IBRD only vs Republic of Moldova: CPIA gender equality rating
CPIA gender equality rating over time
- IBRD only
- Republic of Moldova
How they compare
Republic of Moldova currently reports 4.5 1=low to 6=high against 4.25 1=low to 6=high in IBRD only, a difference of 0.25 1=low to 6=high.
That makes Republic of Moldova's figure about 1.1 times IBRD only's.
Across all 15 years both countries report, Republic of Moldova has been ahead every year.
IBRD only ranks 1st and Republic of Moldova ranks 1st of 42 groups.
Republic of Moldova has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | IBRD only | Republic of Moldova | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 4.05 1=low to 6=high | 4.9 1=low to 6=high | 0.8454 1=low to 6=high | Republic of Moldova |
| 2010s | 4.18 1=low to 6=high | 4.65 1=low to 6=high | 0.4739 1=low to 6=high | Republic of Moldova |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia gender equality rating, IBRD only or Republic of Moldova?
- Republic of Moldova, at 4.5 1=low to 6=high against 4.25 1=low to 6=high in IBRD only as of 2019.
- What is the difference in cpia gender equality rating between IBRD only and Republic of Moldova?
- 0.25 1=low to 6=high, with Republic of Moldova ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for IBRD only and Republic of Moldova?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do IBRD only and Republic of Moldova rank globally for cpia gender equality rating?
- IBRD only ranks 1st and Republic of Moldova ranks 1st of 42 groups.
- Where does this data come from?
- CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA gender equality 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). The CPIA gender equality rating criterion assesses the extent to which the country has enacted and put in place institutions and programs to enforce laws and policies that: (a) promote equal access for men and women to human capital development; (b) promote equal access for men and women to productive and economic resources; and (c) give men and women equal status and protection under the law. For the human capital development dimension, the focus is on primary completion and access to secondary education, access to health care during delivery and to family planning, and adolescent fertility rate. For access to economic and productive resources, the focus is on labor force participation, land tenure and property and inheritance rights. For Agency for change and equalization of status and protection under the law the focus is on individual and family rights and personal security (violence against women, trafficking, or sexual harassment) and political participation.