Jordan vs Nepal: Physical Integrity Rights Score
Jordan
0.55
in 2019
Nepal
0.4996
in 2019
Jordan rank
106th
Nepal rank
108th
Physical Integrity Rights Score over time
- Jordan
- Nepal
How they compare
Jordan currently reports 0.55 against 0.4996 in Nepal, a difference of 0.0504.
That makes Jordan's figure about 1.1 times Nepal's.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 74 shared years of data; in 1946 it was Nepal ahead.
Jordan ranks 106th and Nepal ranks 108th of 193 countries.
Across the 8 decades both report, Jordan averaged higher in 3 and Nepal in 5.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Jordan | Nepal | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1940s | -0.0859 | 0.3733 | 0.4592 | Nepal |
| 1950s | -0.2854 | 0.2437 | 0.5291 | Nepal |
| 1960s | -0.5449 | 0.0026 | 0.5475 | Nepal |
| 1970s | -0.5275 | -0.3307 | 0.1968 | Nepal |
| 1980s | -0.2454 | -0.5618 | 0.3164 | Jordan |
| 1990s | 0.097 | -1.11 | 1.21 | Jordan |
| 2000s | 0.1671 | -1.63 | 1.79 | Jordan |
| 2010s | 0.1368 | 0.2213 | 0.0845 | Nepal |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher physical integrity rights score, Jordan or Nepal?
- Jordan, at 0.55 against 0.4996 in Nepal as of 2019.
- What is the difference in physical integrity rights score between Jordan and Nepal?
- 0.0504, with Jordan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Jordan and Nepal?
- 74 years are reported by both, from 1946 to 2019.
- How do Jordan and Nepal rank globally for physical integrity rights score?
- Jordan ranks 106th and Nepal ranks 108th of 193 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Fariss et al. (2020) – 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.