Costa Rica vs Latvia: Gender gap in the completion rate, upper secondary, urban — Value
Gender gap in the completion rate, upper secondary, urban — Value over time
- Costa Rica
- Latvia
How they compare
Costa Rica currently reports -7.6 % against -8.24 % in Latvia, a difference of 0.64 %.
The two have swapped places 9 times across 16 shared years of data; in 2006 it was Latvia ahead.
Costa Rica ranks 61st and Latvia ranks 64th of 73 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Costa Rica averaged higher in 1 and Latvia in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Costa Rica | Latvia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | -8.55 % | -8.63 % | 0.0775 % | Costa Rica |
| 2010s | -9.79 % | -7.45 % | 2.34 % | Latvia |
| 2020s | -5.4 % | -0.33 % | 5.07 % | Latvia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher gender gap in the completion rate, upper secondary, urban — value, Costa Rica or Latvia?
- Costa Rica, at -7.6 % against -8.24 % in Latvia as of 2023.
- What is the difference in gender gap in the completion rate, upper secondary, urban — value between Costa Rica and Latvia?
- 0.64 %, with Costa Rica ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Costa Rica and Latvia?
- 16 years are reported by both, from 2006 to 2021.
- How do Costa Rica and Latvia rank globally for gender gap in the completion rate, upper secondary, urban — value?
- Costa Rica ranks 61st and Latvia ranks 64th of 73 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Gender gap in the completion rate, upper secondary, urban — Value — All age ranges or no breakdown by age — Urban. 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.