Guinea-Bissau vs Latvia: Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data

Guinea-Bissau
0.084
in 2023
Latvia
0.084
in 2023
Guinea-Bissau rank
157th
Latvia rank
157th

Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data over time

  • Guinea-Bissau
  • Latvia
00.10.20.30.4201520192023

How they compare

Guinea-Bissau currently reports 0.084 against 0.084 in Latvia, a difference of 0.

Across all 8 years both countries report, Latvia has been ahead every year.

Guinea-Bissau ranks 157th and Latvia ranks 157th of 177 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Guinea-Bissau Latvia Difference Ahead
2010s 0.0338 0.1552 0.1215 Latvia
2020s 0.084 0.0945 0.0105 Latvia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dimension 4.3: geospatial data, Guinea-Bissau or Latvia?
Guinea-Bissau, at 0.084 against 0.084 in Latvia as of 2023.
What is the difference in dimension 4.3: geospatial data between Guinea-Bissau and Latvia?
0, with Guinea-Bissau ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Guinea-Bissau and Latvia?
8 years are reported by both, from 2016 to 2023.
How do Guinea-Bissau and Latvia rank globally for dimension 4.3: geospatial data?
Guinea-Bissau ranks 157th and Latvia ranks 157th 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.