Uzbekistan vs Vietnam: Common Good Justifications Score
Uzbekistan
0.163
in 2025
Vietnam
0.054
in 2025
Uzbekistan rank
123rd
Vietnam rank
125th
Common Good Justifications Score over time
- Uzbekistan
- Vietnam
How they compare
Uzbekistan currently reports 0.163 against 0.054 in Vietnam, a difference of 0.109.
That makes Uzbekistan's figure about 3.0 times Vietnam's.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 50 shared years of data; in 1976 it was Vietnam ahead.
Uzbekistan ranks 123rd and Vietnam ranks 125th of 175 countries.
Across the 6 decades both report, Uzbekistan averaged higher in 3 and Vietnam in 3.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Uzbekistan | Vietnam | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1970s | 0.854 | 1.16 | 0.308 | Vietnam |
| 1980s | 1.26 | 1.19 | 0.0653 | Uzbekistan |
| 1990s | 1.52 | 0.9772 | 0.5392 | Uzbekistan |
| 2000s | 0.8191 | 0.9583 | 0.1392 | Vietnam |
| 2010s | 0.7645 | 0.8408 | 0.0763 | Vietnam |
| 2020s | 0.8297 | 0.2643 | 0.5653 | Uzbekistan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher common good justifications score, Uzbekistan or Vietnam?
- Uzbekistan, at 0.163 against 0.054 in Vietnam as of 2025.
- What is the difference in common good justifications score between Uzbekistan and Vietnam?
- 0.109, with Uzbekistan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Uzbekistan and Vietnam?
- 50 years are reported by both, from 1976 to 2025.
- How do Uzbekistan and Vietnam rank globally for common good justifications score?
- Uzbekistan ranks 123rd and Vietnam ranks 125th 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.