Mauritius vs Sierra Leone: Control of Corruption
Mauritius
0.1776 standard error
in 2011
Sierra Leone
0.1824 standard error
in 2011
Mauritius rank
20th
Sierra Leone rank
18th
Control of Corruption over time
- Mauritius
- Sierra Leone
How they compare
Sierra Leone currently reports 0.1824 standard error against 0.1776 standard error in Mauritius, a difference of 0.0048 standard error.
Across all 13 years both countries report, Sierra Leone has been ahead every year.
Mauritius ranks 20th and Sierra Leone ranks 18th of 53 countries.
Sierra Leone has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Mauritius | Sierra Leone | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 0.2871 standard error | 0.4022 standard error | 0.1152 standard error | Sierra Leone |
| 2000s | 0.1856 standard error | 0.2384 standard error | 0.0528 standard error | Sierra Leone |
| 2010s | 0.1799 standard error | 0.1865 standard error | 0.0067 standard error | Sierra Leone |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher control of corruption, Mauritius or Sierra Leone?
- Sierra Leone, at 0.1824 standard error against 0.1776 standard error in Mauritius as of 2011.
- What is the difference in control of corruption between Mauritius and Sierra Leone?
- 0.0048 standard error, with Sierra Leone ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Mauritius and Sierra Leone?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2011.
- How do Mauritius and Sierra Leone rank globally for control of corruption?
- Mauritius ranks 20th and Sierra Leone ranks 18th 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.