Equatorial Guinea vs Thailand: Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score
Equatorial Guinea
0
in 2018
Thailand
0
in 2018
Equatorial Guinea rank
151st
Thailand rank
151st
Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score over time
- Equatorial Guinea
- Thailand
How they compare
Equatorial Guinea currently reports 0 against 0 in Thailand, a difference of 0.
Across all 48 years both countries report, Thailand has been ahead every year.
Equatorial Guinea ranks 151st and Thailand ranks 151st of 167 countries.
Thailand has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Equatorial Guinea | Thailand | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 0 | 3 | 3 | Thailand |
| 1970s | 0 | 1.62 | 1.62 | Thailand |
| 1980s | 0 | 2.2 | 2.2 | Thailand |
| 1990s | 0 | 2.7 | 2.7 | Thailand |
| 2000s | 0 | 2.4 | 2.4 | Thailand |
| 2010s | 0 | 1.22 | 1.22 | Thailand |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher competitiveness of executive recruitment score, Equatorial Guinea or Thailand?
- Equatorial Guinea, at 0 against 0 in Thailand as of 2018.
- What is the difference in competitiveness of executive recruitment score between Equatorial Guinea and Thailand?
- 0, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Thailand?
- 48 years are reported by both, from 1969 to 2018.
- How do Equatorial Guinea and Thailand rank globally for competitiveness of executive recruitment score?
- Equatorial Guinea ranks 151st and Thailand ranks 151st 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).