Ecuador vs Jordan: Statistical performance indicators (SPI): Pillar 5 data
Statistical performance indicators (SPI): Pillar 5 data over time
- Ecuador
- Jordan
How they compare
Ecuador currently reports 70 scale 0-100 against 70 scale 0-100 in Jordan, a difference of 0 scale 0-100.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 9 shared years of data; in 2016 it was Ecuador ahead.
Ecuador ranks 78th and Jordan ranks 78th of 192 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Ecuador averaged higher in 1 and Jordan in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Ecuador | Jordan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 47.5 scale 0-100 | 21.25 scale 0-100 | 26.25 scale 0-100 | Ecuador |
| 2020s | 59 scale 0-100 | 67 scale 0-100 | 8 scale 0-100 | Jordan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher statistical performance indicators (spi): pillar 5 data, Ecuador or Jordan?
- Ecuador, at 70 scale 0-100 against 70 scale 0-100 in Jordan as of 2024.
- What is the difference in statistical performance indicators (spi): pillar 5 data between Ecuador and Jordan?
- 0 scale 0-100, with Ecuador ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Jordan?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2016 to 2024.
- How do Ecuador and Jordan rank globally for statistical performance indicators (spi): pillar 5 data?
- Ecuador ranks 78th and Jordan ranks 78th of 192 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statistical Performance Indicators, World Bank (WB), published as Statistical performance indicators (SPI): Pillar 5 data infrastructure score (scale 0-100). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The data infrastructure pillar overall score measures the hard and soft infrastructure segments, itemizing essential cross cutting requirements for an effective statistical system. The segments are: (i) legislation and governance covering the existence of laws and a functioning institutional framework for the statistical system; (ii) standards and methods addressing compliance with recognized frameworks and concepts; (iii) skills including level of skills within the statistical system and among users (statistical literacy); (iv) partnerships reflecting the need for the statistical system to be inclusive and coherent; and (v) finance mobilized both domestically and from donors.