CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average in Armenia

Armenia: CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average was 3.7 1=low to 6=high in 2013. ▬ Flat

Latest (2013)
3.7 1=low to 6=high
Change on year
unchanged
World rank
7th
of 84 countries
All-time high
3.8 1=low to 6=high
in 2005
All-time low
3.6 1=low to 6=high
in 2011
Years of data
9
2005–2013

CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average in Armenia, 2005–2013

012342005200920132005: 3.8 1=low to 6=high2006: 3.7 1=low to 6=high2007: 3.7 1=low to 6=high2008: 3.7 1=low to 6=high2009: 3.7 1=low to 6=high2010: 3.7 1=low to 6=high2011: 3.6 1=low to 6=high2012: 3.7 1=low to 6=high2013: 3.7 1=low to 6=high

Source: CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Measured in 1=low to 6=high.

Analysis

Armenia recorded 3.7 1=low to 6=high for cpia public sector management and institutions cluster average in 2013.

Compared with earlier readings it is down 2.6% over ten years.

Over the whole period, cpia public sector management and institutions cluster average in Armenia peaked at 3.8 1=low to 6=high in 2005 and was at its lowest, 3.6 1=low to 6=high, in 2011.

Armenia ranks 7th of 84 countries on this measure, in the top 10%.

CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average in Armenia, year by year

Annual values for CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average (1=low to 6=high) in Armenia, 2005 to 2013.
Year 1=low to 6=high Change
2005 3.8 1=low to 6=high
2006 3.7 1=low to 6=high -2.6%
2007 3.7 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2008 3.7 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2009 3.7 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2010 3.7 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2011 3.6 1=low to 6=high -2.7%
2012 3.7 1=low to 6=high +2.8%
2013 3.7 1=low to 6=high +0.0%

Averages by decade

DecadeAverage LowestHighest Years
2000s 3.72 1=low to 6=high 3.7 1=low to 6=high 3.8 1=low to 6=high 5
2010s 3.68 1=low to 6=high 3.6 1=low to 6=high 3.7 1=low to 6=high 4

Countries ranked near Armenia

  1. 5 Rwanda 3.9 1=low to 6=high compare
  2. 6 Côte d'Ivoire 3.8 1=low to 6=high compare
  3. 7 Benin 3.7 1=low to 6=high compare
  4. 7 Ghana 3.7 1=low to 6=high compare
  5. 7 Kenya 3.7 1=low to 6=high compare
  6. 7 Kosovo 3.7 1=low to 6=high compare
  7. 7 Saint Lucia 3.7 1=low to 6=high compare
  8. 7 Tonga 3.7 1=low to 6=high compare
  9. 7 Uzbekistan 3.7 1=low to 6=high compare

See the full ranking of 126 places →

More climate change data for Armenia

All data for Armenia →

Frequently asked questions

What is cpia public sector management and institutions cluster average in Armenia?
Cpia public sector management and institutions cluster average in Armenia was 3.7 1=low to 6=high in 2013, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
What is the highest cpia public sector management and institutions cluster average recorded in Armenia?
The highest recorded value was 3.8 1=low to 6=high in 2005.
What is the lowest cpia public sector management and institutions cluster average recorded in Armenia?
The lowest recorded value was 3.6 1=low to 6=high in 2011.
How does Armenia rank for cpia public sector management and institutions cluster average?
Armenia ranks 7th out of 84 countries with data for 2013.
Is cpia public sector management and institutions cluster average rising or falling in Armenia?
Over the last ten years it is down 2.6%. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
Where does this Armenia data come from?
The figures come from CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as part of CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.

Download this data

CSV · JSON — 9 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average in Armenia. Statizoid, drawing on CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 25 August 2026, from https://climate.statizoid.com/stat/cpia-public-sector-management-and-institutions-cluster-average-1-low-to-6-high/armenia/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://climate.statizoid.com/stat/cpia-public-sector-management-and-institutions-cluster-average-1-low-to-6-high/armenia/">CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average in Armenia</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average (1=low to 6=high)
Unit
1=low to 6=high
Source
CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG)
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
126 places, 2,443 data points, 2005–2025
Last refreshed

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.