Figures 8 through 13 display the range of Human Capital Index scores by income group overall and by Age Group pillar.

Figure 14 displays the correlation between GDP per capita levels and performance on the Human Capital Index. The graph confirms a fairly high correlation (R = 0.60) between a nation’s human capital optimization and its GDP per capita. This correlation supports the theory that, while a country’s income level is one important determinant of its ability to successfully build and leverage its human capital (but far from the only one), its long-term ability to thrive rests heavily on the human capital potential embodied in the skills and learning of its people. Creating a virtuous cycle of this nature should be the aim of all countries.

Interesting patterns emerge in the results when examined by income group. Within the high-income group, Finland (1) and Norway (2) score very close to each other, despite the latter’s much higher level of income per capita. Conversely, Switzerland (3), the United States (17) and Saudi Arabia (85) are practically tied in their GDP per capita level but record very different human capital outcomes. The same holds true for Ghana (82), Kenya (101) and Nigeria (120) at a lower GDP per capita level, indicating that human capital investment and planning can make a difference to a nation’s human capital endowment regardless of where it falls on the global income scale.