CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Moldova
Moldova: CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public was 2.5 1=low to 6=high in 2019. ▼ Falling
CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Moldova, 2005–2019
Source: CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Measured in 1=low to 6=high.
Analysis
Moldova recorded 2.5 1=low to 6=high for cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in 2019. That is the lowest value across all 15 years on record.
The figure is down 16.7% over ten years.
Over the whole period, cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Moldova peaked at 3.5 1=low to 6=high in 2011 and was at its lowest, 2.5 1=low to 6=high, in 2015.
That places Moldova 48th out of 84 countries with data for 2019, putting it in the middle of the range.
The long-run direction has been consistently falling across the 15 years of available data.
CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Moldova, 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 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +16.7% |
| 2012 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2013 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2014 | 3 1=low to 6=high | -14.3% |
| 2015 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | -16.7% |
| 2016 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2018 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
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 | 2.9 1=low to 6=high | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 10 |
Countries ranked near Moldova
- 48 Angola 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Azerbaijan 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Bangladesh 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Central African Republic 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Democratic Republic of Congo 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Congo 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Guinea 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Honduras 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Kyrgyzstan 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Lao People's Democratic Republic 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Liberia 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Madagascar 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Nepal 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Niger 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Tajikistan 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Togo 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Uganda 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Zambia 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
- 48 Zimbabwe 2.5 1=low to 6=high compare
More public sector data for Moldova
- Military expenditure (current USD), per capita 46.09 current USD per person (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per unit of GDP 0.0061 current USD per US$ of GDP (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), annual growth rate 17.34 % change on previous year (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), gaps filled 110.73 million current USD (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per square kilometre 2,866 current USD per square kilometre (2023)
- Tax revenue 18.6% (2023)
- Capital stock, General government, Current prices, Domestic currency 124.55 (2019)
- Taxes on income, profits and capital gains 12.4% (2023)
- Capital stock, General government, Constant prices, Percent of GDP 25.94 (2019)
- Capital stock, General government, Constant prices, Purchasing power 10.33 (2019)
Frequently asked questions
- What is cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Moldova?
- Cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Moldova was 2.5 1=low to 6=high in 2019, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
- What is the highest cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public recorded in Moldova?
- The highest recorded value was 3.5 1=low to 6=high in 2011.
- What is the lowest cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public recorded in Moldova?
- The lowest recorded value was 2.5 1=low to 6=high in 2015.
- How does Moldova rank for cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public?
- Moldova ranks 48th out of 84 countries with data for 2019.
- Is cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public rising or falling in Moldova?
- Over the last ten years it is down 16.7%. The long-run trend across the full record is falling.
- Where does this Moldova 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 — 15 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 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.