CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Other small states

Other small states: CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public was 3.06 1=low to 6=high in 2025. ▬ Flat

Latest (2025)
3.06 1=low to 6=high
Change on year
down 2.0%
Rank
9th
of 42 groups
All-time high
3.43 1=low to 6=high
in 2020
All-time low
3.06 1=low to 6=high
in 2025
Years of data
21
2005–2025

CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Other small states, 2005–2025

01232005201520252005: 3.3 1=low to 6=high2006: 3.2 1=low to 6=high2007: 3.2 1=low to 6=high2008: 3.2 1=low to 6=high2009: 3.4 1=low to 6=high2010: 3.4 1=low to 6=high2011: 3.3 1=low to 6=high2012: 3.3 1=low to 6=high2013: 3.3 1=low to 6=high2014: 3.3 1=low to 6=high2015: 3.3 1=low to 6=high2016: 3.2 1=low to 6=high2017: 3.1 1=low to 6=high2018: 3.2 1=low to 6=high2019: 3.4 1=low to 6=high2020: 3.4 1=low to 6=high2021: 3.4 1=low to 6=high2022: 3.4 1=low to 6=high2023: 3.4 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 transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Other small states is 3.06 1=low to 6=high, measured in 2025. That is the lowest value across all 21 years on record.

Compared with earlier readings it is down 2.0% on the previous year and down 6.8% over ten years.

Over the whole period, cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Other small states peaked at 3.43 1=low to 6=high in 2020 and was at its lowest, 3.06 1=low to 6=high, in 2025.

Other small states ranks 9th of 42 groups on this measure, in the top quarter.

CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Other small states, year by year

Annual values for CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector rating (1=low to 6=high) in Other small states, 2005 to 2025.
Year 1=low to 6=high Change
2005 3.33 1=low to 6=high
2006 3.21 1=low to 6=high -3.6%
2007 3.21 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2008 3.21 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2009 3.36 1=low to 6=high +4.4%
2010 3.36 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2011 3.29 1=low to 6=high -2.1%
2012 3.29 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2013 3.29 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2014 3.29 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2015 3.29 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2016 3.21 1=low to 6=high -2.2%
2017 3.14 1=low to 6=high -2.2%
2018 3.21 1=low to 6=high +2.3%
2019 3.36 1=low to 6=high +4.4%
2020 3.43 1=low to 6=high +2.1%
2021 3.36 1=low to 6=high -2.1%
2022 3.36 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2023 3.36 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2024 3.12 1=low to 6=high -6.9%
2025 3.06 1=low to 6=high -2.0%

Averages by decade

DecadeAverage LowestHighest Years
2000s 3.27 1=low to 6=high 3.21 1=low to 6=high 3.36 1=low to 6=high 5
2010s 3.27 1=low to 6=high 3.14 1=low to 6=high 3.36 1=low to 6=high 10
2020s 3.28 1=low to 6=high 3.06 1=low to 6=high 3.43 1=low to 6=high 6

Countries ranked near Other small states

  1. 11 Armenia 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  2. 11 Benin 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  3. 11 Fiji 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  4. 11 Georgia 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  5. 11 India 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  6. 11 Kenya 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  7. 11 Kiribati 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  8. 11 Kosovo 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  9. 11 Marshall Islands 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  10. 11 Micronesia, Federated States of 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  11. 11 Rwanda 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  12. 11 Senegal 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  13. 11 Tonga 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare
  14. 11 Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) 3.5 1=low to 6=high compare

See the full ranking of 127 places →

More public sector data for Other small states

All data for Other small states →

Frequently asked questions

What is cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Other small states?
Cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Other small states was 3.06 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 Other small states?
The highest recorded value was 3.43 1=low to 6=high in 2020.
What is the lowest cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public recorded in Other small states?
The lowest recorded value was 3.06 1=low to 6=high in 2025.
How does Other small states rank for cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public?
Other small states ranks 9th out of 42 groups with data for 2025.
Is cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public rising or falling in Other small states?
Over the last ten years it is down 6.8%. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
Where does this Other small states 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 — 21 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 Other small states. Statizoid, drawing on CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 06 September 2026, from https://public-sector.statizoid.com/stat/cpia-transparency-accountability-and-corruption-in-the-public-sector-rating-1-low-to-6/other-small-states/

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/other-small-states/">CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Other small states</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
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 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.