Africa: Lower-middle income vs United States: SDG indicator 8.8.2 … freedom of association and collective bargaining

Africa: Lower-middle income
2.91
in 2024
United States
3.83
in 2024
Africa: Lower-middle income rank
49th
United States rank
47th

SDG indicator 8.8.2 … freedom of association and collective bargaining over time

  • Africa: Lower-middle income
  • United States
01234201520192024

How they compare

United States currently reports 3.83 against 2.91 in Africa: Lower-middle income, a difference of 0.92.

That makes United States's figure about 1.3 times Africa: Lower-middle income's.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2015 it was Africa: Lower-middle income ahead.

Africa: Lower-middle income ranks 49th and United States ranks 47th of 83 groups.

Across the 2 decades both report, Africa: Lower-middle income averaged higher in 1 and United States in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Africa: Lower-middle income United States Difference Ahead
2010s 3.02 2.83 0.192 Africa: Lower-middle income
2020s 2.91 3.34 0.43 United States

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher sdg indicator 8.8.2: level of national compliance with labour rights, Africa: Lower-middle income or United States?
United States, at 3.83 against 2.91 in Africa: Lower-middle income as of 2024.
What is the difference in sdg indicator 8.8.2: level of national compliance with labour rights between Africa: Lower-middle income and United States?
0.92, with United States ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Africa: Lower-middle income and United States?
10 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2024.
How do Africa: Lower-middle income and United States rank globally for sdg indicator 8.8.2: level of national compliance with labour rights?
Africa: Lower-middle income ranks 49th and United States ranks 47th of 83 groups.
Where does this data come from?
International Labour Organization, published as SDG indicator 8.8.2: Level of national compliance with labour rights, freedom of association and collective bargaining. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Africa: Lower-middle income vs United States: SDG indicator 8.8.2: Level of national compliance with labour rights. Statizoid, drawing on International Labour Organization. Retrieved 12 October 2026, from https://labour.statizoid.com/compare/sdg-indicator-8-8-2-level-of-national-compliance-with-labour-rights-freedom-of/africa-lower-middle-income/united-states/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under ILO Terms of Use (attribution required); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://labour.statizoid.com/compare/sdg-indicator-8-8-2-level-of-national-compliance-with-labour-rights-freedom-of/africa-lower-middle-income/united-states/">Africa: Lower-middle income vs United States: SDG indicator 8.8.2: Level of national compliance with labour rights</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
SDG indicator 8.8.2: Level of national compliance with labour rights, freedom of association and collective bargaining
Source
International Labour Organization
Licence
ILO Terms of Use (attribution required)
Coverage
269 places, 2,688 data points, 2015–2024
Last refreshed

The indicator measures the level of national compliance with fundamental rights at work (freedom of association and collective bargaining, FACB) for all ILO member states based on six international ILO supervisory body textual sources and also on national legislation. It is based on the coding of textual sources against a list of evaluation criteria and then converting the coding into indicators. The indicator has a range from 0 to 10, with 0 being the best possible score (indicating higher levels of compliance with FACB rights) and 10 the worst (indicating lower levels of compliance with FACB rights). This indicator is not intended as a tool to compare compliance among ILO member States. It should specifically be noted that reporting obligations of an ILO member State to the ILO's supervisory system and thus ILO textual sources are different for ratifying and non‐ratifying ILO member States.