Armenia vs Marshall Islands: Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data

Armenia
0.283
in 2023
Marshall Islands
0.291
in 2023
Armenia rank
87th
Marshall Islands rank
86th

Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data over time

  • Armenia
  • Marshall Islands
00.10.20.3201520192023

How they compare

Marshall Islands currently reports 0.291 against 0.283 in Armenia, a difference of 0.008.

Across all 9 years both countries report, Marshall Islands has been ahead every year.

Armenia ranks 87th and Marshall Islands ranks 86th of 177 countries.

Marshall Islands has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Armenia Marshall Islands Difference Ahead
2010s 0.1462 0.2308 0.0846 Marshall Islands
2020s 0.226 0.3135 0.0875 Marshall Islands

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dimension 4.3: geospatial data, Armenia or Marshall Islands?
Marshall Islands, at 0.291 against 0.283 in Armenia as of 2023.
What is the difference in dimension 4.3: geospatial data between Armenia and Marshall Islands?
0.008, with Marshall Islands ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Armenia and Marshall Islands?
9 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2023.
How do Armenia and Marshall Islands rank globally for dimension 4.3: geospatial data?
Armenia ranks 87th and Marshall Islands ranks 86th of 177 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statistical Performance Indicators, The World Bank (https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/statistical-performance-indicators), published as Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Dimension 4.3: Geospatial 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
179 places, 1,551 data points, 2015–2023
Last refreshed

Geospatial data available at 1st Admin Level. We recognize that this data source provides only limited coverage but consider that it does at least provide some indication of the ability of the national statistical system to produce geospatial data. A major research and data collection effort is needed via GGIM to fill in this information, so that a more comprehensive picture of geospatial data capability at the national level can be produced. Until this is done, it we cannot even assess the scale of the data gaps in a comparable way.