Bosnia and Herzegovina vs Taiwan, China: Openness of Executive Recruitment Score
Bosnia and Herzegovina
4
in 1991
Taiwan, China
4
in 2018
Bosnia and Herzegovina rank
1st
Taiwan, China rank
1st
Openness of Executive Recruitment Score over time
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Taiwan, China
How they compare
Bosnia and Herzegovina currently reports 4 against 4 in Taiwan, China, a difference of 0.
Across all 41 years both countries report, Taiwan, China has been ahead every year.
Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 1st and Taiwan, China ranks 1st of 167 countries.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Taiwan, China | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1940s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1950s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1960s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1970s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1980s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1990s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher openness of executive recruitment score, Bosnia and Herzegovina or Taiwan, China?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina, at 4 against 4 in Taiwan, China as of 1991.
- What is the difference in openness of executive recruitment score between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Taiwan, China?
- 0, with Bosnia and Herzegovina ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bosnia and Herzegovina and Taiwan, China?
- 41 years are reported by both, from 1949 to 1991.
- How do Bosnia and Herzegovina and Taiwan, China rank globally for openness of executive recruitment score?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 1st and Taiwan, China ranks 1st of 167 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Polity 5 (2020) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Openness of Executive Recruitment Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Indicates the extent to which recruitment for the executive is open. It ranges from executive power being seized (score of 0), over hereditary succession (score of 1), dual hereditary-open arrangements with the chief minister designated (score of 2), and dual hereditary-open arrangements with the chief minister being elected (score of 3), to executive recruitment being open (score of 4).