Austria vs Croatia: Common Good Justifications Score
Austria
1.28
in 2025
Croatia
1.27
in 2025
Austria rank
44th
Croatia rank
45th
Common Good Justifications Score over time
- Austria
- Croatia
How they compare
Austria currently reports 1.28 against 1.27 in Croatia, a difference of 0.01.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 81 shared years of data; in 1945 it was Austria ahead.
Austria ranks 44th and Croatia ranks 45th of 175 countries.
Austria has averaged higher in every one of the 9 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Austria | Croatia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1940s | 0.5076 | -2.04 | 2.55 | Austria |
| 1950s | 0.556 | -1.6 | 2.16 | Austria |
| 1960s | 0.556 | -1.21 | 1.76 | Austria |
| 1970s | 1.03 | -1.21 | 2.23 | Austria |
| 1980s | 1.5 | -1.21 | 2.71 | Austria |
| 1990s | 1.5 | 0.1645 | 1.33 | Austria |
| 2000s | 1.47 | 1.16 | 0.3151 | Austria |
| 2010s | 1.37 | 0.9489 | 0.4235 | Austria |
| 2020s | 1.34 | 0.8582 | 0.4852 | Austria |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher common good justifications score, Austria or Croatia?
- Austria, at 1.28 against 1.27 in Croatia as of 2025.
- What is the difference in common good justifications score between Austria and Croatia?
- 0.01, with Austria ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Austria and Croatia?
- 81 years are reported by both, from 1945 to 2025.
- How do Austria and Croatia rank globally for common good justifications score?
- Austria ranks 44th and Croatia ranks 45th of 175 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- V-Dem (2026) β processed by Our World in Data, published as Common Good Justifications Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Central estimate of the extent to which political elites justify their views with the common good for society, either the greatest good for the greatest number of people or as helping the least advantaged people in society when considering important policy changes.