Comparative Empirical Analysis of the Non-OECD Countries: Freedom, Equality and Sustainable Development in the Non-OECD Countries (2002–2016)

  • David F. J. Campbell
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Democracy, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship for Growth book series (DIG)


There are higher levels of economic than political freedom in the world. Economic freedom is more widespread, whereas political freedom appears to be more constrained, when referred to as global phenomena. Economic freedom not necessarily requires also political freedom, so there can be economic freedom without political freedom (or a coexistence of higher levels of economic and lower levels of political freedom). In addition, when we talk about global trends, economic freedom also increased faster than political freedom (while political freedom currently stagnates at the global level). So there has been more progress in the world in economic freedom than in political freedom. Political freedom increased only modestly (or even decreased). As a global trend, gender equality increases. This apparently is the case not only for the world in general, but also for OECD and non-OECD countries more specifically. These increases in gender equality are being sharply contrasted by the developments in income equality. For the whole world, a scenario of stagnation in income equality must be stated, and in context of the OECD countries (not only USA, EU15, but also the Nordic countries), income equality even decreases and decreased. So there may be a troublesome tendency be spotted (and asserted), where higher levels of GDP per capita scores actually associate with a downward tendency in income equality.


Development Economic freedom Gender equality Growth Income equality Non-OECD OECD Political freedom Sustainable development World 


  1. Campbell, D. F. J., Carayannis, E. G., Barth, T. D., & Campbell, G. S. (2013). Measuring Democracy and the Quality of Democracy in a World-Wide Approach: Models and Indices of Democracy and the New Findings of the “Democracy Ranking”. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 4(1), 1–16. Scholar
  2. Carayannis, E. G., Barth, T. D., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2012). The Quintuple Helix Innovation Model: Global Warming as a Challenge and Driver for Innovation. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 1–12. Scholar
  3. Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2010). Triple Helix, Quadruple Helix and Quintuple Helix and How Do Knowledge, Innovation and the Environment Relate To Each Other? A Proposed Framework for a Trans-disciplinary Analysis of Sustainable Development and Social Ecology. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 1(1), 41–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2012). Mode 3 Knowledge Production in Quadruple Helix Innovation Systems. 21st-Century Democracy, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship for Development (Springer Briefs in Business). New York: Springer.
  5. IMF (International Monetary Fund). (2011, April). World Economic Outlook. Tensions from the Two-Speed Recovery Unemployment, Commodities, and Capital Flows. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
  6. Obama, B. (2017, January 9). The Irreversible Momentum of Clean Energy. Science, Policy Forum., Scholar
  7. Przeworski, A., Alvarez, M. E., Cheibub, J. A., & Limongi, F. (2003). Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950–1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). (2007). Human Development Report 2007/2008. Fighting Climate Change: Human Solidarity in a Divided World. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  9. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). (2009). Human Development Report 2009. Overcoming Barriers: Human Mobility and Development. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  10. UNDP (United Nations Development Program). (2011). Human Development Report 2011. Sustainability and Equity: A Better Future for All. New York: United Nations (United Nations Development Program).
  11. Veld, R. J. in´t. (2010a). Knowledge Democracy. Consequences for Science, Politics, and Media. Heidelberg: Springer.
  12. Veld, R. J. in´t. (2010b). Towards Knowledge Democracy. In R. J. in´t Veld (Ed.), Knowledge Democracy: Consequences for Science, Politics, and Media (pp. 1–11). Heidelberg: Springer.
  13. World Bank. (2018). World Development Indicators (Web-based Online Database). Washington, DC: World Bank.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • David F. J. Campbell
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Department for Continuing Education Research and Educational Management, Center for Educational Management and Higher Education DevelopmentDanube University KremsKrems an der DonauAustria
  2. 2.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of ViennaViennaAustria
  3. 3.University of Applied Arts ViennaViennaAustria
  4. 4.Faculty for Interdisciplinary Studies (iff), Department of Science Communication and Higher Education Research (WIHO)Alpen-Adria-Universität KlagenfurtViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations