Voice and Accountability in Liberia
Liberia: Voice and Accountability was 0.1144 standard error in 2011. ▼ Falling
Voice and Accountability in Liberia, 1996–2011
Source: World Bank Institute. Measured in standard error.
Analysis
In 2011, voice and accountability in Liberia stood at 0.1144 standard error.
Compared with earlier readings it is up 1.0% on the previous year and down 50.8% over ten years.
Over the whole period, voice and accountability in Liberia peaked at 0.2606 standard error in 1998 and was at its lowest, 0.1133 standard error, in 2010.
That places Liberia 32nd out of 53 countries with data for 2011, putting it in the middle of the range.
The long-run direction has been consistently falling across the 13 years of available data.
Voice and Accountability in Liberia, year by year
| Year | standard error | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 1996 | 0.2441 standard error | — |
| 1998 | 0.2606 standard error | +6.8% |
| 2000 | 0.2323 standard error | -10.9% |
| 2002 | 0.1761 standard error | -24.2% |
| 2003 | 0.1736 standard error | -1.4% |
| 2004 | 0.1858 standard error | +7.1% |
| 2005 | 0.1924 standard error | +3.5% |
| 2006 | 0.1372 standard error | -28.7% |
| 2007 | 0.1297 standard error | -5.5% |
| 2008 | 0.13 standard error | +0.2% |
| 2009 | 0.114 standard error | -12.3% |
| 2010 | 0.1133 standard error | -0.7% |
| 2011 | 0.1144 standard error | +1.0% |
Liberia compared with similar countries
- Liberia's 0.1144 standard error is below the median for low income countries, which is 0.1175 standard error, 97% of the median. (20 countries reporting)
- Liberia's 0.1144 standard error is below the median for Sub-Saharan Africa, which is 0.1248 standard error, 92% of the median. (47 countries reporting)
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 0.2523 standard error | 0.2441 standard error | 0.2606 standard error | 2 |
| 2000s | 0.1635 standard error | 0.114 standard error | 0.2323 standard error | 9 |
| 2010s | 0.1138 standard error | 0.1133 standard error | 0.1144 standard error | 2 |
Countries ranked near Liberia
More reference data data for Liberia
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.0476 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 0.1282 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 0.229 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.0532 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 0.229 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.1597 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 0.183 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 0.5564 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 1.2 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.2896 (2050)
Frequently asked questions
- What is voice and accountability in Liberia?
- Voice and accountability in Liberia was 0.1144 standard error in 2011, according to World Bank Institute.
- What is the highest voice and accountability recorded in Liberia?
- The highest recorded value was 0.2606 standard error in 1998.
- What is the lowest voice and accountability recorded in Liberia?
- The lowest recorded value was 0.1133 standard error in 2010.
- How does Liberia rank for voice and accountability?
- Liberia ranks 32nd out of 53 countries with data for 2011.
- Is voice and accountability rising or falling in Liberia?
- Over the last ten years it is down 50.8%. The long-run trend across the full record is falling.
- Where does this Liberia 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.