Latvia vs United Kingdom: Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data
Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data over time
- Latvia
- United Kingdom
How they compare
United Kingdom currently reports 0.104 against 0.084 in Latvia, a difference of 0.02.
That makes United Kingdom's figure about 1.2 times Latvia's.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 8 shared years of data; in 2016 it was Latvia ahead.
Latvia ranks 157th and United Kingdom ranks 155th of 177 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Latvia averaged higher in 1 and United Kingdom in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Latvia | United Kingdom | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 0.1552 | 0.0907 | 0.0645 | Latvia |
| 2020s | 0.0945 | 0.1045 | 0.01 | United Kingdom |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher dimension 4.3: geospatial data, Latvia or United Kingdom?
- United Kingdom, at 0.104 against 0.084 in Latvia as of 2023.
- What is the difference in dimension 4.3: geospatial data between Latvia and United Kingdom?
- 0.02, with United Kingdom ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Latvia and United Kingdom?
- 8 years are reported by both, from 2016 to 2023.
- How do Latvia and United Kingdom rank globally for dimension 4.3: geospatial data?
- Latvia ranks 157th and United Kingdom ranks 155th 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
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.