CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bosnia and Herzegovina: CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating was 3 1=low to 6=high in 2013. ▬ Flat
CPIA property rights and rule-based governance 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 property rights and rule-based governance rating in Bosnia and Herzegovina is 3 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 unchanged over ten years.
Over the whole period, cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating in Bosnia and Herzegovina peaked at 3 1=low to 6=high in 2005 and was at its lowest, 3 1=low to 6=high, in 2005.
That places Bosnia and Herzegovina 32nd out of 85 countries with data for 2013, putting it in the middle of the range.
CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating in Bosnia and Herzegovina, year by year
| Year | 1=low to 6=high | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 3 1=low to 6=high | — |
| 2006 | 3 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2007 | 3 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2008 | 3 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2009 | 3 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2010 | 3 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2011 | 3 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2012 | 3 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2013 | 3 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
Bosnia and Herzegovina compared with similar countries
- Bosnia and Herzegovina's 3 1=low to 6=high is below the median for upper middle income countries, which is 3.5 1=low to 6=high, 86% of the median. (21 countries reporting)
- Bosnia and Herzegovina's 3 1=low to 6=high is below the median for Europe & Central Asia, which is 3.5 1=low to 6=high, 86% of the median. (9 countries reporting)
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3 1=low to 6=high | 3 1=low to 6=high | 3 1=low to 6=high | 5 |
| 2010s | 3 1=low to 6=high | 3 1=low to 6=high | 3 1=low to 6=high | 4 |
Countries ranked near Bosnia and Herzegovina
- 32 Azerbaijan 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Burkina Faso 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Congo 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Djibouti 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Fiji 3 1=low to 6=high
- 32 Gambia 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Guinea 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Guyana 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Lao People's Democratic Republic 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Lesotho 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Maldives 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Mauritania 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Mongolia 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Nepal 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Niger 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Sao Tome and Principe 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Sierra Leone 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Solomon Islands 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Sri Lanka 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Tanzania, United Republic of 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 32 Zambia 3 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 property rights and rule-based governance rating in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
- Cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating in Bosnia and Herzegovina was 3 1=low to 6=high in 2013, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
- What is the highest cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating recorded in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
- The highest recorded value was 3 1=low to 6=high in 2005.
- What is the lowest cpia property rights and rule-based governance 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 property rights and rule-based governance rating?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 32nd out of 85 countries with data for 2013.
- Is cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating rising or falling in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this Bosnia and Herzegovina data come from?
- The figures come from CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as part of CPIA property rights and rule-based governance 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). The Property Rights and Rule-Based Governance criterion assesses the extent to which economic activity is facilitated by an effective legal system and rule-based governance structure in which property and contract rights are reliably respected and enforced. It encompasses three dimensions: (a) legal framework for secure property and contract rights, including predictability and impartiality of laws and regulations; (b) quality of the legal and judicial system, as measured by independence, accessibility, legitimacy, efficiency, transparency, and integrity of the courts and other relevant dispute resolution mechanisms; and (c) crime and violence as an impediment to economic activity and citizen security.