Middle income vs Uzbekistan: CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating
CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating over time
- Middle income
- Uzbekistan
How they compare
Uzbekistan currently reports 3.5 1=low to 6=high against 3.3 1=low to 6=high in Middle income, a difference of 0.2 1=low to 6=high.
That makes Uzbekistan's figure about 1.1 times Middle income's.
Across all 21 years both countries report, Uzbekistan has been ahead every year.
Middle income ranks 15th and Uzbekistan ranks 17th of 42 groups.
Uzbekistan has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Middle income | Uzbekistan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.14 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 0.3566 1=low to 6=high | Uzbekistan |
| 2010s | 3.2 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 0.2957 1=low to 6=high | Uzbekistan |
| 2020s | 3.3 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 0.2043 1=low to 6=high | Uzbekistan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating, Middle income or Uzbekistan?
- Uzbekistan, at 3.5 1=low to 6=high against 3.3 1=low to 6=high in Middle income as of 2025.
- What is the difference in cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating between Middle income and Uzbekistan?
- 0.2 1=low to 6=high, with Uzbekistan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Middle income and Uzbekistan?
- 21 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2025.
- How do Middle income and Uzbekistan rank globally for cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating?
- Middle income ranks 15th and Uzbekistan ranks 17th of 42 groups.
- Where does this data come from?
- CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability 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 Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (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 criterion assesses the extent to which environmental policies and institutions foster the protection and sustainable use of natural resources and the management of pollution.