American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking ISSN (E): 2832-8078 Volume 41, October - 2025 P a g e | 72 www.americanjournal.org CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PUBLIC GOVERNANCE IN INTERNATIONAL RATINGS AND INDICES Mamatqulov Bekzod Akmalovich Researcher at the Academy of Public Administration bekzodmamatkulov4444@gmail.com ORCID:0009-0004-2019-222X A B S T R A C T K E Y W O R D S This research analyzes the criteria for assessing the effectiveness of public governance in international ratings and indices. In particular, it examines global indicators such as the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI), Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), and Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) to evaluate the efficiency of public institutions, anti-corruption efforts, political stability, rule of law, and economic competitiveness. The main goal of the study is to determine Uzbekistan’s position in international assessments, identify its strengths and weaknesses, and develop scientific and practical recommendations for improving the public administration system. Effectiveness of public governance, international ratings, Worldwide Governance Indicators, Corruption Perceptions Index, Global Competitiveness Index, political stability, corruption level, institutional development, economic competitiveness, Uzbekistan’s position in international rankings. Introduction In today’s globalized world, the effectiveness of the public administration system is one of the key factors determining a country’s reputation and economic competitiveness on the international stage. Global experience shows that improving governance quality, reducing corruption, and strengthening institutional trust ensure sustainable development and investment attractiveness. Therefore, international ratings and indices — such as the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI), Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), and Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) — serve as important tools for assessing countries’ governance capacity based on international standards. The relevance of this topic lies in the fact that within the framework of the “Uzbekistan–2030” Strategy, the Republic of Uzbekistan has set a goal to achieve effective governance, transparency, accountability, and a strong fight against corruption. This requires improving the country’s position in international rankings, enhancing the efficiency of state institutions, and strengthening citizens’ trust in government. American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 41 October- 2025 P a g e | 73 www.americanjournal.org The main purpose of this study is to thoroughly examine the criteria for assessing public governance effectiveness in international ratings and indices, analyze Uzbekistan’s current position, and develop scientifically grounded recommendations for further improving the governance system. The research tasks include studying the methodology of international indices, conducting comparative analysis of governance indicators, identifying Uzbekistan’s position in the rankings, and proposing institutional measures to achieve more effective governance. Literature Review Theoretical approaches to assessing the effectiveness of public governance at the international level have been widely covered in numerous academic studies. In the research titled “Governance Matters VIII: Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators, 1996–2008” by Kaufmann, Kraay, and Mastruzzi, the methodology of the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) was developed. The authors attempted to measure a country’s governance capacity based on six key indicators — political stability, government effectiveness, rule of law, control of corruption, regulatory quality, and voice and accountability. This model is now used by many countries as a primary source for evaluating and reforming their governance systems.1 The “Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI)” published by Transparency International makes it possible to identify the level of corruption in the public sector and compare it internationally. According to the main findings of the study, countries with higher levels of corruption tend to have lower public governance efficiency, economic performance, and social trust. Therefore, CPI results serve as an important analytical tool not only for shaping political but also economic and social development strategies.2 In addition, the “Global Competitiveness Report” prepared by the World Economic Forum assesses countries’ competitiveness based on 12 key pillars, including institutional environment, infrastructure, macroeconomic stability, health, quality of education, innovation capacity, and others. The study emphasizes that a high quality of governance is a key factor ensuring a country’s investment attractiveness and sustainable economic growth. This approach interprets public governance not only as a political system but also as a crucial component of economic competitiveness.3 As for Uzbekistan, the analytical report “Governance and Public Administration Reform in Uzbekistan” prepared by the UNDP examines the reforms being implemented in the country to modernize the governance system, enhance transparency, and strengthen anti-corruption mechanisms. The report highlights Uzbekistan’s positive progress in recent years based on WGI and CPI indicators, noting that further improvement in international rankings requires deepening institutional reforms, improving the quality of public services, and expanding public oversight.4 1 Kaufmann D., Kraay A., Mastruzzi M. Governance matters VIII: aggregate and individual governance indicators, 1996- 2008 //World bank policy research working paper. – 2009. – №. 4978. 2 Albu O. B., Murphy J. Measuring corruption perceptions in Tunisia: transparency international, the corruption perception index and the world bank //The Elgar Companion to the World Bank. – Edward Elgar Publishing, 2024. – С. 263-273. 3 Olczyk M., Kuc-Czarnecka M., Saltelli A. Changes in the Global Competitiveness Index 4.0 methodology: The improved approach of competitiveness benchmarking //Journal of Competitiveness. – 2022. – Т. 14. – С. 118-135. 4 Ergashev B. Public administration reform in Uzbekistan //Problems of Economic Transition. – 2006. – Т. 48. – №. 12. – С. 32-82. American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 41 October- 2025 P a g e | 74 www.americanjournal.org Methodology The research methodology is primarily based on theoretical analysis and comparative approaches. It involves an in-depth study of existing academic literature, reports of international organizations such as the World Bank, Transparency International, and the World Economic Forum, as well as their methodological frameworks for assessing the effectiveness of public governance in international ratings and indices. During the research process, theoretical analysis, induction and deduction, a systematic approach, and comparative analysis methods were applied to evaluate governance efficiency through the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI), Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), and Global Competitiveness Index (GCI). Based on this, scientific and theoretical justifications of Uzbekistan’s position in international rankings were developed, along with recommendations for improving the quality of governance. Analysis and results In assessing the effectiveness of public governance, these indices encompass numerous criteria such as economic growth rates, the favorability of the business environment, the level of anti-corruption measures, the rule of law, the quality of public service delivery, and citizens’ trust in government institutions. These factors, in turn, have a significant impact on a country’s international image, investment attractiveness, and sustainable development. In recent years, Uzbekistan has paid special attention to strengthening its position in international ratings and indices. Through reforms in public administration, the introduction of digital technologies, enhanced transparency, and the establishment of effective communication between citizens and state institutions, the country aims to improve its international reputation. Therefore, analyzing the assessment criteria used in international ratings and indices is not only of scientific and practical importance but also crucial for determining the strategic priorities of state policy. The following section provides a comprehensive theoretical analysis of the criteria used in international ratings and indices to evaluate the effectiveness of public governance. The Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI), published by the World Bank since 1996, is an international evaluation system that analyzes governance effectiveness in nearly 200 countries and territories. This index covers six main dimensions: government effectiveness, regulatory quality, control of corruption, rule of law, voice and accountability, and political stability and absence of violence. The assessment is conducted on a scale from –2.5 to +2.5, where –2.5 represents the lowest and +2.5 the highest performance. The WGI combines data from various international organizations and expert surveys through the Unobserved Components Model (UCM), allowing for a comparative analysis of governance quality across countries. American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 41 October- 2025 P a g e | 75 www.americanjournal.org Table 1 Main areas of WGI and their classification5 Yo‘nalish nomi Content (what it evaluates) Key indicators Information sources Result scale 1. Government Effectiveness The quality of public services, the ability to formulate and implement policies, and the presence of an independent civil service. • Quality of public services • Decisions free from political pressure • Level of bureaucracy Economist Intelligence Unit, World Economic Forum, Gallup polls –2.5 = very low; 0 = average; +2.5 = very high; 2. Regulatory Quality Creating favorable conditions for a market economy and the level of barriers to entrepreneurship • Ease of starting a business • Fight against monopolies • Freedom of trade policy World Bank Doing Business, Heritage Foundation –2.5 … +2.5 3. Control of Corruption The level of misuse of state resources and the inevitability of punishment for corruption • Public sector bribery • Elite interest • Political corruption Transparency International, Freedom House, Bertelsmann Foundation –2.5 … +2.5 4. Rule of Law Equality of citizens before the law, independence of the judicial system, and protection of property rights • Independence of the courts • Crime rate • Guarantee of property rights World Justice Project, Global Insight, Gallup –2.5 … +2.5 5. Voice and Accountability Citizens’ participation in politics, freedom of speech, freedom of the media, and the quality of elections • Fairness of elections • Freedom of the press • Civil society activity Freedom House, Reporters Without Borders, Afrobarometer –2.5 … +2.5 6. Political Stability and Absence of Violence The degree to which the government is protected from instability, coups, and terrorism • Potential for political violence • Internal armed conflicts • Terrorist threats PRS Group, Economist Intelligence Unit, Global Terrorism Index –2.5 … +2.5 WGI is not based on a single explicit formula but rather on the statistical integration of various surveys and indices from multiple sources. The World Bank uses a statistical technique called the Unobserved Components Model (UCM). The simplified UCM formula is as follows: 𝐺𝑖 = ∑ 𝑤𝑖𝑗𝑋𝑖𝑗 + ϵ𝑖 𝑛 𝑗=1 Where: Gi ⎯ the overall governance score of the country, Xij ⎯ scores obtained from various sources (surveys, expert assessments, indices), wij ⎯ the weighting coefficient of each source, εij ⎯ the statistical error term. Thus, the WGI integrates data provided by various organizations such as Transparency International, Freedom House, The Economist Intelligence Unit, and others into a unified system. As of 2024, the WGI serves as an international “standard” for analyzing the effectiveness of public governance by presenting key aspects such as the quality of government institutions, political stability, the consistency of the regulatory environment, and civil liberties in a single framework. The table below shows the 2024 WGI “Government Effectiveness (EST)” results for a number of developed and Asian countries. 5 Thomas M. A. What do the worldwide governance indicators measure? //The European Journal of Development Research. – 2010. – Т. 22. – №. 1. – С. 31-54. American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 41 October- 2025 P a g e | 76 www.americanjournal.org Table 2 The position of developed and developing countries in the WGI assessment index6 Countries VA PV GE RQ RL CC Average Singapore -0.07 1.03 2.32 2.31 1.79 2.04 1.57 Japan 1.11 0.35 1.05 1.34 1.54 1.01 1.07 Germany 1.46 0.59 1.19 1.46 1.55 — 1.25 South Korea 0.86 0.61 1.40 1.12 1.25 0.89 1.02 USA 0.88 0.03 1.22 1.39 1.33 1.12 1.00 Italy 1.12 0.58 0.61 0.64 0.39 0.55 0.65 China -1.50 -0.51 0.68 -0.36 -0.04 -0.01 -0.29 Kazakhstan -1.00 -0.27 0.15 0.07 -0.45 -0.27 -0.30 Uzbekistan -1.31 -0.15 -0.28 -0.58 -0.83 -0.81 -0.66 Tajikistan -1.63 -0.47 -0.77 -1.18 -1.28 -1.38 -1.12 VA — Voice and Accountability: perceptions of citizens’ participation in political processes and their ability to choose their government; freedom of speech, association, and media. PV — Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism: perceptions regarding the likelihood of political instability, conflicts, and terrorism. GE — Government Effectiveness: quality of public services, competence and independence of civil servants, quality of policy formulation and implementation, and the credibility of government actions. RQ — Regulatory Quality: the ability of the government to design and implement sound policies and regulations that support private sector development. RL — Rule of Law: confidence in the rule of law; enforcement of contracts, protection of property rights, quality of the judiciary and police, and the level of crime risk. CC — Control of Corruption: perceptions of the extent to which public power is exercised for private gain (including petty and grand corruption, as well as “state capture”). Overall, the WGI indicators provide a multidimensional “temperature” of public governance effectiveness. As of 2023, Singapore, Japan, Germany, South Korea, and the United States form the leading group in governance quality, with their main strengths in GE, RQ, RL, and CC. Italy ranks in the upper–middle segment, while China demonstrates positive performance in GE but requires improvements in VA, PV, and RQ. In Central Asia, Kazakhstan has shown slight positive progress, whereas Uzbekistan and Tajikistan still prioritize strengthening institutional pillars such as RL, CC, and VA. Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI, Transparency International) The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) is an international ranking published annually by Transparency International, designed to assess the effectiveness of public governance by measuring the perceived level of corruption within state institutions. Established in 1995, the index now covers nearly 180 countries worldwide. The CPI does not measure actual instances of corruption but rather evaluates the perceived level of corruption based on surveys, studies, and observations conducted by 6 https://worldjusticeproject.org/ https://worldjusticeproject.org/ American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 41 October- 2025 P a g e | 77 www.americanjournal.org business communities and independent experts. The assessment is carried out on a 0 to 100 scale, where 0 indicates a high level of corruption and 100 represents a very clean and efficient governance system. Thus, the CPI serves as an important indicator in shaping a country’s economic development, political stability, investment attractiveness, and public trust in government. The index results are widely used by international organizations, investors, and political analysts to assess the effectiveness of anti- corruption reforms, develop anti-corruption strategies, and strengthen governance systems. Therefore, the CPI is not merely a statistical figure but a global indicator that reflects how effectively a country’s political and administrative governance operates under the principles of integrity, transparency, and accountability. The CPI measures the perceived level of corruption rather than actual corruption cases. For this purpose, it relies on data from surveys and analyses conducted by international organizations and expert groups. The simplified calculation formula is as follows: 𝐶𝑃𝐼𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑦 = ∑ 𝑆𝑖 𝑛 𝑖=1 𝑛 Where: Si – the standardized score a country receives from each source (survey or index), n – the number of sources (usually between 8 and 13). Each source is recalibrated to a 0–100 scale, after which the average of all sources is calculated. The final result is the CPI score. Table 3 The main significance and general analytical overview of the CPI7 Sections Explanation (content) Basic elements/formulas Importance General concept The CPI is a global index measuring the perception of the level of corruption in the public sector. It is calculated on a scale of 0– 100 (0 = high corruption, 100 = most transparent country). The role of countries in the fight against corruption is determined. Evaluation sources It is formed based on surveys by international organizations and experts. Sources 8–13: World Bank, African Development Bank, Bertelsmann Foundation, etc. Combining results from multiple independent sources ensures objectivity. Calculation formula The results of each source are standardized between 0–100 and the arithmetic mean is calculated. 𝐶𝑃𝐼𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑦 = ∑ 𝑆𝑖 𝑛 𝑖=1 𝑛 Si – source score, n – number of sources. The country’s final CPI score is determined. Evaluation criteria - Perception of corruption - Transparency in the public sector - Rule of law - Quality of public service Each criterion is directly or indirectly covered by various international indices. It is used as an indicator of the efficiency and transparency of public administration. Goals Comparing and monitoring corruption levels globally. A ranking of countries will be formed (1st place - the most transparent, last place - the most corrupt). To demonstrate to governments the need to gain trust in the international arena and reform. Duties - Mobilizing society against corruption - Urging the government to reform - Sending a signal to investors CPI results directly affect a country's international image and investment climate. It serves as a guiding indicator in making strategic decisions. 7 Index C. P. Corruption perception index //Transparancy International. – 2018. American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 41 October- 2025 P a g e | 78 www.americanjournal.org Overall, the CPI reveals both the achievements and shortcomings of countries in combating corruption. A high score in the index reflects transparency in public governance, increased citizen trust, and greater investment attractiveness. Conversely, a low score clearly indicates the need to strengthen anti- corruption policies. Therefore, the CPI serves as a global mechanism of awareness and motivation, encouraging countries to undertake reforms aimed at enhancing integrity and accountability in governance. Table 4 Position of selected countries in the CPI 20248 Countriea Score (0–100) Place (from 180) Singapore 84 3 Japan 71 20 Germany 75 15 South Korea 64 30 United States 65 28 Italy 54 52 China 43 76 Kazakhstan 40 88 Uzbekistan 32 121 Tajikistan 19 164 The table reveals significant disparities among the selected countries. Singapore, with a score of 84 points, ranks 3rd globally and leads the Asia-Pacific region; this is attributed to strong institutions and strict accountability mechanisms. Germany ranks 15th (75 points), although a slight decline has been observed in recent years. Japan (71; 20th) and South Korea (64; 30th) belong to the upper–middle segment, while the United States (65; 28th) remains among advanced democracies but has slightly dropped in the latest evaluation. Italy (54; 52nd) holds an average position within the European Union. China (43; 76th), scoring below 50, reflects limitations in systemic transparency and accountability. In Central Asia, Kazakhstan (40; 88th) performs relatively better within the region, whereas Uzbekistan (32; 121st) and Tajikistan (19; 164th) rank lower, highlighting the need for deep reforms in strengthening the justice sector, increasing transparency in public procurement, and managing conflicts of interest. The 2024 CPI results show that countries with high scores typically possess independent judicial systems, effective accountability mechanisms, transparent public procurement, and accessible information infrastructures for stakeholders. The experiences of Singapore, Germany, and Japan confirm the synergy of these factors. Conversely, countries scoring below 50 often face heightened corruption risks due to political influence, weak public oversight, and opaque relations between the state and the real sector. For Central Asia, the following measures are essential for sustained improvement: maintaining full and open registers of beneficial ownership, implementing comprehensive e-procurement systems, ensuring legal protection for whistleblowers, strengthening meritocracy and independence in the judiciary, and expanding public access to budget and subsidy data. 8 https://www.transparency.org/en/ https://www.transparency.org/en/ American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 41 October- 2025 P a g e | 79 www.americanjournal.org At the same time, it is important to remember that the CPI reflects perceptions rather than actual corruption cases; while it does not capture the full reality, it serves as an important “signal” for political dialogue and reform. Therefore, combining CPI results with national audits, sector-specific indicators, and civil society monitoring provides the most effective approach to governance improvement. Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) The Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) is a major international index developed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) to assess the economic competitiveness of countries worldwide. First introduced in 2004, the GCI currently covers the economic performance of over 140 countries. It serves as one of the most important global benchmarks for evaluating a country’s long-term growth potential, competitiveness level, and capacity for innovation-driven development. Its significance lies in the fact that the GCI measures not only economic indicators but also broader areas such as the quality of public governance, the legal environment, healthcare and education systems, infrastructure, financial market efficiency, and labor market flexibility. In this regard, the GCI plays a vital role in analyzing comprehensive national development, identifying strengths and weaknesses, and attracting international investment. The main purpose of the GCI is to determine a country’s position in the global economic environment, guide it toward long-term sustainable growth, and identify specific policy directions for national reform. Therefore, the GCI is not merely a collection of numerical indicators but a strategic analytical tool that contributes to shaping global development policies. The Global Competitiveness Index is built on a complex mathematical model structured around 12 main pillars, each comprising numerous indicators — in total, over 100 variables are taken into account in the assessment. The general formula is expressed as follows: 𝐺𝐶𝐼 = ∑ 𝑤𝑖 × 𝑃𝑖 12 𝑖=1 Where: 𝑃𝑖 ⎯ i- column (pillar) score indicator, 𝑤𝑖 ⎯ i- weight coefficient given to the column, The sum of the 12 columns determines the country's overall GCI score. The main pillars are as follows: ⎯ Quality of institutions; ⎯ Infrastructure; ⎯ Macroeconomic stability; ⎯ Health and primary education; ⎯ Higher education and vocational training; ⎯ Product market efficiency; ⎯ Labor market efficiency; ⎯ Financial market development; ⎯ Technological readiness; ⎯ Market size; ⎯ Business development; American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 41 October- 2025 P a g e | 80 www.americanjournal.org ⎯ Innovation opportunities. In the calculation process, each pillar is weighted differently. For example, in low-income countries, the “basic requirements” pillars — such as institutions, infrastructure, and healthcare — carry greater weight, while in high-income countries, more emphasis is placed on the “innovation and sophistication” factors. Thus, the GCI calculation methodology is adjusted according to each country’s stage of development. Table 5 The main significance and general analytical overview of the GCI index9 Pillars Number of indicators Evaluation weight (%) Main content Institutional Quality 21 10% Rule of law, property rights, fight against corruption Infrastructure 12 8% Transport, communication, energy supply Macroeconomic Stability 5 6% Budget deficit, inflation rate Health and Primary Education 10 6% Life expectancy, literacy rate Higher Education and Vocational Training 8 6% Education quality, opportunities for professional development Product Market Efficiency 15 8% Competition, tax burden, import-export Labor Market Efficiency 10 7% Labor force flexibility, wages Financial Market Development 9 6% Access to credit, banking system Technological Readiness 8 7% Internet, mobile communications, technology transfer Market Size 4 5% Domestic and foreign market share Business Development 9 9% Clusters, business strategies Innovation Opportunities 7 12% Scientific research, patents, innovative activity The Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) is a comprehensive, reliable, and effective tool for determining the position of countries in the international economic arena. This index covers not only economic growth factors but also public governance, the legal environment, education, healthcare, and innovation activities. Therefore, it serves as a multidimensional indicator of national development. Since the methodology of the index is adapted to each country’s stage of development, it reflects the real conditions of each nation more accurately. For example, for emerging economies, basic requirements (institutions, infrastructure, and macroeconomic stability) are of critical importance, while for high-income countries, innovation capacity and technological advancement play a key role. In conclusion, the GCI is not merely a ranking indicator but also a roadmap for countries. It plays an invaluable role in defining national policy priorities, implementing reforms effectively, and ensuring competitiveness in the global arena. Moreover, by analyzing GCI results, governments can better understand their strengths and weaknesses within the global economic system and develop clearer strategies for sustainable development. 9 Benítez-Márquez M. D., Sánchez-Teba E. M., Coronado-Maldonado I. An alternative index to the global competitiveness index //Plos one. – 2022. – Т. 17. – №. 3. – С. e0265045. American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 41 October- 2025 P a g e | 81 www.americanjournal.org Conclusion The research results show that international ratings and indices play an indispensable role in assessing the effectiveness of public governance. Systems such as the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI), Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), and Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) are crucial indicators that reflect the quality of a country’s political, institutional, and economic environment. Through these indices, the quality of governance, the level of corruption, the rule of law, and competitiveness capacity are analyzed — providing a solid scientific foundation for making informed decisions aimed at improving the overall efficiency of the governance system. Figure 1. Governance assessment pyramid. The analysis conducted in the context of Uzbekistan shows that in recent years, significant progress has been made in modernizing public administration, increasing transparency and openness, combating corruption, and improving the country’s position in international rankings. At the same time, it is possible to further enhance governance efficiency by deepening institutional reforms, improving the quality of public services, and establishing effective cooperation with civil society. The study concludes that a comprehensive strategic approach based on international assessment systems is necessary to improve the quality of public administration. References 1. Kaufmann D., Kraay A., Mastruzzi M. Governance matters VIII: aggregate and individual governance indicators, 1996-2008 //World bank policy research working paper. – 2009. – №. 4978. 2. Albu O. B., Murphy J. Measuring corruption perceptions in Tunisia: transparency international, the corruption perception index and the world bank //The Elgar Companion to the World Bank. – Edward Elgar Publishing, 2024. – С. 263-273. 3. Olczyk M., Kuc-Czarnecka M., Saltelli A. Changes in the Global Competitiveness Index 4.0 methodology: The improved approach of competitiveness benchmarking //Journal of Competitiveness. – 2022. – Т. 14. – С. 118-135. American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 41 October- 2025 P a g e | 82 www.americanjournal.org 4. Ergashev B. Public administration reform in Uzbekistan //Problems of Economic Transition. – 2006. – Т. 48. – №. 12. – С. 32-82. 5. Thomas M. A. What do the worldwide governance indicators measure? //The European Journal of Development Research. – 2010. – Т. 22. – №. 1. – С. 31-54. 6. Index C. P. Corruption perception index //Transparancy International. – 2018. 7. Benítez-Márquez M. D., Sánchez-Teba E. M., Coronado-Maldonado I. An alternative index to the global competitiveness index //Plos one. – 2022. – Т. 17. – №. 3. – С. e0265045.