Kazakhstan vs Mongolia: Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data

Kazakhstan
0.5
in 2023
Mongolia
0.479
in 2023
Kazakhstan rank
16th
Mongolia rank
19th

Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data over time

  • Kazakhstan
  • Mongolia
00.20.40.6201520192023

How they compare

Kazakhstan currently reports 0.5 against 0.479 in Mongolia, a difference of 0.021.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 9 shared years of data; in 2015 it was Mongolia ahead.

Kazakhstan ranks 16th and Mongolia ranks 19th of 177 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Kazakhstan Mongolia Difference Ahead
2010s 0.3886 0.368 0.0206 Kazakhstan
2020s 0.5105 0.458 0.0525 Kazakhstan

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dimension 4.3: geospatial data, Kazakhstan or Mongolia?
Kazakhstan, at 0.5 against 0.479 in Mongolia as of 2023.
What is the difference in dimension 4.3: geospatial data between Kazakhstan and Mongolia?
0.021, with Kazakhstan ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Kazakhstan and Mongolia?
9 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2023.
How do Kazakhstan and Mongolia rank globally for dimension 4.3: geospatial data?
Kazakhstan ranks 16th and Mongolia ranks 19th 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.