CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bosnia and Herzegovina: CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating was 3.5 1=low to 6=high in 2013. ▲ Rising
CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2005–2013
Source: CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Measured in 1=low to 6=high.
Analysis
The most recent figure for cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Bosnia and Herzegovina is 3.5 1=low to 6=high, measured in 2013. That is the highest value across all 9 years on record.
Compared with earlier readings it is up 16.7% over ten years.
Over the whole period, cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Bosnia and Herzegovina peaked at 3.5 1=low to 6=high in 2006 and was at its lowest, 3 1=low to 6=high, in 2005.
That places Bosnia and Herzegovina 17th out of 85 countries with data for 2013, putting it in the top quarter.
CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Bosnia and Herzegovina, year by year
| Year | 1=low to 6=high | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 3 1=low to 6=high | — |
| 2006 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +16.7% |
| 2007 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2008 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2009 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2010 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2011 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2012 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2013 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
Bosnia and Herzegovina compared with similar countries
- Bosnia and Herzegovina's 3.5 1=low to 6=high is above the median for upper middle income countries, which is 3.5 1=low to 6=high, 1.0× the median. (21 countries reporting)
- Bosnia and Herzegovina's 3.5 1=low to 6=high is above the median for Europe & Central Asia, which is 3.5 1=low to 6=high, 1.0× the median. (9 countries reporting)
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.4 1=low to 6=high | 3 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 5 |
| 2010s | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 4 |
Countries ranked near Bosnia and Herzegovina
- 17 Bolivia, Plurinational State of 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Burundi 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Cambodia 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Cameroon 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Congo, Democratic Republic of the 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Dominica 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Gambia 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Ghana 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Kosovo 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Lao People's Democratic Republic 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Lesotho 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Maldives 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Mali 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Mongolia 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Mozambique 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Nepal 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Niger 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Samoa 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Sao Tome and Principe 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Senegal 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Sierra Leone 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Tajikistan 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Uganda 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Uzbekistan 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Vanuatu 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 17 Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
More public sector data for Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Arms imports 12.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2021)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per capita 3.7 SIPRI trend indicator values per person (2021)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per unit of GDP 0.0005 SIPRI trend indicator values per US$ of GDP (2021)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), gaps filled 12.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2021)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per capita 68.25 current USD per person (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per unit of GDP 0.0073 current USD per US$ of GDP (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), annual growth rate 9.45 % change on previous year (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), gaps filled 215.97 million current USD (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per square kilometre 234.38 SIPRI trend indicator values per square kilometre (2021)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per square kilometre 3,854 current USD per square kilometre (2023)
Frequently asked questions
- What is cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
- Cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Bosnia and Herzegovina was 3.5 1=low to 6=high in 2013, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
- What is the highest cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating recorded in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
- The highest recorded value was 3.5 1=low to 6=high in 2006.
- What is the lowest cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating recorded in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
- The lowest recorded value was 3 1=low to 6=high in 2005.
- How does Bosnia and Herzegovina rank for cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 17th out of 85 countries with data for 2013.
- Is cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating rising or falling in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
- Over the last ten years it is up 16.7%. The long-run trend across the full record is rising.
- Where does this Bosnia and Herzegovina data come from?
- The figures come from CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as part of CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 9 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). This criterion assesses the extent to which environmental policies and institutions foster the protection and sustainable use of natural resources and the management of pollution.