Djibouti vs Sao Tome and Principe: Control of Corruption
Control of Corruption over time
- Djibouti
- Sao Tome and Principe
How they compare
Sao Tome and Principe currently reports 0.2293 standard error against 0.2275 standard error in Djibouti, a difference of 0.0018 standard error.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 13 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Sao Tome and Principe ahead.
Djibouti ranks 6th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 4th of 53 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Djibouti averaged higher in 1 and Sao Tome and Principe in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Djibouti | Sao Tome and Principe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 0.4509 standard error | 0.4509 standard error | 0 standard error | — |
| 2000s | 0.2774 standard error | 0.2702 standard error | 0.0072 standard error | Djibouti |
| 2010s | 0.2278 standard error | 0.2299 standard error | 0.0022 standard error | Sao Tome and Principe |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher control of corruption, Djibouti or Sao Tome and Principe?
- Sao Tome and Principe, at 0.2293 standard error against 0.2275 standard error in Djibouti as of 2011.
- What is the difference in control of corruption between Djibouti and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 0.0018 standard error, with Sao Tome and Principe ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Djibouti and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2011.
- How do Djibouti and Sao Tome and Principe rank globally for control of corruption?
- Djibouti ranks 6th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 4th of 53 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- World Bank Institute, published as Control of Corruption (standard error). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
See definition GV.CONT.CO.ES. Inherent to all Governance Indicators is a margin of error, which might vary from country to country, normally attributable to two factors: (i) cross-country differences in the number of sources in which a country appears, and (ii) differences in the precision of the sources in which each country appears.