Equatorial Guinea vs Yemen: Common Good Justifications Score
Equatorial Guinea
-2.24
in 2025
Yemen
-2.06
in 2025
Equatorial Guinea rank
171st
Yemen rank
169th
Common Good Justifications Score over time
- Equatorial Guinea
- Yemen
How they compare
Yemen currently reports -2.06 against -2.24 in Equatorial Guinea, a difference of 0.18.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 53 shared years of data; in 1900 it was Yemen ahead.
Equatorial Guinea ranks 171st and Yemen ranks 169th of 175 countries.
Across the 6 decades both report, Equatorial Guinea averaged higher in 1 and Yemen in 5.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Equatorial Guinea | Yemen | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1900s | -3.63 | 0.291 | 3.92 | Yemen |
| 1910s | -3.63 | 0.291 | 3.92 | Yemen |
| 1990s | -1.78 | -0.4381 | 1.34 | Yemen |
| 2000s | -1.78 | -0.5252 | 1.25 | Yemen |
| 2010s | -1.75 | -1.34 | 0.4073 | Yemen |
| 2020s | -2.24 | -2.27 | 0.0303 | Equatorial Guinea |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher common good justifications score, Equatorial Guinea or Yemen?
- Yemen, at -2.06 against -2.24 in Equatorial Guinea as of 2025.
- What is the difference in common good justifications score between Equatorial Guinea and Yemen?
- 0.18, with Yemen ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Yemen?
- 53 years are reported by both, from 1900 to 2025.
- How do Equatorial Guinea and Yemen rank globally for common good justifications score?
- Equatorial Guinea ranks 171st and Yemen ranks 169th 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.