Ecuador vs South Korea: Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score
Ecuador
3
in 2018
South Korea
3
in 2018
Ecuador rank
1st
South Korea rank
1st
Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score over time
- Ecuador
- South Korea
How they compare
Ecuador currently reports 3 against 3 in South Korea, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 5 times across 68 shared years of data; in 1948 it was Ecuador ahead.
Ecuador ranks 1st and South Korea ranks 1st of 167 countries.
Across the 8 decades both report, Ecuador averaged higher in 4 and South Korea in 3.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Ecuador | South Korea | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1940s | 2 | 1 | 1 | Ecuador |
| 1950s | 2 | 1 | 1 | Ecuador |
| 1960s | 1.5 | 2.25 | 0.75 | South Korea |
| 1970s | 0.9 | 1.4 | 0.5 | South Korea |
| 1980s | 3 | 1.22 | 1.78 | Ecuador |
| 1990s | 3 | 2.2 | 0.8 | Ecuador |
| 2000s | 2.4 | 3 | 0.6 | South Korea |
| 2010s | 3 | 3 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher competitiveness of executive recruitment score, Ecuador or South Korea?
- Ecuador, at 3 against 3 in South Korea as of 2018.
- What is the difference in competitiveness of executive recruitment score between Ecuador and South Korea?
- 0, with Ecuador ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and South Korea?
- 68 years are reported by both, from 1948 to 2018.
- How do Ecuador and South Korea rank globally for competitiveness of executive recruitment score?
- Ecuador ranks 1st and South Korea ranks 1st of 167 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).