Dimension 5.2: Standards and Methods in Suriname
Suriname: Dimension 5.2: Standards and Methods was 0.55 in 2023. ▲ Rising
Dimension 5.2: Standards and Methods in Suriname, 2016–2023
Source: Statistical Performance Indicators, The World Bank (https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/statistical-performance-indicators).
Analysis
In 2023, dimension 5.2: standards and methods in Suriname stood at 0.55.
The figure is down 8.3% on the previous year and up 22.2% over ten years.
That places Suriname 114th out of 188 countries with data for 2023, putting it in the middle of the range.
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 0.4125 | 0.35 | 0.45 | 4 |
| 2020s | 0.525 | 0.35 | 0.6 | 4 |
Countries ranked near Suriname
- 114 Afghanistan 0.55 compare
- 114 Belize 0.55 compare
- 114 Bolivia 0.55 compare
- 114 Cape Verde 0.55 compare
- 114 Cambodia 0.55 compare
- 114 Cameroon 0.55 compare
- 114 Gambia 0.55 compare
- 114 Guinea 0.55 compare
- 114 Morocco 0.55 compare
- 114 Nepal 0.55 compare
- 114 Nicaragua 0.55 compare
- 114 Peru 0.55 compare
- 114 San Marino 0.55 compare
- 114 Saint Lucia 0.55 compare
- 114 Tanzania 0.55 compare
More reference data data for Suriname
- Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Manure applied to 28.83 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.0324 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Burning - Crop re 0.6572 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Agricultural Soil 147.68 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Crop Residues 15.75 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.0109 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 0.1239 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Manure left on Pa 56.48 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Manure Management 13.43 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.1088 (2050)
Frequently asked questions
- What is dimension 5.2: standards and methods in Suriname?
- Dimension 5.2: standards and methods in Suriname was 0.55 in 2023, according to Statistical Performance Indicators, The World Bank (https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/statistical-performance-indicators).
- What is the highest dimension 5.2: standards and methods recorded in Suriname?
- The highest recorded value was 0.6 in 2021.
- What is the lowest dimension 5.2: standards and methods recorded in Suriname?
- The lowest recorded value was 0.35 in 2019.
- How does Suriname rank for dimension 5.2: standards and methods?
- Suriname ranks 114th out of 188 countries with data for 2023.
- Is dimension 5.2: standards and methods rising or falling in Suriname?
- Over the last ten years it is up 22.2%. The long-run trend across the full record is rising.
- Where does this Suriname data come from?
- The figures come from Statistical Performance Indicators, The World Bank (https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/statistical-performance-indicators), published as part of Dimension 5.2: Standards and Methods. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 8 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
About this data
Average score for Standards and Methods indicators. Internationally accepted and recommended methodology, classifications and standards provide the basis for national statistical offices (NSOs) on data integration, facilitating data exchange and providing the foundation for the preparation of relevant statistical indicators. The following methods and standards are considered: System of national accounts in use, National Accounts base year, Classification of national industry, CPI base year, Classification of household consumption, Classification of status of employment, Central government accounting status, Compilation of government finance statistics, Compilation of monetary and financial statistics, Business process. . Further work could improve the validity of this indicator and reduce the risk that countries may be incentivized to adopt only traditional standards and methods and neglect innovative solutions that may be more valid in the current context.