Guinea-Bissau vs Turkmenistan: State Capacity Index

Guinea-Bissau
-0.8603
in 2015
Turkmenistan
-0.7071
in 2015
Guinea-Bissau rank
153rd
Turkmenistan rank
152nd

State Capacity Index over time

  • Guinea-Bissau
  • Turkmenistan
-1.2-1-0.75-0.5-0.250197419942015

How they compare

Turkmenistan currently reports -0.7071 against -0.8603 in Guinea-Bissau, a difference of 0.1532.

Across all 25 years both countries report, Turkmenistan has been ahead every year.

Guinea-Bissau ranks 153rd and Turkmenistan ranks 152nd of 165 countries.

Turkmenistan has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Guinea-Bissau Turkmenistan Difference Ahead
1990s -1.08 -0.3457 0.7327 Turkmenistan
2000s -0.8559 -0.4862 0.3697 Turkmenistan
2010s -0.7455 -0.5644 0.1812 Turkmenistan

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher state capacity index, Guinea-Bissau or Turkmenistan?
Turkmenistan, at -0.7071 against -0.8603 in Guinea-Bissau as of 2015.
What is the difference in state capacity index between Guinea-Bissau and Turkmenistan?
0.1532, with Turkmenistan ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Guinea-Bissau and Turkmenistan?
25 years are reported by both, from 1991 to 2015.
How do Guinea-Bissau and Turkmenistan rank globally for state capacity index?
Guinea-Bissau ranks 153rd and Turkmenistan ranks 152nd of 165 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Jonathan Hanson and Rachel Sigman (2021); Population based on various sources (2023) – with major processing by Our World in Data, published as State Capacity Index. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
State Capacity Index
Source
Jonathan Hanson and Rachel Sigman (2021); Population based on various sources (2023) – with major processing by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
166 places, 8,015 data points, 1960–2015
Last refreshed

Measures state capacity by combining 21 different indicators related to three key dimensions: extractive capacity, coercive capacity, and administrative capacity. Higher values indicate greater state capacity.