Where does Rwanda stand on Coordination?
This page reads one capability from the published data and is recomputed with every release. It separates what Rwanda does, which makes the score, from what the country has, which sits beside the score, and places the country among the 10 countries at the nearest income. The text describes the data and recommends no policy.
What does the score rest on?
Confidence is in the thin band, so the score rests on little evidence.
The Coordination score is the equal-weight mean of the positions of three indicators on a 0 to 100 scale that every country sets together. Confidence measures the evidence behind the score and sits beside it as a second number.
The Coordination score tracks GDP per capita at r = 0.53 across 123 countries.
Observed indicators
- Position on the scale68.8Peer median75.510 peers with a value
Border compliance time to export
83.3 hours
World Bank (TRD.ACRS.BRDR.EXPT.BRDR.COMP.HR.DB1619), 2019
- Position on the scale98.7Peer median73.210 peers with a value
Budget execution fidelity
101 percentage points from approved budget
World Bank (GF.XPD.BUDG.ZS), 2024
- Position on the scale35.9Peer median71.410 peers with a value
Civil society strength
0.4 index 0-1
V-Dem (v2x_cspart), 2025
No comparable source yet, so lowering confidence: university-industry collaboration and public-private collaboration.
No condition is published beside Coordination in this release, so the page shows only the indicators that make the score.
Where does Rwanda sit among its peers?
The peers are the 10 countries at the nearest income. Income is GDP per capita at purchasing power parity, in constant international dollars, for the latest year the World Bank publishes, and distance is measured on a log scale, where half and double are equally far. No country is picked by hand, and the set changes when the data does.
In this release peer income runs from US$ 2,721 to US$ 4,456, and Rwanda has US$ 3,559 (2025).
- Solid ring: usable or good evidence
- Broken ring: thin evidence, opening further as confidence falls
- The shaded band is the middle half of the set and the line inside it is the median.
- Uganda: 81.7
- Ethiopia: 80.3
- Tanzania: 78.8
- Papua New Guinea: 78.3
- Zambia: 74.8
- Lesotho: 71.2
- Mali: 69.4
- Rwanda: 67.8
- Guinea: 64.5
- Guinea-Bissau: 56.3
- Gambia: 53.7
- ZambiaUS$ 3,742, 202574.8
- TanzaniaUS$ 3,821, 202578.8
- GambiaUS$ 3,167, 202553.7
- EthiopiaUS$ 3,095, 202580.3
- GuineaUS$ 4,217, 202564.5
- MaliUS$ 2,993, 202569.4
- UgandaUS$ 2,980, 202581.7
- Papua New GuineaUS$ 4,456, 202578.3
- Guinea-BissauUS$ 2,814, 202556.3
- LesothoUS$ 2,721, 202571.2
What separates Rwanda from its peers?
Rwanda scores 67.8 on Coordination, below the median of the 10 scored peers, which is 73.
Indicators placed above the peer median on the scale: budget execution fidelity.
Indicators placed below the peer median on the scale: border compliance time to export and civil society strength.
Each sentence compares one position with one median. Why a difference exists, and what to do about it, lie outside this data.
What this reading does not show
- A national score is a coarse proxy. A capability forms in firms, cities, networks and groups below the level of the country, and a national average only describes the conditions they work in.
- Peers share income and nothing else. Size, production structure, region and political regime are outside the rule, and a set of 10 countries can change with any revision to GDP.
- An r reads the whole set at once and says nothing about one country alone. A correlation does not show a cause either.
- The known artefacts that bear on Coordination, described on the limits page: artefact A3, artefact A6, artefact A9, artefact A12.
- And the ones every score in the benchmark carries: artefact A8, artefact A10.