Honduras vs South Korea: Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score
Honduras
3
in 2018
South Korea
3
in 2018
Honduras rank
1st
South Korea rank
1st
Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score over time
- Honduras
- South Korea
How they compare
Honduras currently reports 3 against 3 in South Korea, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 68 shared years of data; in 1948 it was South Korea ahead.
Honduras ranks 1st and South Korea ranks 1st of 167 countries.
Across the 8 decades both report, Honduras averaged higher in 1 and South Korea in 4.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Honduras | South Korea | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1940s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1950s | 0.6 | 1 | 0.4 | South Korea |
| 1960s | 0 | 2.4 | 2.4 | South Korea |
| 1970s | 0 | 1.4 | 1.4 | South Korea |
| 1980s | 2 | 1.29 | 0.7143 | Honduras |
| 1990s | 2.1 | 2.2 | 0.1 | South Korea |
| 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, Honduras or South Korea?
- Honduras, at 3 against 3 in South Korea as of 2018.
- What is the difference in competitiveness of executive recruitment score between Honduras and South Korea?
- 0, with Honduras ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Honduras and South Korea?
- 68 years are reported by both, from 1948 to 2018.
- How do Honduras and South Korea rank globally for competitiveness of executive recruitment score?
- Honduras 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).