Belgium vs Madagascar: Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data

Belgium
0.223
in 2023
Madagascar
0.22
in 2023
Belgium rank
119th
Madagascar rank
120th

Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data over time

  • Belgium
  • Madagascar
00.050.10.150.20.25201520192023

How they compare

Belgium currently reports 0.223 against 0.22 in Madagascar, a difference of 0.003.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 8 shared years of data; in 2016 it was Belgium ahead.

Belgium ranks 119th and Madagascar ranks 120th of 177 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Belgium averaged higher in 1 and Madagascar in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Belgium Madagascar Difference Ahead
2010s 0.2193 0.0195 0.1998 Belgium
2020s 0.2055 0.2155 0.01 Madagascar

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dimension 4.3: geospatial data, Belgium or Madagascar?
Belgium, at 0.223 against 0.22 in Madagascar as of 2023.
What is the difference in dimension 4.3: geospatial data between Belgium and Madagascar?
0.003, with Belgium ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Belgium and Madagascar?
8 years are reported by both, from 2016 to 2023.
How do Belgium and Madagascar rank globally for dimension 4.3: geospatial data?
Belgium ranks 119th and Madagascar ranks 120th 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.