Statizoid

CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Lao People's Democratic Republic

Lao People's Democratic Republic: CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating was 3.5 1=low to 6=high in 2025. ▼ Falling

Latest (2025)
3.5 1=low to 6=high
Change on year
unchanged
World rank
17th
of 85 countries
All-time high
4 1=low to 6=high
in 2008
All-time low
3.5 1=low to 6=high
in 2005
Years of data
21
2005–2025

CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Lao People's Democratic Republic, 2005–2025

012342005201520252005: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2006: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2007: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2008: 4 1=low to 6=high2009: 4 1=low to 6=high2010: 4 1=low to 6=high2011: 4 1=low to 6=high2012: 4 1=low to 6=high2013: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2014: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2015: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2016: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2017: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2018: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2019: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2020: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2021: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2022: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2023: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2024: 3.5 1=low to 6=high2025: 3.5 1=low to 6=high

Source: CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Measured in 1=low to 6=high.

Analysis

In 2025, cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Lao People's Democratic Republic stood at 3.5 1=low to 6=high. That is the lowest value across all 21 years on record.

That represents a change of unchanged over ten years.

Over the whole period, cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Lao People's Democratic Republic peaked at 4 1=low to 6=high in 2008 and was at its lowest, 3.5 1=low to 6=high, in 2005.

That places Lao People's Democratic Republic 17th out of 85 countries with data for 2025, putting it in the top quarter.

The long-run direction has been consistently falling across the 21 years of available data.

CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Lao People's Democratic Republic, year by year

Year 1=low to 6=high Change
2005 3.5 1=low to 6=high —
2006 3.5 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2007 3.5 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2008 4 1=low to 6=high +14.3%
2009 4 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2010 4 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2011 4 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2012 4 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2013 3.5 1=low to 6=high -12.5%
2014 3.5 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2015 3.5 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2016 3.5 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2017 3.5 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2018 3.5 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2019 3.5 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2020 3.5 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2021 3.5 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2022 3.5 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2023 3.5 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2024 3.5 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2025 3.5 1=low to 6=high +0.0%

Averages by decade

DecadeAverage LowestHighest Years
2000s 3.7 1=low to 6=high 3.5 1=low to 6=high 4 1=low to 6=high 5
2010s 3.65 1=low to 6=high 3.5 1=low to 6=high 4 1=low to 6=high 10
2020s 3.5 1=low to 6=high 3.5 1=low to 6=high 3.5 1=low to 6=high 6

Countries ranked near Lao People's Democratic Republic

  1. 17 Bolivia, Plurinational State of 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  2. 17 Bosnia and Herzegovina 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  3. 17 Burundi 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  4. 17 Cambodia 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  5. 17 Cameroon 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  6. 17 Congo, Democratic Republic of the 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  7. 17 Dominica 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  8. 17 Gambia 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  9. 17 Ghana 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  10. 17 Kosovo 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  11. 17 Lesotho 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  12. 17 Maldives 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  13. 17 Mali 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  14. 17 Mongolia 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  15. 17 Mozambique 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  16. 17 Nepal 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  17. 17 Niger 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  18. 17 Samoa 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  19. 17 Sao Tome and Principe 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  20. 17 Senegal 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  21. 17 Sierra Leone 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  22. 17 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  23. 17 Tajikistan 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  24. 17 Uganda 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  25. 17 Uzbekistan 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  26. 17 Vanuatu 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  27. 17 Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare

See the full ranking of 127 places →

More public sector data for Lao People's Democratic Republic

All data for Lao People's Democratic Republic →

Frequently asked questions

What is cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Lao People's Democratic Republic?
Cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Lao People's Democratic Republic was 3.5 1=low to 6=high in 2025, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
What is the highest cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating recorded in Lao People's Democratic Republic?
The highest recorded value was 4 1=low to 6=high in 2008.
What is the lowest cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating recorded in Lao People's Democratic Republic?
The lowest recorded value was 3.5 1=low to 6=high in 2005.
How does Lao People's Democratic Republic rank for cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating?
Lao People's Democratic Republic ranks 17th out of 85 countries with data for 2025.
Is cpia policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating rising or falling in Lao People's Democratic Republic?
Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is falling.
Where does this Lao People's Democratic Republic 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 — 21 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Lao People's Democratic Republic. Statizoid, drawing on CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 05 September 2026, from https://public-sector.statizoid.com/stat/cpia-policy-and-institutions-for-environmental-sustainability-rating-1-low-to-6-high/lao-pdr/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://public-sector.statizoid.com/stat/cpia-policy-and-institutions-for-environmental-sustainability-rating-1-low-to-6-high/lao-pdr/">CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating in Lao People's Democratic Republic</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating (1=low to 6=high)
Unit
1=low to 6=high
Source
CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG)
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
127 places, 2,460 data points, 2005–2025
Last refreshed

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.