CPIA equity of public resource use rating in East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries)
East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries): CPIA equity of public resource use rating was 3.32 1=low to 6=high in 2025. ▼ Falling
CPIA equity of public resource use rating in East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries), 2005–2025
Source: CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Measured in 1=low to 6=high.
Analysis
In 2025, cpia equity of public resource use rating in East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries) stood at 3.32 1=low to 6=high.
That represents a change of down 1.3% over ten years.
Over the whole period, cpia equity of public resource use rating in East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries) peaked at 3.73 1=low to 6=high in 2010 and was at its lowest, 3.29 1=low to 6=high, in 2016.
That places East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries) 30th out of 42 groups 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 equity of public resource use rating in East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries), year by year
| Year | 1=low to 6=high | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | — |
| 2006 | 3.38 1=low to 6=high | -3.6% |
| 2007 | 3.41 1=low to 6=high | +1.0% |
| 2008 | 3.41 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2009 | 3.59 1=low to 6=high | +5.3% |
| 2010 | 3.73 1=low to 6=high | +3.8% |
| 2011 | 3.54 1=low to 6=high | -5.1% |
| 2012 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | -1.1% |
| 2013 | 3.4 1=low to 6=high | -2.9% |
| 2014 | 3.4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2015 | 3.37 1=low to 6=high | -1.0% |
| 2016 | 3.29 1=low to 6=high | -2.4% |
| 2017 | 3.29 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2018 | 3.32 1=low to 6=high | +1.1% |
| 2019 | 3.29 1=low to 6=high | -1.1% |
| 2020 | 3.29 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2021 | 3.39 1=low to 6=high | +3.3% |
| 2022 | 3.36 1=low to 6=high | -1.1% |
| 2023 | 3.32 1=low to 6=high | -1.1% |
| 2024 | 3.32 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2025 | 3.32 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.46 1=low to 6=high | 3.38 1=low to 6=high | 3.59 1=low to 6=high | 5 |
| 2010s | 3.41 1=low to 6=high | 3.29 1=low to 6=high | 3.73 1=low to 6=high | 10 |
| 2020s | 3.33 1=low to 6=high | 3.29 1=low to 6=high | 3.39 1=low to 6=high | 6 |
Countries ranked near East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries)
- 30 Bangladesh 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Bosnia and Herzegovina 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Burkina Faso 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Burundi 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Cape Verde 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Congo, Democratic Republic of the 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Djibouti 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Ethiopia 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Gambia 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Grenada 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Guinea 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Honduras 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Kosovo 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Liberia 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Madagascar 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Maldives 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Republic of Moldova 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Nepal 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Nicaragua 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Pakistan 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Sierra Leone 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Saint Lucia 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Tajikistan 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Zimbabwe 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 30 Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
More public sector data for East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries)
- Arms imports 872.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per capita 0.4124 SIPRI trend indicator values per person (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per unit of GDP 0 SIPRI trend indicator values per US$ of GDP (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), annual growth rate -41.87 % change on previous year (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), gaps filled 872.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per capita 163.99 current USD per person (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per unit of GDP 0.0156 current USD per US$ of GDP (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), annual growth rate 6.25 % change on previous year (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), gaps filled 346.78 billion current USD (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per square kilometre 94.45 SIPRI trend indicator values per square kilometre (2023)
Frequently asked questions
- What is cpia equity of public resource use rating in East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries)?
- Cpia equity of public resource use rating in East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries) was 3.32 1=low to 6=high in 2025, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
- What is the highest cpia equity of public resource use rating recorded in East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries)?
- The highest recorded value was 3.73 1=low to 6=high in 2010.
- What is the lowest cpia equity of public resource use rating recorded in East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries)?
- The lowest recorded value was 3.29 1=low to 6=high in 2016.
- How does East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries) rank for cpia equity of public resource use rating?
- East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries) ranks 30th out of 42 groups with data for 2025.
- Is cpia equity of public resource use rating rising or falling in East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries)?
- Over the last ten years it is down 1.3%. The long-run trend across the full record is falling.
- Where does this East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries) data come from?
- The figures come from CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as part of CPIA equity of public resource use 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
Equity of public resource use assesses the extent to which the pattern of public expenditures and revenue collection affects the poor and is consistent with national poverty reduction priorities.