Central Africa vs Kazakhstan: SDG indicator 8.8.2 … freedom of association and collective bargaining
SDG indicator 8.8.2 … freedom of association and collective bargaining over time
- Central Africa
- Kazakhstan
How they compare
Kazakhstan currently reports 2.77 against 2.39 in Central Africa, a difference of 0.38.
That makes Kazakhstan's figure about 1.2 times Central Africa's.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2015 it was Central Africa ahead.
Central Africa ranks 58th and Kazakhstan ranks 61st of 83 groups.
Across the 2 decades both report, Central Africa averaged higher in 1 and Kazakhstan in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Central Africa | Kazakhstan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 2.48 | 2.19 | 0.284 | Central Africa |
| 2020s | 2.43 | 2.84 | 0.414 | Kazakhstan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher sdg indicator 8.8.2: level of national compliance with labour rights, Central Africa or Kazakhstan?
- Kazakhstan, at 2.77 against 2.39 in Central Africa as of 2024.
- What is the difference in sdg indicator 8.8.2: level of national compliance with labour rights between Central Africa and Kazakhstan?
- 0.38, with Kazakhstan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Central Africa and Kazakhstan?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2024.
- How do Central Africa and Kazakhstan rank globally for sdg indicator 8.8.2: level of national compliance with labour rights?
- Central Africa ranks 58th and Kazakhstan ranks 61st of 83 groups.
- Where does this data come from?
- International Labour Organization, published as SDG indicator 8.8.2: Level of national compliance with labour rights, freedom of association and collective bargaining. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The indicator measures the level of national compliance with fundamental rights at work (freedom of association and collective bargaining, FACB) for all ILO member states based on six international ILO supervisory body textual sources and also on national legislation. It is based on the coding of textual sources against a list of evaluation criteria and then converting the coding into indicators. The indicator has a range from 0 to 10, with 0 being the best possible score (indicating higher levels of compliance with FACB rights) and 10 the worst (indicating lower levels of compliance with FACB rights). This indicator is not intended as a tool to compare compliance among ILO member States. It should specifically be noted that reporting obligations of an ILO member State to the ILO's supervisory system and thus ILO textual sources are different for ratifying and non‐ratifying ILO member States.