Post-demographic dividend vs Uzbekistan: CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average (1=low)
CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average (1=low) over time
- Post-demographic dividend
- Uzbekistan
How they compare
Uzbekistan currently reports 3.7 1=low to 6=high against 3.3 1=low to 6=high in Post-demographic dividend, a difference of 0.4 1=low to 6=high.
That makes Uzbekistan's figure about 1.1 times Post-demographic dividend's.
Across all 9 years both countries report, Post-demographic dividend has been ahead every year.
Post-demographic dividend ranks 6th and Uzbekistan ranks 7th of 42 groups.
Post-demographic dividend has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Post-demographic dividend | Uzbekistan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.32 1=low to 6=high | 2.56 1=low to 6=high | 0.76 1=low to 6=high | Post-demographic dividend |
| 2010s | 3.3 1=low to 6=high | 2.88 1=low to 6=high | 0.425 1=low to 6=high | Post-demographic dividend |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia public sector management and institutions cluster average, Post-demographic dividend or Uzbekistan?
- Uzbekistan, at 3.7 1=low to 6=high against 3.3 1=low to 6=high in Post-demographic dividend as of 2025.
- What is the difference in cpia public sector management and institutions cluster average between Post-demographic dividend and Uzbekistan?
- 0.4 1=low to 6=high, with Uzbekistan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Post-demographic dividend and Uzbekistan?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2013.
- How do Post-demographic dividend and Uzbekistan rank globally for cpia public sector management and institutions cluster average?
- Post-demographic dividend ranks 6th and Uzbekistan ranks 7th of 42 groups.
- 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.