Iceland vs Papua New Guinea: Men's universal right to vote
Iceland
1
in 2025
Papua New Guinea
1
in 2025
Iceland rank
1st
Papua New Guinea rank
1st
Men's universal right to vote over time
- Iceland
- Papua New Guinea
How they compare
Iceland currently reports 1 against 1 in Papua New Guinea, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 142 shared years of data; in 1884 it was Papua New Guinea ahead.
Iceland ranks 1st and Papua New Guinea ranks 1st of 197 countries.
Iceland has averaged higher in every one of the 15 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Iceland | Papua New Guinea | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1890s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1900s | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1910s | 0.5 | 0 | 0.5 | Iceland |
| 1920s | 1 | 0 | 1 | Iceland |
| 1930s | 1 | 0 | 1 | Iceland |
| 1940s | 1 | 0 | 1 | Iceland |
| 1950s | 1 | 0.9 | 0.1 | Iceland |
| 1960s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1970s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1980s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1990s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 2000s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 2010s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 2020s | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher men's universal right to vote, Iceland or Papua New Guinea?
- Iceland, at 1 against 1 in Papua New Guinea as of 2025.
- What is the difference in men's universal right to vote between Iceland and Papua New Guinea?
- 0, with Iceland ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Iceland and Papua New Guinea?
- 142 years are reported by both, from 1884 to 2025.
- How do Iceland and Papua New Guinea rank globally for men's universal right to vote?
- Iceland ranks 1st and Papua New Guinea ranks 1st of 197 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Lexical Index (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Men's 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 all men are allowed to vote in national elections. It neither considers informal restrictions nor legal restrictions based on age, criminal conviction, disability, and local residency.