Korea's Competitiveness Surge

IMD’s ranking methodology is based on four pillars—economic performance, government efficiency, business efficiency and infrastructure—and uses a large indicator set: 172 statistical indicators plus 92 indicators from an executive opinion survey (264 total). IMD’s latest report used 2025 statistics and an executive opinion survey conducted between March and May, according to Korea’s Ministry of Economy and Finance.

For South Korea, the business-efficiency rebound is broken down further: business efficiency rose from 44th to 34th, with productivity/efficiency improving from 45th to 34th and the labor market from 53rd to 45th; finance improved from 33rd to 29th and management practices from 55th to 49th. Infrastructure also improved in specific sub-pillars, including “scientific infrastructure” staying at a high rank of 2nd, while basic infrastructure moved 35th→28th and technological infrastructure 27th→21st.

South Korea’s government-efficiency result was not just “roughly flat” but stayed unchanged at 31st year-on-year, while the report says economic-performance declines were linked to weaker performances in employment and inflation. The finance ministry said it plans to “refer to the IMD assessment results and analyze our economy's strengths and weaknesses,” adding that it will “continue efforts to improve policies and pursue innovation.”

For Thailand, the Thai Management Association (TMA) highlighted public-sector governance as a major concern, citing especially weak scores on rule of law (57th), corruption (52nd) and government transparency (51st). It also said business legislation and regulations remain weak (40th), and that—per the executive opinion survey—regulations are still viewed as obstacles to business operations and competitiveness.