News

World champions, but... of what?

December 07 2022
Sustainability Chair

By Roberto Artavia Loría and Jaime García Gómez

The FIFA World Cup in Qatar 2022 is a time to talk about more than just football. A world cup that has been involved in controversies related to investment levels -there is talk of a total investment that exceeds that of Russia 2018 by almost 12 times-; with the deaths of thousands of workers during, or as a consequence of their work in, the gigantic infrastructure projects, of corruption widely documented in two recent documentaries on platforms of streaming, and a schedule, for climatic reasons, that has affected the celebration and result of multiple national, regional and even global tournaments, since it is not very clear how the Club World Cup will be held amid all these programming changes.

There is talk that the favorites to take the title are "the usual ones": Brazil and Argentina from the Latin American perspective; France as a recent world soccer power; and with less chance, because they are teams that have come to less on this occasion, England, Germany and Spain. In the extreme it is thought that there are two other European nations that are Belgium and Denmark that could have a chance to change history, but their chances are slim. Some simulation models see a Brazil-Argentina final almost inevitable, with a reserved forecast. We, as passionate Latin Americans, have our preference and some hope that the feat of Brazil 2014 will be repeated and the "sele" advance to at least the round of XNUMX.

But it is not all of this that we wanted to write about.

As representatives of Latin American Center for Competitiveness and Sustainable Development from INCAE Business School, we decided to run four simulations —respecting the structure of the groups formed for Qatar 2022, as well as the rule of crossovers between groups for the round of XNUMX— in which the "world cup" is played based on the indices of: social progress (from the Social Progress Imperative), competitiveness (from the World Economic Forum); environmental performance (from the Yale University Institute for Environmental Policy); and of Integral Humanist Ecology (developed by an alliance between INCAE and the Catholic University of Costa Rica, based on the Papal Encyclical Laudato si ').

These four World Cups give us the following results:

In social progress, the final would be played between Denmark and Switzerland, with Denmark reaching the cup; in the match for third place the Netherlands would narrowly edge out Japan. Germany, England, Australia and South Korea would occupy positions 5 to 8; while Canada, Belgium, Wales, Portugal, Poland, Argentina, Serbia and Ecuador would occupy positions 9 to 16. In the latter, the group in which they played the first round already affects, since Ecuador, Serbia and Argentina come out ahead of nations with better performance, but those who had to compete in more demanding groups. Costa Rica occupies the 21st position, barely surpassed by France, Spain, the United States and Croatia, which also do not qualify in this World Cup due to the demanding nature of their groups. Costa Rica and Spain —despite acceptable performance— are eliminated by Germany and Japan, clearly top performers in social progress.

In environmental performance, the classification —using the same groups and crossing rules as in the World Cup— is as follows: Denmark, once again, reaches the championship, with Wales playing in the final, followed by Switzerland and Croatia (which reached these stages with the help of by favorable crosses). France, Germany, England and Portugal participated in the quarterfinals, followed by the Netherlands, Belgium, Japan, Poland, South Korea, Ecuador, Mexico, and Serbia, the last five favored by the weakness of their initial groups. Costa Rica appears again in position 21, behind Australia, Spain, the United States and Canada, in that order.


In competitiveness, the classification is different. The final is played by the United States and the Netherlands and the United States is champion, and they are followed, in order, by Switzerland, Germany, Japan, Denmark, South Korea and France. England, Canada, Belgium, Qatar, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Poland and Brazil also qualified for the round of 22. Costa Rica falls to position XNUMX, also surpassed by Wales, Australia, Spain, Mexico and Uruguay.


In integral humanist ecology, Australia is world champion, with Denmark in second, followed by Canada and Switzerland in third and fourth. They are followed in order by Wales, England, Germany and South Korea —helped by favorable crosses—, Japan, the Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal, Poland, Serbia, Argentina, and Ecuador, the last four helped by the structure of their groups and favorable crosses. . Costa Rica is again 21, preceded by France, Spain, the United States and Croatia.


The last in each classification are in reverse order (from last to third last): Ghana, Cameroon and Senegal in social progress; in environmental performance Ghana, Morocco and Cameroon; in competitiveness Cameroon, Senegal and Ghana; and in integral humanist ecology Cameroon, Senegal and Ghana. It is clear that West Africa falls short in the various dimensions of development in which “our World Cups were at stake”.

If the four indices are averaged to obtain the most developed nation in terms of collective well-being, environmental sustainability, aggregate productivity and for its actions in favor of the common good and care for the common home, the most advanced country is Denmark, followed by Wales, Switzerland and Japan. Costa Rica is in position 21 preceded by the United States and Croatia and followed by Uruguay and Argentina.


You will say that it is easier to simply rank from best to worst performance. And of course, that's what indices do. But generally, life is not “so linear”, regional factors intervene in the performance of countries —in our case, which nations classify based on sporting merit—, situational competition factors —such as that which occurs in groups, where you compete with nations from other regions, cultures and characteristics—, direct competition at some point in time, such as circumstantial crosses in the round of XNUMX and quarterfinals, where it depends on who it meets and the particular circumstances of the moment, if the country achieves its goals of positioning, investment, growth, etc.

The semifinals and finals are something else. There the competition is one by one among those who reached them and this leads the methodology to opt for those with the best performance, as is usually the case in professional sports. A good player, like Messi or Cristiano, is equivalent to the "good luck" of having, at the time of analysis, a good president and government.

There are several messages to highlight. The development models of Central and Northern Europe appear to be much more advanced and better balanced than those of North America, Oceania and Asia. The most successful nations are small, not geographic or demographic giants, except on the issue of competitiveness, where access to a large and rich market seems very determining. Costa Rica shows impressive consistency, but not a very high performance in the various criteria; which surely indicates that there are important synergies between the various themes: for example, high social progress contributes to competitiveness and the two together contribute to sustainability. Latin America performs generally mediocre, surpassing Central and South Asia and Africa, but behind North America, Europe, Oceania and East Asia.

In other words, and using the soccer World Cup as a reference, the countries that reach the World Cup can be divided into 3 groups: those that are contenders, those that can win; those who are entertainers, those who can compete and surprise their assigned group; and those who are only there to participate. And beyond football, in global competitions of high importance for development, The data shows that the countries of our region are mainly from the third group, mere participants, unable to stand out in the issues that really matter for development.

The predicted champions of the soccer world cup, according to the predictions, do not perform well in the fields of our analysis. Brazil and Argentina barely qualified for the round of XNUMX each, despite being the superpowers in soccer. This has two implications; one about what is prioritized, what is important, in each country; and another on how it is possible to achieve excellence in some fields —in this case, soccer—, even in generally mediocre environments.

Finally, Costa Rica continues to be an "unfulfilled promise." We are among the regional leaders in CONCACAF, very close even to much richer nations like the United States and Canada and surpassing demographic giants like Mexico; but we still have to celebrate our mediocrity, superior to that of those around us, instead of aspiring to a World Cup like the one in 2014 —beating true powers— in the things that really matter...

Roberto Artavia Loría and Jaime García Gómez They are representatives of the Latin American Center for Competitiveness and Sustainable Development of INCAE Business School.