Cambodia vs China: Voice and Accountability - Governance estimate

Cambodia
-1.67 approx. -2.5 to +2.5
in 2024
China
-1.65 approx. -2.5 to +2.5
in 2024
Cambodia rank
193rd
China rank
192nd

Voice and Accountability - Governance estimate over time

  • Cambodia
  • China
-1.6-1.4-1.2-1-0.8199620102024

How they compare

China currently reports -1.65 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 against -1.67 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 in Cambodia, a difference of 0.02 approx. -2.5 to +2.5.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 26 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Cambodia ahead.

Cambodia ranks 193rd and China ranks 192nd of 206 countries.

Cambodia has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Cambodia China Difference Ahead
1990s -1.19 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 -1.6 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.4104 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Cambodia
2000s -0.9677 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 -1.53 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.5597 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Cambodia
2010s -1.18 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 -1.43 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.2458 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Cambodia
2020s -1.51 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 -1.61 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.1083 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Cambodia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher voice and accountability - governance estimate, Cambodia or China?
China, at -1.65 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 against -1.67 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 in Cambodia as of 2024.
What is the difference in voice and accountability - governance estimate between Cambodia and China?
0.02 approx. -2.5 to +2.5, with China ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Cambodia and China?
26 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2024.
How do Cambodia and China rank globally for voice and accountability - governance estimate?
Cambodia ranks 193rd and China ranks 192nd of 206 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Revised Methodology for Measuring Governance Using Perception Data., World Bank Group (WBG), published as Voice and Accountability - Governance estimate (approx. -2.5 to +2.5). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Cambodia vs China: Voice and Accountability - Governance estimate. Statizoid, drawing on The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Revised Methodology for Measuring Governance Using Perception Data., World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 20 August 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/voice-and-accountability-governance-estimate-approx-2-5-to-2-5/cambodia/china/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/voice-and-accountability-governance-estimate-approx-2-5-to-2-5/cambodia/china/">Cambodia vs China: Voice and Accountability - Governance estimate</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Voice and Accountability - Governance estimate (approx. -2.5 to +2.5)
Unit
approx. -2.5 to +2.5
Source
The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Revised Methodology for Measuring Governance Using Perception Data., World Bank Group (WBG)
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
206 places, 5,259 data points, 1996–2024
Last refreshed

Voice and Accountability (VA) captures perceptions of the extent to which citizens can participate in selecting their government including electoral integrity, and of accountability mechanisms for citizens—reflected in the ability to access information, governmental oversight bodies, and a robust traditional/digital media landscape. Governance estimate from the aggregation model, in units of a standard normal distribution, i.e. ranging from approximately -2.5 to 2.5. Larger values correspond to better governance. The (country-series-time) metadata include the (a) number of sources, and (b) standard error. The number of sources indicates the number of underlying data sources on which the governance estimate is based. The standard error indicates the precision of the governance estimate. Larger values indicate less precise estimates. A 90% confidence interval for the governance estimate is given by the estimate +/- 1.64 times the standard error.