Openness of Executive Recruitment Score in China
China: Openness of Executive Recruitment Score was 4 in 2018. ◆ Volatile
Openness of Executive Recruitment Score in China, 1800–2018
Source: Polity 5 (2020) – processed by Our World in Data.
Analysis
In 2018, openness of executive recruitment score in China stood at 4. That is the highest value across all 206 years on record.
That represents a change of unchanged over ten years.
Over the whole period, openness of executive recruitment score in China peaked at 4 in 1914 and was at its lowest, 0, in 1912.
That places China 1st out of 167 countries with data for 2018, putting it in the top 10%.
The series is highly variable year to year, so single readings are best treated with caution.
Openness of Executive Recruitment Score in China, year by year
| Year | Value | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 1800 | 1 | — |
| 1801 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1802 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1803 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1804 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1805 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1806 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1807 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1808 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1809 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1810 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1811 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1812 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1813 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1814 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1815 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1816 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1817 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1818 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1819 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1820 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1821 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1822 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1823 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1824 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1825 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1826 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1827 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1828 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1829 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1830 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1831 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1832 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1833 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1834 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1835 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1836 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1837 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1838 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1839 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1840 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1841 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1842 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1843 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1844 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1845 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1846 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1847 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1848 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1849 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1850 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1851 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1852 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1853 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1854 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1855 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1856 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1857 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1858 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1859 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1862 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1863 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1864 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1865 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1866 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1867 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1868 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1869 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1870 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1871 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1872 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1873 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1874 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1875 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1876 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1877 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1878 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1879 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1880 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1881 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1882 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1883 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1884 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1885 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1886 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1887 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1888 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1889 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1890 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1891 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1892 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1893 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1894 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1895 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1896 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1897 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1898 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1899 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1900 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1901 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1902 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1903 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1904 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1905 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1906 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1907 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1908 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1909 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1910 | 1 | +0.0% |
| 1912 | 0 | -100.0% |
| 1914 | 4 | — |
| 1915 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1916 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1917 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1918 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1919 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1920 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1921 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1922 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1923 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1924 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1925 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1926 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1927 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1928 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1929 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1930 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1931 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1932 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1933 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1934 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1935 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1936 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1946 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1947 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1948 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1949 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1950 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1951 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1952 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1953 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1954 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1955 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1956 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1957 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1958 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1959 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1960 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1961 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1962 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1963 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1964 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1965 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1966 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1967 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1968 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1969 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1970 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1971 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1972 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1973 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1974 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1975 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1976 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1977 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1978 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1979 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1980 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1981 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1982 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1983 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1984 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1985 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1986 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1987 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1988 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1989 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1990 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1991 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1992 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1993 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1994 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1995 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1996 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1997 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1998 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 1999 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2000 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2001 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2002 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2003 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2004 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2005 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2006 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2007 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2008 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2009 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2010 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2011 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2012 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2013 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2014 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2015 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2016 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 4 | +0.0% |
| 2018 | 4 | +0.0% |
China compared with similar countries
- China's 4 is above the median for upper middle income countries, which is 4, 1.0× the median. (47 countries reporting)
- China's 4 is above the median for East Asia & Pacific, which is 4, 1.0× the median. (20 countries reporting)
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1800s | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 |
| 1810s | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 |
| 1820s | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 |
| 1830s | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 |
| 1840s | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 |
| 1850s | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 |
| 1860s | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 |
| 1870s | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 |
| 1880s | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 |
| 1890s | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 |
| 1900s | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 |
| 1910s | 3.12 | 0 | 4 | 8 |
| 1920s | 4 | 4 | 4 | 10 |
| 1930s | 4 | 4 | 4 | 7 |
| 1940s | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| 1950s | 4 | 4 | 4 | 10 |
| 1960s | 4 | 4 | 4 | 10 |
| 1970s | 4 | 4 | 4 | 10 |
| 1980s | 4 | 4 | 4 | 10 |
| 1990s | 4 | 4 | 4 | 10 |
| 2000s | 4 | 4 | 4 | 10 |
| 2010s | 4 | 4 | 4 | 9 |
Countries ranked near China
- 1 Afghanistan 4 compare
- 1 Albania 4 compare
- 1 Angola 4 compare
- 1 Argentina 4 compare
- 1 Armenia 4 compare
- 1 Australia 4 compare
- 1 Austria 4 compare
- 1 Azerbaijan 4 compare
- 1 Bangladesh 4 compare
- 1 Belarus 4 compare
- 1 Belgium 4 compare
- 1 Benin 4 compare
- 1 Bolivia 4 compare
- 1 Bosnia and Herzegovina 4 compare
- 1 Botswana 4 compare
- 1 Brazil 4 compare
- 1 Bulgaria 4 compare
- 1 Burkina Faso 4 compare
- 1 Burundi 4 compare
- 1 Canada 4 compare
- 1 Cape Verde 4 compare
- 1 Central African Republic 4 compare
- 1 Chile 4 compare
- 1 Colombia 4 compare
- 1 Costa Rica 4 compare
- 1 Cote d'Ivoire 4 compare
- 1 Croatia 4 compare
- 1 Cuba 4 compare
- 1 Cyprus 4 compare
- 1 Czechia 4 compare
- 1 Democratic Republic of Congo 4 compare
- 1 Denmark 4 compare
- 1 Djibouti 4 compare
- 1 Dominican Republic 4 compare
- 1 East Timor 4 compare
- 1 Ecuador 4 compare
- 1 El Salvador 4 compare
- 1 Eritrea 4 compare
- 1 Estonia 4 compare
- 1 Ethiopia 4 compare
- 1 Finland 4 compare
- 1 France 4 compare
- 1 Gabon 4 compare
- 1 Gambia 4 compare
- 1 Georgia 4 compare
- 1 Germany 4 compare
- 1 Ghana 4 compare
- 1 Greece 4 compare
- 1 Guatemala 4 compare
- 1 Guinea 4 compare
- 1 Guinea-Bissau 4 compare
- 1 Guyana 4 compare
- 1 Haiti 4 compare
- 1 Honduras 4 compare
- 1 Hungary 4 compare
- 1 India 4 compare
- 1 Indonesia 4 compare
- 1 Iran 4 compare
- 1 Iraq 4 compare
- 1 Ireland 4 compare
- 1 Israel 4 compare
- 1 Italy 4 compare
- 1 Jamaica 4 compare
- 1 Japan 4 compare
- 1 Kazakhstan 4 compare
- 1 Kenya 4 compare
- 1 Kyrgyzstan 4 compare
- 1 Laos 4 compare
- 1 Latvia 4 compare
- 1 Lebanon 4 compare
- 1 Lesotho 4 compare
- 1 Liberia 4 compare
- 1 Lithuania 4 compare
- 1 Luxembourg 4 compare
- 1 Madagascar 4 compare
- 1 Malawi 4 compare
- 1 Malaysia 4 compare
- 1 Mali 4 compare
- 1 Mauritius 4 compare
- 1 Mexico 4 compare
- 1 Moldova 4 compare
- 1 Mongolia 4 compare
- 1 Montenegro 4 compare
- 1 Mozambique 4 compare
- 1 Myanmar 4 compare
- 1 Namibia 4 compare
- 1 Nepal 4 compare
- 1 Netherlands 4 compare
- 1 New Zealand 4 compare
- 1 Nicaragua 4 compare
- 1 Niger 4 compare
- 1 Nigeria 4 compare
- 1 North Macedonia 4 compare
- 1 Norway 4 compare
- 1 Pakistan 4 compare
- 1 Panama 4 compare
- 1 Papua New Guinea 4 compare
- 1 Paraguay 4 compare
- 1 Peru 4 compare
- 1 Philippines 4 compare
- 1 Poland 4 compare
- 1 Portugal 4 compare
- 1 Romania 4 compare
- 1 Russia 4 compare
- 1 Senegal 4 compare
- 1 Serbia 4 compare
- 1 Sierra Leone 4 compare
- 1 Singapore 4 compare
- 1 Slovakia 4 compare
- 1 Slovenia 4 compare
- 1 Solomon Islands 4 compare
- 1 Somalia 4 compare
- 1 South Africa 4 compare
- 1 South Korea 4 compare
- 1 Spain 4 compare
- 1 Sri Lanka 4 compare
- 1 Suriname 4 compare
- 1 Sweden 4 compare
- 1 Switzerland 4 compare
- 1 Syria 4 compare
- 1 Taiwan 4 compare
- 1 Tajikistan 4 compare
- 1 Tanzania 4 compare
- 1 Togo 4 compare
- 1 Trinidad and Tobago 4 compare
- 1 Tunisia 4 compare
- 1 Turkmenistan 4 compare
- 1 USSR 4 compare
- 1 Ukraine 4 compare
- 1 United Kingdom 4 compare
- 1 United States 4 compare
- 1 Uruguay 4 compare
- 1 Uzbekistan 4 compare
- 1 Vatican 4 compare
- 1 Venezuela 4 compare
- 1 Vietnam 4 compare
- 1 Zambia 4 compare
- 1 Zimbabwe 4 compare
More reference data data for China
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 49.4 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 75.5 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 303.29 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 18.8 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 303.29 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 165.62 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 206.2 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 350.74 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 1,480 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 102.37 (2050)
Frequently asked questions
- What is openness of executive recruitment score in China?
- Openness of executive recruitment score in China was 4 in 2018, according to Polity 5 (2020) – processed by Our World in Data.
- What is the highest openness of executive recruitment score recorded in China?
- The highest recorded value was 4 in 1914.
- What is the lowest openness of executive recruitment score recorded in China?
- The lowest recorded value was 0 in 1912.
- How does China rank for openness of executive recruitment score?
- China ranks 1st out of 167 countries with data for 2018.
- Is openness of executive recruitment score rising or falling in China?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is volatile.
- Where does this China data come from?
- The figures come from Polity 5 (2020) – processed by Our World in Data, published as part of Openness of Executive Recruitment Score. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 206 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data).
About this data
Indicates the extent to which recruitment for the executive is open. It ranges from executive power being seized (score of 0), over hereditary succession (score of 1), dual hereditary-open arrangements with the chief minister designated (score of 2), and dual hereditary-open arrangements with the chief minister being elected (score of 3), to executive recruitment being open (score of 4).