Burundi vs China: Dimension 1.5: Data use by international organizations

Burundi
0.7
in 2023
China
0.734
in 2023
Burundi rank
134th
China rank
133rd

Dimension 1.5: Data use by international organizations over time

  • Burundi
  • China
0.20.40.60.8200420132023

How they compare

China currently reports 0.734 against 0.7 in Burundi, a difference of 0.034.

Across all 20 years both countries report, China has been ahead every year.

Burundi ranks 134th and China ranks 133rd of 214 countries.

China has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Burundi China Difference Ahead
2000s 0.2667 0.4 0.1333 China
2010s 0.55 0.6536 0.1036 China
2020s 0.633 0.784 0.151 China

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dimension 1.5: data use by international organizations, Burundi or China?
China, at 0.734 against 0.7 in Burundi as of 2023.
What is the difference in dimension 1.5: data use by international organizations between Burundi and China?
0.034, with China ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Burundi and China?
20 years are reported by both, from 2004 to 2023.
How do Burundi and China rank globally for dimension 1.5: data use by international organizations?
Burundi ranks 134th and China ranks 133rd of 214 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statistical Performance Indicators, The World Bank (https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/statistical-performance-indicators), published as Dimension 1.5: Data use by international organizations. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Dimension 1.5: Data use by international organizations
Source
Statistical Performance Indicators, The World Bank (https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/statistical-performance-indicators)
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
217 places, 4,340 data points, 2004–2023
Last refreshed

Five measures usefulness or reliability of country produced measures for international organizations. First, on comparability of poverty estimates for the World Bank reporting on international poverty (Source: Povcalnet). Second on usable surveys for statistics on child mortality for the UN Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation (Source: https://childmortality.org/). Third on accuracy of debt reporting as classified by the World Bank (Source: World Bank WDI metadata). Fourth, on availability of safely managed drinking water data for use by JMP. Fifth, on labor force participation data for use by ILO. We recognize that these data sources provide only partial coverage but consider that they do at least provide some indication of the performance of the national statistical system. With more complete data sources it would be possible to assess this further