China vs Panama: Openness of Executive Recruitment Score
China
4
in 2018
Panama
4
in 2018
China rank
1st
Panama rank
1st
Openness of Executive Recruitment Score over time
- China
- Panama
How they compare
China currently reports 4 against 4 in Panama, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 105 shared years of data; in 1903 it was Panama ahead.
China ranks 1st and Panama ranks 1st of 167 countries.
Across the 12 decades both report, China averaged higher in 2 and Panama in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | China | Panama | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1900s | 1 | 4 | 3 | Panama |
| 1910s | 3.12 | 4 | 0.875 | Panama |
| 1920s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1930s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1940s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1950s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1960s | 4 | 3.2 | 0.8 | China |
| 1970s | 4 | 0.8 | 3.2 | China |
| 1980s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1990s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 2000s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 2010s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher openness of executive recruitment score, China or Panama?
- China, at 4 against 4 in Panama as of 2018.
- What is the difference in openness of executive recruitment score between China and Panama?
- 0, with China ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for China and Panama?
- 105 years are reported by both, from 1903 to 2018.
- How do China and Panama rank globally for openness of executive recruitment score?
- China ranks 1st and Panama 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).