1. Country Fact Sheet Lebanon

2. Human Development Index
The Human Development Index (HDI) focuses on three measurable dimensions of Human Development:
Living a long and Healthy life
Being educated
Having a decent standard of living
It combines measures of life expectancy, school enrolment,literacy and income to allow a broader view of country’s development than does income alone.
HDI is constructed using data from international sources and up-to-date data from national sources

3. HDI Lebanon Rank
HDI rank
2003
(177) countries
GDP per capita
rank (177) countries
(PPP US $)
rank minus
(higher means better on HDR)
GDP per
capita
value
(PPP US$)
HDI
Value 2003
Lebanon 81 95 14
5,074
0.759
Arab States -
5,685
0.679
Best performer in Arab states (Qatar) 40 27
-13
19,844
0.849
Worst performer in Arab States(Yemen)
151
166 15
889
0.489

4. HDI Lebanon Rank
Lebanon is ranked 81st in the 2005 Human Development Report
Lebanon’s development rank is one step lower than its rank in 2004 (80th out of 177 countries) but has been in the medium human development rank all through 2000’s

5. Human Development Index Comparison Table
Life expectancy at birth
(years 2003)
Combined Primary, secondary and tertiary enrollment ratio% 2002/2003
GDP per capita
(PPP US $)
2003
1. Japan(82.0)
1.UK (123) %
1. Luxembourg (62,298)
2.Hong Kong,China (81.6)
2.Australia (116)%
2. Ireland (37,738)
3. Iceland (80.7)
3. Belgium (114)%
3. Norway (37,670)
67. Bulgaria(72.2)
55.Cuba (80)%
89. Dominica (5,448)
68.Tonga(72.2)
56.Panama (79)%
90. Peru (5,260)
69. Mauritius (72.2)
57.Malta (79)%
91. Cape Verde (5,214)
70. Lebanon (72.0)
58. Lebanon (79)%
92. Lebanon (5,074)
177.Swaziland (32.5)
173. Niger (21)%
170. Sierra Leone (548)

6. Human Poverty Index
The HDR 1997 introduced the human poverty index (HPI) which focuses on the proportion of people below a threshold level in basic dimensions of Human Development- Living a long and healthy life, having access to education, and a decent standard of living
HPI-1 rank
103 countries
HPI-1 Value %
Lebanon 18
9.6
Best performer in Arab States( Occupied Palestinian Territories) 7
6.5
Worst performer in Arab States (Yemen) 77
40.3
Best performer in the world (Uruguay) 1
3.6
Worst performer in the world (Niger)
103
64.4

7. Building the capabilities of women
The Gender Related Development Index (GDI) introduced in HDR 2005 captures inequalities in achievement between women and men
GDI rank
140 countries
GDI Value
HDI rank
Minus
HDI value
Lebanon 68
0.745 -4
0.759
Best performer in Arab States) Kuwait) 39
0.843 1
0.844
Worst performer in Arab States (Yemen)
121
0.448
0.489
Best performer in the world (Norway)
0.960
0.963
Worst performer in the world (Niger)
140
0.271
0.281

8. Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM)
The Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) reveals whether women take an active part in economic and political life. It focuses on gender inequality in key areas of economic and political participation and decision-making. It tracks the following:
share of seats in the parliament held by women; female legislator,
senior officials and mangers,
female professionals and technical workers,
Gender disparity in earned income, reflecting economical independence,
The GEM value for Lebanon can not be calculated because some data are missing

9. The Gender Empowerment Measure
Seats in Parliament held by women(% of total)
Female administrators and managers
Female professionals and technical workers
(% of total)
Estimated female earned income
(PPPUS$)
Ratio of female earned income to male earned income
1. Rwanda (45.3)
1.Philippines (58.1)
1. Barbados(71.3)
1.Luxemburg (34,891)
1.Kenya (0.93)
2.Sweden
(45.3)
2.Fiji (50.6)
2.Lithuania
(69.7)
2.Norway
(32,273)
2.Switzerland
(0.90)
3. Norway (38.2)
3.Tanzania(49.1)
4.Mongolia (65.6)
3. US (29,017)
141.Sudan(0.32)
156.Iran (4.1)
4.US (45.9)
6. Russian Federation
(64.5)
88.Sir Lanka (2,580)
142. Algeria(0.31)
159.Lebanon(2.3) -
89.Lebanon (2,431)
143. Lebanon(0.31)
162.Yemen(0.3)
85.Pakistan (2.4)
86.Saudi Arabia (6.4)
154. Sierra Leone(326)
154.Oman(0.19)

10. 2005 HDR
The HDR 2005: “International Cooperation at Cross Roads” has three objectives:
To outline the state of HD across the world, with a special focus on how far countries are from achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDG)
To draw attention to inequality as an important barrier to progress. The report argues that millions of people could be lifted out of poverty if steps were taken to income the growth rate of incomes of the poor.
To discuss the three core issues of international cooperation: Aid, Trade and Security where steps are needed
Notes for you to say:
Without aid for health, education and other social services aimed at reducing inequalities, countries will not have work forces productive enough to engage with international economy. Without access to markets in trade,aid resources would go waste as development and poverty reduction remain stunted. And without addressing human security concerns, many countries that have recently emerged from episodes of violent conflict, will not see progress on MDGs.

11. 2005 HDR
Focuses on what governments in rich countries can do to keep their side at the global partnership bargain.
The Report looks at 3 pillars of Cooperation:
Development Assistance which suffers from two problems:chronic under financing and poor quality
International trade which has the potential to increase the share of the world’s poorest countries and people in global prosperity
Security which could create the conditions for accelerated human development. Failure in any one area will underline the foundations for future progress
Notes for you to say(conclusion)
What the report is saying is that human development is greater than meeting the MDGs (although they are very important) and concerted actions on these areas of international cooperation can lay the foundations for development even beyond 2015.