Which countries are becoming less peaceful?
THERE ARE often clear signs that a country is sliding into conflict or crisis. The government might muzzle the press or lock up opposition politicians. The currency might go haywire. Perhaps sectarian fighting has broken out. Often, however, the erosion of order is subtler. A new report from the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) assesses the stability of 163 countries. It finds that six of the nine global regions became more troubled in the past year (see chart below)  The Economist Today Hand-picked stories, in your inbox A daily email with the best of our journalism Sign up  The report offers two different rankings. The first is a Positive Peace Index (PPI), a composite measure of factors that might be expected to make a country more peaceful. These include a countrys institutions and general socio-economic health. Eight indicators influence the overall score, including levels of corruption, human capital, broad access to public services such as health and education, and a well-functioning government. Countries that perform well on this index are generally less tolerant of violence and offer other means by which to resolve disputes. The second ranking is the Global Peace Index (GPI), a measure of how peaceful the country actually is. (Some of the data are provided by the Economist Intelligence Unit, our sister company.) This is based on a further 23 weighted indicators, such as the countrys homicide rate, the ease of access to weapons and the levels of political violence and terrorism. Iceland, New Zealand and Denmark sit at the top of the list; Syria, Yemen and Afghanistan at the bottom (see top chart). If a country performs poorly according to the PPI (a measure of the strength of its social structures) but well on the GPI (an assessment of how peaceful it actually is), then it has a peace deficitie, it is more peaceful than might be expected given its stage of development. Put differently, peace in such a country is likely to be fragile, and could easily break down. For example, in 2009 the IEP found that Egypt had a large peace deficit: it ranked 63rd on the GPI, largely because Hosni Mubaraks autocratic government had crushed nearly all dissent. However, it performed poorly on the PPI, placing 115th. There were few formal channels through which to resolve grievances. So when turbulence came, it came suddenly. In 2011, during the Arab Spring, hundreds of thousands of Egyptians took to the streets and overthrew Mr Mubarak. The report aims to offer clues as to which countries to watch for future shocks. Of the countries that had a peace deficit in 2014, 68% became less peaceful over the next five years. In the latest report, the country with the biggest peace deficit is Equatorial Guinea, a brutal kleptocracy run by Africas longest-serving dictator. The next is Sierra Leone, a country still wrestling with the legacy of a civil war that happened two decades ago. The third-highest deficit belongs to Laos, a small, impoverished country dealing with the aftermath of being a heroin hub. Each differs in history and context. But the model suggests reasons to fear that peace in all three might be temporary.