Libya vs Moldova: Common Good Justifications Score
Libya
0.617
in 2025
Moldova
0.661
in 2025
Libya rank
95th
Moldova rank
93rd
Common Good Justifications Score over time
- Libya
- Moldova
How they compare
Moldova currently reports 0.661 against 0.617 in Libya, a difference of 0.044.
That makes Moldova's figure about 1.1 times Libya's.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 77 shared years of data; in 1940 it was Moldova ahead.
Libya ranks 95th and Moldova ranks 93rd of 175 countries.
Across the 9 decades both report, Libya averaged higher in 2 and Moldova in 7.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Libya | Moldova | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1940s | -3.41 | 0.761 | 4.17 | Moldova |
| 1950s | 0.206 | 0.848 | 0.642 | Moldova |
| 1960s | 0.2284 | 0.854 | 0.6256 | Moldova |
| 1970s | 0.753 | 0.854 | 0.101 | Moldova |
| 1980s | 0.753 | 1.26 | 0.5064 | Moldova |
| 1990s | 0.753 | 0.2593 | 0.4937 | Libya |
| 2000s | 0.753 | 0.3406 | 0.4124 | Libya |
| 2010s | 0.3291 | 0.8136 | 0.4845 | Moldova |
| 2020s | 0.4367 | 1.19 | 0.758 | Moldova |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher common good justifications score, Libya or Moldova?
- Moldova, at 0.661 against 0.617 in Libya as of 2025.
- What is the difference in common good justifications score between Libya and Moldova?
- 0.044, with Moldova ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Libya and Moldova?
- 77 years are reported by both, from 1940 to 2025.
- How do Libya and Moldova rank globally for common good justifications score?
- Libya ranks 95th and Moldova ranks 93rd 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.