This article validates a composite governance indicator for MEDA countries by comparing it with alternative methods for reconstructing indices. Building on the World Bank’s Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGIs), we benchmark our overall index against those obtained through principal component analysis (PCA), as well as the Mazziotta–Pareto Index (MPI) and the weighted MPI (WMPI). Covering 2010–2023—a period marked by two important shocks, the “Arab Springs” and the global pandemic, the analysis shows that PCA closely mirrors governance conditions, while MPI and WMPI are less effective. On the other hand, our composite index is SMART—Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Reliable, and Time-bound. It is easy to calculate and implement, theoretically correct, preserves cross-country governance trends, captures all three governance sub-dimensions, and adequately incorporates the six basic indicators.
AcemogluD. (2025). Institutions, technology, and prosperity[NBER working paper, No. 33442]. http://www.nber.org/papers/w33442
2.
AcemogluD., & RobinsonJ. A. (2022). Weak, despotic, or inclusive? How state type emerges from state versus civil society competition. American Political Science Review, 117(2), 407–420. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055422000740
3.
AcemogluD., EgorovG., & SoninK. (2021). Institutional change and institutional persistence. In BisinA. & FedericoG. (Eds.), The handbook of historical economics (pp. 365–389). Elsevier.
4.
AddinkH. (2019). Good governance: Concept and context. Oxford University Press.
5.
AlonsoJ. A., & OcampoJ. A. (2015). Global governance and rules for the post-2015 era. Bloomsbury Publishing.
6.
BalandJ.-M., MoeneK. O., & RobinsonJ. A. (2010). Governance and development. In RodrikD. & RosenzweigM. (Eds.), Handbook of development economics (Vol. 5). Elsevier.
7.
BenatiG., & GuerrieroC. (2020). The origins of the state: Technology, cooperation and institutions. Journal of Institutional Economics, 18(1), 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1744137420000569
8.
BenatiG., GuerrieroC., & ZainaF. (2022). The origins of political institutions and property rights. Journal of Comparative Economics, 50(4), 946–968. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jce.2022.07.002
9.
BergerS. (2000). Globalization and politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 3(1), 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.3.1.43
10.
BevirM., & RhodesR. A. W. (2016). Rethinking governance. Routledge.
11.
BiermannF., & KimR. E.(Eds.). (2020). Architectures of earth system governance: Institutional complexity and structural transformation. Cambridge University Press.
12.
CalzaF., AlianeN., & CannavaleC. (2013). Intercultural bridges in the internationalization of European businesses towards Islamic countries: The key role of cultural competence. EuroMed Journal of Business, 8(2), 172–187. https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-07-2013-0038
13.
CamposN., CoricelliF., & FrigerioM. (2024). Growth and democracy: A U-shaped relationship. Research Square Preprint. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4847234/v1
14.
CerquaA., GiannantoniC., ZampolloF., & MazziottaM. (2025). The municipal administration quality index: The Italian case. Social Indicators Research, 177(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-024-03511-8
15.
EmaraN., & ChiuI. (2016). The impact of governance environment on economic growth: The case of Middle Eastern and North African countries. Journal of Economics Library, 3(1), 24–37.
16.
EmaraN., & El-SaidA. (2021). Financial inclusion and economic growth: The role of governance in selected MENA countries. International Review of Economics and Finance, 75, 34–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2021.03.014
17.
European Union. (2021). Renewed partnership with the Southern Neighbourhood: A new agenda for the Mediterranean. Euro-Med Agenda.
18.
GhoshS., & SahaS. (2025). Impact of foreign direct investment on economic growth in developing countries: The role of institutional quality. Sustainable Economies, 3(1), 389–418. https://doi.org/10.62617/se389
19.
GuisoL., SapienzaP., & ZingalesL. (2016). Long-term persistence. Journal of the European Economic Association, 14(6), 1401–1436. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeea.12177
20.
International Monetary Fund. (2001). Review of the Fund’s experience in governance issues. [Policy Development and Review. Department paper no. 1–57]. https://doi.org/10.5089/9781498328074.007
21.
Jiménez-FernándezE., SánchezA., & Ortega-PérezM. (2022). Dealing with weighting scheme in composite indicators: An unsupervised distance-machine learning proposal for quantitative data. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 83, 101339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2022.101339
22.
KarnaneP., & QuinnM. (2019). Political instability, ethnic fractionalization and economic growth. International Economics and Economic Policy, 16(2), 435–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10368-017-0393-3
23.
KaufmannD., & KraayA. (2024). The worldwide governance indicators: Methodology and 2024 update[Policy research working paper, no. 10952]. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-10952
24.
KaufmannD., KraayA., & ZoidoP. (1999). Governance matters[Policy research working paper, no. 2196]. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-2196
25.
KepingY. (2018). Governance and good governance: A new framework for political analysis. Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 11, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40647-017-0197-4
26.
KyriacouA. (2025). Economic inequality, culture, and governance quality. Journal of Economic Surveys, 39(1), 375–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12623
27.
MagginoF.(Ed.). (2017). Complexity in society: From indicators construction to their synthesis. Springer.
MarsonM., MigheliM., & SacconeD. (2021). New evidence on the link between ethnic fractionalization and economic freedom. Economics of Governance, 22(3), 257–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10101-021-00259-6
30.
MazziottaM., & ParetoA. (2016). On a generalized non-compensatory composite index for measuring socio-economic phenomena. Social Indicators Research, 127(3), 983–1003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-0998-2
31.
MazziottaM., & ParetoA. (2021). Everything you always wanted to know about normalization. Italian Review of Economics, Demography and Statistics, 75, 41–52.
32.
MazziottaM., & ParetoA. (2022). Weighting in composite indices construction: The case of the Mazziotta-Pareto index. Italian Review of Economics, Demography and Statistics, 76(4), 17–26. https://www.rieds-journal.org/rieds/article/view/154/146
33.
MazziottaM., & ParetoA. (2024). Principal component analysis for constructing socio-economic composite indicators: Theoretical and empirical considerations. SN Social Sciences, 4(6), 114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-024-00920-x
34.
MiraR., & HammadacheA. (2017). Good governance and economic growth: A contribution to the institutional debate about state failure in Middle East and North Africa. Asian Journal of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies, 11(3), 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/25765949.2017.12023313
35.
MondaM., GabrieliG., & MazziottaM. (2021). An indicator of well-being for Italian agriculture. Italian Review of Agricultural Economics, 76(2), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.36253/rea-13097
36.
MukandS., & RodrikD. (2020). The political economy of liberal democracy. Economic Journal, 130(627), 765–792. https://doi.org/10.1093/ej/ueaa004
37.
NorthD. (1991). Institutions. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.5.1.97
38.
ÖzekinA., & AksoyF. (2025). Index generation for good governance via multiplicative data envelopment analysis. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 99, 102197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2025.102197
39.
PerssonT., & TabelliniG. (2021). Culture, institutions, and policy. In A. Bisin & G. Federico (Eds.), The handbook of historical economics (pp. 463–489). Elsevier.
40.
RhodesR. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity, and accountability. Open University Press.
41.
RodrikD. (2018). Populism and the economics of globalization. Journal of International Business Policy, 1(1–2), 12–33. https://doi.org/10.1057/s42214-018-0001-4
42.
SaidiY., OchiA., & MaktoufS. (2022). FDI inflows, economic growth, and governance quality trilogy in developing countries: A panel VAR analysis. Bulletin of Economic Research, 75(2), 426–449. https://doi.org/10.1111/boer.12364
43.
ScalamontiF. (2021). The transition of the Southern economies of Mediterranean Sea: The macroeconomic framework and the determinants of foreign investments. Industry—Review of Industrial Economics and Policy, 42(3), 533–578. https://doi.org/10.1430/98711
44.
ScalamontiF. (2024a). The foreign investments-growth nexus in underdeveloped countries: The state-of-art of research analysing a selected and recent empirical literature (2020–2022). Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 198, 122933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122933
45.
ScalamontiF. (2024b). The mediating role of governance climate, natural resource endowment, and international capital flow on growth determinants across MEDA transitional economies[SSRN working paper series]. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5001402
46.
ScalamontiF. (2024c). A quantitative and qualitative macroeconomic and sociopolitical outlook of the MEDA transitional economies: Development-paths, governance climate, and sociocultural factors. National Accounting Review, 6(3), 407–448. https://doi.org/10.3934/NAR.2024019
47.
ScalamontiF. (2024d). The Sustainable Development Index: An integration of the ecological framework considering the governance-development nexus. Highlights of Sustainability, 3(4), 354–373. https://doi.org/10.54175/hsustain3040020
48.
ScalamontiF. (2025a). Societal change and progress in an evolving world: Beyond the maximization logic and to the adoption of satisficing choices for sustainable development. Sustainable Economies, 3(2), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.62617/se1847
49.
ScalamontiF. (2025b). An empirical analysis of the intra-industry trade flows with a spatial-gravity model for a cluster of EU-advanced economies and MEDA-transitional economies. Financial Statistical Journal, 8(1), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.24294/fsj10238
50.
ScalamontiF. (2025c). The determinants of SMEs’ internationalisation across MEDA transitional economies[SSRN working paper series]. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5084116
51.
ScalamontiF. (2025d). The weak-form efficient markets hypothesis: Macroeconomic evidence from MEDA capital marketsQuantitative Finance and Economics, 9(3), 631–657. https://doi.org/10.3934/QFE.2025022
52.
ScalamontiF. (2025e). Empirical evidence on the determinants of health expenditure in the MEDA region[SSRN working paper series]. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5111946
53.
ScalamontiF. (2025f). The Italy-MEDA emerging markets partnership: Trade relationships, cross-border operations on firms’ equity, and constant market shares analysis. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 5(2), 258–292. https://doi.org/10.3934/DSFE.2025012
54.
SoysaI., & AlmasS. (2019). Does ethnolinguistic diversity preclude good governance? A comparative study with alternative data, 1990–2015. Kyklos, 72(4), 604–636. https://doi.org/10.1111/kykl.12210
55.
StiglitzJ., FitoussiJ., & DurandM. (2018). Beyond GDP: Measuring what counts for economic and social performance. OECD Publishing.
56.
StojanovićI., AteljevićJ., & StevićR. (2016). Good governance as a tool of sustainable development. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 5(4), 558–558. https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2016.v5n4p558
57.
SundaramJ., & ChowdhuryA.(Eds.). (2012). Is good governance good for development?Bloomsbury Publishing.
58.
TerziS., OtoiuA., ParetoA., GrimacciaE., & MazziottaM. (2021). Open issues in composite indicators: A starting point and a reference on some state-of-the-art issues. RomaTrE-Press.
59.
ThomasG.(Ed.). (2012). Thinking about global governance. Routledge.
60.
ValliV. (2025). Europe and the world economy. OEET Press.
61.
VercelliA. (2020). Finance and democracy: Towards a sustainable financial system. Palgrave.
World Bank. (2017). World Development Report: Governance and the law. The World Bank Group. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/wdr2017
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
