Republic of Moldova vs Saint Lucia: CPIA fiscal policy rating
CPIA fiscal policy rating over time
- Republic of Moldova
- Saint Lucia
How they compare
Republic of Moldova currently reports 3.5 1=low to 6=high against 3.5 1=low to 6=high in Saint Lucia, a difference of 0 1=low to 6=high.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Saint Lucia ahead.
Republic of Moldova ranks 19th and Saint Lucia ranks 19th of 85 countries.
Republic of Moldova has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Republic of Moldova | Saint Lucia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.8 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 0.3 1=low to 6=high | Republic of Moldova |
| 2010s | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 3.15 1=low to 6=high | 0.35 1=low to 6=high | Republic of Moldova |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia fiscal policy rating, Republic of Moldova or Saint Lucia?
- Republic of Moldova, at 3.5 1=low to 6=high against 3.5 1=low to 6=high in Saint Lucia as of 2019.
- What is the difference in cpia fiscal policy rating between Republic of Moldova and Saint Lucia?
- 0 1=low to 6=high, with Republic of Moldova ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Republic of Moldova and Saint Lucia?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Republic of Moldova and Saint Lucia rank globally for cpia fiscal policy rating?
- Republic of Moldova ranks 19th and Saint Lucia ranks 19th of 85 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA fiscal policy 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 CPIA fiscal policy criterion assesses the quality of the fiscal policy in its stabilization and allocation functions. The stabilization function deals with achieving macroeconomic policy objectives in conjunction with coherent monetary and exchange rate policies—smoothing business cycle fluctuations, accommodating shocks. The allocation function is concerned with the appropriate provision of public goods. The criterion pays attention to public expenditure composition, including, for example, the provision of public infrastructure and agriculture related public goods and services that support medium-term growth.