CARO Fairness Index — Bangladesh Pilot Results

Section I — Overall Fairness Index

1.74 out of 5.0

Majority perceives governance as structurally unfair

An OFI of 1.74 places this cohort in the Majority Unfair range (1.81–2.60 threshold), approaching the Strong Unfairness Consensus boundary (below 1.80). Across all five governance domains, participants consistently judged prevailing practices as falling short of structural fairness standards — no domain scored above 1.89.

The near-alignment of OFI (1.74) with the average institutional trust score (1.88) is consistent with Equitism’s theoretical prediction: populations perceiving high governance unfairness show proportionally low system trust.

OFI = 1.74 / 5.00 Institutional trust = 1.88 / 5.00 Scale: 1 = Completely Unfair → 5 = Completely Fair N = 86 valid responses

Key Findings

OFI of 1.74 is the first empirical data point in CARO’s longitudinal governance fairness tracking series. It establishes the Bangladesh baseline against which all future cohort measurements will be compared.
Near-alignment of OFI (1.74) and institutional trust (1.88) confirms Equitism’s theoretical prediction that populations perceiving high governance unfairness show proportionally low system trust.
Cohort profile: 71% aged 18–25, 54% undergraduate, 62% urban. Analytically significant youth-educated-urban signal — not yet nationally representative. All findings should be understood in that context.
All five domain scores fall below 2.0. This is not concentrated unfairness in one area — it is a broad, consistent signal across governance, justice, economy, public services, and accountability.

Section II — Domain Fairness Scores

Five domains.
All in the unfair range.

Domain Fairness Scores (DFS) computed using equal-weight averaging per Chapter 16 V1 formula: DFS(d) = (QFS_q1 + … + QFS_q5) / 5. All five scores fall below 2.0.

Governance Pentagon

Radar visualization. Inner boundary = 1.0. Outer boundary = 5.0. All five domains cluster near the unfair pole. Scale bars shown at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

Domain Score Breakdown

All five DFS values on the 1–5 structural fairness scale. Bar fill represents position within the 1–5 range. Every domain falls below 2.0.

D1 — Governance & Leadership 1.700

Strong unfairness consensus

D2 — Justice & Rule of Law 1.814

Majority perceives as unfair

D3 — Economy & Resources 1.877

Majority perceives as unfair

D4 — Public Services & Welfare 1.437

Strongest unfairness signal — lowest domain score

D5 — Accountability & Institutions 1.847

Majority perceives as unfair

Overall Fairness Index (OFI)

Equal-weight mean of five domain scores

1.74 / 5.00

Section III — Question Fairness Scores

All 25 questions.
Complete results.

QFS = mean of all valid responses per question. N = 86. σ = standard deviation. Bar represents position within the 1–5 range.

1.00–1.80: Strong unfairness consensus 1.81–2.60: Majority unfair 2.61–3.40: Contested

1

Governance & Leadership

1.700

Strong unfairness consensus

Q1

Elected officials changing parties after election without a new mandateনতুন ম্যান্ডেট ছাড়া দল বদল

1.86

σ 1.07

Majority unfair

Q2

Major policy decisions without public consultation or explanationজনপরামর্শ ছাড়া বড় নীতি সিদ্ধান্ত

1.59

σ 1.14

Strong consensus

Q3

Appointing close family members to government positionsপরিবারের সদস্যকে সরকারি পদে নিয়োগ

1.51

σ 1.08

Strong consensus

Q4

Restricting citizens' right to public protestপ্রকাশ্য প্রতিবাদের অধিকার সীমিত করা

1.69

σ 1.14

Strong consensus

Q5

Selecting candidates without transparent internal party processesস্বচ্ছ প্রক্রিয়া ছাড়া প্রার্থী বাছাই

1.85

σ 1.19

Majority unfair

2

Justice & Rule of Law

1.814

Majority perceives as unfair

Q6

Wealthy individuals having much better access to legal defenseধনীদের অনেক ভালো আইনি সুরক্ষা

1.43

σ 0.94

Strong consensus

Q7

Government influencing court decisions in politically sensitive casesরাজনৈতিক মামলায় আদালতকে প্রভাবিত করা

1.54

σ 1.04

Strong consensus

Q8

Courts significantly influenced by the preferences of the ruling partyক্ষমতাসীন দলের পছন্দে প্রভাবিত আদালত

1.63

σ 0.96

Strong consensus

Q9

People accused of crimes detained for long periods without trialবিচার ছাড়া দীর্ঘ আটক

2.80

σ 1.53

Contested ⚠

Q10

Physical force used against protesters even when some caused property damageআন্দোলনকারীদের বিরুদ্ধে বলপ্রয়োগ

1.67

σ 1.15

Strong consensus

3

Economy & Resources

1.877

Majority perceives as unfair

Q11

Corrupt public officials remaining in office during investigationতদন্তকালে দুর্নীতিবাজদের পদে থাকা

1.59

σ 1.16

Strong consensus

Q12

Very wealthy individuals paying the same tax rate as low-income citizensধনী ও গরিবের একই করহার

2.12

σ 1.24

Majority unfair

Q13

Government financial subsidies provided to large corporationsবড় কর্পোরেশনে সরকারি ভর্তুকি

1.55

σ 1.01

Strong consensus

Q14

Government contracts awarded without open competitive biddingঅল্প কোম্পানির হাতে নিত্যপণ্যের নিয়ন্ত্রণ

2.33

σ 1.68

Majority unfair ⚠

Q15

No support or retraining for workers displaced by automationপ্রযুক্তিতে ছাঁটাই শ্রমিকদের সহায়তা নেই

1.80

σ 1.12

Strong consensus

4

Public Services & Welfare

1.437

Lowest domain — strongest unfairness signal

Q16

Rural citizens receiving fewer public services than urban citizensগ্রামে শহরের চেয়ে কম সরকারি সেবা

1.40

σ 0.83

Strong consensus

Q17

Wealthier citizens receiving better healthcare because they pay moreঅর্থের বিনিময়ে উন্নত স্বাস্থ্যসেবা

1.47

σ 0.85

Strong consensus

Q18

Public education quality differing significantly between regionsঅঞ্চলভেদে শিক্ষার মানে বৈষম্য

1.28

σ 0.78

Strongest ★

Q19

Prioritizing large infrastructure while leaving welfare underfundedঅবকাঠামোতে অগ্রাধিকার, কল্যাণে অর্থাভাব

1.55

σ 0.84

Strong consensus

Q20

Political connections influencing access to government servicesরাজনৈতিক সংযোগে সরকারি সেবাপ্রাপ্তি

1.50

σ 0.97

Strong consensus

5

Accountability & Institutions

1.847

Majority perceives as unfair

Q21

Governments limiting access to information about public spendingজনব্যয় তথ্যে প্রবেশাধিকার সীমিত

2.24

σ 1.33

Majority unfair

Q22

Media organizations openly supporting specific political partiesমিডিয়ার প্রকাশ্য দলীয় সমর্থন

1.49

σ 0.97

Strong consensus

Q23

Governments using emergency powers to restrict citizens' freedomsজরুরি ক্ষমতায় নাগরিক স্বাধীনতা সীমিত

1.78

σ 1.12

Strong consensus

Q24

Powerful corporations influencing government policies through lobbyingকর্পোরেট লবিংয়ে নীতি প্রভাবিত

1.49

σ 0.84

Strong consensus

Q25

International organizations attaching policy conditions to financial aidসাহায্যের সাথে নীতিগত শর্ত

2.23

σ 1.39

Majority unfair

Section IV — Analytical Highlights

What the data
shows most clearly.

Strongest Consensus — Unfair

Q18 — Education quality by region

“Is it fair for public education quality to differ significantly between regions?”

1.28

Lowest QFS across all 25 questions. σ = 0.78. Near-unanimous rejection — the tightest consensus in the dataset.

Only Contested Question

Q9 — Pre-trial detention

“Is it fair for people accused of crimes to be detained for long periods without trial?”

2.80

Highest QFS. Only question crossing the contested threshold (2.61–3.40). Highest σ = 1.53 — maximum disagreement.

Most Divided Response

Q14 — Contracts without competitive bidding

“Is it fair for government contracts to be awarded without open competitive bidding?”

2.33

Highest standard deviation in the dataset: σ = 1.68. Responses spread across the full 1–5 range.

Weakest Domain (Most Unfair)

D4 — Public Services & Welfare

Rural/urban service disparity, wealth-based healthcare, regional education inequality — all strongly rejected.

1.44

Lowest domain score. All five questions in this domain score below 1.55. Strongest unfairness signal across all five domains.

Complete Domain & OFI Summary

Domain	DFS Score	Interpretation	Lowest Q	Highest Q
D1 Governance & Leadership	1.700	Strong unfairness consensus	Q3 — 1.51 (Nepotism)	Q1 — 1.86 (Party switching)
D2 Justice & Rule of Law	1.814	Majority unfair	Q6 — 1.43 (Legal defense)	Q9 — 2.80 (Pre-trial detention)
D3 Economy & Resources	1.877	Majority unfair	Q11 — 1.59 (Corruption in office)	Q14 — 2.33 (No competitive bidding)
D4 Public Services & Welfare	1.437	★ Strongest unfairness signal	Q18 — 1.28 (Education quality)	Q19 — 1.55 (Infrastructure vs welfare)
D5 Accountability & Institutions	1.847	Majority unfair	Q22 — 1.49 (Media partisanship)	Q21 — 2.24 (Spending opacity)
Overall Fairness Index (OFI)	1.74	Majority Unfair range — approaching Strong Unfairness Consensus threshold (1.80) — N=86 — Bangladesh Pilot April 2026

Section V — Participant Profile

Who responded.
N = 86 valid responses.

Age Group

18–2571%

26–3524%

Under 182%

Over 501%

Gender

Male61%

Female37%

Prefer not to say1%

Location

Urban / Major city62%

Semi-urban / Town21%

Rural / Village15%

Prefer not to say1%

Education

Undergraduate / Bachelor's54%

Higher secondary / A-level30%

Postgraduate / Master's+14%

Secondary / High school1%

⚠

Cohort limitation. This pilot is not nationally representative. It skews young (71% aged 18–25), male (61%), urban (62%), and educated (54% undergraduate or above). The OFI of 1.74 reflects this cohort’s structural fairness perceptions. GGL publications will contextualize findings within the participant demographic profile and track how scores shift as the sample expands and diversifies across age, location, gender, and education cohorts.

Join the dataset

Add your voice to the
global measurement.

The Fairness Index survey is open globally through the PlayerOne platform. 25 questions. 5–8 minutes. Every response expands the empirical foundation of the world’s first governance fairness measurement.

Take the Fairness Index on PlayerOne → GGL Research & Publications →

Responses are anonymous · Aggregate data published by Global Governance Lab · Publication: June 2026

The BangladeshFairness PerceptionBaseline

Majority perceives governance as structurally unfair

Majority perceives governance as structurally unfair

Key Findings

Five domains.All in the unfair range.

Governance Pentagon

Domain Score Breakdown

All 25 questions.Complete results.

What the datashows most clearly.

Who responded.N = 86 valid responses.

Age Group

Gender

Location

Education

Add your voice to theglobal measurement.

The Bangladesh
Fairness Perception
Baseline

Five domains.
All in the unfair range.

All 25 questions.
Complete results.

What the data
shows most clearly.

Who responded.
N = 86 valid responses.

Add your voice to the
global measurement.