Libya vs Qatar: Common Good Justifications Score
Libya
0.617
in 2025
Qatar
0.668
in 2025
Libya rank
95th
Qatar rank
92nd
Common Good Justifications Score over time
- Libya
- Qatar
How they compare
Qatar currently reports 0.668 against 0.617 in Libya, a difference of 0.051.
That makes Qatar's figure about 1.1 times Libya's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 83 shared years of data; in 1934 it was Qatar ahead.
Libya ranks 95th and Qatar ranks 92nd of 175 countries.
Across the 10 decades both report, Libya averaged higher in 6 and Qatar in 4.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Libya | Qatar | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1930s | -3.41 | -2.17 | 1.24 | Qatar |
| 1940s | -3.41 | -2.17 | 1.24 | Qatar |
| 1950s | 0.206 | -2.17 | 2.38 | Libya |
| 1960s | 0.2284 | -1.36 | 1.59 | Libya |
| 1970s | 0.753 | -1.36 | 2.12 | Libya |
| 1980s | 0.753 | -1.36 | 2.12 | Libya |
| 1990s | 0.753 | -0.7474 | 1.5 | Libya |
| 2000s | 0.753 | 0.5284 | 0.2246 | Libya |
| 2010s | 0.3291 | 0.668 | 0.3389 | Qatar |
| 2020s | 0.4367 | 0.668 | 0.2313 | Qatar |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher common good justifications score, Libya or Qatar?
- Qatar, at 0.668 against 0.617 in Libya as of 2025.
- What is the difference in common good justifications score between Libya and Qatar?
- 0.051, with Qatar ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Libya and Qatar?
- 83 years are reported by both, from 1934 to 2025.
- How do Libya and Qatar rank globally for common good justifications score?
- Libya ranks 95th and Qatar ranks 92nd of 175 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- V-Dem (2026) – 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.