Lesotho vs Mauritius: Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score

Lesotho
3
in 2018
Mauritius
3
in 2018
Lesotho rank
1st
Mauritius rank
1st

Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score over time

  • Lesotho
  • Mauritius
0123196619922018

How they compare

Lesotho currently reports 3 against 3 in Mauritius, a difference of 0.

Across all 51 years both countries report, Mauritius has been ahead every year.

Lesotho ranks 1st and Mauritius ranks 1st of 166 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Lesotho Mauritius Difference Ahead
1960s 2 3 1 Mauritius
1970s 0.7 3 2.3 Mauritius
1980s 1 3 2 Mauritius
1990s 1.4 3 1.6 Mauritius
2000s 2.8 3 0.2 Mauritius
2010s 3 3 0

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher competitiveness of executive recruitment score, Lesotho or Mauritius?
Lesotho, at 3 against 3 in Mauritius as of 2018.
What is the difference in competitiveness of executive recruitment score between Lesotho and Mauritius?
0, with Lesotho ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Lesotho and Mauritius?
51 years are reported by both, from 1968 to 2018.
How do Lesotho and Mauritius rank globally for competitiveness of executive recruitment score?
Lesotho ranks 1st and Mauritius 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

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).