The gradual transition to democracy in the 1990s improved that image, and the world perceived Bangladesh as a democratic, moderate Muslim country. Right now, the world community is closely watching the outcome of the search for democracy under a caretaker government.

We definitely need to pay attention to our international image in a globalised world. A favourable rating or image should help us in trade, business, investment and tourism. It is related to national and international events (for example, the winning of the Nobel Peace Prize and the intermittent success of the national cricket team positively contribute to our image), our political system, international relations, economic growth, government policies, entrepreneurship, privatisation, literacy, and international trade and travel. It is also affected by flooding, cyclones and natural calamities, political violence, and corruption.

Country ratings, conducted annually by various international institutions, affect the image of a nation. Despite their bias and methodological problems, they are useful indicators for "marketing a nation" to the world. Governments, international organisations, and multi-nationals use them for environmental scanning, segmentation, entry strategy, market development, business investment, and policy purposes.

The primary purpose of this article is to raise awareness about our international image, and also to point out that it is affected by our country ratings. In a table, Bangladesh is compared with five other countries on the basis of six international ratings. There are many other ratings; these six are chosen as examples. Policy suggestions are also provided. GDP per capita and population are added in the table for comparison purposes.

Political Freedom and Civil Liberties Index
Freedom House, a conservative think-tank based in Washington, D.C., evaluates political freedom and civil liberties on a 7-point scale, with 1 representing most free and 7 representing least free. Countries are rated as free (1-2.5), partly free (3.0-5.0) and not free (5.0-7.0).

Bangladesh is rated as a partly free country, and is behind Turkey and India. With curtailed political activities, and over 50,000 people behind bars under the current caretaker regime, we are not likely to do well in this rating. Lifting of emergency and re-introduction of democracy will improve our image.

Economic Freedom Rating
Heritage Foundation and Fraser Institute evaluate countries of the world on the basis of citizen's economic freedom. Their methodologies differ, but their findings correlate well. Only Heritage Foundation's ratings are reported in the table.

We rank the lowest among the six countries in terms of economic freedom. We definitely need to improve our economic freedom rating by paying attention to the ten dimensions of freedom. They are: business, trade, monetary, price stability, government, fiscal policy, property rights, investment, finance, corruption, and labour. Overall, business and entrepreneurship must be upheld.

Global competitiveness index
GCI is a comprehensive index indicating the level of productivity and economic growth of a country. The World Economic Forum determines the global competitiveness index of 125 countries on the basis of nine factors.

They are: institutions, infrastructure, macro-economy, health and primary education, higher education and training, market efficiency, technological readiness, and business sophistication and innovation.

Again, we score lowest on this, and are far away from our peers except Pakistan. Our competitiveness could be increased by paying attention to the nine factors defining GCI.

Globalisation Index
Globalisation is an umbrella term that refers to global connectivity and interdependence. The A.T. Kearney/Foreign Policy Globalisation Index assesses countries in terms of economic integration, personal contact, technological connectivity, and political engagement. In 2006, out of 62 countries Bangladesh ranked 58th. Among our peers, Malaysia (19) is the most globalised country and can be a good role model for us to follow.

Corruption Perception Index
This is probably the most known index in Bangladesh. Transparency International rates countries of the world on a 10 point scale, where a high score indicates low corruption. TI has labeled Bangladesh as one of the most corrupt countries in the world.

The rating has hurt our image in international forums and undermined governance. In 2006, TI surveyed 163 countries of the world, and we ranked 156th. Our current drive against corruption should improve that score in the future.

Human Development Index
The United Nations Development Program determines the Human Development Index of the countries of the world annually. HDI is a composite of per capita income, education, and life expectancy at birth. It indicates how well a country is doing with respect to economic as well as non-economic qualitative aspects of development.

In 2004, out of 177 countries Bangladesh ranked 137th. In the table, Bangladesh has the lowest score and is close to Pakistan. Without substantial improvement in economic growth, literacy and health, we are not likely to do better on this index.

Bangladesh is behind her peers in almost all ratings. Concerted government policy interventions, with help from business, media, advocacy groups and citizens would be required to improve them.

The ratings are highly correlated. For example, political freedom ratings are highly correlated with economic freedom and GCI. On the other hand, CPI is negatively correlated to competitiveness and freedom. It also increases the risk of doing business in a country. HDI improves if a country shows material economic gains. The relationship among different ratings calls for careful policy interventions.

Country ratings guide the "branding of a country" to the world. Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, South Africa, Botswana, and Poland have taken "proactive" country branding strategies to change their international image. Bangladesh could learn from them to (re)define our international image and develop her own integrated marketing communication (IMC) campaigns. For the sake of brevity, I refrain from discussing this in the article.

On a policy level, we may consider establishing a "monitoring cell," with representation from government, academia, business, media, and private citizens, to evaluate our international image. The cell could evaluate Bangladesh with respect to her neighbours (Saarc nations), competitors (countries that we compete with), and aspirants (countries that could be our role models). The cell could also offer policy suggestions to improve our image through proactive country branding strategies.

Concepts like international image, country risk rating, country branding, or destination competitiveness have been around for a long time. As mentioned, many emerging and developing countries have deliberated on them, and have taken measures to better their image and national standing. We need to begin such discussions in Bangladesh. The sooner we begin, the better it will be for our international image in a globalised world.

Dr. A.N.M. Waheeduzzaman is a Professor of Marketing and International Business at Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi.