Sep 28th, 2007, in News, by Patung
Political stability and rule of law conditions, 1996 to 2006.
According to this World Bank collation of figures general governance conditions in the country have declined since 1996, – even in the area of corruption but except in the level of participatory democracy, – when Indonesia was ruled by General Suharto, although the trend in the last few years, since president Yudhoyono has been in office, is upwards.
The scores are found in the “percentile rank” colored column, 100 being best, and with anything in the 0-10 range likely in the Third World “basket case” category. The data sources are gathered from a variety of survey institutes, think tanks, non-governmental organizations, and international organizations. [worldbank]
Governance
Indicator |
Sources |
Year |
Percentile
Rank
(0-100) |
Governance
Score
(-2.5 to +2.5) |
Standard Error |
Voice and Accountability
the extent to which a country’s citizens are able to participate in selecting their government, as well as freedom of expression, freedom of association, and a free media. |
|
2006 |
41.3 |
-0.25 |
0.14 |
|
|
2005 |
45.2 |
-0.16 |
0.15 |
|
|
2004 |
37.0 |
-0.40 |
0.16 |
|
|
2003 |
36.5 |
-0.45 |
0.15 |
|
|
2002 |
36.1 |
-0.48 |
0.17 |
|
|
2000 |
35.1 |
-0.41 |
0.22 |
|
|
1998 |
16.3 |
-1.08 |
0.23 |
|
|
1996 |
15.8 |
-1.13 |
0.24 |
Political Stability
the perceptions of the likelihood that the government will be destabilized or overthrown by unconstitutional or violent means, including domestic violence and terrorism. |
|
2006 |
14.9 |
-1.17 |
0.22 |
|
|
2005 |
11.5 |
-1.29 |
0.21 |
|
|
2004 |
7.2 |
-1.57 |
0.22 |
|
|
2003 |
3.4 |
-2.03 |
0.23 |
|
|
2002 |
8.2 |
-1.62 |
0.22 |
|
|
2000 |
6.3 |
-1.76 |
0.23 |
|
|
1998 |
9.1 |
-1.43 |
0.24 |
|
|
1996 |
21.6 |
-0.81 |
0.29 |
Government Effectiveness
the quality of public services, the quality of the civil service and the degree of its independence from political pressures, the quality of policy formulation and implementation, and the credibility of the government’s commitment to such policies. |
|
2006 |
40.8 |
-0.38 |
0.15 |
|
|
2005 |
36.5 |
-0.47 |
0.14 |
|
|
2004 |
38.9 |
-0.43 |
0.16 |
|
|
2003 |
31.8 |
-0.58 |
0.15 |
|
|
2002 |
32.7 |
-0.56 |
0.15 |
|
|
2000 |
35.1 |
-0.50 |
0.15 |
|
|
1998 |
20.9 |
-0.78 |
0.15 |
|
|
1996 |
64.0 |
+0.14 |
0.23 |
Regulatory Quality
the ability of the government to formulate and implement sound policies and regulations that permit and promote private sector development. |
|
2006 |
43.4 |
-0.26 |
0.17 |
|
|
2005 |
34.6 |
-0.48 |
0.17 |
|
|
2004 |
34.1 |
-0.50 |
0.17 |
|
|
2003 |
27.8 |
-0.61 |
0.16 |
|
|
2002 |
25.4 |
-0.68 |
0.19 |
|
|
2000 |
35.6 |
-0.33 |
0.20 |
|
|
1998 |
44.9 |
+0.02 |
0.26 |
|
|
1996 |
63.9 |
+0.43 |
0.23 |
Rule of Law
the extent to which agents have confidence in and abide by the rules of society, in particular the quality of contract enforcement, the police, and the courts, as well as the likelihood of crime and violence. |
|
2006 |
23.3 |
-0.82 |
0.13 |
|
|
2005 |
21.4 |
-0.86 |
0.13 |
|
|
2004 |
21.9 |
-0.84 |
0.13 |
|
|
2003 |
18.1 |
-0.97 |
0.13 |
|
|
2002 |
17.6 |
-1.00 |
0.13 |
|
|
2000 |
24.8 |
-0.82 |
0.13 |
|
|
1998 |
22.9 |
-0.77 |
0.16 |
|
|
1996 |
39.5 |
-0.36 |
0.19 |
Control of Corruption
the extent to which public power is exercised for private gain, including petty and grand forms of corruption, as well as “capture” of the state by elites and private interests. |
|
2006 |
23.3 |
-0.77 |
0.13 |
|
|
2005 |
19.9 |
-0.87 |
0.12 |
|
|
2004 |
17.0 |
-0.93 |
0.13 |
|
|
2003 |
14.6 |
-0.97 |
0.13 |
|
|
2002 |
6.8 |
-1.17 |
0.13 |
|
|
2000 |
11.2 |
-1.01 |
0.14 |
|
|
1998 |
10.7 |
-1.11 |
0.15 |
|
|
1996 |
31.1 |
-0.55 |
0.20 |
Comparing Indonesia’s 2006 score to the average score for the other countries in south east Asia, such as Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, etc.
Governance
Indicator |
Sources |
Year |
Percentile
Rank
(0-100) |
Regional Average,
Percentile |
Governance
Score
(-2.5 to +2.5) |
Standard Error |
| Voice and Accountability |
|
2006 |
41.3 |
49.4 |
-0.25 |
0.14 |
| Political Stability |
|
2006 |
14.9 |
60.4 |
-1.17 |
0.22 |
| Government Effectiveness |
|
2006 |
40.8 |
47.1 |
-0.38 |
0.15 |
| Regulatory Quality |
|
2006 |
43.4 |
47.2 |
-0.26 |
0.17 |
| Rule of Law |
|
2006 |
23.3 |
54.9 |
-0.82 |
0.13 |
| Control of Corruption |
|
2006 |
23.3 |
45.6 |
-0.77 |
0.13 |
Comparing Indonesia’s 2006 score to the average score for the other countries in the same national income bracket (“lower middle income”), such as China, Egypt, Thailand, etc.
Governance
Indicator |
Sources |
Year |
Percentile
Rank
(0-100) |
Income Average,
Percentile |
Governance
Score
(-2.5 to +2.5) |
Standard Error |
| Voice and Accountability |
|
2006 |
41.3 |
38.4 |
-0.25 |
0.14 |
| Political Stability |
|
2006 |
14.9 |
39.3 |
-1.17 |
0.22 |
| Government Effectiveness |
|
2006 |
40.8 |
37.8 |
-0.38 |
0.15 |
| Regulatory Quality |
|
2006 |
43.4 |
36.6 |
-0.26 |
0.17 |
| Rule of Law |
|
2006 |
23.3 |
37.6 |
-0.82 |
0.13 |
| Control of Corruption |
|
2006 |
23.3 |
37.7 |
-0.77 |
0.13 |
iamisaid says:
Raden says:
Peter says:
Political Stability 14.9?? That’s ridiculous. The risk the government is “destabilized or overthrown by unconstitutional or violent means” is pretty low. Anyway, I prepare Indonesia’s “instability” to Thailand’s, Myanmar’s, Malaysia’s stability (i.e. stable but highly undemocratic).