Panama vs Sweden: Openness of Executive Recruitment Score
Panama
4
in 2018
Sweden
4
in 2018
Panama rank
1st
Sweden rank
1st
Openness of Executive Recruitment Score over time
- Panama
- Sweden
How they compare
Panama currently reports 4 against 4 in Sweden, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 106 shared years of data; in 1903 it was Panama ahead.
Panama ranks 1st and Sweden ranks 1st of 167 countries.
Across the 12 decades both report, Panama averaged higher in 1 and Sweden in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Panama | Sweden | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1900s | 4 | 2 | 2 | Panama |
| 1910s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1920s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1930s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1940s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1950s | 4 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1960s | 3.2 | 4 | 0.8 | Sweden |
| 1970s | 0.8 | 4 | 3.2 | Sweden |
| 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, Panama or Sweden?
- Panama, at 4 against 4 in Sweden as of 2018.
- What is the difference in openness of executive recruitment score between Panama and Sweden?
- 0, with Panama ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Panama and Sweden?
- 106 years are reported by both, from 1903 to 2018.
- How do Panama and Sweden rank globally for openness of executive recruitment score?
- Panama ranks 1st and Sweden 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).