Bosnia and Herzegovina vs Republic of Moldova: CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average
CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average over time
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Republic of Moldova
How they compare
Bosnia and Herzegovina currently reports 3.3 1=low to 6=high against 3.3 1=low to 6=high in Republic of Moldova, a difference of 0 1=low to 6=high.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 9 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Bosnia and Herzegovina ahead.
Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 23rd and Republic of Moldova ranks 23rd of 85 countries.
Republic of Moldova has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Republic of Moldova | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.32 1=low to 6=high | 3.34 1=low to 6=high | 0.02 1=low to 6=high | Republic of Moldova |
| 2010s | 3.3 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 0.2 1=low to 6=high | Republic of Moldova |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia public sector management and institutions cluster average, Bosnia and Herzegovina or Republic of Moldova?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina, at 3.3 1=low to 6=high against 3.3 1=low to 6=high in Republic of Moldova as of 2013.
- What is the difference in cpia public sector management and institutions cluster average between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republic of Moldova?
- 0 1=low to 6=high, with Bosnia and Herzegovina ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republic of Moldova?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2013.
- How do Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republic of Moldova rank globally for cpia public sector management and institutions cluster average?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 23rd and Republic of Moldova ranks 23rd of 85 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (CPIA) measures the extent to which a country’s policy and institutional framework supports sustainable growth and poverty reduction, and consequently the effective use of development assistance. The outcome of the exercise yields both an overall score and scores for sixteen criteria that compose the CPIA. These criteria include: A. Economic Management (1. Monetary and Exchange Rate Policies; 2. Fiscal Policy; 3. Debt Policy and Management), B. Structural Policies (4. Trade; 5. Financial Sector; 6. Business Regulatory Environment), C. Policies for Social Inclusion/Equity (7. Gender equality; 8. Equity of public resource use; 9. Building human resources; 10. Social protection and labor; 11. Policies and institutions for environmental sustainability), D. Public Sector Management and Institutions (12. Property rights and rule-based governance; 13. Quality of budgetary and financial management; 14. Efficiency of revenue mobilization; 15. Quality of public administration; 16. Transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector). The Public Sector Management and Institutions cluster includes property rights and rule-based governance, quality of budgetary and financial management, efficiency of revenue mobilization, quality of public administration, and transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector.