Egypt vs Singapore: Dimension 4.2: Administrative Data

Egypt
1
in 2023
Singapore
1
in 2023
Egypt rank
1st
Singapore rank
1st

Dimension 4.2: Administrative Data over time

  • Egypt
  • Singapore
00.20.40.60.81200420132023

How they compare

Egypt currently reports 1 against 1 in Singapore, a difference of 0.

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

Egypt ranks 1st and Singapore ranks 1st of 214 countries.

Head to head by decade

Decade Egypt Singapore Difference Ahead
2000s 0 0 0
2010s 0.5 0.5 0
2020s 1 1 0

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dimension 4.2: administrative data, Egypt or Singapore?
Egypt, at 1 against 1 in Singapore as of 2023.
What is the difference in dimension 4.2: administrative data between Egypt and Singapore?
0, with Egypt ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Egypt and Singapore?
20 years are reported by both, from 2004 to 2023.
How do Egypt and Singapore rank globally for dimension 4.2: administrative data?
Egypt ranks 1st and Singapore ranks 1st 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 4.2: Administrative Data. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Dimension 4.2: Administrative Data
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

Average score for CRVS indicator. An ideal indicator would include a score based on the density of administrative data available in sectors of social protection, education, labor, and health. However, social protection, education, health, and labor admin data indicators not included because of lack of established methodology. While our team identified several promising sources for administrative data from the World Bank's ASPIRE team, WHO, UNESCO, and ILO, incomplete coverage across countries made us drop these indicators from our index. A major research and data collection effort is needed from all custodian agencies to fill in this information, so that a more comprehensive picture of administrative data availability can be produced.