Afghanistan vs Cuba: Regulatory Quality - Governance score
Regulatory Quality - Governance score over time
- Afghanistan
- Cuba
How they compare
Cuba currently reports 32.2 0-100 against 30.6 0-100 in Afghanistan, a difference of 1.6 0-100.
That makes Cuba's figure about 1.1 times Afghanistan's.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 26 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Cuba ahead.
Afghanistan ranks 194th and Cuba ranks 191st of 204 countries.
Cuba has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Afghanistan | Cuba | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 15.84 0-100 | 33.84 0-100 | 18.01 0-100 | Cuba |
| 2000s | 27.1 0-100 | 31.96 0-100 | 4.86 0-100 | Cuba |
| 2010s | 34.35 0-100 | 34.69 0-100 | 0.3466 0-100 | Cuba |
| 2020s | 32.45 0-100 | 35.2 0-100 | 2.75 0-100 | Cuba |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher regulatory quality - governance score, Afghanistan or Cuba?
- Cuba, at 32.2 0-100 against 30.6 0-100 in Afghanistan as of 2024.
- What is the difference in regulatory quality - governance score between Afghanistan and Cuba?
- 1.6 0-100, with Cuba ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Afghanistan and Cuba?
- 26 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2024.
- How do Afghanistan and Cuba rank globally for regulatory quality - governance score?
- Afghanistan ranks 194th and Cuba ranks 191st of 204 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 score (0-100). 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 score is a linear transformation of the governance estimate using hypothetical worst-case and base-case countries. It is an absolute score ranging from 0-100. Larger values correspond to better governance. The (country-series-time) metadata include the (a) number of sources, and (b) confidence intervals (lower and upper bound). The number of sources indicates the number of underlying data sources on which the governance score (respectively the underlying governance estimate) is based. The confidence intervals include the lower and upper bound of the 90% confidence interval for the governance score. Confidence intervals are a statistical range of values that likely contain the true value (of what is being estimated).