Azerbaijan vs IDA total: CPIA structural policies cluster average (1=low to 6=high)
CPIA structural policies cluster average (1=low to 6=high) over time
- Azerbaijan
- IDA total
How they compare
Azerbaijan currently reports 3.5 1=low to 6=high against 3.15 1=low to 6=high in IDA total, a difference of 0.35 1=low to 6=high.
That makes Azerbaijan's figure about 1.1 times IDA total's.
Across all 6 years both countries report, Azerbaijan has been ahead every year.
Azerbaijan ranks 23rd and IDA total ranks 25th of 85 countries.
Azerbaijan has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Azerbaijan | IDA total | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.63 1=low to 6=high | 3.35 1=low to 6=high | 0.28 1=low to 6=high | Azerbaijan |
| 2010s | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 3.33 1=low to 6=high | 0.1716 1=low to 6=high | Azerbaijan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia structural policies cluster average, Azerbaijan or IDA total?
- Azerbaijan, at 3.5 1=low to 6=high against 3.15 1=low to 6=high in IDA total as of 2010.
- What is the difference in cpia structural policies cluster average between Azerbaijan and IDA total?
- 0.35 1=low to 6=high, with Azerbaijan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Azerbaijan and IDA total?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2010.
- How do Azerbaijan and IDA total rank globally for cpia structural policies cluster average?
- Azerbaijan ranks 23rd and IDA total ranks 25th of 85 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA structural policies cluster average (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 Structural Policies cluster includes trade, financial sector, and business regulatory environment.