Guyana vs Qatar: Justified Political Positions Score

Guyana
0.421
in 2025
Qatar
0.424
in 2025
Guyana rank
99th
Qatar rank
98th

Justified Political Positions Score over time

  • Guyana
  • Qatar
-202190019622025

How they compare

Qatar currently reports 0.424 against 0.421 in Guyana, a difference of 0.003.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 126 shared years of data; in 1900 it was Guyana ahead.

Guyana ranks 99th and Qatar ranks 98th of 175 countries.

Guyana has averaged higher in every one of the 13 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Guyana Qatar Difference Ahead
1900s 0.572 -2.65 3.22 Guyana
1910s 0.572 -2.36 2.93 Guyana
1920s 0.572 -1.19 1.77 Guyana
1930s 1.6 -1.19 2.8 Guyana
1940s 1.6 -1.19 2.8 Guyana
1950s 1.93 -1.19 3.12 Guyana
1960s 1.21 -1.19 2.4 Guyana
1970s 0.75 -1.93 2.68 Guyana
1980s 0.5016 -1.8 2.3 Guyana
1990s 0.2097 -1.58 1.79 Guyana
2000s 0.005 -0.453 0.458 Guyana
2010s 0.2072 -0.453 0.6602 Guyana
2020s 0.4448 -0.1607 0.6055 Guyana

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher justified political positions score, Guyana or Qatar?
Qatar, at 0.424 against 0.421 in Guyana as of 2025.
What is the difference in justified political positions score between Guyana and Qatar?
0.003, with Qatar ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Guyana and Qatar?
126 years are reported by both, from 1900 to 2025.
How do Guyana and Qatar rank globally for justified political positions score?
Guyana ranks 99th and Qatar ranks 98th of 175 countries.
Where does this data come from?
V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Justified Political Positions Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Justified Political Positions Score
Source
V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
175 places, 20,802 data points, 1900–2025
Last refreshed

Central estimate of the extent to which political elites provide complex, nuanced, and complete justifications for their views when considering important policy changes.