Brazil vs Philippines: Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data

Brazil
0.473
in 2023
Philippines
0.491
in 2023
Brazil rank
20th
Philippines rank
17th

Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data over time

  • Brazil
  • Philippines
00.10.20.30.40.5201520192023

How they compare

Philippines currently reports 0.491 against 0.473 in Brazil, a difference of 0.018.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 9 shared years of data; in 2015 it was Philippines ahead.

Brazil ranks 20th and Philippines ranks 17th of 177 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Brazil averaged higher in 1 and Philippines in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Brazil Philippines Difference Ahead
2010s 0.3162 0.2702 0.046 Brazil
2020s 0.431 0.449 0.018 Philippines

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dimension 4.3: geospatial data, Brazil or Philippines?
Philippines, at 0.491 against 0.473 in Brazil as of 2023.
What is the difference in dimension 4.3: geospatial data between Brazil and Philippines?
0.018, with Philippines ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Brazil and Philippines?
9 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2023.
How do Brazil and Philippines rank globally for dimension 4.3: geospatial data?
Brazil ranks 20th and Philippines ranks 17th 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.