Skip to content
NCBNational Capability Benchmark
Navigate with โ†‘ โ†“Enter to openEsc to close

Challenge the benchmark

Choose a score and give the benchmark a specific reason to reconsider it.

When you submit, the form attaches the current score and confidence for the country and capability you chose.

Submissions are public and start as awaiting review. A maintainer can add a response and signature after review.

Capability agenda

Iran

Generated 2026-10-03

The frame includes 125 countries. Each dimension is scored from 0 to 100, with no overall ranking, and each score shows its confidence beside it. Read the known limits of the data before you quote a score.

Open the profile: indicators, values, years and sources

Where Iran stands

DimensionScoreConfidenceTrend
Anticipation33.80.46+14.7 over 10 years using 2 indicators
Agency24.80.49no trend
Coordination35.30.23no trend
Trust39.50.37no trend
Learning37.00.32no trend
Experimentation55.20.33+0.7 over 10 years using 3 indicators
Adaptability72.40.53no trend
Building45.00.38+10.8 over 10 years using 2 indicators
Shared Purpose72.80.26no trend

Score

  • weakNear the floor of the frame. Check the confidence before reading anything into it.0 to 25
  • below middleIn the lower half of the frame.25 to 50
  • above middleIn the upper half of the frame.50 to 75
  • strongNear the top of the frame on this dimension.75 and above

Confidence

  • very thin0.00 to 0.25

    The score rests on one or two indicators. Do not quote it on its own.

  • thin0.25 to 0.45

    A minority of indicators, or evidence old enough to have moved. Read with care.

  • usable0.45 to 0.65

    Enough evidence to compare countries, with known holes.

  • good0.65 and above

    Most indicators observed, recent, from official or intergovernmental sources.

Capability over time

Select a dimension to see how Iranโ€™s comparable evidence has moved over time. The vertical scale is the current comparison frame, from 0 to 100.

Dimension

Capability position in the current frame0 to 100
025507510020162017201820192020202120222023202420252026

Anticipation 2016 โ†’ 2026: 19.1 to 33.8 (+14.7) over 10 years using 2 indicators

Historical values use todayโ€™s frame from 0 to 100 and a matched basket of indicators. They show movement in the available evidence, not an overall development score. Dated agenda items appear on a separate timeline and do not change the score. A missing line means the evidence does not support a comparable trend for that dimension.

What to raise

These are the lowest scores with usable evidence. Thin evidence appears below.

Agency

24.80.49

How able are individuals and organizations to turn an intention into action?

Anticipation

33.80.46

How capable is the country of identifying and preparing for emerging change?

Uses 2 observed indicators. +14.7 over 10 years using 2 indicators.

Highest usable scores: Denmark 98.1, Norway 97.2, Switzerland 93.4.

Related deliveries in other countries: Embrapa, a fifty-year bet on tropical agriculture (Brazil); The Delta Programme and its fund (Netherlands); Lei de Informรกtica, a sectoral industrial policy (Brazil); CGEE, the strategic studies center (Brazil); Centre for Strategic Futures, foresight inside government (Singapore); Legally binding carbon budgets (United Kingdom); Fukushima decommissioning roadmap, a 30โ€“40-year risk-reduction horizon (Japan); National basic-research funding allocation (China); PLANAPP and REPLAN, a centre-of-government foresight network (Portugal); Labour Market Intelligence Programme and forward skills planning (South Africa); Government Report on the Future and the parliamentary Committee for the Future (Finland); Foresight Centre at the Riigikogu (Arenguseire Keskus) (Estonia); Office of Technology Assessment, defunded and closed in 1995 (United States); Rzฤ…dowe Centrum Studiรณw Strategicznych, liquidated in 2006 (Poland); Office of Technology Assessment at the German Bundestag (TAB) (Germany); National Assembly Futures Institute (South Korea); Federal Chancellery situation and environment analysis (Perspektivstab) (Switzerland); Senate foresight delegation (Dรฉlรฉgation sรฉnatoriale ร  la prospective) (France); Senate Commission on Future Challenges, Science, Technology and Innovation (Chile); Policy Horizons Canada, the federal foresight unit, and its 2024 disruption scan (Canada); Framtidskommissionen, the Prime Minister's time-limited future commission (Sweden); National Planning Commission foresight work for Malawi 2063 (Malawi); Bureau National de la Prospective et de la Veille Stratรฉgique and the national prospective studies (Cรดte d'Ivoire); Teknologiraadet, the Norwegian Board of Technology (Norway); Teknologiraadet, the Danish Board of Technology, abolished in 2012 (Denmark); Bureau federal du Plan (Belgium); Special Secretariat of Foresight (now of Long-term Planning) (Greece); STRATA foresight for the Lietuva 2050 state progress strategy (Lithuania); Institut Royal des Etudes Stratรฉgiques (IRES) (Morocco); Long-term Insights Briefings under the Public Service Act 2020 (New Zealand).

Missing indicators: Government foresight capacity, Long-horizon research commitments.

What to measure first

The evidence is too thin to manage these dimensions confidently.

What to keep watching

These dimensions score at least 50 with usable evidence.

DimensionScoreConfidence
Adaptability72.40.53

Missing data

18 requested indicators have no comparable dataset, and each one lowers confidence. A gap can become an indicator when a comparable series covers at least two countries.

DimensionMissing indicatorWhat it asks
AnticipationGovernment foresight capacityExistence, mandate and continuity of a national strategic foresight function.
AnticipationLong-horizon research commitmentsNew competitively awarded public research grants that run for five years or longer, as a share of all new competitive public research grants awarded in the year.
AgencyAdults doing digital tasksShare of adults who carried out a named digital task in the last three months, such as sending a message with an attached file, moving a file between devices or using a spreadsheet formula, counted one task at a time and never as a skill level.
CoordinationUniversity-industry collaborationIntensity of research collaboration between universities and firms.
CoordinationPublic-private collaborationFrequency and scale of joint public-private delivery of national objectives.
TrustTrust in public institutionsConfidence in national government, courts and civil service.
TrustCourt case clearance rateCivil and commercial cases resolved in a year as a share of cases filed in the same year.
LearningAdult learning participationShare of adults in formal or non-formal education and training in the last 12 months.
ExperimentationVenture dealsFirst venture capital rounds closed by companies based in the country in the year, per million people, counted by deal and never by amount.
ExperimentationFirms through regulatory sandboxesFirms admitted to, and firms completing, a regulatory sandbox or controlled trial regime in the year, per million people, summed across every regulator in the country.
ExperimentationUniversity spinoutsCompanies formed to commercialise university research, per million people.
AdaptabilityDisaster preparedness and recoveryDemonstrated capacity to prepare for and recover from major shocks.
AdaptabilityInstitutional responsivenessSpeed at which rules and public programmes are changed in response to new conditions.
BuildingLarge project deliveryCost and schedule performance of major public infrastructure projects.
BuildingFirm scale-up rateShare of young firms reaching significant employment or turnover thresholds.
Shared PurposeSense of national belongingReported identification with and attachment to the national community, as distinct from pride in the nation.
Shared PurposeVolunteeringShare of adults who volunteered time to an organisation in the last month.
Shared PurposePolitical polarisationDegree to which political differences run along a single hostile divide.

What the indicators miss about Iran

Documented deliveries linked to missing indicators. They do not affect scores or confidence.

  • Targeted Subsidy Reform cash transfer, and its erosion (Adaptability)

    Iran's government replaced universal fuel and bread subsidies with a universal cash transfer of 455,000 rials (about US$40) per person per month from late 2010, then left the transfer unindexed, so that by 2019 its purchasing power had fallen to less than US$6 per person before a top-up was added in late 2019.

  • Earthquake Emergency Recovery after the 2002 Changureh-Avaj earthquake (Adaptability)

    After the April 2002 earthquake in Kermanshah and the June 2002 earthquake in Qazvin, Zanjan and Hamedan, Iran's Ministry of Interior project unit and the Housing Foundation repaired or rebuilt about 24,000 damaged houses to seismic standards by June 2009, using government funds and a US$180 million World Bank loan, of which US$174.9 million was disbursed.

  • Tehran Sewerage Project (first phase: interceptors, trunk main and southern treatment plant) (Building)

    The Tehran Sewerage Company built interceptors, trunk mains, tunnels and a wastewater treatment plant under the first phase of the Tehran Sewerage Project at a latest estimated cost of US$359.22 million against US$341.45 million at appraisal in 2000, with the treatment works costing 189 percent of their estimate and the loan closing on 30 June 2008, two years late, before the plant and the eastern trunk main were finished.

Contribute

Fill a gap, file evidence or challenge an indicator at github.com/envisioning/national-capability-benchmark. The docs explain the method and decisions.