Lithuania vs Spain: Openness of Executive Recruitment Score
Lithuania
4
in 2018
Spain
4
in 2018
Lithuania rank
1st
Spain rank
1st
Openness of Executive Recruitment Score over time
- Lithuania
- Spain
How they compare
Lithuania currently reports 4 against 4 in Spain, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 95 shared years of data; in 1918 it was Lithuania ahead.
Lithuania ranks 1st and Spain ranks 1st of 166 countries.
Lithuania has averaged higher in every one of the 11 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Lithuania | Spain | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1910s | 4 | 3 | 1 | Lithuania |
| 1920s | 4 | 1.12 | 2.88 | Lithuania |
| 1930s | 4 | 3.56 | 0.4444 | Lithuania |
| 1940s | 4 | 0 | 4 | Lithuania |
| 1950s | 4 | 0 | 4 | Lithuania |
| 1960s | 4 | 0 | 4 | Lithuania |
| 1970s | 4 | 1.14 | 2.86 | Lithuania |
| 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, Lithuania or Spain?
- Lithuania, at 4 against 4 in Spain as of 2018.
- What is the difference in openness of executive recruitment score between Lithuania and Spain?
- 0, with Lithuania ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Lithuania and Spain?
- 95 years are reported by both, from 1918 to 2018.
- How do Lithuania and Spain rank globally for openness of executive recruitment score?
- Lithuania ranks 1st and Spain ranks 1st 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
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).