Ecuador vs Turkey: Coverage of social safety net programs in richest quintile (%)
Coverage of social safety net programs in richest quintile (%) over time
- Ecuador
- Turkey
How they compare
Ecuador currently reports 2.4% against 2.1% in Turkey, a difference of 0.3%.
That makes Ecuador's figure about 1.1 times Turkey's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2008 it was Turkey ahead.
Ecuador ranks 34th and Turkey ranks 35th of 39 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Ecuador averaged higher in 1 and Turkey in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Ecuador | Turkey | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 18.4% | 21.7% | 3.3% | Turkey |
| 2010s | 23.5% | 2.8% | 20.7% | Ecuador |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher coverage of social safety net programs in richest quintile, Ecuador or Turkey?
- Ecuador, at 2.4% against 2.1% in Turkey as of 2022.
- What is the difference in coverage of social safety net programs in richest quintile between Ecuador and Turkey?
- 0.3%, with Ecuador ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Turkey?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2008 to 2019.
- How do Ecuador and Turkey rank globally for coverage of social safety net programs in richest quintile?
- Ecuador ranks 34th and Turkey ranks 35th 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 richest 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.