Libya vs South Sudan: Regulatory Quality - Governance estimate
Regulatory Quality - Governance estimate over time
- Libya
- South Sudan
How they compare
Libya currently reports -1.74 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 against -1.93 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 in South Sudan, a difference of 0.19 approx. -2.5 to +2.5.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 14 shared years of data; in 2011 it was Libya ahead.
Libya ranks 200th and South Sudan ranks 203rd of 205 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Libya averaged higher in 1 and South Sudan in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Libya | South Sudan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | -1.84 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 | -1.69 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 | 0.1436 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 | South Sudan |
| 2020s | -1.87 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 | -1.95 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 | 0.0793 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 | Libya |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher regulatory quality - governance estimate, Libya or South Sudan?
- Libya, at -1.74 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 against -1.93 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 in South Sudan as of 2024.
- What is the difference in regulatory quality - governance estimate between Libya and South Sudan?
- 0.19 approx. -2.5 to +2.5, with Libya ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Libya and South Sudan?
- 14 years are reported by both, from 2011 to 2024.
- How do Libya and South Sudan rank globally for regulatory quality - governance estimate?
- Libya ranks 200th and South Sudan ranks 203rd of 205 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Revised Methodology for Measuring Governance Using Perception Data., World Bank Group (WBG), published as Regulatory Quality - Governance estimate (approx. -2.5 to +2.5). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Regulatory Quality (RQ) captures perceptions of the government’s ability to design and implement policies and regulations that promote private sector development. Governance estimate from the aggregation model, in units of a standard normal distribution, i.e. ranging from approximately -2.5 to 2.5. Larger values correspond to better governance. The (country-series-time) metadata include the (a) number of sources, and (b) standard error. The number of sources indicates the number of underlying data sources on which the governance estimate is based. The standard error indicates the precision of the governance estimate. Larger values indicate less precise estimates. A 90% confidence interval for the governance estimate is given by the estimate +/- 1.64 times the standard error.