Equatorial Guinea vs Mauritius: Political Stability/No Violence
Political Stability/No Violence over time
- Equatorial Guinea
- Mauritius
How they compare
Mauritius currently reports 0.2842 standard error against 0.2835 standard error in Equatorial Guinea, a difference of 0.0007 standard error.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 13 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Mauritius ahead.
Equatorial Guinea ranks 8th and Mauritius ranks 7th of 53 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Equatorial Guinea averaged higher in 2 and Mauritius in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Equatorial Guinea | Mauritius | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 0.3844 standard error | 0.4577 standard error | 0.0733 standard error | Mauritius |
| 2000s | 0.3283 standard error | 0.3083 standard error | 0.02 standard error | Equatorial Guinea |
| 2010s | 0.2845 standard error | 0.2654 standard error | 0.0191 standard error | Equatorial Guinea |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher political stability/no violence, Equatorial Guinea or Mauritius?
- Mauritius, at 0.2842 standard error against 0.2835 standard error in Equatorial Guinea as of 2011.
- What is the difference in political stability/no violence between Equatorial Guinea and Mauritius?
- 0.0007 standard error, with Mauritius ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Mauritius?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2011.
- How do Equatorial Guinea and Mauritius rank globally for political stability/no violence?
- Equatorial Guinea ranks 8th and Mauritius ranks 7th of 53 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- World Bank Institute, published as Political Stability/No Violence (standard error). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
See definition GV.POLI.ST.SD. Inherent to all Governance Indicators is a margin of error, which might vary from country to country, normally attributable to two factors: (i) cross-country differences in the number of sources in which a country appears, and (ii) differences in the precision of the sources in which each country appears.