawed measures have repeatedly raised eyebrows for their questionable methodologies and apparent political biases: the Global Hunger Index (GHI), the Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index and the World Happiness Report. These rankings, often touted as objective assessments of countries’ performance, are nothing more than sophisticated propaganda tools that rely more on perception and selective data than on comprehensive scientific analysis. How can you claim that someone is happy or unhappy, someone is hungry, and they are hungry because they do not have food to eat? In India, people do fast due to religious and cultural practices; they have food, but they do not eat. Would you consider them as hungry?
The article will look into the flaws and irregularities of these indexes and how the institutions that release these reports work as a tool for Western countries to make perceptions about them.
The Global Hunger Index: A Recipe for Misinformation
Let’s begin with the Global Hunger Index, a report that claims to measure hunger and malnutrition across countries but needs more credible scientific standards. The most glaring issue is its methodology, which is nothing short of pseudoscience. Imagine trying to assess the hunger situation of 1.4 billion people through an opinion poll of merely 3,000 individuals – that’s less than four people per district in India. It’s like trying to understand the ocean by looking at a single droplet of water.
The index’s calculation is even more absurd. A staggering 75% of its parameters are related to child health, making its name “Global Hunger Index” a misnomer. Agricultural economist Shivendra Kumar Srivastava rightly suggests it should be called the “Global Hunger and Child Health Index.” Yet, the ranking continues to malign countries like India despite clear improvements in key metrics. Child mortality rates have dropped from 49 per 1,000 children in 2015 to 39 in 2020, and child stunting has decreased from 41.7% in 2012 to 30.9% in 2020.
What’s more concerning is the funding of the sources behind these rankings. The GHI is prepared by Irish and German NGOs that receive billions of dollars from government agencies, international organizations, and private donors. This raises a critical question: Can an index funded by governmental and institutional sources truly remain unbiased? The financial strings attached to these organizations suggest a potential agenda that goes beyond mere data collection.
The most ridiculous aspect of the GHI is its measurement of undernourishment – a critical 33.3% of the total ranking – which is based entirely on an opinion poll. The poll’s questions are designed to elicit emotional responses rather than factual information, with no mechanism to verify the truthfulness of responses. It’s a classic case of creating a narrative rather than measuring reality.
In 2022, India was ranked 107 of 129 countries in the index report, which was below Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. This is absurd. How a country like Pakistan can be placed above India? We have seen people of Pakistan fighting for flour on the street. The whole world has seen people in Pakistan bringing domestic gas in balloons because they are not able to afford a whole gas cylinder. On the other hand, India has provided food and medicine to other countries during the pandemic. When the Russia-Ukraine war started, the world was facing acute shortages of wheat. India saved nearly half of the world with its wheat during the crisis, and the GHI put India in 107th place in that year, which exposed their clear bias and propaganda.
Democracy Index: When Perception Trumps Reality
The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index is cut from the same problematic cloth. This ranking claims to measure democratic functioning but relies on a subjective questionnaire answered by anonymous “experts.” The methodology is so opaque that even the identities of these experts remain a mystery. Peter Tasker, an investment analyst, aptly describes this as a black box where “nobody knows” who these experts are or what credentials they possess.
The democracy ranking completely sidesteps objective measures of democracy. While one would expect concrete metrics like economic living standards, political representation, or citizen welfare, the index instead focuses on subjective perceptions. Questions about election fairness, voter security, and foreign influence are answered without any standardized verification process. Any person belonging to the opposition party in India will say that the Indian election is rugged. The Election Commission is working for the current government. Still, it’s far from the truth because the Election in India is free and fair. We do not need a certificate from a UK-based organization to know our status. It’s essentially a “perception of democracy” index rather than an actual measure of democratic functioning.
What’s particularly ironic is the index’s treatment of countries like India. The report acknowledges positive democratic processes – such as the government’s accountability demonstrated by the withdrawal of farm laws following farmer protests – but then undermines this by making sweeping, unsubstantiated claims about minority persecution. These statements are made without referencing concrete data, revealing a clear ideological bias. They just mentioned that minorities in India are being persecuted but did not mention how, when and on what basis. The world is silently watching the persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh and not coming up with any kind of report which can put into question the anti-Hindu sentiment and anti-Hindu interim government, but they will start crying if someone from the Muslim community in India is arrested for a genuine crime.
The Indian government has repeatedly sought transparency from these ranking bodies, only to be met with silence. The Economist Intelligence Unit has refused to share its methodology or sample size, a stance that runs counter to the very democratic principles it claims to measure. When the government requested details, the response was nothing more than bureaucratic stonewalling.
These indices are a form of intellectual colonialism, as the Western institutions continue to frame the narratives about developing countries from a position of superiority and judgment. They exploit the global information ecosystem, creating rankings that can influence international perception, diplomatic relations, and even economic investments. The biggest example can be seen in South Korea, where The EIU Democracy Index has put South Korea in the category of Full democracy, which is above India’s position as a flawed democracy, but on the 3rd of December, the president brought an emergency clause and declared an emergency in South Korea. However, India just completed state elections in two states; the incumbent ruling BJP party in the centre has lost one and won one, and a power transition is on the way. Hence, the EIU Democracy Index should first place its own organization in a flawed category for censoring its methodologies and sample size of the study.
The Happiness Illusion: A Ladder to Nowhere
The next in the series is the World Happiness Report. Imagine trying to measure how happy you are by asking you to place yourself on a ladder. Sounds ridiculous, right? Well, that’s exactly what the World Happiness Report does, and it’s about as scientific as measuring your intelligence with a paper clip. These so-called experts think they can boil down human happiness to a single number, but they’re missing the entire point of what makes life meaningful.
Here’s the problem: when you’re asked to rate your life on a ladder from 0 to 10, your brain doesn’t actually think about happiness. Instead, you start comparing yourself to others. Are you doing better than your neighbour? More successful than your friend? Suddenly, it’s not about how content you are but about how you stack up in some imaginary social competition. It’s like turning happiness into a weird game of social ranking.
The researchers themselves discovered how messed up this approach is. When they changed the question and removed the ladder image, people started talking about what really matters – their health, their relationships, and whether they feel financially secure. Suddenly, happiness wasn’t about being on top but about feeling good in your own life.
Think about the United States, supposedly one of the richest countries in the world. The report shows Americans are becoming more miserable, not because they lack stuff, but because they’re constantly comparing themselves to others. Social media has turned comparison into a full-time job. You’re scrolling through Instagram, seeing everyone’s perfect life, and feeling worse about yourself. That’s not happiness – that’s torture.
The real kicker? By creating these global happiness rankings, the report is doing exactly what makes people unhappy – forcing them to compare themselves to others. It’s like creating a global misery machine. Experts say true happiness comes from connecting with people, not beating them in some imaginary life competition. Even the definition of happiness is different for different people. For example, some become happy after wining and dining, while others become happy by just eating candy.
In the 2024 World Happiness Report, India was placed in 126th position out of 143 countries. The fun fact is that India is placed below China, Nepal, Pakistan, and Myanmar. Why this is funny because Myanmar is almost in a civil war, Pakistan is facing a shortage of food, and the terrorist attacks have increased at the same time. Pakistan is seeing an unprecedented civil uprising against the military. Hence, according to the report, the people of Myanmar are happy in the civil war, and the people of Pakistan celebrate their happiness by protesting and not eating food.
So the next time you read a headline about Finland being the “happiest” country or the United States ranking low on happiness, take a deep breath. These rankings are about as reliable as a fortune cookie’s life advice. Real happiness isn’t a number. It’s about feeling good in your own skin, having people who love you, and finding meaning in your daily life. No ladder is required.
The Hypocrisy of Global Indices: Need for Global South to Define Its Own Narratives
The most alarming aspect of these rankings, however, is their potential for real-world harm. By relentlessly portraying countries like India in a certain light, they can affect investor confidence, international reputation, and even internal political discourse. Opposition parties and certain media outlets gleefully deploy these rankings without critically examining their methodologies.
What makes these indices particularly insidious is their veneer of academic credibility. They use complex statistical language, employ seemingly sophisticated methodologies, and come from organizations with global recognition. This makes them appear objective and trustworthy to the casual observer when, in reality, they are deeply flawed instruments of propaganda.
It’s time we call out these global ranking systems for what they truly are: tools of soft power that serve geopolitical and economic interests rather than providing genuine, objective assessments. A true understanding of a country’s performance requires nuanced, comprehensive analysis that goes beyond simplistic scoring systems and anonymous expert opinions.
Developing nations, particularly those in the Global South, must develop their own robust methodological frameworks for self-assessment. We cannot continue to be judged by metrics designed by institutions that fundamentally do not understand our complex socio-economic realities.
The Global Hunger Index, Democracy Index, and World Happiness Index are not mirrors reflecting reality – they are funhouse mirrors, distorting truth to suit a predetermined narrative. Until these ranking systems embrace true transparency, scientific rigour, and genuine objectivity, they should be viewed not as authoritative assessments but as sophisticated pieces of geopolitical fiction.
