Billy Wilson via Flickr

To implement ambitious policies effectively and mobilize public finance for climate, nature and equity, governments must follow through on commitments and enforce laws consistently — even for those with political and economic power.

Accountability is necessary to drive climate action and fulfill domestic and international commitments

Climate diplomacy and national policymaking have increasingly called for greater fulfillment of commitments and increased ambitions. This necessitates that countries strengthen governance and institutions to deliver on their promises and be held accountable, both internationally and to their citizens.

When accountability is lacking, corruption can drain public finances, contribute to wealth inequality and deprive citizens — especially those already disadvantaged — of critical services like health, education and clean water.

Corruption and lack of accountability also undermine progress toward climate goals. This can take many forms, from wealthy governments failing to fulfill their finance pledges to greenwashing concerns. At the same time, corruption facilitates illegal logging and mining in areas with critical value for people, nature and climate, such as the Amazon, while large-scale climate adaptation projects are also prone to corrupt practices.
 

Most government accountability indicators are moving in the wrong direction, but there are some signs of progress

While governance estimates include several subjective measures of processes and the behavior of political actors or institutions, overall trends regarding government accountability and corruption are not encouraging. For four indicators — respect for national constitutions, opposition party oversight and executive oversight by both legislative and non-legislative bodies — the trend is moving in the wrong direction, reflecting a continued deterioration in the rule of law. Similarly, the share of countries where conflicts of interest are published for officials declined from 2021 to 2023.

Nonetheless, some of the indicators in this shift also provide signs of recent progress. The share of countries publishing public procurement tenders and awards has grown slightly, and the independence of high courts has recorded modest improvement since 2021. The number of countries with live registers of beneficial ownership has also shown marked improvement since the first register was launched in 2015.

These indicators highlight the need for accelerated action on government accountability. Practitioners, elected officials and advocates can draw lessons on best practice from initiatives such as the Green Accountability Platform or the Open Government Partnership. By independently reviewing the implementation of government commitments, initiatives like these provide a fertile space for shared learning and collaboration among civil society, government, multilaterals and other actors.
 

A wide range of measures can help strengthening accountability and anti-corruption efforts

A holistic approach is necessary to ensure greater accountability and eliminate corruption. In this context, the institutions, capacities and incentives that lead to accountability include those covered elsewhere in this system, such as transparency, free press, access to justice and state capacity. The indicators listed in this shift assess whether countries have put in place good practices for accountability in public spending, anti-corruption, oversight, and checks and balances on political powers. At the project level, corruption risk analysis must be strengthened by examining the political struggles over who benefits from natural resources in specific contexts.

Despite public calls for accountability, most countries have not adequately implemented institutions and mechanisms commonly viewed as important checks and balances to political elites and safeguards against corrupt actors. Opportunities to shift from this status quo arise when political and economic elites recognize a sustainable development agenda as aligned with their interests. These opportunities are further strengthened when there is sufficient state capacity to pursue that agenda, along with mechanisms to learn and adapt.

Political breakthroughs on climate change are also more likely when long-term strategies and climate laws are combined with policies that deliver tangible benefits to new constituencies and reduce the costs of climate action. Success also depends on inclusive policymaking processes that address equity and distributional impacts.
 


The indicators presented in this shift are all directional, with an increasing trend indicating improvements in government accountability and anti-corruption measures. While there are no specified global targets or timeframes, robust and effective governance can only be realized if these key measures show rapid improvement.

Tracking progress on global outcomes

3464: Countries where the legislature routinely questions the executive in practice

Status: Wrong Direction
Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Number of countries included in the study in 2000-2006: 177 countries. 2007-2010: 178 countries. 2011-2025: 179 countries.

Countries that received a score of 1 corresponding to “Yes (routinely)” to the question: “In practice, does the legislature routinely question executive branch officials?” were included in the selection criteria. A score of 0 indicates “No — never or very rarely.” For more information about the V-Dem composite index, please refer to the V-Dem codebook.

A common governance risk is consolidation of power in the executive, which can enable the executive and his/her party to use the executive branch for personal gain or parcel out public resources in return for political favors. This can further enable corruption and divert resources away from populations or problems that need them the most.

Parliaments that are sufficiently independent from the executive therefore provide critical accountability functions. This includes, for instance, oversight committees on policy implementation and calling for inquiries on the impact of climate policies on vulnerable populations. Parliamentary actions may also spur post-legislative scrutiny, public hearings, reports and other means of creating transparency and accountability.

The Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute assesses whether the legislature of a given country routinely questions executive branch officials. This could mean summoning the head of government to answer questions on executive policy or to testify. This indicator does not guarantee that the ability of the legislature to exercise oversight will lead to accountability, nor that the legislature will always use this ability in the public (rather than political) interest, but it does indicate some level of political checks on the power of the executive.

In recent years, the share of countries demonstrating this practice has gradually decreased, and as of 2025, only 66% of the 179 surveyed countries exhibited this form of oversight. A downward trend has existed over the past ten years, suggesting that this indicator is headed in the wrong direction.

3465: Countries where executive oversight can be exercised by non-legislative institutions with oversight functions

Status: Wrong Direction

This global indicator from the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute assesses whether there are bodies — such as a comptroller, ombudsperson or general prosecutor — that would be likely to have the political independence, capacity and willingness to investigate the executive branch (including the head of government) in the event of wrongdoing. This helps to understand whether the country has independent oversight institutions that function in practice at the highest levels. Such oversight is essential to avoid misuse of finance, ensure that laws are upheld and protect the fulfillment of civil liberties and rights.

Even when such institutions have been established by law, much work is still needed to build their capacity and independence to effectively challenge illegal or unconstitutional activities. Importantly, to ensure these systems can deliver meaningful impact, the executive branch must also respond to their reports and decisions — an action that is often lacking across countries of all income levels.

As of 2025, 46% of the 179 surveyed countries had an oversight body with the independence, capacity and willingness to investigate the executive branch in the event of wrongdoing and would be likely to do so in practice. This marks a decline from 50% in 2022 and the peak of 55% in 2012, suggesting a slow but consistent downward trend.

3469: Countries where opposition party oversight can be exercised against the wishes of the governing party or coalition

Status: Wrong Direction
Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Number of countries included in the study 2000-2006: 177 countries; 2007-2010: 178 countries; 2011-2025: 179 countries.

The selection criteria for the global aggregate values includes countries that received a score corresponding to “2 (Yes, for the most part)” to the question: “Are opposition parties (those not in the ruling party or coalition) able to exercise oversight and investigatory functions against the wishes of the governing party or coalition?” Country values include “0 (No, not at all),” “1 (occasionally)” and “2 (Yes, for the most part).” For more information about the V-Dem composite index, please refer to the V-Dem codebook.

This global indicator from the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute assesses whether opposition parties are willing and able in practice to exercise oversight of the ruling political party.

Opposition party oversight is a key component of the sharing of powers and rule of law, both of which are essential for a stable multiparty democracy and accountable governance. When opposition parties can exercise oversight of the ruling party, it may help overall stability, rule of law and protection of the interests of ethnic, linguistic or political minorities.

As of 2025, only 20% of the 179 surveyed countries had opposition parties that were viewed as able to exercise this oversight function. This figure has declined from a peak of 34% in 2011 and continues to trend downward.

3466: Countries where the executive branch respects the constitution

Status: Wrong Direction
Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Number of countries included in the study in 2000-2006: 177 countries; 2007-2010: 178 countries; 2011-2025: 179 countries.

The selection criteria for the global values includes countries that received a score of at least “3 (Members of the executive rarely violate the constitution, and when it happens they face legal charges.)” responding to the question: “Do members of the executive (the head of state, the head of government, and cabinet ministers) respect the constitution?” In addition to scores of 3, country values include: “0 (Members of the executive value the constitution whenever they want to, without legal consequences),” “1 (Members of the executive violate most provisions of the constitution without legal consequences, but still must respect certain provisions,” “2 (Somewhere in between (1) and (3). Members of the executive would face legal consequences for violating most provisions of the constitution, but can disregard some provisions without any legal consequences)” and “4 (Members of the executive never violate the constitution).” For more information about the V-Dem composite index, please refer to the V-Dem codebook.

This global indicator from the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute assesses how willing members of the executive branch are to violate the constitution, as well as to what extent and whether they are likely to face consequences. This is another contributor to rule of law, balance of powers and controls on corruption.

In 2015, 51% of the 179 surveyed countries were recorded by V-Dem as having an executive branch that respected the constitution; by 2025, that number had fallen to 44%, coinciding with a decade marked by the rise of increasingly autocratic governments.

3467: Countries where the high court rules independently of the government’s position

Status: Wrong Direction
Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Number of countries included in the study in 2000-2006: 177 countries; 2007-2010: 178 countries; 2011-2025: 179 countries.

The selection criteria for the global value calculations includes countries that received a score of at least “3 (Seldom)” to the question: “When the high court in the judicial system is ruling in cases that are salient to the government, how often would you say that it makes decisions that merely reflect government wishes regardless of its sincere view of the legal record?” Other country values include: “0 (Always),” “1 (Usually),” and “4 (Never).” For more information about the V-Dem composite index, please refer to the V-Dem codebook.

This global indicator from the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute assesses whether the high court of a country is sufficiently independent from the executive branch, to the extent that it is willing to rule against it when the court’s legal view is contrary.

An independent justice system is an important check on government and private sector actions that may have strong political support but violate procedural or substantive statutes. This was demonstrated, for example, when the Kenyan National Environmental Tribunal halted construction of a new coal plant.

As of 2025, 46% of the 179 surveyed countries had a high court that was considered willing to rule against the executive branch, down from a peak of 55% in 2011.

3461: Countries where conflicts of interest are published for officials required to declare

Status: Insufficient Data
Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Number of countries included in the study in 2021: 129 countries; 2023: 143 countries.

The selection criteria for global values includes only countries that scored 1 (the highest, “Available for all officials required to declare” in response to T-Index Q10 (conflict of interest disclosures)). In addition to “1,” other possible individual country values include “0.5 (Available only for part of the officials required to declare, e.g. top officials) and “0 (Not available online (or only upon request)).” For more information about T-index scores, please refer to T-index methodology.

This indicator from the Transparency Index (T-Index) measures both de jure (legal commitments) and de facto (practice) transparency by assessing the extent to which countries disclose public officials’ declared conflicts of interest. This approach provides insights on a country’s progress in accordance with the United Nations Convention Against Corruption, as well as Sustainable Development Goal Target 16.6.

Conflict of interest disclosures reduce corruption risk by requiring elected officials to proactively identify and disclose where they may have a personal or economic interest that could impact their decisions.

As of 2023, officials from only 21% (30) of the 143 surveyed countries disclosed conflicts of interest for all public officials required to declare — down from 25% (32 countries) in 2021 — while an additional 15% disclosed conflicts of interest for top officials only.

3462: Countries where public procurement tenders and awards are publicized

Status: Insufficient Data
Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

This is a new index and therefore has only two years of data available. Number of countries included in the study in 2021: 129 countries; 2023: 143 countries.

The selection criteria for global calculations includes only countries that scored 1 (the highest, “Calls for bids AND award notices are published”) in response to T-Index Q3 (public procurement). In addition to “1,” other possible individual country values include “0.5 (Only call for bids or award notices are published) and “0 (No procurement portal exists OR information published is minimal (selected procedures only)).” For more information about T-index scores, please refer to T-index methodology.

To ensure infrastructure investment aligns with the Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement, an annual investment of $6.9 trillion will be needed by 2030. According to the Open Contracting Partnership, governments spend a total of approximately $13 trillion annually through public contracts. Although public procurement represents the largest marketplace in the world, contracting information is often unavailable for public scrutiny.

This indicator assesses whether countries are publicizing public procurement tenders and awards, enabling greater public involvement in the contracting process. Open contracting has been seen to promote greater economic inclusion, improve competition, reduce corruption and improve service delivery.

As of 2023, about 55% of the 143 countries surveyed published public procurement tenders and awards, 31% published one or the other, and 13% did not publish either. Currently, this indicator does not have sufficient historical global data to evaluate trends.

While this indicator captures whether tenders and awards are published at all, the Open Contracting Data Standard (OCDS) enables the disclosure of data and documents across all stages of the contracting process. So far, only 30 governments worldwide have implemented this data standard for public contracting.

3480: Countries where there is public registry of companies’ beneficial owners

Status: Right Direction
Historical Data Methodology and Challenges:

Staff at Open Ownership update the database passively and periodically (not annually) based on when new registries become publicly available. Data on the Open Ownership map is drawn from publicly available sources and may not be comprehensive for all countries. Data is available starting 2015 and September 2025 was the last time the list was accessed for this indicator. Six of the countries in the study (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru and Seychelles) did not have a year associated with the launch of their registry; we therefore did an online search for these dates and added them to the dataset. Ecuador is the only country whose public launch date could not be fully confirmed, so the team used the 2024 date on Open Ownership’s website, wherein it communicates Ecuador’s official commitment to creating a roadmap for implementing the Beneficial Ownership Data Standard in 2022-2024. Countries without a live registry as of September 2025 were assigned a value of “0” and the year 2025.

Open Ownership methodology: Countries that had fully implemented registries at the sector or full economy level were included. As of September 2025, this totaled to 95 countries. Data on the Open Ownership map is drawn from publicly-available sources and may not be comprehensive for all countries.

Beneficial owners are the individuals who control and profit from a company, which may not match the legal owner. Secretive and convoluted chains for corporate ownership can be used to hide proceeds from corruption, disguise conflicts of interest, evade taxes and win government contracts through improper means.

Beneficial ownership transparency has long been a major challenge in the extractives industry, limiting the accountability of extractive revenues and shielding bad actors. By one estimate, developing countries lose $1 trillion annually from corrupt or illegal deals that often involve anonymous companies.

Momentum to enhance beneficial ownership transparency has been building in recent years. For example, as of 2023, 23 of 54 countries in Africa had enacted laws and regulations requiring the beneficial owners to disclose themselves to a government authority. In the Asia-Pacific region, support for beneficial ownership reforms varies, but countries such as Indonesia and Armenia have taken significant steps toward greater transparency.

This indicator, sourced from Open Ownership, assesses which countries have implemented and published sectoral or economy-wide registries of beneficial owners. Ukraine was the first country to launch a registry in 2015. As of September 2025, 95 countries had implemented live registries and another 29 were actively being implemented. This progress suggests that the indicator is moving in the right direction.

Key enablers and barriers to change

Other shift Other shifts needed to transform the system

Enable a safe and secure environment for workers, civil society and communities

Equitable systems change is impossible without respect for human rights and civil liberties. These rights set the foundation for all people to access essential services, live in a safe and healthy environment, and participate fully in governance.

Ensure transparency and access to information

Transparency and access to information are essential for effective government coordination, meaningful participation from civil society and building international trust and cooperation.

Guarantee access to justice

An independent, impartial and accessible justice system is a critical tool for individuals and communities to protect their rights and obtain justice.

Ensure inclusive citizen participation in policymaking and political processes

The ability of any individual or social group to participate meaningfully in political and policymaking processes is a fundamental recognized human right — and a powerful way to advance the voices of those most affected by climate change, social inequality and loss of nature.

Strengthen government capacity to implement commitments fairly and effectively

Governments should build their capacity to collect tax revenues fairly, secure their borders effectively and maintain skilled bureaucracies that can plan, coordinate, regulate and adapt to new information and technology.