Equatorial Guinea vs Seychelles: Regulatory Quality
Regulatory Quality over time
- Equatorial Guinea
- Seychelles
How they compare
Seychelles currently reports 0.2119 standard error against 0.1991 standard error in Equatorial Guinea, a difference of 0.0128 standard error.
That makes Seychelles's figure about 1.1 times Equatorial Guinea's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 13 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Seychelles ahead.
Equatorial Guinea ranks 5th and Seychelles ranks 3rd of 53 countries.
Seychelles has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Equatorial Guinea | Seychelles | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 0.3145 standard error | 0.4034 standard error | 0.0888 standard error | Seychelles |
| 2000s | 0.2183 standard error | 0.2356 standard error | 0.0173 standard error | Seychelles |
| 2010s | 0.199 standard error | 0.2132 standard error | 0.0142 standard error | Seychelles |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher regulatory quality, Equatorial Guinea or Seychelles?
- Seychelles, at 0.2119 standard error against 0.1991 standard error in Equatorial Guinea as of 2011.
- What is the difference in regulatory quality between Equatorial Guinea and Seychelles?
- 0.0128 standard error, with Seychelles ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Seychelles?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2011.
- How do Equatorial Guinea and Seychelles rank globally for regulatory quality?
- Equatorial Guinea ranks 5th and Seychelles ranks 3rd 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.