Chile vs Philippines: Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score
Chile
3
in 2018
Philippines
3
in 2018
Chile rank
1st
Philippines rank
1st
Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score over time
- Chile
- Philippines
How they compare
Chile currently reports 3 against 3 in Philippines, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 80 shared years of data; in 1935 it was Philippines ahead.
Chile ranks 1st and Philippines ranks 1st of 166 countries.
Philippines has averaged higher in every one of the 9 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Chile | Philippines | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1930s | 2 | 3 | 1 | Philippines |
| 1940s | 2 | 3 | 1 | Philippines |
| 1950s | 2.2 | 3 | 0.8 | Philippines |
| 1960s | 3 | 3 | 0 | — |
| 1970s | 0.9 | 1.4 | 0.5 | Philippines |
| 1980s | 0.2222 | 1.67 | 1.44 | Philippines |
| 1990s | 2 | 3 | 1 | Philippines |
| 2000s | 3 | 3 | 0 | — |
| 2010s | 3 | 3 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher competitiveness of executive recruitment score, Chile or Philippines?
- Chile, at 3 against 3 in Philippines as of 2018.
- What is the difference in competitiveness of executive recruitment score between Chile and Philippines?
- 0, with Chile ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Chile and Philippines?
- 80 years are reported by both, from 1935 to 2018.
- How do Chile and Philippines rank globally for competitiveness of executive recruitment score?
- Chile ranks 1st and Philippines ranks 1st 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
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).