The things that matter most continue to go unreported. Take the findings of the independent think tank on global sustainability, SolAbility, published in December 2025: This idea is that we read the summary of it, take notice of its observations, and think about ways we can individually act on this critical information to help fix up the world: Key take-aways: State of the World 2025 [their 14th edition of the Global Competitiveness Index, the rest of this idea is cut and pasted from it] The Global Competitiveness Index reveals that the World remains far from a sustainable state: • The global average Sustainable Competitiveness score in 2025 is 46.8 – out of a possible maximum of 100 • The global gap to a sustainable world is 53.2 points. We remain distant from achieving an inclusive, circular society living in equilibrium with the natural environment. • In the Natural Capital dimension, degradation continues: Despite some localized improvements, over half of all natural capital indicators globally show negative trends. The trajectory points toward further environmental decline without decisive intervention. • Resource efficiency improvements are occurring, but at an insufficient pace to avert climate disaster. While necessary technologies exist and are increasingly cost-competitive, there remains a critical lack of political will to systematically redirect markets toward sustainable competitiveness. The gap between technological potential and policy implementation continues to widen. • The corporate sector is increasingly outpacing political leadership: Market driven competition and cost-benefit optimization are driving efficiency gains faster than regulatory frameworks can evolve, creating both opportunities and governance gaps. • The Intellectual Capital divide remains stark: Top performers (South Korea, Japan, Singapore) score above 70, while bottom performers struggle below 35. This 35+ point gap raises a fundamental question: Is education the foundation for development, or the consequence of it? The data suggests a reinforcing cycle where both are true. • Modest but positive trends in Social and Intellectual Capital: Analysis shows slow but steady improvements in education systems, healthcare access, and social cohesion in countries with stable governance. Under favourable conditions, these dimensions demonstrate the most consistent upward trajectories. • The Governance dimension shows the highest variance and volatility: Countries affected by tribalism, polarizing cultural conflicts, power struggles, and armed conflict (Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Afghanistan) rank 40-50 points below stable democracies. Political instability is the single greatest impediment to implementing proven, cost-effective, and readily available sustainability solutions. • Immense untapped potential exists across all dimensions: Countries that have implemented coherent efficiency-focused policies demonstrate that coordinated action across education, Natural Capital preservation, Resource Intensity reduction, and Social Capital investment can yield measurable improvements within 5-10-year timeframes. The gap between leaders (Finland: 60.4) and the global average (46.8) represents actionable opportunity, not insurmountable challenge. • The ESG rating distribution reveals systemic patterns: 84% of countries score below AA-, indicating that even relatively well-performing nations face significant sustainability deficits. Only 9 countries achieve AA- or above, all from Northern Europe, suggesting that comprehensive sustainable competitiveness requires integrated policy frameworks rather than siloed interventions. Global Trends • Resource intensity is declining, and resource efficiency is increasing: more than 60% of all indicators in the resource usage dimension globally are positive. However, these changes are slow, and insufficient in face of global resource consumption challenges. • Intellectual Capital shows a high percentage of positive trends, mostly driven by Asian Nations. At the same time, we see decline or stagnation in other parts of the World • A high number of Natural Capital trends are negative. Unfortunately, we have to expect further decline of the natural environment in the future.