Cayman Islands vs Japan: Voice and Accountability - Governance estimate (approx. -2.5 to +2.5)

Cayman Islands
1.11 approx. -2.5 to +2.5
in 2025
Japan
1.11 approx. -2.5 to +2.5
in 2025
Cayman Islands rank
29th
Japan rank
31st

Voice and Accountability - Governance estimate (approx. -2.5 to +2.5) over time

  • Cayman Islands
  • Japan
00.511.5199620102025

How they compare

Cayman Islands currently reports 1.11 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 against 1.11 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 in Japan, a difference of 0 approx. -2.5 to +2.5.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 27 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Cayman Islands ahead.

Cayman Islands ranks 29th and Japan ranks 31st of 208 countries.

Across the 4 decades both report, Cayman Islands averaged higher in 1 and Japan in 3.

Head to head by decade

Decade Cayman Islands Japan Difference Ahead
1990s 1.41 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.7486 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.6647 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Cayman Islands
2000s 0.8985 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 1.01 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.1161 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Japan
2010s 0.6339 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 1.16 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.5252 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Japan
2020s 0.8118 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 1.07 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 0.2602 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 Japan

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher voice and accountability - governance estimate, Cayman Islands or Japan?
Cayman Islands, at 1.11 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 against 1.11 approx. -2.5 to +2.5 in Japan as of 2025.
What is the difference in voice and accountability - governance estimate between Cayman Islands and Japan?
0 approx. -2.5 to +2.5, with Cayman Islands ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Cayman Islands and Japan?
27 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2025.
How do Cayman Islands and Japan rank globally for voice and accountability - governance estimate?
Cayman Islands ranks 29th and Japan ranks 31st of 208 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

Cayman Islands vs Japan: 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 13 November 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/voice-and-accountability-governance-estimate-approx-2-5-to-2-5/cayman-islands/japan/

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/cayman-islands/japan/">Cayman Islands vs Japan: 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
208 places, 5,514 data points, 1996–2025
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.