Tuvalu vs Upper middle income: CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating
CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating over time
- Tuvalu
- Upper middle income
How they compare
Tuvalu currently reports 4 1=low to 6=high against 3.53 1=low to 6=high in Upper middle income, a difference of 0.47 1=low to 6=high.
That makes Tuvalu's figure about 1.1 times Upper middle income's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 14 shared years of data; in 2012 it was Upper middle income ahead.
Tuvalu ranks 1st and Upper middle income ranks 2nd of 85 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Tuvalu averaged higher in 1 and Upper middle income in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Tuvalu | Upper middle income | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 3.55 1=low to 6=high | 0.0534 1=low to 6=high | Upper middle income |
| 2020s | 3.75 1=low to 6=high | 3.57 1=low to 6=high | 0.1778 1=low to 6=high | Tuvalu |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating, Tuvalu or Upper middle income?
- Tuvalu, at 4 1=low to 6=high against 3.53 1=low to 6=high in Upper middle income as of 2025.
- What is the difference in cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating between Tuvalu and Upper middle income?
- 0.47 1=low to 6=high, with Tuvalu ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Tuvalu and Upper middle income?
- 14 years are reported by both, from 2012 to 2025.
- How do Tuvalu and Upper middle income rank globally for cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating?
- Tuvalu ranks 1st and Upper middle income ranks 2nd of 85 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA property rights and rule-based governance 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). The Property Rights and Rule-Based Governance criterion assesses the extent to which economic activity is facilitated by an effective legal system and rule-based governance structure in which property and contract rights are reliably respected and enforced. It encompasses three dimensions: (a) legal framework for secure property and contract rights, including predictability and impartiality of laws and regulations; (b) quality of the legal and judicial system, as measured by independence, accessibility, legitimacy, efficiency, transparency, and integrity of the courts and other relevant dispute resolution mechanisms; and (c) crime and violence as an impediment to economic activity and citizen security.