South Africa vs Taiwan: Universal right to vote
South Africa
2
in 2025
Taiwan
2
in 2025
South Africa rank
1st
Taiwan rank
1st
Universal right to vote over time
- South Africa
- Taiwan
How they compare
South Africa currently reports 2 against 2 in Taiwan, a difference of 0.
Across all 126 years both countries report, Taiwan has been ahead every year.
South Africa ranks 1st and Taiwan ranks 1st of 197 countries.
Taiwan has averaged higher in every one of the 13 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | South Africa | Taiwan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1900s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1910s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1920s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1930s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1940s | 0 | 0.6 | 0.6 | Taiwan |
| 1950s | 0 | 2 | 2 | Taiwan |
| 1960s | 0 | 2 | 2 | Taiwan |
| 1970s | 0 | 2 | 2 | Taiwan |
| 1980s | 0 | 2 | 2 | Taiwan |
| 1990s | 1.2 | 2 | 0.8 | Taiwan |
| 2000s | 2 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 2010s | 2 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 2020s | 2 | 2 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher universal right to vote, South Africa or Taiwan?
- South Africa, at 2 against 2 in Taiwan as of 2025.
- What is the difference in universal right to vote between South Africa and Taiwan?
- 0, with South Africa ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for South Africa and Taiwan?
- 126 years are reported by both, from 1900 to 2025.
- How do South Africa and Taiwan rank globally for universal right to vote?
- South Africa ranks 1st and Taiwan ranks 1st of 197 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Lexical Index (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Universal right to vote. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Indicates whether virtually all men and women that are citizens are allowed to vote in national elections (score 2), whether it is only men (score 1), or there is no universal rights to vote for either men or women (score 0). It neither considers informal restrictions nor legal restrictions based on age, criminal conviction, disability, and local residency.