CPIA debt policy rating (1=low to 6=high) in Kiribati
Kiribati: CPIA debt policy rating (1=low to 6=high) was 2.5 1=low to 6=high in 2025. ▼ Falling
CPIA debt policy rating in Kiribati, 2005–2025
Source: CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Measured in 1=low to 6=high.
Analysis
In 2025, cpia debt policy rating in Kiribati stood at 2.5 1=low to 6=high.
That represents a change of up 25.0% over ten years.
Over the whole period, cpia debt policy rating in Kiribati peaked at 5 1=low to 6=high in 2005 and was at its lowest, 2 1=low to 6=high, in 2014.
That places Kiribati 63rd out of 85 countries with data for 2025, putting it in the middle of the range.
The long-run direction has been consistently falling across the 21 years of available data.
CPIA debt policy rating (1=low to 6=high) in Kiribati, year by year
| Year | 1=low to 6=high | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 5 1=low to 6=high | — |
| 2006 | 5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2007 | 5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2008 | 5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2009 | 5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2010 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | -30.0% |
| 2011 | 3 1=low to 6=high | -14.3% |
| 2012 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | -16.7% |
| 2013 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2014 | 2 1=low to 6=high | -20.0% |
| 2015 | 2 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2016 | 2 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +25.0% |
| 2018 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2020 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2021 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2022 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2023 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2024 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2025 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
Kiribati compared with similar countries
- Kiribati's 2.5 1=low to 6=high is below the median for lower middle income countries, which is 3.5 1=low to 6=high, 71% of the median. (39 countries reporting)
- Kiribati's 2.5 1=low to 6=high is below the median for East Asia & Pacific, which is 3 1=low to 6=high, 83% of the median. (16 countries reporting)
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 5 1=low to 6=high | 5 1=low to 6=high | 5 1=low to 6=high | 5 |
| 2010s | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | 2 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 10 |
| 2020s | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | 6 |
Countries ranked near Kiribati
- 63 Comoros 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 63 Ethiopia 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 63 Guinea-Bissau 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 63 Marshall Islands 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 63 Niger 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 63 Senegal 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 63 Somalia 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 63 Zimbabwe 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
More public sector data for Kiribati
- Democracy, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Chief executive of the government is elected, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Elected parliament, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Men's universal right to vote, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Universal right to vote, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Universal right to vote in practice, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Tax revenue 17.5% (2023)
- Taxes on income, profits and capital gains 7.4% (2023)
- Taxes on goods and services 11.8% (2023)
- Net investment in nonfinancial assets 7.1% (2023)
Frequently asked questions
- What is cpia debt policy rating in Kiribati?
- Cpia debt policy rating in Kiribati was 2.5 1=low to 6=high in 2025, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
- What is the highest cpia debt policy rating recorded in Kiribati?
- The highest recorded value was 5 1=low to 6=high in 2005.
- What is the lowest cpia debt policy rating recorded in Kiribati?
- The lowest recorded value was 2 1=low to 6=high in 2014.
- How does Kiribati rank for cpia debt policy rating?
- Kiribati ranks 63rd out of 85 countries with data for 2025.
- Is cpia debt policy rating rising or falling in Kiribati?
- Over the last ten years it is up 25.0%. The long-run trend across the full record is falling.
- Where does this Kiribati data come from?
- The figures come from CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as part of CPIA debt policy rating (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 21 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
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 Debt Policy and Management criterion assesses whether the country’s debt management strategy is conducive to ensure medium-term debt sustainability and minimize budgetary risks. The criterion covers: (a) the extent to which external and domestic debt is contracted with a view to achieving/maintaining debt sustainability; and (b) the effectiveness of debt management functions (including the degree of coordination between debt management and other macroeconomic policies, the effectiveness of the debt management unit, and the existence of a debt management strategy and of a legal framework for borrowing).