Papua New Guinea vs United Arab Emirates: Physical Integrity Rights Score
Physical Integrity Rights Score over time
- Papua New Guinea
- United Arab Emirates
How they compare
United Arab Emirates currently reports 0.0856 against 0.0577 in Papua New Guinea, a difference of 0.0279.
That makes United Arab Emirates's figure about 1.5 times Papua New Guinea's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 45 shared years of data; in 1975 it was United Arab Emirates ahead.
Papua New Guinea ranks 127th and United Arab Emirates ranks 125th of 193 countries.
United Arab Emirates has averaged higher in every one of the 5 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Papua New Guinea | United Arab Emirates | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1970s | 1.45 | 2.04 | 0.5899 | United Arab Emirates |
| 1980s | 0.902 | 1.87 | 0.9707 | United Arab Emirates |
| 1990s | -1.04 | 1.2 | 2.24 | United Arab Emirates |
| 2000s | 0.208 | 1.28 | 1.08 | United Arab Emirates |
| 2010s | 0.4099 | 0.5579 | 0.148 | United Arab Emirates |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher physical integrity rights score, Papua New Guinea or United Arab Emirates?
- United Arab Emirates, at 0.0856 against 0.0577 in Papua New Guinea as of 2019.
- What is the difference in physical integrity rights score between Papua New Guinea and United Arab Emirates?
- 0.0279, with United Arab Emirates ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Papua New Guinea and United Arab Emirates?
- 45 years are reported by both, from 1975 to 2019.
- How do Papua New Guinea and United Arab Emirates rank globally for physical integrity rights score?
- Papua New Guinea ranks 127th and United Arab Emirates ranks 125th 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.