Pacific Islands vs Togo: SDG indicator 8.8.2 … freedom of association and collective bargaining
SDG indicator 8.8.2 … freedom of association and collective bargaining over time
- Pacific Islands
- Togo
How they compare
Togo currently reports 2.1 against 0.93 in Pacific Islands, a difference of 1.17.
That makes Togo's figure about 2.3 times Pacific Islands's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2015 it was Togo ahead.
Pacific Islands ranks 75th and Togo ranks 76th of 83 groups.
Across the 2 decades both report, Pacific Islands averaged higher in 1 and Togo in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Pacific Islands | Togo | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 1.02 | 0.99 | 0.032 | Pacific Islands |
| 2020s | 0.956 | 1.2 | 0.242 | Togo |
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, Pacific Islands or Togo?
- Togo, at 2.1 against 0.93 in Pacific Islands as of 2024.
- What is the difference in sdg indicator 8.8.2: level of national compliance with labour rights between Pacific Islands and Togo?
- 1.17, with Togo ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Pacific Islands and Togo?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2024.
- How do Pacific Islands and Togo rank globally for sdg indicator 8.8.2: level of national compliance with labour rights?
- Pacific Islands ranks 75th and Togo ranks 76th 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
About this data
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.