Brazil vs Kyrgyzstan: Coverage of social safety net programs in 3rd quintile
Coverage of social safety net programs in 3rd quintile over time
- Brazil
- Kyrgyzstan
How they compare
Brazil currently reports 22.3% against 10.4% in Kyrgyzstan, a difference of 11.9%.
That makes Brazil's figure about 2.1 times Kyrgyzstan's.
Across all 9 years both countries report, Brazil has been ahead every year.
Brazil ranks 31st and Kyrgyzstan ranks 32nd of 39 countries.
Brazil has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Brazil | Kyrgyzstan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 19.8% | 6.3% | 13.4% | Brazil |
| 2010s | 15.6% | 9.9% | 5.7% | Brazil |
| 2020s | 58.9% | 10.4% | 48.5% | Brazil |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher coverage of social safety net programs in 3rd quintile, Brazil or Kyrgyzstan?
- Brazil, at 22.3% against 10.4% in Kyrgyzstan as of 2022.
- What is the difference in coverage of social safety net programs in 3rd quintile between Brazil and Kyrgyzstan?
- 11.9%, with Brazil ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Brazil and Kyrgyzstan?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2006 to 2020.
- How do Brazil and Kyrgyzstan rank globally for coverage of social safety net programs in 3rd quintile?
- Brazil ranks 31st and Kyrgyzstan ranks 32nd of 39 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- ASPIRE: The Atlas of Social Protection - Indicators of Resilience and Equity, World Bank (WB), published as Coverage of social safety net programs in 3rd quintile (% of population). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Coverage of social safety net programs shows the percentage of population participating in cash transfers and last resort programs, noncontributory social pensions, other cash transfers programs (child, family and orphan allowances, birth and death grants, disability benefits, and other allowances), conditional cash transfers, in-kind food transfers (food stamps and vouchers, food rations, supplementary feeding, and emergency food distribution), school feeding, other social assistance programs (housing allowances, scholarships, fee waivers, health subsidies, and other social assistance) and public works programs (cash for work and food for work). Estimates include both direct and indirect beneficiaries.