6 ms·
2023 Global Passport Ranking
- samwillis 4y agoA clickable map of this with lines to the visa free travel countries would be a brilliant visualisation. Sadly they don't have a downloadable form of the data. There is however an internal API that returns nice JSON, it looks like they built in provision for maps and coordinate, but never populated that data.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- brm 4y agoIn the interest of moving the Overton window, I've yet to hear a good, logical reason why we don't allow the free movement of people between administrative states.
- snowpid 4y ago1.) welfare state 2.) some people refuse to integrate like Expats using only English.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- eloisant 4y ago1. Immigrants are a net positive for the welfare state because you don't have to pay for their education and all their young years where they don't produce anything. They come ready to work and pay taxes. 2. Expats who only speak English and not the local language are the one who have no trouble getting a visa anyway. To take the example of France, the countries from where people want to migrate (and can't even come with a tourist visa) are mostly African French speaking countries.
- balderdash 4y agoI don’t think you can make the blanket statement that immigrants are educated, want to work (who does?!), and pay taxes.
- snowpid 4y ago1. This is not in case in Germany generally. What if the immigrants are uneducated? 2. strenghts my argument.
- eru 4y agoYou can have free movement without extending to welfare state to non-citizen.
- 082349872349872 4y agoprobably not the why you were looking for, but 1914*. cf Zweig, The World of Yesterday for the memoirs of someone who remembered a world without. * iow, the start of the "short 20th century"
- yourapostasy 4y agoMan, did Zweig ever have an ear for lyrically lush phrasing. His and Garet Garrett's polemics against strident nationalism unfortunately fell upon deaf ears.
- michens 4y agoTo reduce the impact of foreign intelligence agencies? Especially important in the EU nowadays.
- eru 4y agoHuh? As if an FSB agent couldn't get a passport..
- gggggg5 4y agoBasically any foreign intelligence agency can produce perfect fake passports (except for the chip, but you don't need a functional chip). Even regular criminals manage to produce good enough documents to travel with, and those guys don't have access to Heidelberg printing presses.
- rwmj 4y agoPretty sure any half-competent intelligence agency should be able to make the chip too, if only by infiltrating the company that makes the passports.
- gggggg5 4y agoSure, I can't imagine it being too difficult to compromise the keys for some first world country. But there's no need to bother, you won't get busted at an airport because the chip of your passport failed. If they were suspicious, they'd just go through a document verification checklist and see if your passport has the correct physical features. Check out the PRADO glossary for example https://www.consilium.europa.eu/prado/en/prado-glossary/prado-glossary.pdf https://www.consilium.europa.eu/prado/en/prado-glossary/prad... A bunch of EU countries still issue non-biometric passports, even if with limited validity periods.
- dfadsadsf 4y agoSame reason you do not invite local “unhoused” meth addict to live in your spare bedroom. There are significant negative consequences from crime to destruction of high trust society.
- SCdF 4y agoAre you intentionally equating people who are from countries with less passport mobility than yours with meth addicts?
- prepend 4y agoFrom a US perspective, I think it’s because people enter on travel visas and do not leave. I had a coworker from India who was a naturalized citizen for 5-10 years and he was trying to get travel visas for his parents to visit. He had applied many times and been denied each time. We talked about it and he said that the reason given was that the state department considered his parents a risk to not leave at the end of their visit. Comically, when I complained about how that was wrong and his parents would obviously go back he said “100% they will stay, I don’t really blame the visa people. My in laws stayed on a travel visa years ago and are still here.” There’s also a reciprocity issue that’s sort of chicken and egg. India didn’t grant visas easily back in 2005 because the US didn’t grant their citizens visas.
- eloisant 4y agoThe question isn't that much "why don't we accept all travel visas" but "why don't we accept all immigrants". People are talking about the "risk that they stay" like it's something bad to have too many immigrants. And it ended up like some common sense idea. But what if it's not? Did California or New York suffer from getting people moving from all the "country side" state? Did the US suffer from their immigration waves when they had open borders, and all you needed to get in was a medical exam on Ellis Island?
- prepend 4y agoI think there’s pretty common and clear data on why unlimited immigration is harmful to the receiving country [0] (tl;dr; lowers wages and increases costs for non-immigrants). The question is whether it’s worth it for the obvious benefit to immigrants. So it may be a net benefit when factoring the improvements to people who immigrate in. The US benefited greatly from open immigration 100+ years ago because they weren’t that great and there wasn’t much to lose. So it’s apples to oranges of open immigration then to open immigration now. Back then there were no government services and land was literally given out for free. [0] https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0809/3-ways-immigration-helps-and-hurts-the-economy.aspx https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0809/3-ways-immi...
- arvinsim 4y ago
- detrites 4y agoJust move to any place that's had its workforce, welfare system and social order decimated by impoverished immigrants and given enough time to amass some awful experiences, you'll be able to list your own reasons.
- eru 4y ago> Just move to any place that's had its workforce, welfare system and social order decimated by impoverished immigrants [...] Can you name an example?
- detrites 4y agoMany parts of the UK, and half of mainland Europe? Was ongoing and in decline in some places, but become worse since the Ukraine crisis which has exacerbated, as both wealthy and poor are arriving en masse straining limited resources. Sure, in a country with unused land, untapped resources, and infrastructure that can easily adapt, it could (potentially) result in growth and prosperity for all. But much of overcrowded Europe doesn't meet the prerequisites.
- eru 4y agoHow do migrants decimate the workforce? Wouldn't they add to the workforce? (Though I do agree that eg the German policy to ban asylum seekers from working while at the same time enrolling them in welfare is asinine. The devil finds work for bored young man.) Enrolling migrants in the welfare system is a choice. It's easy to restrict the welfare system to citizens only. Social order is a bit too nebulous to make a comment.
- detrites 4y agoMigrants from poorer countries have lower standards of living, and often able to claim exclusive subsidies. When a job market is saturated with people willing to do jobs for way less, the existing workforce gets pushed out. Country level this mightn't change much initially, as the existing workforce moves where they maintain their income. But on a local level it's disruptive, and if not held in check flows up to country-level. (A "brain-drain".)
- klntsky 4y agoPublic goods exist.
- eru 4y agoPublic goods are by definition non-rivalrous. So other people coming and enjoying them is fine.
- rippercushions 4y agoFor bonus points, explain why that reason should apply to movement between nation states, but not to movement between the states of a nation state.
- elvis10ten 4y agoBecause of the asymmetry of prosperity? Movement is gonna be one-sided from a lot of less prosperous countries. I think this list clearly reflects that: you are ranked higher if movement is close to equilibrium (you have a country lots of people also want to move to or not a lot of people want to leave).
- whodidntante 4y agoThe current politics around this issue is not simply about free movement. It is about economics. For example, it is easy to travel to Denmark, using Denmark as an example of an "enlightened" state. However, if you intend to stay for more than 3 months, you must secure work/residency before even arriving. State benefits are also available only to citizens and others of certain legal status, with more limited benefits available to EU citizens. The actual question that is being debated is allowing free movement into this country while at the same time providing full benefits (welfare, housing, health, etc) without requiring job/work permit/etc.
- _xnmw 4y ago1. Large-scale free movement of people between administrative states is called "an invasion". Why doesn't Ukraine just let Russians walk into Kiev? 2. Because it would lead to further concentration and centralization of power and money and influence and insanely expensive real estate in the hands of even fewer. 3. Because it is nice to live in a community of people that speak the same language, have a shared culture, and can interact according to some shared norms. I understand this is already lost in Western urban centers, so cultural homogeneity not valued anymore. But those who have it, value it.
- 082349872349872 4y ago> I understand this is already lost in Western urban centers I don't want to accuse anyone of lying to you on the internet ... but as I've had no problem interacting according to shared norms (with varied languages and varied cultures) in many* Western urban centers, I will suggest you may wish to reconsider the veracity of your sources. * eg. Amsterdam Barcelona Boston Edinburgh Hamburg London Los Angeles Milan New York Paris Salzburg Seattle Vancouver
- _xnmw 4y agoSource: I was born in Toronto, and have been to many of the Western cities you mentioned, and didn’t know anything else until I moved to culturally homogeneous Ukraine. The difference is night and day. Life is just more meaningful and I have a much stronger relationship with people living around me. I would prefer Bangladesh to Toronto anytime (and yes I have actually travelled extensively in Bangladesh, and I am NOT ethnically Bengali) just because of the cultural homogeneity. There is no place on Earth I hate more than Dubai because of the cultural potpourri. Maybe it’s just me, but I strongly prefer cultural homogeneity over everything else, even risking my life in a warzone right now (Kyiv) because I love being part of a well-defined centuries-old cultural heritage.
- 082349872349872 4y agoFair enough; good luck! I hope to visit Одеса* some day (but not as a war zone). * in my head-canon, the "swarthy moldovan" of Смуглянка fame is not necessarily an ethnic moldovan, but possibly a vineyard worker from the Moldavanka slum (as it was then) of Odesa.
- balderdash 4y agoWell considering one general way of defining the purpose of a nation state is to provide for the security, economic/social/public welfare, and administration of justice for its citizens - its hard to see mass migration from certain states to others as aligning with those obligations.
- yucky 4y agoThe same reason that has been true since the beginning of civilization - resources are limited. Also, not all cultures align. Hundreds of millions of people are very much against some of the values that you may hold dear. If enough of them become your neighbors, you may be forced to align to their values.
- nl 4y agoDoes anyone know (or can speculate) why Nepal is ranked so low (worse than North Korea)?
- rippercushions 4y agoCountries usually decide whether to grant visa-free travel based on the likelihood that travellers from that country will become illegal immigrants. For Nepal, this is considered very likely. For North Korea, it's exceedingly unlikely, because it's so difficult to leave the country in the first place, those who are allowed to leave are carefully vetted, and their family back home is essentially held hostage to ensure they return.
- nl 4y agoSure, but illegal immigration is hardly the only reason for visas (many countries have concerns over organised crime for example), and it ranks well below other countries that have similar reputations for illegal immigration. For example Congo and South Sudan rank higher and given the refugee numbers from those countries I'd imagine they are a large source of illegal immigration too.
- gggggg5 4y agoDo you imagine that there is a meaningful increase in desirable tourism to be derived from granting Nepalese visa-free entry?
- nl 4y agoI don't know but I'd imagine more than North Korea. I've worked with Nepalise programmers so business travel is certainly a reasonable reason. But I imagine a lot of tourists from rich countries would enjoy visa free travel to Nepal, and reciprocal rights is a thing. Maybe that's what explains it? Nepal doesn't grant visa free travel to many countries so not many grant it in return?
- Trias11 4y agoRussian passport in the top 50? Please.
- snehk 4y agoWhy not?
- Trias11 4y agoRussia is under sanctions for ongoing war crimes. Try to travel with russian passport in any civilized country.
- dijit 4y agoThere are a lot of countries that we in the west don't really care about that are aligned with Russia. Kazakhstan being one example of a country that is so unknown to the west it was used for comedy. There's also a lot of "ties" in that top 50 too, 49 is not an enviable position. There are actually 90 countries that are stronger.
- thefounder 4y ago>> Kazakhstan For what's worth Russia said at some point last year that Kazakhstan is not a real country...it's actually part of Russia. If the Ukraine invasion works out for Russia(highly unlikely) I'm pretty sure these countries will be next.
- 082349872349872 4y agoMaybe they meant RF base passport + the Cypriot paid DLC? [Edit: no, it's actually very reasonable, on a par with Moldova and Georgia. Cyprus —which advertises in Cyrillic— is in the top 20]
- smcl 4y agoCypriot passport described as "DLC" gave me a chuckle :)
- 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- college_physics 4y agoJapan must be doing something well... I don't know if passport ranking is included in any human development index, but somehow being able to negotiate diplomatically with large numbers of "others" is evidence for an advanced society (and in some ways a role model if we ever want to reach some sort of pax humana)
- modernpink 4y agoBeing rich, highly educated, low in criminality, low in illegal emigration means that other nations are more willing to welcome you in. Think of who you would welcome into your own home and they map pretty homomorphically to the same set of rules you would set at the national level i.e. probably someone who won't steal your things, is good company, won't break your rules, or overstay their welcome.
- arturkane7 4y agoNot diplomacy or government action, it simply helps if you are the sort of nation whose travelling supporters volunteer to help clean up their mess in stadiums after their matches in international tournaments. Contrast that with away supporters of other nations (looking at you England :D)
- j7ake 4y agoThe benefit of Japan, Singapore, South Korea is that they are countries in Asia that have historically been supported by the West. Practically, it means they enjoy easy access to Europe, North America, as well as Asia with little trouble.
- warinukraine 4y ago> The benefit of Japan, Singapore, South Korea is that they are countries in Asia that have historically been supported by the West. In my view Japan at least is undoubtedly a western nation, at least when it comes to the strength and values of their institutions.
- karmakaze 4y ago
- xuki 4y agoThe raw number doesn’t tell the whole story. Singaporeans can travel to China without a visa while other top 10 countries can’t.
- modernpink 4y agoWeighting the access countries by these three factors would be very interesting: Land mass (access to space), GDP per capita (access to human capital), aggregate GDP (access to markets).
- balderdash 4y agoI’d add some tourist desirability factor and quality of life factor
- utdiscant 4y agoWish the data was available in a downloadable form. Would be interesting to see which combinations of passports gives you the best access together. For example, if you could hold two arbitrary passports at the same time, which two would give access to most countries (feels like a kind of graph covering problem to calculate).
- amir 4y agoThere's an "Improve My Travel Freedom" tab
- nine_zeros 4y agoFunny enough, the countries where legal movement is harder appear to have a lot more problems with illegal overstays. This is because the legal system keeps people in various kinds of limbo which automatically put them in an out of status state. If countries could process legal visas fast enough, illegal movement would drop like a rock since most ineligible people will just take the denial and move to a different place.
- rwmj 4y agoWhy is the UK above Belgium? Edit: Also how was this constructed? The "factsheet" download link requires giving them your personal details.
- callahad 4y agoThe blurb above the table notes that the ranking is "the number of destinations their holders can access without a prior visa," and that it is based on data from IATA. Basically, the same data as used by airlines to assess documentation requirements before allowing passengers to board international flights. The UK is above Belgium because, according to their data, a British passport allows visa free access to 187 destinations, while a Belgian passport only allows access to 186 destinations. There's also a full methodology page at https://www.henleyglobal.com/passport-index/about https://www.henleyglobal.com/passport-index/about
- danbruc 4y agoI recently searched for passport ranking and there are several and they do - of course - not agree. The first three search results for me are [1][2][3] but there are certainly more and the different results are due to the metric used - for example, is visa-free as good as 90 days visa-free and if not, how are they weighted? [1] https://www.passportindex.org/byRank.php https://www.passportindex.org/byRank.php [2] https://www.henleyglobal.com/passport-index/ranking https://www.henleyglobal.com/passport-index/ranking [3] https://www.globalcitizensolutions.com/passport-index/global-passport-index/ https://www.globalcitizensolutions.com/passport-index/global...
- pcthrowaway 4y agoI was going to recommend passportindex.org as a superior list (from a UX perspective anyway, not sure about accuracy)
- balderdash 4y agoThis index needs to be adjusted for desirability (does anyone want to go there?) and economic ranking (% of world gdp accessible) Visa free travel to Vanuatu, South Sudan, and North Korea != New Zealand, Botswana, and South Korea
- 4cao 4y agoThe ranking should more appropriately be called "tourist passport ranking", "visitor passport ranking" or something the like. It's a misnomer to call it a "passport ranking" without any qualifiers as this is based on visa exemptions for short-term visitors only. Japan and Singapore win it every year because apart from being able to enter all the "usual" Western countries and tourist destinations, they are allowed 14-day visa-free entry to China and some other places that typically require visas from everyone else. But then, for China (at least pre-COVID), many other nationals are allowed 5-day visa-free stay while "transiting." And US citizens can get multiple-entry 10-year visas. So the difference in practice isn't that big. Visitor visas in general are hardly difficult to obtain. For example Germany is a notch above other EU member states because it has visa-free entry to Namibia (perhaps in reciprocity for the generous German aid directed there), whereas for passport holders from most other countries it's a question of paying a nominal fee ("tourist tax"). Although the amount itself is steep (€90 last I checked), obtaining a visa there is unlikely to prove an obstacle. It would be more interesting to see a ranking comparing access to the best job markets instead. But then the winners would obviously be EU/EEA member state and US passports, alongside some others that grant a pathway to one of those (Canada, Australia, ...). Yet another way of looking at it is that the "best" passport is the one that grants the best consular protection for their holders abroad, and here the winners would either be the US (willing and capable of doing more than any other country to get their citizens out of trouble) or some countries that are nominally neutral and non-threatening to anyone (so that holding their passport does not paint you as a target in adversary countries), while still being able to flex their diplomatic muscle if need be (Switzerland? Sweden? The latter used to have the most embassies in the world I think.). Finally, some passports have anti-features. For example the US citizenship is great if living in the US but can be a burden while abroad due to the need to file taxes even if non-resident, and the FATCA regulations making it difficult to even open a bank account in another country (extra reporting burden on the bank). Singapore is not even a democracy and has mandatory conscription for citizens by birth (perhaps not a gift you'd want to make to your children). I would like to see a ranking considering all of the above as well but I doubt that's going to happen (unless I made one myself I guess): since the simplistic approach is enough to win the news cycle, why would anyone bother. It's similar to all those city rankings always topped by the most boring places that nominally check all the right boxes but few people aspire to move to.