CPIA quality of public administration rating in Bhutan
Bhutan: CPIA quality of public administration rating was 4 1=low to 6=high in 2025. ▬ Flat
CPIA quality of public administration rating in Bhutan, 2005–2025
Source: CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Measured in 1=low to 6=high.
Analysis
Bhutan recorded 4 1=low to 6=high for cpia quality of public administration rating in 2025. That is the highest value across all 21 years on record.
That represents a change of unchanged over ten years.
Over the whole period, cpia quality of public administration rating in Bhutan peaked at 4 1=low to 6=high in 2005 and was at its lowest, 4 1=low to 6=high, in 2005.
That places Bhutan 1st out of 84 countries with data for 2025, putting it in the top 10%.
CPIA quality of public administration rating in Bhutan, year by year
| Year | 1=low to 6=high | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 4 1=low to 6=high | — |
| 2006 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2007 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2008 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 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 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2014 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2015 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2016 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2018 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2020 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2021 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2022 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2023 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2024 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2025 | 4 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 4 1=low to 6=high | 4 1=low to 6=high | 4 1=low to 6=high | 5 |
| 2010s | 4 1=low to 6=high | 4 1=low to 6=high | 4 1=low to 6=high | 10 |
| 2020s | 4 1=low to 6=high | 4 1=low to 6=high | 4 1=low to 6=high | 6 |
Countries ranked near Bhutan
More public sector data for Bhutan
- Arms imports 4.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2021)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per capita 5.16 SIPRI trend indicator values per person (2021)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), gaps filled 4.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2021)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per square kilometre 104.88 SIPRI trend indicator values per square kilometre (2021)
- Tax revenue 12.3% (2020)
- Capital stock, General government, Current prices, Domestic currency 245.49 (2019)
- Taxes on income, profits and capital gains 19.9% (2020)
- Capital stock, General government, Constant prices, Percent of GDP 94.12 (2019)
- Capital stock, General government, Constant prices, Purchasing power 8.39 (2019)
- Taxes on goods and services 17.9% (2020)
Frequently asked questions
- What is cpia quality of public administration rating in Bhutan?
- Cpia quality of public administration rating in Bhutan was 4 1=low to 6=high in 2025, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
- What is the highest cpia quality of public administration rating recorded in Bhutan?
- The highest recorded value was 4 1=low to 6=high in 2005.
- What is the lowest cpia quality of public administration rating recorded in Bhutan?
- The lowest recorded value was 4 1=low to 6=high in 2005.
- How does Bhutan rank for cpia quality of public administration rating?
- Bhutan ranks 1st out of 84 countries with data for 2025.
- Is cpia quality of public administration rating rising or falling in Bhutan?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this Bhutan data come from?
- The figures come from CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as part of CPIA quality of public administration 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
The 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 CPIA Quality of Public Administration criterion covers the core administration defined as the civilian central government (and subnational governments, to the extent that their size or policy responsibilities are significant) excluding health and education personnel, and police. The criterion assesses the functioning of the core administration in three areas: (a) managing its own operations; (b) ensuring quality in policy implementation and regulatory management; and (c) coordinating the larger public sector Human Resources Management regime outside the core administration (de-concentrated and arms-length bodies and subsidiary governments).