Central African Republic vs Malawi: Regulatory Quality
Regulatory Quality over time
- Central African Republic
- Malawi
How they compare
Malawi currently reports 0.1678 standard error against 0.1673 standard error in Central African Republic, a difference of 0.0005 standard error.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 13 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Central African Republic ahead.
Central African Republic ranks 24th and Malawi ranks 23rd of 53 countries.
Central African Republic has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Central African Republic | Malawi | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 0.4034 standard error | 0.294 standard error | 0.1094 standard error | Central African Republic |
| 2000s | 0.2159 standard error | 0.1849 standard error | 0.031 standard error | Central African Republic |
| 2010s | 0.1681 standard error | 0.1676 standard error | 0.0006 standard error | Central African Republic |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher regulatory quality, Central African Republic or Malawi?
- Malawi, at 0.1678 standard error against 0.1673 standard error in Central African Republic as of 2011.
- What is the difference in regulatory quality between Central African Republic and Malawi?
- 0.0005 standard error, with Malawi ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Central African Republic and Malawi?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2011.
- How do Central African Republic and Malawi rank globally for regulatory quality?
- Central African Republic ranks 24th and Malawi ranks 23rd of 53 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- World Bank Institute, published as Regulatory Quality (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.REGL.LA.ES. 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.