Comoros vs Sao Tome and Principe: Voice and Accountability
Voice and Accountability over time
- Comoros
- Sao Tome and Principe
How they compare
Sao Tome and Principe currently reports 0.162 standard error against 0.162 standard error in Comoros, a difference of 0 standard error.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 13 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Sao Tome and Principe ahead.
Comoros ranks 3rd and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 2nd of 53 countries.
Sao Tome and Principe has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Comoros | Sao Tome and Principe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 0.298 standard error | 0.298 standard error | 0 standard error | — |
| 2000s | 0.2062 standard error | 0.2107 standard error | 0.0045 standard error | Sao Tome and Principe |
| 2010s | 0.1638 standard error | 0.1639 standard error | 0.0001 standard error | Sao Tome and Principe |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher voice and accountability, Comoros or Sao Tome and Principe?
- Sao Tome and Principe, at 0.162 standard error against 0.162 standard error in Comoros as of 2011.
- What is the difference in voice and accountability between Comoros and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 0 standard error, with Sao Tome and Principe ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Comoros and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2011.
- How do Comoros and Sao Tome and Principe rank globally for voice and accountability?
- Comoros ranks 3rd and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 2nd of 53 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- World Bank Institute, published as Voice and Accountability (standard error). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
See definition GV.VOIC.AC.ES. Inherent to all Governance Indicators is a margin of error, which might vary from country to country, normally attributable to two factors: (i) cross-country differences in the number of sources in which a country appears, and (ii) differences in the precision of the sources in which each country appears.