Panama vs Thailand: Gender gap in the completion rate, lower secondary, rural — Value
Gender gap in the completion rate, lower secondary, rural — Value over time
- Panama
- Thailand
How they compare
Panama currently reports -6.8 % against -7.25 % in Thailand, a difference of 0.45 %.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 5 shared years of data; in 2000 it was Thailand ahead.
Panama ranks 62nd and Thailand ranks 63rd of 72 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Panama averaged higher in 1 and Thailand in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Panama | Thailand | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | -15.9 % | -7.28 % | 8.62 % | Thailand |
| 2010s | -6.67 % | -15.12 % | 8.45 % | Panama |
| 2020s | -7.9 % | -7.25 % | 0.65 % | Thailand |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher gender gap in the completion rate, lower secondary, rural — value, Panama or Thailand?
- Panama, at -6.8 % against -7.25 % in Thailand as of 2023.
- What is the difference in gender gap in the completion rate, lower secondary, rural — value between Panama and Thailand?
- 0.45 %, with Panama ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Panama and Thailand?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2022.
- How do Panama and Thailand rank globally for gender gap in the completion rate, lower secondary, rural — value?
- Panama ranks 62nd and Thailand ranks 63rd of 72 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Gender gap in the completion rate, lower secondary, rural — Value — All age ranges or no breakdown by age — Rural. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Suite of Gender Indicators presents a set of indicators relevant to agrifood systems that are disaggregated by sex, with the aim of highlighting gender differences across agrifood systems. The initial set of indicators is based on those used in FAO’s 2023 Status of Women in Agrifood Systems (SWAFS) report and on the recommendations of an expert consultation held in December 2023, and covers key dimensions including economic participation, governance, agency, social norms, assets and services, education, health, and nutrition. Indicator selection was informed by expert judgment and by the availability of data with sufficient geographic and temporal coverage to enable meaningful comparisons across regions and over time. While most indicators are produced and published by FAO and other international organizations, the objective of this domain is to provide a one-stop shop for sex-disaggregated data on agrifood systems.