Statizoid

CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating in East Asia & Pacific

East Asia & Pacific: CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating was 3.11 1=low to 6=high in 2025. ▬ Flat

Latest (2025)
3.11 1=low to 6=high
Change on year
unchanged
Rank
10th
of 42 groups
All-time high
3.19 1=low to 6=high
in 2011
All-time low
2.88 1=low to 6=high
in 2006
Years of data
21
2005–2025

CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating in East Asia & Pacific, 2005–2025

01232005201520252005: 3 1=low to 6=high2006: 2.9 1=low to 6=high2007: 2.9 1=low to 6=high2008: 3 1=low to 6=high2009: 3 1=low to 6=high2010: 3.1 1=low to 6=high2011: 3.2 1=low to 6=high2012: 3.2 1=low to 6=high2013: 3.1 1=low to 6=high2014: 3.1 1=low to 6=high2015: 3.1 1=low to 6=high2016: 3.1 1=low to 6=high2017: 3.1 1=low to 6=high2018: 3 1=low to 6=high2019: 3.1 1=low to 6=high2020: 3.1 1=low to 6=high2021: 3 1=low to 6=high2022: 3.1 1=low to 6=high2023: 3.1 1=low to 6=high2024: 3.1 1=low to 6=high2025: 3.1 1=low to 6=high

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 East Asia & Pacific is 3.11 1=low to 6=high, measured in 2025.

The figure is up 0.2% over ten years.

Over the whole period, cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating in East Asia & Pacific peaked at 3.19 1=low to 6=high in 2011 and was at its lowest, 2.88 1=low to 6=high, in 2006.

East Asia & Pacific ranks 10th of 42 groups on this measure, in the top quarter.

CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating in East Asia & Pacific, year by year

Year 1=low to 6=high Change
2005 3.05 1=low to 6=high —
2006 2.88 1=low to 6=high -5.6%
2007 2.91 1=low to 6=high +1.2%
2008 3.05 1=low to 6=high +4.7%
2009 3.05 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2010 3.09 1=low to 6=high +1.5%
2011 3.19 1=low to 6=high +3.3%
2012 3.18 1=low to 6=high -0.4%
2013 3.1 1=low to 6=high -2.5%
2014 3.1 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2015 3.1 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2016 3.07 1=low to 6=high -0.9%
2017 3.07 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2018 3.04 1=low to 6=high -1.2%
2019 3.11 1=low to 6=high +2.4%
2020 3.07 1=low to 6=high -1.1%
2021 3.04 1=low to 6=high -1.2%
2022 3.07 1=low to 6=high +1.2%
2023 3.11 1=low to 6=high +1.2%
2024 3.11 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2025 3.11 1=low to 6=high +0.0%

Averages by decade

DecadeAverage LowestHighest Years
2000s 2.98 1=low to 6=high 2.88 1=low to 6=high 3.05 1=low to 6=high 5
2010s 3.1 1=low to 6=high 3.04 1=low to 6=high 3.19 1=low to 6=high 10
2020s 3.08 1=low to 6=high 3.04 1=low to 6=high 3.11 1=low to 6=high 6

Countries ranked near East Asia & Pacific

  1. 9 Armenia 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  2. 9 Benin 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  3. 9 Côte d'Ivoire 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  4. 9 Dominica 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  5. 9 Georgia 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  6. 9 Grenada 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  7. 9 India 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  8. 9 Kenya 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  9. 9 Kiribati 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  10. 9 Kosovo 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  11. 9 Kyrgyzstan 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  12. 9 Malawi 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  13. 9 Marshall Islands 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  14. 9 Micronesia, Federated States of 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  15. 9 Republic of Moldova 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  16. 9 Rwanda 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  17. 9 Senegal 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  18. 9 Togo 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  19. 9 Uganda 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  20. 9 Uzbekistan 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  21. 9 Vanuatu 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  22. 9 Viet Nam 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  23. 9 Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare

See the full ranking of 127 places →

More public sector data for East Asia & Pacific

All data for East Asia & Pacific →

Frequently asked questions

What is cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating in East Asia & Pacific?
Cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating in East Asia & Pacific was 3.11 1=low to 6=high in 2025, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
What is the highest cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating recorded in East Asia & Pacific?
The highest recorded value was 3.19 1=low to 6=high in 2011.
What is the lowest cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating recorded in East Asia & Pacific?
The lowest recorded value was 2.88 1=low to 6=high in 2006.
How does East Asia & Pacific rank for cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating?
East Asia & Pacific ranks 10th out of 42 groups with data for 2025.
Is cpia property rights and rule-based governance rating rising or falling in East Asia & Pacific?
Over the last ten years it is up 0.2%. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
Where does this East Asia & Pacific 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 — 21 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating in East Asia & Pacific. Statizoid, drawing on CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 09 September 2026, from https://public-sector.statizoid.com/stat/cpia-property-rights-and-rule-based-governance-rating-1-low-to-6-high/east-asia-and-pacific/

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-property-rights-and-rule-based-governance-rating-1-low-to-6-high/east-asia-and-pacific/">CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating in East Asia & Pacific</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
CPIA property rights and rule-based governance 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). 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.