CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Fiji

Fiji: CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public was 3.5 1=low to 6=high in 2025. ▬ Flat

Latest (2025)
3.5 1=low to 6=high
Change on year
unchanged
World rank
11th
of 84 countries
All-time high
3.5 1=low to 6=high
in 2020
All-time low
3.5 1=low to 6=high
in 2020
Years of data
6
2020–2025

CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Fiji, 2020–2025

012342020202220252020: 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 transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Fiji stood at 3.5 1=low to 6=high. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.

The figure is unchanged over ten years.

That places Fiji 11th out of 84 countries with data for 2025, putting it in the top quarter.

CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Fiji, year by year

Annual values for CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector rating (1=low to 6=high) in Fiji, 2020 to 2025.
Year 1=low to 6=high Change
2020 3.5 1=low to 6=high
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%

Countries ranked near Fiji

  1. 11 Armenia 3.5 1=low to 6=high
  2. 11 Benin 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  3. 11 Georgia 3.5 1=low to 6=high
  4. 11 India 3.5 1=low to 6=high
  5. 11 Kenya 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  6. 11 Kiribati 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  7. 11 Kosovo 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  8. 11 Marshall Islands 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  9. 11 Micronesia (country) 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  10. 11 Rwanda 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  11. 11 Senegal 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  12. 11 Tonga 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare

See the full ranking of 126 places →

More public sector data for Fiji

All data for Fiji →

Frequently asked questions

What is cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Fiji?
Cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Fiji was 3.5 1=low to 6=high in 2025, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
What is the highest cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public recorded in Fiji?
The highest recorded value was 3.5 1=low to 6=high in 2020.
What is the lowest cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public recorded in Fiji?
The lowest recorded value was 3.5 1=low to 6=high in 2020.
How does Fiji rank for cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public?
Fiji ranks 11th out of 84 countries with data for 2025.
Is cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public rising or falling in Fiji?
Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
Where does this Fiji data come from?
The figures come from CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as part of CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector rating (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.

Download this data

CSV · JSON — 6 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Fiji. Statizoid, drawing on CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 01 September 2026, from https://public-sector.statizoid.com/stat/cpia-transparency-accountability-and-corruption-in-the-public-sector-rating-1-low-to-6/fiji/

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-transparency-accountability-and-corruption-in-the-public-sector-rating-1-low-to-6/fiji/">CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Fiji</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector 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
126 places, 2,443 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 Transparency, Accountability, and Corruption in the Public Sector criterion assesses the extent to which the executive, legislators, and other high-level officials can be held accountable for their use of funds, administrative decisions, and results obtained. Accountability is generally enhanced by transparency in decision-making, access to relevant and timely information, public and media scrutiny, and by institutional checks (e.g., inspector general, ombudsman, or independent audit) on the authority of the chief executive. The criterion covers four dimensions: (a) the accountability of the executive and other top officials to effective oversight institutions; (b) access of civil society to timely and reliable information on public affairs and public policies, including fiscal information (on public expenditures, revenues, and large contract awards); (c) state capture by narrow vested interests; and (d) integrity in the management of public resources, including aid and natural resource revenues.