CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Small states
Small states: CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public was 3.38 1=low to 6=high in 2025. ▬ Flat
CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Small states, 2005–2025
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 Small states stood at 3.38 1=low to 6=high. That is the lowest value across all 21 years on record.
The figure is down 0.6% on the previous year and down 3.6% over ten years.
Over the whole period, cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Small states peaked at 3.57 1=low to 6=high in 2021 and was at its lowest, 3.38 1=low to 6=high, in 2025.
That places Small states 5th out of 42 groups with data for 2025, putting it in the top 10%.
CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Small states, year by year
| Year | 1=low to 6=high | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 3.44 1=low to 6=high | — |
| 2006 | 3.38 1=low to 6=high | -1.6% |
| 2007 | 3.41 1=low to 6=high | +0.9% |
| 2008 | 3.44 1=low to 6=high | +0.9% |
| 2009 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +1.7% |
| 2010 | 3.47 1=low to 6=high | -0.8% |
| 2011 | 3.45 1=low to 6=high | -0.7% |
| 2012 | 3.48 1=low to 6=high | +0.8% |
| 2013 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.7% |
| 2014 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2015 | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2016 | 3.48 1=low to 6=high | -0.7% |
| 2017 | 3.45 1=low to 6=high | -0.7% |
| 2018 | 3.48 1=low to 6=high | +0.7% |
| 2019 | 3.52 1=low to 6=high | +1.4% |
| 2020 | 3.55 1=low to 6=high | +0.6% |
| 2021 | 3.57 1=low to 6=high | +0.7% |
| 2022 | 3.57 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2023 | 3.57 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2024 | 3.4 1=low to 6=high | -4.9% |
| 2025 | 3.38 1=low to 6=high | -0.6% |
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.43 1=low to 6=high | 3.38 1=low to 6=high | 3.5 1=low to 6=high | 5 |
| 2010s | 3.48 1=low to 6=high | 3.45 1=low to 6=high | 3.52 1=low to 6=high | 10 |
| 2020s | 3.51 1=low to 6=high | 3.38 1=low to 6=high | 3.57 1=low to 6=high | 6 |
Countries ranked near Small states
More public sector data for Small states
- Arms imports 162.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2021)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per capita 8.25 SIPRI trend indicator values per person (2021)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), gaps filled 162.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2021)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per square kilometre 215.46 SIPRI trend indicator values per square kilometre (2021)
- Tax revenue 20.5% (2019)
- Taxes on income, profits and capital gains 24.1% (2022)
- Taxes on goods and services 33.4% (2022)
- Net investment in nonfinancial assets 3.0% (2019)
- Net lending (+) / net borrowing (-) -2.2% (2019)
- Interest payments 1.8% (2022)
Frequently asked questions
- What is cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Small states?
- Cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public in Small states was 3.38 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 Small states?
- The highest recorded value was 3.57 1=low to 6=high in 2021.
- What is the lowest cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public recorded in Small states?
- The lowest recorded value was 3.38 1=low to 6=high in 2025.
- How does Small states rank for cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public?
- Small states ranks 5th out of 42 groups with data for 2025.
- Is cpia transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public rising or falling in Small states?
- Over the last ten years it is down 3.6%. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this 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).
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.