Madagascar vs Mauritania: Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data

Madagascar
0.22
in 2023
Mauritania
0.22
in 2023
Madagascar rank
120th
Mauritania rank
120th

Dimension 4.3: Geospatial Data over time

  • Madagascar
  • Mauritania
00.050.10.150.2201520192023

How they compare

Madagascar currently reports 0.22 against 0.22 in Mauritania, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 9 shared years of data; in 2015 it was Madagascar ahead.

Madagascar ranks 120th and Mauritania ranks 120th of 177 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Madagascar averaged higher in 1 and Mauritania in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Madagascar Mauritania Difference Ahead
2010s 0.036 0.1034 0.0674 Mauritania
2020s 0.2155 0.1565 0.059 Madagascar

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dimension 4.3: geospatial data, Madagascar or Mauritania?
Madagascar, at 0.22 against 0.22 in Mauritania as of 2023.
What is the difference in dimension 4.3: geospatial data between Madagascar and Mauritania?
0, with Madagascar ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Madagascar and Mauritania?
9 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2023.
How do Madagascar and Mauritania rank globally for dimension 4.3: geospatial data?
Madagascar ranks 120th and Mauritania ranks 120th 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.