Data for 2020
Compliance with Labour Rights, 2020
2020, as ILO’s 2026 release gives it · stored as published, never rewritten
Compliance with Labour Rights, 2020 covers 186 countries. United Arab Emirates is highest, at 10.00; 12 countries share the lowest reading, 0.00. The middle country reads 1.43. Against 2019, 36 values changed (17 up, 19 down), the same countries are covered.
Compliance with Labour Rights · Data for 2020
HighestUnited Arab Emirates
10.00Lowest12 countries share it
0.00Shaded by value in five groups of equal size, darkest at the lowest end. A higher value is the worse result.
01Values only
The table
Every country and every column of Compliance with Labour Rights, 2020, as published. The file carries values only, so no position is shown. “=” marks a shared position.
Showing 25 of 186 countries · select a heading to sort
| United Arab EmiratesAREWestern Asia | 10.00 | — |
 IranIRNSouthern Asia | 9.96 | — |
 ChinaCHNEastern Asia | 9.32 | — |
 BangladeshBGDSouthern Asia | 8.75 | — |
 QatarQATWestern Asia | 8.56 | — |
 VietnamVNMSouth-eastern Asia | 7.87 | — |
 BelarusBLREastern Europe | 7.76 | — |
 VenezuelaVENSouth America | 7.47 | — |
 SudanSDNNorthern Africa | 6.86 | — |
 UzbekistanUZBCentral Asia | 6.78 | — |
 ThailandTHASouth-eastern Asia | 6.70 | — |
 Saudi ArabiaSAUWestern Asia | 6.64 | — |
 LibyaLBYNorthern Africa | 6.49 | — |
 IraqIRQWestern Asia | 6.48 | — |
 SyriaSYRWestern Asia | 6.47 | — |
 EgyptEGYNorthern Africa | 6.26 | — |
 DjiboutiDJIEastern Africa | 6.17 | — |
 LaosLAOSouth-eastern Asia | 6.02 | — |
 FijiFJIMelanesia | 5.73 | — |
 GuatemalaGTMCentral America | 5.38 | — |
 ZimbabweZWEEastern Africa | 5.30 | — |
 MalaysiaMYSSouth-eastern Asia | 5.11 | — |
 ColombiaCOLSouth America | 5.02 | — |
 MaldivesMDVSouthern Asia | 4.79 | — |
 South KoreaKOREastern Asia | 4.74 | — |
 CambodiaKHMSouth-eastern Asia | 4.73 | — |
 AfghanistanAFGSouthern Asia | 4.71 | — |
 PanamaPANCentral America | 4.70 | — |
 PakistanPAKSouthern Asia | 4.64 | — |
 Equatorial GuineaGNQMiddle Africa | 4.62 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 HondurasHNDCentral America | 4.52 | — |
 El SalvadorSLVCentral America | 4.42 | — |
 EcuadorECUSouth America | 4.25 | — |
 PeruPERSouth America | 4.20 | — |
 OmanOMNWestern Asia | 4.17 | — |
 LebanonLBNWestern Asia | 4.16 | — |
 BahrainBHRWestern Asia | 4.00 | — |
 KenyaKENEastern Africa | 4.00 | — |
 PhilippinesPHLSouth-eastern Asia | 3.97 | — |
 NepalNPLSouthern Asia | 3.78 | — |
 TürkiyeTURWestern Asia | 3.68 | — |
 IndiaINDSouthern Asia | 3.48 | — |
 ParaguayPRYSouth America | 3.22 | — |
 DR CongoCODMiddle Africa | 3.16 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 United StatesUSANorthern America | 3.08 | — |
 ArgentinaARGSouth America | 3.06 | — |
 BoliviaBOLSouth America | 2.94 | — |
 MyanmarMMRSouth-eastern Asia | 2.94 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 BotswanaBWASouthern Africa | 2.91 | — |
 JordanJORWestern Asia | 2.91 | — |
 NigeriaNGAWestern Africa | 2.90 | — |
 BurundiBDIEastern Africa | 2.85 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 Guinea-BissauGNBWestern Africa | 2.83 | — |
 VanuatuVUTMelanesia | 2.83 | — |
 Solomon IslandsSLBMelanesia | 2.73 | — |
 SingaporeSGPSouth-eastern Asia | 2.70 | — |
 MexicoMEXCentral America | 2.69 | — |
 EritreaERIEastern Africa | 2.59 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 BruneiBRNSouth-eastern Asia | 2.58 | — |
 KazakhstanKAZCentral Asia | 2.57 | — |
 EthiopiaETHEastern Africa | 2.54 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 BahamasBHSCaribbean | 2.51 | — |
 KuwaitKWTWestern Asia | 2.51 | — |
 ChileCHLSouth America | 2.49 | — |
 AlgeriaDZANorthern Africa | 2.48 | — |
 MoroccoMARNorthern Africa | 2.44 | — |
 Sri LankaLKASouthern Asia | 2.37 | — |
 AngolaAGOMiddle Africa | 2.27 | — |
 RomaniaROUEastern Europe | 2.27 | — |
 ZambiaZMBEastern Africa | 2.21 | — |
 RussiaRUSEastern Europe | 2.19 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 BrazilBRASouth America | 2.12 | — |
 South SudanSSDEastern Africa | 2.03 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 MauritiusMUSEastern Africa | 1.96 | — |
 Costa RicaCRICentral America | 1.91 | — |
 Trinidad and TobagoTTOCaribbean | 1.84 | — |
 CameroonCMRMiddle Africa | 1.83 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 MaltaMLTSouthern Europe | 1.83 | — |
 MozambiqueMOZEastern Africa | 1.83 | — |
 Marshall IslandsMHLMicronesia | 1.72 | — |
 MadagascarMDGEastern Africa | 1.65 | — |
 TunisiaTUNNorthern Africa | 1.65 | — |
 GambiaGMBWestern Africa | 1.64 | — |
 MauritaniaMRTWestern Africa | 1.63 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 SenegalSENWestern Africa | 1.63 | — |
 GhanaGHAWestern Africa | 1.62 | — |
 HaitiHTICaribbean | 1.62 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 Central African RepublicCAFMiddle Africa | 1.61 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 SamoaWSMPolynesia | 1.52 | — |
 IndonesiaIDNSouth-eastern Asia | 1.51 | — |
 Dominican RepublicDOMCaribbean | 1.45 | — |
 LesothoLSOSouthern Africa | 1.44 | — |
 New ZealandNZLAustralia and New Zealand | 1.43 | — |
 TanzaniaTZAEastern Africa | 1.43 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 TurkmenistanTKMCentral Asia | 1.43 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 TuvaluTUVPolynesia | 1.42 | — |
 SerbiaSRBSouthern Europe | 1.41 | — |
 ArmeniaARMWestern Asia | 1.40 | — |
 PalauPLWMicronesia | 1.39 | — |
 ComorosCOMEastern Africa | 1.35 | — |
 CubaCUBCaribbean | 1.35 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 NigerNERWestern Africa | 1.30 | — |
 RwandaRWAEastern Africa | 1.28 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 BulgariaBGREastern Europe | 1.26 | — |
 UgandaUGAEastern Africa | 1.26 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 JamaicaJAMCaribbean | 1.23 | — |
 MontenegroMNESouthern Europe | 1.21 | — |
 São Tomé and PríncipeSTPMiddle Africa | 1.16 | — |
 CroatiaHRVSouthern Europe | 1.12 | — |
 JapanJPNEastern Asia | 1.11 | — |
 Papua New GuineaPNGMelanesia | 1.10 | — |
 PolandPOLEastern Europe | 1.10 | — |
 KiribatiKIRMicronesia | 1.08 | — |
 YemenYEMWestern Asia | 1.08 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 SeychellesSYCEastern Africa | 1.07 | — |
 United KingdomGBRNorthern Europe | 1.06 | — |
 Saint Vincent and the GrenadinesVCTCaribbean | 1.03 | — |
 South AfricaZAFSouthern Africa | 0.98 | — |
 UkraineUKREastern Europe | 0.94 | — |
 LiberiaLBRWestern Africa | 0.93 | — |
 EswatiniSWZSouthern Africa | 0.92 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 Bosnia and HerzegovinaBIHSouthern Europe | 0.89 | — |
 MaliMLIWestern Africa | 0.88 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 BeninBENWestern Africa | 0.87 | — |
 CanadaCANNorthern America | 0.87 | — |
 TongaTONPolynesia | 0.87 | — |
 GeorgiaGEOWestern Asia | 0.86 | — |
 GreeceGRCSouthern Europe | 0.85 | — |
 Cook IslandsCOKPolynesia | 0.83 | — |
 Sierra LeoneSLEWestern Africa | 0.75 | — |
 NamibiaNAMSouthern Africa | 0.73 | — |
 AlbaniaALBSouthern Europe | 0.72 | — |
 Antigua and BarbudaATGCaribbean | 0.72 | — |
 Côte d’IvoireCIVWestern Africa | 0.72 | — |
 HungaryHUNEastern Europe | 0.72 | — |
 GrenadaGRDCaribbean | 0.71 | — |
 SpainESPSouthern Europe | 0.71 | — |
 ChadTCDMiddle Africa | 0.70 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 AustraliaAUSAustralia and New Zealand | 0.69 | — |
 Burkina FasoBFAWestern Africa | 0.69 | — |
 MoldovaMDAEastern Europe | 0.69 | — |
 FranceFRAWestern Europe | 0.68 | — |
 Saint Kitts and NevisKNACaribbean | 0.68 | — |
 GuineaGINWestern Africa | 0.67 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 AzerbaijanAZEWestern Asia | 0.54 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 BarbadosBRBCaribbean | 0.54 | — |
 TogoTGOWestern Africa | 0.54 | — |
 BelizeBLZCentral America | 0.53 | — |
 GuyanaGUYSouth America | 0.53 | — |
 North MacedoniaMKDSouthern Europe | 0.52 | — |
 UruguayURYSouth America | 0.52 | — |
 BelgiumBELWestern Europe | 0.51 | — |
 PortugalPRTSouthern Europe | 0.51 | — |
 TajikistanTJKCentral Asia | 0.51 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 Republic of the CongoCOGMiddle Africa | 0.50 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 Timor-LesteTLSSouth-eastern Asia | 0.50 | — |
 Saint LuciaLCACaribbean | 0.39 | — |
 GermanyDEUWestern Europe | 0.38 | — |
 NetherlandsNLDWestern Europe | 0.38 | — |
 NicaraguaNICCentral America | 0.36 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 KyrgyzstanKGZCentral Asia | 0.35 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 Cabo VerdeCPVWestern Africa | 0.32 | — |
 DenmarkDNKNorthern Europe | 0.19 | — |
 LuxembourgLUXWestern Europe | 0.19 | — |
 CzechiaCZEEastern Europe | 0.18 | — |
 LithuaniaLTUNorthern Europe | 0.18 | — |
 SloveniaSVNSouthern Europe | 0.18 | — |
 SwitzerlandCHEWestern Europe | 0.18 | — |
 DominicaDMACaribbean | 0.17 | — |
 MalawiMWIEastern Africa | 0.17 | — |
 SurinameSURSouth America | 0.17 | — |
 EstoniaESTNorthern Europe | 0.15 | — |
 GabonGABMiddle Africa | 0.15 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 MongoliaMNGEastern Asia | 0.15 | — |
 AustriaAUTWestern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 CyprusCYPWestern Asia | 0.00 | — |
 FinlandFINNorthern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 IcelandISLNorthern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 IrelandIRLNorthern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 IsraelISRWestern Asia | 0.00 | — |
 ItalyITASouthern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 LatviaLVANorthern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 NorwayNORNorthern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 San MarinoSMRSouthern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 SlovakiaSVKEastern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 SwedenSWENorthern Europe | 0.00 | — |
02In 2020
At either end
The 5 countries at each end of the headline.
Highest
- United Arab Emirates10.00
- Iran9.96
- China9.32
- Bangladesh8.75
- Qatar8.56
Lowest
- Swedenshared0.00
- Slovakiashared0.00
- San Marinoshared0.00
- Norwayshared0.00
- Latviashared0.00
A higher value is the worse result. The middle country reads 1.43. “Shared” marks a value another country also holds.
032019 → 2020
Since 2019
What changed between 2019 and this one: who joined or left, and how far the headline moved.
- +0 / −0countries joined / left
- 36values changed, of 186 in both
- 17 · 19rose · fell
- 150unchanged
Rose most
Both years come from the same release, so a difference here is a change in the data, not a revision of it. Every country’s full history is charted on the statistic page.
04Caveats
Read before you use
What this edition’s numbers are and are not, worked out from the file itself.
One year of the 2026 release
Every year in this series comes from ILO’s 2026 release, recalculated on one method. It can differ from what was first published for 2020.
133 distinct values among 186
Values are stored exactly as published, to 2 decimals. 12 countries share 0.00. Countries sharing a value share a position too.
Which end is better
A higher value is the worse result.
158 empty cells
An empty cell means the publisher gave no figure. It is never a zero.
05The files
Download and cite
The table as a file, digit for digit, what this site changed, and a citation for this edition.
- .csv
For a spreadsheet or code
186 rows · 10 KB · UTF-8, opens in Excel
Opens with 11 lines of source notes; the table starts on row 13.
Download labour-rights-compliance-2020-nations-inquiry.csv - ↗
The publisher’s original
ILO’s own file, on its own site.
https://rplumber.ilo.org/data/indicator/?id=SDG_0882_NOC_RT&format=.csv&channel=ilostat
What this site changed: Reshaped into one row per country: regional and income-group totals are left out, only the columns listed are kept, each row gets its ISO 3166 code, and some country names are brought to one spelling. No value is recalculated, rescaled or rounded.
Licence: CC BY 4.0. Share, adapt and use commercially. Credit the publisher and say if you changed anything.
Cite this edition
International Labour Organization (ILO) (2020). Compliance with Labour Rights, 2020 [data set], describing 2020. As held by Nations Inquiry, https://nationsinquiry.com/datasets/labour-rights-compliance/2020
0610 held
Other years
‹ The year before
Compliance with Labour Rights, 2019186 countries
The year after ›
Compliance with Labour Rights, 2021186 countries
All of them
Compliance with Labour Rights: every year10 held, with the data dictionary, coverage and licence.
How it has moved, charted by country
07Questions
Compliance with Labour Rights, 2020: questions and answers
Which country has the highest labour rights compliance in Compliance with Labour Rights, 2020?
United Arab Emirates, at 10.00, of the 186 countries in the file.
What year does Compliance with Labour Rights, 2020 describe?
2020.
How many countries does Compliance with Labour Rights, 2020 cover?
186.
Where can I download Compliance with Labour Rights, 2020?
On this page, as a CSV file holding every value exactly as published, or from the publisher’s own site, linked below.
Is Compliance with Labour Rights, 2020 the newest?
No. The newest held here is Compliance with Labour Rights, 2024.