Across 182 countries, Alcohol consumption and Regulatory quality rise and fall together at r = +0.53 (on a scale from −1 to +1, where 0 means no link). Comparing only countries with similar income (GDP per person) shrinks it to +0.25, which could easily be chance (q = 0.087, allowing for the many pairs tested, and allowing for countries in the same region being alike). So the first figure mostly shows richer countries differing from poorer ones, not a link between these two things.
Comparing countries across the middle half of alcohol consumption, 1.76 to 8.05 litres per adult per year, regulatory quality is better by 0.761 points at the top of that range than the bottom. Comparing only countries with similar national income, the gap is 0.258 points.
Link before adjusting (r)+0.525p = 2.7e-14 · 182 countries
After adjusting for national income+0.251p = 0.001 · likely range [+0.11, +0.38]
p, allowing for regions0.014standard error 0.073 · 7 regions
Check for luck (q)0.087across 12,497 pairs
How to read these.r runs from −1 (one goes up as the other goes down) to +1 (they rise together), and 0 means no link. Adjusting for national income means comparing countries with the same GDP per person, so differences in wealth can’t explain the link. Income is used in percentage terms, since an extra $1,000 means more to a poor country than to a rich one. p is how likely a link this strong would be if there were really none. Below 0.05 means it is unlikely to be chance. Very small values are written in short form: 1.1e-32 means a decimal point followed by 31 zeros and then 11, so very close to zero. The likely range is where the true figure probably lies, and a range that crosses zero means the link could easily be chance. Countries in the same region tend to resemble each other, so the third figure allows for that, which gives a fairer p. The standard error is the typical size of the error in r. Finally, testing this many pairs means some will look strong by luck alone. A q below 0.05 means this link is unlikely to be one of those.
Alcohol consumption · litres per adult per yearlink with income +0.51 · moderate
Regulatory quality · index (approx. -2.5 to 2.5)link with income +0.83 · proxy
“Link with income” is how closely each measure tracks GDP per person across countries, from −1 to +1.
Every country as a dot
best-fit line line after adjusting
Four ways to measure the link
Method
r
p
Countries
Standard (Pearson), not adjusted
+0.525
2.7e-14
182
By rank (Spearman), not adjusted
+0.513
1.3e-13
182
Standard (Pearson), adjusted for national income
+0.251
0.001
182
By rank (Spearman), adjusted for national income
+0.201
0.007
182
The rank version uses only each country’s place in line, from lowest to highest, so a few extreme countries count for less. The adjusted and unadjusted versions use the same 182 countries: those that report both measures and GDP per person. So the gap between them comes from the adjustment, not from a change in which countries are counted. Drop in the size of r after adjusting: +0.275 (a minus sign means it grew).
How solid is it?
Leaving out one country at a time, r ranges from +0.233 (without LBY) to +0.286 (without BLR). The bar above shows that range on a scale from −1 to +1, with the solid line at the full result. The single country that moves r most: BLR (+0.035).
Within each region
Countries are not separate, unrelated cases, and neighbors share a lot. A link that holds inside each region is far more believable than one that shows up only when comparing regions.
n
r
East Asia & Pacific
27
-0.02
Europe & Central Asia
49
+0.10
Latin America & Caribbean
31
+0.24
Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan & Pakistan
21
+0.07
Sub-Saharan Africa
46
+0.20
By income third
If the link shows up only in the richest third of countries, it is a feature of rich countries, not a general pattern.
n
r
Poorest third
61
+0.22
Middle third
60
+0.30
Richest third
61
+0.25
By largest religious group
Countries grouped by a label they share, such as main religion, rather than by a number. Groups of fewer than twelve countries are not shown. These groups differ in income, region and history all at once. So a gap between them is a place to start asking questions, not an answer.
n
r
Christians
108
+0.16
Muslims
48
+0.18
By last european coloniser
Countries grouped by a label they share, such as main religion, rather than by a number. Groups of fewer than twelve countries are not shown. These groups differ in income, region and history all at once. So a gap between them is a place to start asking questions, not an answer.
n
r
France
25
+0.28
Never a European colony
21
+0.40
Spain
20
-0.15
United Kingdom
63
+0.37
Without outliers (countries far outside the middle half of countries on either measure, by more than one and a half times the width of that middle half): r = +0.251 after dropping 0 countries.
Two series, one country
Both measures over the years for one country you pick. The two charts are stacked so they share only the years along the bottom.
Loading…
Over time, within countries
Everything above compares countries with each other at one moment. This section compares each country only with itself over 21years. So a link here can’t come from anything about a country that stays the same, such as its history, geography, institutions or culture.
Within countries over time, there is no link that is clearly more than chance (r = +0.077, comparing each country only with itself over the years, and each year only with the same year elsewhere). Whatever the cross-country picture shows, countries whose alcohol consumption moved did not tend to see their regulatory quality move with it.
Across countries (adjusted)+0.251for comparison
Within countries+0.086each country vs itself
…and vs the same year elsewhere+0.077q = 0.374 · 185 countries
Year-on-year changes+0.013q = 0.747
Read with care.
Almost all of this indicator's variation is between countries, not within them, so the within-country estimate rests on a small part of the data.
3,666 country-years (one country in one year), 185 countries, 2000–2020, about 20 years each on average. Share of the variation that happens within countries over time: 4% for Alcohol consumption, 5% for Regulatory quality. The margins of error allow for each country appearing many times, and for each year’s value being close to the year before.
Year-to-year changes are a cautious test, not a final answer. Looking only at changes from one year to the next removes each country’s own trends. But it also makes measurement mistakes louder, which pulls the results toward zero. A near-zero result here is weak evidence of no link, not proof.
With one measure years behind the other
Same year (lag 0): +0.077. A peak away from zero does not show which comes first. These series change slowly — this year’s value is close to last year’s. That makes the curve smooth and nearly symmetric, whatever produced the data. Even a sharp peak at one lag (a gap of some years) would not prove that one measure changes the other.
The data
litres per adult per year
index (approx. -2.5 to 2.5)
Years
Romania ROU
16.8
0.383
2020, 2024
Georgia GEO
14.4
0.65
2020, 2024
Latvia LVA
12.9
1.1
2020, 2024
Lithuania LTU
12.1
1.29
2020, 2024
Czechia CZE
12
1.23
2020, 2024
Germany DEU
11.8
1.5
2020, 2024
Poland POL
11.7
0.686
2020, 2024
Belarus BLR
11.6
-1.23
2020, 2024
Bulgaria BGR
11.6
0.288
2020, 2024
Austria AUT
11.5
1.35
2020, 2024
Uganda UGA
11.3
-0.524
2020, 2024
Burkina Faso BFA
11.3
-0.526
2020, 2024
Moldova MDA
11.1
-0.0467
2020, 2024
Tanzania TZA
10.9
-0.535
2020, 2024
Luxembourg LUX
10.8
1.84
2020, 2024
World Bank, World Development Indicators Kaufmann, D. and A. Kraay, Worldwide Governance Indicators, World Bank
Total alcohol consumption per capita (litres of pure alcohol, age 15+)
World Health Organization Global Health Observatory · CC BY 4.0 · updated quarterly
Recorded drinking plus an estimate of unrecorded drinking, per person aged fifteen and over. Ends in 2020.
No "better" direction is set, and the reason is the strongest fact about this measure on the site. Of everything here, it is what most separates countries by their largest religion. Alcohol is forbidden in Islam, so a low figure in a Muslim-majority country is religious practice showing up in a health statistic. Calling that end "best" would make this site score religious practice, which it refuses to do everywhere else. Every measure of attendance, prayer, marriage and belief here has no "better" direction for exactly that reason. This is the same fact arriving through a different column.
The World Health Organization is right that alcohol carries a real burden of disease, and the site does not dispute it. It declines to turn that into a score for a country, when the thing being scored would largely be how many of its people are Muslim.
Data used: most recent value in 2010-2025; values come from 2019–2024. To adjust for income, each measure is first predicted from GDP per person (in percentage terms, on a log scale) with a straight-line fit. Only what is left over is then compared. This is called a partial correlation. The line is drawn the standard way (ordinary least squares), which picks the line that comes closest to all the countries at once. The error margins allow for countries in the same region resembling each other, using 7 World Bank regions. The q-value corrects for testing all 12,497 pairs at once, using the Benjamini–Hochberg method. Underlying data last updated DYB 2024. How the country data works · explore Alcohol consumption and Regulatory quality
This page shows that two measures go together. It does not show that Alcohol consumption changes Regulatory quality, or the reverse. These figures also describe countries, not individual people. See the ecological fallacy.
More links with Alcohol consumption or Regulatory quality