Georgia vs Poland: Coverage of social safety net programs in 3rd quintile
Coverage of social safety net programs in 3rd quintile over time
- Georgia
- Poland
How they compare
Georgia currently reports 64.1% against 53.0% in Poland, a difference of 11.1%.
That makes Georgia's figure about 1.2 times Poland's.
Across all 6 years both countries report, Georgia has been ahead every year.
Georgia ranks 11th and Poland ranks 14th of 39 countries.
Georgia has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher coverage of social safety net programs in 3rd quintile, Georgia or Poland?
- Georgia, at 64.1% against 53.0% in Poland as of 2021.
- What is the difference in coverage of social safety net programs in 3rd quintile between Georgia and Poland?
- 11.1%, with Georgia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Georgia and Poland?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2011 to 2019.
- How do Georgia and Poland rank globally for coverage of social safety net programs in 3rd quintile?
- Georgia ranks 11th and Poland ranks 14th 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.