Botswana vs Myanmar: Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score

Botswana
2
in 2018
Myanmar
2
in 2018
Botswana rank
84th
Myanmar rank
84th

Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score over time

  • Botswana
  • Myanmar
0123194819832018

How they compare

Botswana currently reports 2 against 2 in Myanmar, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 52 shared years of data; in 1966 it was Botswana ahead.

Botswana ranks 84th and Myanmar ranks 84th of 166 countries.

Botswana has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Botswana Myanmar Difference Ahead
1960s 2 0 2 Botswana
1970s 2 0.6 1.4 Botswana
1980s 2 0.8 1.2 Botswana
1990s 2 0 2 Botswana
2000s 2 0 2 Botswana
2010s 2 0.75 1.25 Botswana

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher competitiveness of executive recruitment score, Botswana or Myanmar?
Botswana, at 2 against 2 in Myanmar as of 2018.
What is the difference in competitiveness of executive recruitment score between Botswana and Myanmar?
0, with Botswana ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Botswana and Myanmar?
52 years are reported by both, from 1966 to 2018.
How do Botswana and Myanmar rank globally for competitiveness of executive recruitment score?
Botswana ranks 84th and Myanmar ranks 84th of 166 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Polity 5 (2020) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score
Source
Polity 5 (2020) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
167 places, 17,813 data points, 1789–2020
Last refreshed

Indicates the extent to which executive recruitment is competitive. It ranges from executive power being seized (score of 0), over the executive being selected by elites (score of 1), and dual selection-election or transitional arrangements (score of 2), to the executive being elected (score of 4).