Donor scores: Sweden

Note : Click on the GRAPH tab to see graphs for this country and to graphically compare this donor's scores with other OECD / DAC donors' scores

Sweden is ranked first in this year’s Index. Its good performance is evenly distributed across the Pillars, ranking first in Pillars 1 and 3, second in Pillars 4 and 5 and third in Pillar 2. Sweden occupies the top place in 12 of the 58 indicators used to construct the Index and one of the top five slots in almost three-quarters of all these. For example, the country ranked first in the indicators for funding UN, IFRC and ICRC appeals, as well as in supporting IHL and involving beneficiaries in monitoring and evaluation and multi-year funding. Sweden’s lowest rankings were 21st in the indicator for sectoral distribution of funding through UN appeals and 20th in the indicator around distribution of funding relative to ECHO’s Crisis and Vulnerability Indices. Based on the average scores for survey responses from all the crises studied, Sweden is generally perceived as a good donor by humanitarian agencies in the field in comparison to its peers. Sweden scored above average in questions relating to respect for the fundamental principles of humanitarian action. It also did particularly well in questions relating to the reallocation of funding from one crisis to another, and in providing funds for needs assessments. It was also perceived as doing well in supporting coordination efforts. Sweden scored well above the average in responses to questions relating to long-term funding arrangements, an area in which other donors are generally perceived as doing poorly.

Read more

Note : To compare this donor's scores with those of other OECD / DAC donors, select country names in the box to the right
Please adjust your browser preferences and turn on Javascript to view the chart.
The chart will appear within this DIV. This text will be replaced by the chart.