Across 184 countries, Education spending and Rule of law rise and fall together at r = +0.34 (on a scale from −1 to +1, where 0 means no link). It holds up almost unchanged when only countries with similar income (GDP per person) are compared (r = +0.45, q = 0.034, allowing for the many pairs tested).
Comparing countries across the middle half of education spending, 3.09% to 5.28% of GDP, rule of law is better by 0.343 points at the top of that range than the bottom. Comparing only countries with similar national income, the gap is 0.323 points.
Link before adjusting (r)+0.339p = 2.5e-6 · 184 countries
After adjusting for national income+0.454p = 1.0e-10 · likely range [+0.33, +0.56]
p, allowing for regions0.002standard error 0.091 · 7 regions
Check for luck (q)0.034across 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.
Education spending · % of GDPlink with income +0.12 · independent
Rule of law · index (approx. -2.5 to 2.5)link with income +0.72 · high
“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
+0.339
2.5e-6
184
By rank (Spearman), not adjusted
+0.358
5.9e-7
184
Standard (Pearson), adjusted for national income
+0.454
1.0e-10
184
By rank (Spearman), adjusted for national income
+0.391
4.4e-8
184
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 184 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: -0.115 (a minus sign means it grew).
How solid is it?
Leaving out one country at a time, r ranges from +0.421 (without TUV) to +0.475 (without DZA). 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: TUV (-0.033).
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
31
+0.72
Europe & Central Asia
48
+0.45
Latin America & Caribbean
34
+0.14
Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan & Pakistan
18
+0.24
Sub-Saharan Africa
44
+0.48
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
62
+0.69
Middle third
61
+0.20
Richest third
61
+0.46
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
107
+0.48
Muslims
44
+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
24
+0.47
Never a European colony
21
-0.07
Spain
19
+0.72
United Kingdom
59
+0.62
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 = +0.357 after dropping 5 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 29years. 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 = +0.031, 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 education spending moved did not tend to see their rule of law move with it.
Across countries (adjusted)+0.454for comparison
Within countries+0.024each country vs itself
…and vs the same year elsewhere+0.031q = 0.558 · 186 countries
Year-on-year changes+0.032q = 0.259
Read with care.
Almost all of the second indicator's variation is between countries, so the within-country estimate rests on a small part of the data.
3,337 country-years (one country in one year), 186 countries, 1996–2024, about 18 years each on average. Share of the variation that happens within countries over time: 20% for Education spending, 4% for Rule of law. 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): +0.031. 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
% of GDP
index (approx. -2.5 to 2.5)
Years
Kiribati KIR
16.4%
0.786
2023, 2024
Tuvalu TUV
12.8%
1.22
2023, 2024
Micronesia, Fed. Sts. FSM
11.6%
0.977
2020, 2024
Namibia NAM
9.08%
0.328
2024
Algeria DZA
8.98%
-0.697
2024
Solomon Islands SLB
8.29%
0.153
2023, 2024
Botswana BWA
8.06%
0.312
2020, 2024
Marshall Islands MHL
7.7%
0.836
2022, 2024
Vanuatu VUT
7.64%
0.422
2024
Mauritania MRT
7.61%
-0.864
2024
Bolivia BOL
7.54%
-1.27
2024
Sweden SWE
7.32%
1.73
2022, 2024
Iceland ISL
7.31%
1.63
2022, 2024
Kyrgyz Republic KGZ
6.83%
-0.936
2023, 2024
Tunisia TUN
6.73%
-0.364
2023, 2024
World Bank, World Development Indicators Kaufmann, D. and A. Kraay, Worldwide Governance Indicators, World Bank
Data used: most recent value in 2010-2025; values come from 2013–2025. 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 Education spending and Rule of law
This page shows that two measures go together. It does not show that Education spending changes Rule of law, or the reverse. These figures also describe countries, not individual people. See the ecological fallacy.