Malawi vs Papua New Guinea: Regulatory Quality - Governance estimate (approx. -2.5 to +2.5)

Malawi
-0.589 approx. -2.5 to +2.5
in 2025
Papua New Guinea
-0.6137 approx. -2.5 to +2.5
in 2025
Malawi rank
143rd
Papua New Guinea rank
145th

Regulatory Quality - Governance estimate (approx. -2.5 to +2.5) over time

  • Malawi
  • Papua New Guinea
-1-0.8-0.6-0.4-0.2199620102025

How they compare

Malawi currently reports -0.589 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 against -0.6137 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 in Papua New Guinea, a difference of 0.0247 approx. -2.5 to +2.5.

The two have swapped places 4 times across 27 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Malawi ahead.

Malawi ranks 143rd and Papua New Guinea ranks 145th of 206 countries.

Across the 4 decades both report, Malawi averaged higher in 3 and Papua New Guinea in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Malawi Papua New Guinea Difference Ahead
1990s -0.3769 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 -0.7345 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.3575 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Malawi
2000s -0.5658 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 -0.6132 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.0474 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Malawi
2010s -0.6416 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 -0.4285 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.2132 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Papua New Guinea
2020s -0.653 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 -0.6593 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.0063 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Malawi

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher regulatory quality - governance estimate, Malawi or Papua New Guinea?
Malawi, at -0.589 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 against -0.6137 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 in Papua New Guinea as of 2025.
What is the difference in regulatory quality - governance estimate between Malawi and Papua New Guinea?
0.0247 approx. -2.5 to +2.5, with Malawi ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Malawi and Papua New Guinea?
27 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2025.
How do Malawi and Papua New Guinea rank globally for regulatory quality - governance estimate?
Malawi ranks 143rd and Papua New Guinea ranks 145th of 206 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

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Malawi vs Papua New Guinea: Regulatory Quality - Governance estimate. Statizoid, drawing on The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Revised Methodology for Measuring Governance Using Perception Data., World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 13 November 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/regulatory-quality-governance-estimate-approx-2-5-to-2-5/malawi/papua-new-guinea/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/regulatory-quality-governance-estimate-approx-2-5-to-2-5/malawi/papua-new-guinea/">Malawi vs Papua New Guinea: Regulatory Quality - Governance estimate</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Regulatory Quality - Governance estimate (approx. -2.5 to +2.5)
Unit
approx. -2.5 to +2.5
Source
The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Revised Methodology for Measuring Governance Using Perception Data., World Bank Group (WBG)
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
206 places, 5,391 data points, 1996–2025
Last refreshed

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.