Afghanistan - Country Policy and Institutional Assessment
CPIA business regulatory environment rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA business regulatory environment rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 2.00 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 2.50 in 2016 and a minimum value of 2.00 in 2017.
Definition: Business regulatory environment assesses the extent to which the legal, regulatory, and policy environments help or hinder private businesses in investing, creating jobs, and becoming more productive.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 2.50 |
| 2007 | 2.50 |
| 2008 | 2.50 |
| 2009 | 2.50 |
| 2010 | 2.50 |
| 2011 | 2.50 |
| 2012 | 2.50 |
| 2013 | 2.50 |
| 2014 | 2.50 |
| 2015 | 2.50 |
| 2016 | 2.50 |
| 2017 | 2.00 |
| 2018 | 2.00 |
| 2019 | 2.00 |
| 2020 | 2.00 |
CPIA debt policy rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA debt policy rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 2.50 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 3.50 in 2009 and a minimum value of 2.50 in 2010.
Definition: Debt policy assesses whether the debt management strategy is conducive to minimizing budgetary risks and ensuring long-term debt sustainability.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 3.00 |
| 2007 | 3.00 |
| 2008 | 3.00 |
| 2009 | 3.50 |
| 2010 | 2.50 |
| 2011 | 2.50 |
| 2012 | 2.50 |
| 2013 | 2.50 |
| 2014 | 3.00 |
| 2015 | 3.00 |
| 2016 | 2.50 |
| 2017 | 2.50 |
| 2018 | 2.50 |
| 2019 | 2.50 |
| 2020 | 2.50 |
CPIA economic management cluster average (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA economic management cluster average (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 3.00 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 3.33 in 2009 and a minimum value of 3.00 in 2010.
Definition: The economic management cluster includes macroeconomic management, fiscal policy, and debt policy.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 3.33 |
| 2007 | 3.17 |
| 2008 | 3.20 |
| 2009 | 3.33 |
| 2010 | 3.00 |
| 2011 | 3.00 |
| 2012 | 3.00 |
| 2013 | 3.00 |
| 2014 | 3.00 |
| 2015 | 3.00 |
| 2016 | 3.00 |
| 2017 | 3.00 |
| 2018 | 3.00 |
| 2019 | 3.00 |
| 2020 | 3.00 |
CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA policy and institutions for environmental sustainability rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 2.50 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 2.50 in 2020 and a minimum value of 2.00 in 2006.
Definition: Policy and institutions for environmental sustainability assess the extent to which environmental policies foster the protection and sustainable use of natural resources and the management of pollution.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 2.00 |
| 2007 | 2.00 |
| 2008 | 2.50 |
| 2009 | 2.50 |
| 2010 | 2.50 |
| 2011 | 2.50 |
| 2012 | 2.50 |
| 2013 | 2.50 |
| 2014 | 2.50 |
| 2015 | 2.50 |
| 2016 | 2.50 |
| 2017 | 2.50 |
| 2018 | 2.50 |
| 2019 | 2.50 |
| 2020 | 2.50 |
CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 3.50 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 3.50 in 2020 and a minimum value of 3.00 in 2006.
Definition: Quality of budgetary and financial management assesses the extent to which there is a comprehensive and credible budget linked to policy priorities, effective financial management systems, and timely and accurate accounting and fiscal reporting, including timely and audited public accounts.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 3.00 |
| 2007 | 3.00 |
| 2008 | 3.00 |
| 2009 | 3.50 |
| 2010 | 3.50 |
| 2011 | 3.50 |
| 2012 | 3.50 |
| 2013 | 3.50 |
| 2014 | 3.50 |
| 2015 | 3.50 |
| 2016 | 3.50 |
| 2017 | 3.50 |
| 2018 | 3.50 |
| 2019 | 3.50 |
| 2020 | 3.50 |
CPIA financial sector rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA financial sector rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 1.50 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 2.50 in 2009 and a minimum value of 1.50 in 2020.
Definition: Financial sector assesses the structure of the financial sector and the policies and regulations that affect it.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 2.00 |
| 2007 | 2.00 |
| 2008 | 2.50 |
| 2009 | 2.50 |
| 2010 | 2.00 |
| 2011 | 2.00 |
| 2012 | 2.00 |
| 2013 | 2.00 |
| 2014 | 2.00 |
| 2015 | 2.00 |
| 2016 | 2.00 |
| 2017 | 2.00 |
| 2018 | 2.00 |
| 2019 | 2.00 |
| 2020 | 1.50 |
CPIA fiscal policy rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA fiscal policy rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 3.00 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 3.00 in 2020 and a minimum value of 2.50 in 2014.
Definition: Fiscal policy assesses the short- and medium-term sustainability of fiscal policy (taking into account monetary and exchange rate policy and the sustainability of the public debt) and its impact on growth.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 3.00 |
| 2007 | 3.00 |
| 2008 | 3.00 |
| 2009 | 3.00 |
| 2010 | 3.00 |
| 2011 | 3.00 |
| 2012 | 3.00 |
| 2013 | 3.00 |
| 2014 | 2.50 |
| 2015 | 2.50 |
| 2016 | 3.00 |
| 2017 | 3.00 |
| 2018 | 3.00 |
| 2019 | 3.00 |
| 2020 | 3.00 |
CPIA gender equality rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA gender equality rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 1.50 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 2.00 in 2012 and a minimum value of 1.50 in 2013.
Definition: Gender equality assesses the extent to which the country has installed institutions and programs to enforce laws and policies that promote equal access for men and women in education, health, the economy, and protection under law.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 2.00 |
| 2007 | 2.00 |
| 2008 | 2.00 |
| 2009 | 2.00 |
| 2010 | 2.00 |
| 2011 | 2.00 |
| 2012 | 2.00 |
| 2013 | 1.50 |
| 2014 | 1.50 |
| 2015 | 1.50 |
| 2016 | 1.50 |
| 2017 | 1.50 |
| 2018 | 1.50 |
| 2019 | 1.50 |
| 2020 | 1.50 |
CPIA building human resources rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA building human resources rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 3.50 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 3.50 in 2020 and a minimum value of 3.00 in 2006.
Definition: Building human resources assesses the national policies and public and private sector service delivery that affect the access to and quality of health and education services, including prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 3.00 |
| 2007 | 3.00 |
| 2008 | 3.00 |
| 2009 | 3.00 |
| 2010 | 3.00 |
| 2011 | 3.50 |
| 2012 | 3.50 |
| 2013 | 3.50 |
| 2014 | 3.50 |
| 2015 | 3.50 |
| 2016 | 3.50 |
| 2017 | 3.50 |
| 2018 | 3.50 |
| 2019 | 3.50 |
| 2020 | 3.50 |
IDA resource allocation index (1=low to 6=high)
The value for IDA resource allocation index (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 2.66 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 2.75 in 2009 and a minimum value of 2.50 in 2007.
Definition: IDA Resource Allocation Index is obtained by calculating the average score for each cluster and then by averaging those scores. For each of 16 criteria countries are rated on a scale of 1 (low) to 6 (high).
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 2.61 |
| 2007 | 2.50 |
| 2008 | 2.60 |
| 2009 | 2.75 |
| 2010 | 2.63 |
| 2011 | 2.68 |
| 2012 | 2.68 |
| 2013 | 2.65 |
| 2014 | 2.65 |
| 2015 | 2.69 |
| 2016 | 2.72 |
| 2017 | 2.68 |
| 2018 | 2.68 |
| 2019 | 2.70 |
| 2020 | 2.66 |
CPIA macroeconomic management rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA macroeconomic management rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 3.50 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 4.00 in 2006 and a minimum value of 3.50 in 2007.
Definition: Macroeconomic management assesses the monetary, exchange rate, and aggregate demand policy framework.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 4.00 |
| 2007 | 3.50 |
| 2008 | 3.50 |
| 2009 | 3.50 |
| 2010 | 3.50 |
| 2011 | 3.50 |
| 2012 | 3.50 |
| 2013 | 3.50 |
| 2014 | 3.50 |
| 2015 | 3.50 |
| 2016 | 3.50 |
| 2017 | 3.50 |
| 2018 | 3.50 |
| 2019 | 3.50 |
| 2020 | 3.50 |
CPIA quality of public administration rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA quality of public administration rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 2.50 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 2.50 in 2020 and a minimum value of 2.00 in 2006.
Definition: Quality of public administration assesses the extent to which civilian central government staff is structured to design and implement government policy and deliver services effectively.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 2.00 |
| 2007 | 2.00 |
| 2008 | 2.00 |
| 2009 | 2.00 |
| 2010 | 2.00 |
| 2011 | 2.50 |
| 2012 | 2.50 |
| 2013 | 2.50 |
| 2014 | 2.50 |
| 2015 | 2.50 |
| 2016 | 2.50 |
| 2017 | 2.50 |
| 2018 | 2.50 |
| 2019 | 2.50 |
| 2020 | 2.50 |
CPIA equity of public resource use rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA equity of public resource use rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 3.50 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 3.50 in 2020 and a minimum value of 2.50 in 2006.
Definition: Equity of public resource use assesses the extent to which the pattern of public expenditures and revenue collection affects the poor and is consistent with national poverty reduction priorities.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 2.50 |
| 2007 | 2.50 |
| 2008 | 2.50 |
| 2009 | 3.00 |
| 2010 | 3.00 |
| 2011 | 3.00 |
| 2012 | 3.00 |
| 2013 | 3.00 |
| 2014 | 3.00 |
| 2015 | 3.00 |
| 2016 | 3.00 |
| 2017 | 3.00 |
| 2018 | 3.00 |
| 2019 | 3.50 |
| 2020 | 3.50 |
CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA property rights and rule-based governance rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 2.00 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 2.00 in 2020 and a minimum value of 1.50 in 2006.
Definition: Property rights and rule-based governance assess the extent to which private economic activity is facilitated by an effective legal system and rule-based governance structure in which property and contract rights are reliably respected and enforced.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 1.50 |
| 2007 | 1.50 |
| 2008 | 1.50 |
| 2009 | 1.50 |
| 2010 | 1.50 |
| 2011 | 1.50 |
| 2012 | 1.50 |
| 2013 | 1.50 |
| 2014 | 1.50 |
| 2015 | 1.50 |
| 2016 | 2.00 |
| 2017 | 2.00 |
| 2018 | 2.00 |
| 2019 | 2.00 |
| 2020 | 2.00 |
CPIA social protection rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA social protection rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 2.50 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 2.50 in 2020 and a minimum value of 2.00 in 2006.
Definition: Social protection and labor assess government policies in social protection and labor market regulations that reduce the risk of becoming poor, assist those who are poor to better manage further risks, and ensure a minimal level of welfare to all people.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 2.00 |
| 2007 | 2.00 |
| 2008 | 2.50 |
| 2009 | 2.50 |
| 2010 | 2.50 |
| 2011 | 2.50 |
| 2012 | 2.50 |
| 2013 | 2.50 |
| 2014 | 2.50 |
| 2015 | 2.50 |
| 2016 | 2.50 |
| 2017 | 2.50 |
| 2018 | 2.50 |
| 2019 | 2.50 |
| 2020 | 2.50 |
CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA public sector management and institutions cluster average (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 2.60 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 2.60 in 2020 and a minimum value of 2.20 in 2007.
Definition: The public sector management and institutions cluster includes property rights and rule-based governance, quality of budgetary and financial management, efficiency of revenue mobilization, quality of public administration, and transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 2.30 |
| 2007 | 2.20 |
| 2008 | 2.20 |
| 2009 | 2.40 |
| 2010 | 2.40 |
| 2011 | 2.50 |
| 2012 | 2.50 |
| 2013 | 2.50 |
| 2014 | 2.50 |
| 2015 | 2.50 |
| 2016 | 2.60 |
| 2017 | 2.60 |
| 2018 | 2.60 |
| 2019 | 2.60 |
| 2020 | 2.60 |
CPIA efficiency of revenue mobilization rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA efficiency of revenue mobilization rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 3.00 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 3.00 in 2020 and a minimum value of 2.50 in 2006.
Definition: Efficiency of revenue mobilization assesses the overall pattern of revenue mobilization--not only the de facto tax structure, but also revenue from all sources as actually collected.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 2.50 |
| 2007 | 2.50 |
| 2008 | 2.50 |
| 2009 | 3.00 |
| 2010 | 3.00 |
| 2011 | 3.00 |
| 2012 | 3.00 |
| 2013 | 3.00 |
| 2014 | 3.00 |
| 2015 | 3.00 |
| 2016 | 3.00 |
| 2017 | 3.00 |
| 2018 | 3.00 |
| 2019 | 3.00 |
| 2020 | 3.00 |
CPIA policies for social inclusion/equity cluster average (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA policies for social inclusion/equity cluster average (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 2.70 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 2.70 in 2020 and a minimum value of 2.30 in 2006.
Definition: The policies for social inclusion and equity cluster includes gender equality, equity of public resource use, building human resources, social protection and labor, and policies and institutions for environmental sustainability.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 2.30 |
| 2007 | 2.30 |
| 2008 | 2.50 |
| 2009 | 2.60 |
| 2010 | 2.60 |
| 2011 | 2.70 |
| 2012 | 2.70 |
| 2013 | 2.60 |
| 2014 | 2.60 |
| 2015 | 2.60 |
| 2016 | 2.60 |
| 2017 | 2.60 |
| 2018 | 2.60 |
| 2019 | 2.70 |
| 2020 | 2.70 |
CPIA structural policies cluster average (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA structural policies cluster average (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 2.33 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 2.67 in 2016 and a minimum value of 2.33 in 2007.
Definition: The structural policies cluster includes trade, financial sector, and business regulatory environment.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 2.50 |
| 2007 | 2.33 |
| 2008 | 2.50 |
| 2009 | 2.67 |
| 2010 | 2.50 |
| 2011 | 2.50 |
| 2012 | 2.50 |
| 2013 | 2.50 |
| 2014 | 2.50 |
| 2015 | 2.67 |
| 2016 | 2.67 |
| 2017 | 2.50 |
| 2018 | 2.50 |
| 2019 | 2.50 |
| 2020 | 2.33 |
CPIA trade rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA trade rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 3.50 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 3.50 in 2020 and a minimum value of 2.50 in 2007.
Definition: Trade assesses how the policy framework fosters trade in goods.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 3.00 |
| 2007 | 2.50 |
| 2008 | 2.50 |
| 2009 | 3.00 |
| 2010 | 3.00 |
| 2011 | 3.00 |
| 2012 | 3.00 |
| 2013 | 3.00 |
| 2014 | 3.00 |
| 2015 | 3.50 |
| 2016 | 3.50 |
| 2017 | 3.50 |
| 2018 | 3.50 |
| 2019 | 3.50 |
| 2020 | 3.50 |
CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector rating (1=low to 6=high)
The value for CPIA transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector rating (1=low to 6=high) in Afghanistan was 2.00 as of 2020. As the graph below shows, over the past 14 years this indicator reached a maximum value of 2.50 in 2006 and a minimum value of 2.00 in 2007.
Definition: Transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector assess the extent to which the executive can be held accountable for its use of funds and for the results of its actions by the electorate and by the legislature and judiciary, and the extent to which public employees within the executive are required to account for administrative decisions, use of resources, and results obtained. The three main dimensions assessed here are the accountability of the executive to oversight institutions and of public employees for their performance, access of civil society to information on public affairs, and state capture by narrow vested interests.
Source: World Bank Group, CPIA database (http://www.worldbank.org/ida).
See also:
| Year | Value |
|---|---|
| 2006 | 2.50 |
| 2007 | 2.00 |
| 2008 | 2.00 |
| 2009 | 2.00 |
| 2010 | 2.00 |
| 2011 | 2.00 |
| 2012 | 2.00 |
| 2013 | 2.00 |
| 2014 | 2.00 |
| 2015 | 2.00 |
| 2016 | 2.00 |
| 2017 | 2.00 |
| 2018 | 2.00 |
| 2019 | 2.00 |
| 2020 | 2.00 |
Classification
Topic: Public Sector Indicators
Sub-Topic: Policy & institutions
