Kiribati vs Tuvalu: CPIA business regulatory environment rating
CPIA business regulatory environment rating over time
- Kiribati
- Tuvalu
How they compare
Kiribati currently reports 2.5 1=low to 6=high against 2.5 1=low to 6=high in Tuvalu, a difference of 0 1=low to 6=high.
Across all 14 years both countries report, Tuvalu has been ahead every year.
Kiribati ranks 62nd and Tuvalu ranks 62nd of 85 countries.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Kiribati | Tuvalu | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | 0 1=low to 6=high | — |
| 2020s | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | 0 1=low to 6=high | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia business regulatory environment rating, Kiribati or Tuvalu?
- Kiribati, at 2.5 1=low to 6=high against 2.5 1=low to 6=high in Tuvalu as of 2025.
- What is the difference in cpia business regulatory environment rating between Kiribati and Tuvalu?
- 0 1=low to 6=high, with Kiribati ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Kiribati and Tuvalu?
- 14 years are reported by both, from 2012 to 2025.
- How do Kiribati and Tuvalu rank globally for cpia business regulatory environment rating?
- Kiribati ranks 62nd and Tuvalu ranks 62nd of 85 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA business regulatory environment rating (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The CPIA measures the extent to which a country’s policy and institutional framework supports sustainable growth and poverty reduction, and consequently the effective use of development assistance. The outcome of the exercise yields both an overall score and scores for sixteen criteria that compose the CPIA. These criteria include: A. Economic Management (1. Monetary and Exchange Rate Policies; 2. Fiscal Policy; 3. Debt Policy and Management), B. Structural Policies (4. Trade; 5. Financial Sector; 6. Business Regulatory Environment), C. Policies for Social Inclusion/Equity (7. Gender equality; 8. Equity of public resource use; 9. Building human resources; 10. Social protection and labor; 11. Policies and institutions for environmental sustainability), D. Public Sector Management and Institutions (12. Property rights and rule-based governance; 13. Quality of budgetary and financial management; 14. Efficiency of revenue mobilization; 15. Quality of public administration; 16. Transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector). This Business Regulatory Environment criterion assesses the extent to which the legal, regulatory, and policy environment helps or hinders private business in investing, creating jobs, and becoming more productive. The emphasis is on direct regulations of business activity and regulation of goods and factor markets. Three sub-components are measured: (a) regulations affecting entry, exit, and competition; (b) regulations of ongoing business operations; and (c) regulations of factor markets (labor and land).