Jamaica vs Papua New Guinea: Physical Integrity Rights Score
Physical Integrity Rights Score over time
- Jamaica
- Papua New Guinea
How they compare
Papua New Guinea currently reports 0.0577 against 0.0359 in Jamaica, a difference of 0.0218.
That makes Papua New Guinea's figure about 1.6 times Jamaica's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 45 shared years of data; in 1975 it was Papua New Guinea ahead.
Jamaica ranks 129th and Papua New Guinea ranks 127th of 193 countries.
Across the 5 decades both report, Jamaica averaged higher in 1 and Papua New Guinea in 4.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Jamaica | Papua New Guinea | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1970s | 0.2851 | 1.45 | 1.17 | Papua New Guinea |
| 1980s | 0.3985 | 0.902 | 0.5035 | Papua New Guinea |
| 1990s | -0.1102 | -1.04 | 0.9313 | Jamaica |
| 2000s | -0.2449 | 0.208 | 0.4528 | Papua New Guinea |
| 2010s | -0.1493 | 0.4099 | 0.5592 | Papua New Guinea |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher physical integrity rights score, Jamaica or Papua New Guinea?
- Papua New Guinea, at 0.0577 against 0.0359 in Jamaica as of 2019.
- What is the difference in physical integrity rights score between Jamaica and Papua New Guinea?
- 0.0218, with Papua New Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Jamaica and Papua New Guinea?
- 45 years are reported by both, from 1975 to 2019.
- How do Jamaica and Papua New Guinea rank globally for physical integrity rights score?
- Jamaica ranks 129th and Papua New Guinea ranks 127th of 193 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Fariss et al. (2020) β processed by Our World in Data, published as Physical Integrity Rights Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score captures the extent to which citizens are protected from government killings, torture, political imprisonments, extrajudicial executions, mass killings and disappearances. Large positive scores mean abuses are rare relative to other countries and years, large negative scores that abuses are relatively widespread.