Voice and Accountability in Angola
Angola: Voice and Accountability was 0.1108 standard error in 2011. ▼ Falling
Voice and Accountability in Angola, 1996–2011
Source: World Bank Institute. Measured in standard error.
Analysis
The most recent figure for voice and accountability in Angola is 0.1108 standard error, measured in 2011.
That represents a change of up 1.1% on the previous year and down 47.6% over ten years.
Over the whole period, voice and accountability in Angola peaked at 0.2318 standard error in 1998 and was at its lowest, 0.1096 standard error, in 2010.
That places Angola 46th out of 53 countries with data for 2011, putting it in the bottom quarter.
The long-run direction has been consistently falling across the 13 years of available data.
Voice and Accountability in Angola, year by year
| Year | standard error | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 1996 | 0.2211 standard error | — |
| 1998 | 0.2318 standard error | +4.8% |
| 2000 | 0.2116 standard error | -8.7% |
| 2002 | 0.1655 standard error | -21.8% |
| 2003 | 0.1583 standard error | -4.4% |
| 2004 | 0.1508 standard error | -4.7% |
| 2005 | 0.1521 standard error | +0.9% |
| 2006 | 0.122 standard error | -19.8% |
| 2007 | 0.1246 standard error | +2.1% |
| 2008 | 0.1161 standard error | -6.8% |
| 2009 | 0.1106 standard error | -4.7% |
| 2010 | 0.1096 standard error | -1.0% |
| 2011 | 0.1108 standard error | +1.1% |
Angola compared with similar countries
- Angola's 0.1108 standard error is below the median for lower middle income countries, which is 0.1161 standard error, 95% of the median. (24 countries reporting)
- Angola's 0.1108 standard error is below the median for Sub-Saharan Africa, which is 0.1248 standard error, 89% of the median. (47 countries reporting)
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 0.2265 standard error | 0.2211 standard error | 0.2318 standard error | 2 |
| 2000s | 0.1457 standard error | 0.1106 standard error | 0.2116 standard error | 9 |
| 2010s | 0.1102 standard error | 0.1096 standard error | 0.1108 standard error | 2 |
Countries ranked near Angola
More reference data data for Angola
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.4536 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 2.99 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 3.82 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.163 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 3.82 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 1.52 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 1.82 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 15.22 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 20.43 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.8877 (2050)
Frequently asked questions
- What is voice and accountability in Angola?
- Voice and accountability in Angola was 0.1108 standard error in 2011, according to World Bank Institute.
- What is the highest voice and accountability recorded in Angola?
- The highest recorded value was 0.2318 standard error in 1998.
- What is the lowest voice and accountability recorded in Angola?
- The lowest recorded value was 0.1096 standard error in 2010.
- How does Angola rank for voice and accountability?
- Angola ranks 46th out of 53 countries with data for 2011.
- Is voice and accountability rising or falling in Angola?
- Over the last ten years it is down 47.6%. The long-run trend across the full record is falling.
- Where does this Angola data come from?
- The figures come from World Bank Institute, published as part of Voice and Accountability (standard error). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 13 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
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.