Burkina Faso vs Gambia: Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data

Burkina Faso
0.253
in 2023
Gambia
0.257
in 2023
Burkina Faso rank
104th
Gambia rank
102nd

Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data over time

  • Burkina Faso
  • Gambia
0.10.20.30.4201520192023

How they compare

Gambia currently reports 0.257 against 0.253 in Burkina Faso, a difference of 0.004.

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

Burkina Faso ranks 104th and Gambia ranks 102nd of 177 countries.

Burkina Faso has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Burkina Faso Gambia Difference Ahead
2010s 0.254 0.1548 0.0992 Burkina Faso
2020s 0.31 0.257 0.053 Burkina Faso

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dimension 4.3: geospatial data, Burkina Faso or Gambia?
Gambia, at 0.257 against 0.253 in Burkina Faso as of 2023.
What is the difference in dimension 4.3: geospatial data between Burkina Faso and Gambia?
0.004, with Gambia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Burkina Faso and Gambia?
9 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2023.
How do Burkina Faso and Gambia rank globally for dimension 4.3: geospatial data?
Burkina Faso ranks 104th and Gambia ranks 102nd 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.