Congo vs Equatorial Guinea: Openness of Executive Recruitment Score

Congo
0
in 2018
Equatorial Guinea
0
in 2018
Congo rank
150th
Equatorial Guinea rank
150th

Openness of Executive Recruitment Score over time

  • Congo
  • Equatorial Guinea
01234196019892018

How they compare

Congo currently reports 0 against 0 in Equatorial Guinea, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 50 shared years of data; in 1968 it was Equatorial Guinea ahead.

Congo ranks 150th and Equatorial Guinea ranks 150th of 166 countries.

Congo has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Congo Equatorial Guinea Difference Ahead
1960s 4 2 2 Congo
1970s 4 0 4 Congo
1980s 4 0 4 Congo
1990s 2.67 0 2.67 Congo
2000s 0 0 0
2010s 0 0 0

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher openness of executive recruitment score, Congo or Equatorial Guinea?
Congo, at 0 against 0 in Equatorial Guinea as of 2018.
What is the difference in openness of executive recruitment score between Congo and Equatorial Guinea?
0, with Congo ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Congo and Equatorial Guinea?
50 years are reported by both, from 1968 to 2018.
How do Congo and Equatorial Guinea rank globally for openness of executive recruitment score?
Congo ranks 150th and Equatorial Guinea ranks 150th of 166 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

Indicator
Openness of Executive Recruitment Score
Source
Polity 5 (2020) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
167 places, 17,813 data points, 1789–2020
Last refreshed

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).