placestats

Legal system and property rights (Fraser) vs. Married by 18

Fades after adjusting for income

Across 119 countries, Legal system and property rights (Fraser) and Married by 18 rise and fall together at r = -0.54 (on a scale from −1 to +1, where 0 means no link). Comparing only countries with similar income (GDP per person) shrinks it to -0.19, which could easily be chance (q = 0.35, 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. Caution: direction is not consistent across regions.

Comparing countries across the middle half of legal system and property rights (Fraser), 3.74 to 5.49 points, married by 18 is better by 9.95% of women aged 20-24 at the top of that range than the bottom. Comparing only countries with similar national income, the gap is 3.63% of women aged 20-24.

Link before adjusting (r)-0.544p = 1.7e-10 · 119 countries
After adjusting for national income-0.190p = 0.039 · likely range [-0.36, -0.01]
p, allowing for regions0.160standard error 0.115 · 6 regions
Check for luck (q)0.349across 17,292 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.

Legal system and property rights (Fraser) · rating (0-10)link with income +0.81 · proxy
Married by 18 · % of women aged 20-24link with income -0.60 · moderate

“Link with income” is how closely each measure tracks GDP per person across countries, from −1 to +1.

Every country as a dot

Legal system and property rights (Fraser) · rating (0-10) →Married by 18 · % of women aged 20-24 →1.929.090%76.3%Angola: 3.33 rating (0-10), 23.1% of women aged 20-24Albania: 5.61 rating (0-10), 11.8% of women aged 20-24Argentina: 5.15 rating (0-10), 15.5% of women aged 20-24Armenia: 5.86 rating (0-10), 5.3% of women aged 20-24Azerbaijan: 5.09 rating (0-10), 15% of women aged 20-24Burundi: 3.35 rating (0-10), 19% of women aged 20-24Belgium: 7.64 rating (0-10), 0.1% of women aged 20-24Benin: 4.41 rating (0-10), 27.5% of women aged 20-24Burkina Faso: 3.62 rating (0-10), 38.2% of women aged 20-24Bangladesh: 2.9 rating (0-10), 47.2% of women aged 20-24Bosnia and Herzegovina: 4.59 rating (0-10), 3.5% of women aged 20-24Belarus: 4.28 rating (0-10), 4.7% of women aged 20-24Belize: 4.09 rating (0-10), 33.5% of women aged 20-24Bolivia: 3.95 rating (0-10), 14.5% of women aged 20-24Barbados: 5.62 rating (0-10), 29.2% of women aged 20-24Bhutan: 6.73 rating (0-10), 9% of women aged 20-24Central African Republic: 2.03 rating (0-10), 61% of women aged 20-24Chile: 6.96 rating (0-10), 0% of women aged 20-24China: 4.73 rating (0-10), 2.8% of women aged 20-24Cote d'Ivoire: 5.13 rating (0-10), 25.8% of women aged 20-24Cameroon: 2.86 rating (0-10), 29.8% of women aged 20-24Congo, Dem. Rep.: 2.68 rating (0-10), 29.9% of women aged 20-24Congo, Rep.: 3.1 rating (0-10), 27.3% of women aged 20-24Colombia: 5.06 rating (0-10), 23.4% of women aged 20-24Comoros: 3.17 rating (0-10), 20.7% of women aged 20-24Cabo Verde: 6.33 rating (0-10), 8.4% of women aged 20-24Costa Rica: 6.62 rating (0-10), 17.1% of women aged 20-24Djibouti: 3.6 rating (0-10), 6.5% of women aged 20-24Denmark: 9.09 rating (0-10), 0.7% of women aged 20-24Dominican Republic: 5.29 rating (0-10), 31.5% of women aged 20-24Algeria: 3.91 rating (0-10), 3.8% of women aged 20-24Ecuador: 4.87 rating (0-10), 22.2% of women aged 20-24Egypt, Arab Rep.: 3.36 rating (0-10), 15.8% of women aged 20-24Ethiopia: 4.25 rating (0-10), 40.3% of women aged 20-24Finland: 8.88 rating (0-10), 0.1% of women aged 20-24Fiji: 4.87 rating (0-10), 4% of women aged 20-24Gabon: 3.73 rating (0-10), 13.3% of women aged 20-24United Kingdom: 7.92 rating (0-10), 0% of women aged 20-24Georgia: 6.09 rating (0-10), 9.4% of women aged 20-24Ghana: 5.25 rating (0-10), 16.1% of women aged 20-24Guinea: 3.54 rating (0-10), 46.5% of women aged 20-24Gambia, The: 4.91 rating (0-10), 23.1% of women aged 20-24Guinea-Bissau: 2.77 rating (0-10), 25.7% of women aged 20-24Guatemala: 4.78 rating (0-10), 29.5% of women aged 20-24Guyana: 5.09 rating (0-10), 32.3% of women aged 20-24Honduras: 4.11 rating (0-10), 34% of women aged 20-24Haiti: 2.44 rating (0-10), 14.9% of women aged 20-24Indonesia: 4.54 rating (0-10), 16.3% of women aged 20-24India: 5.28 rating (0-10), 22.3% of women aged 20-24Iran, Islamic Rep.: 3.4 rating (0-10), 16.7% of women aged 20-24Iraq: 2.44 rating (0-10), 27.9% of women aged 20-24Israel: 6.14 rating (0-10), 0.8% of women aged 20-24Jamaica: 5.83 rating (0-10), 26.9% of women aged 20-24Jordan: 4.62 rating (0-10), 9.9% of women aged 20-24Kazakhstan: 5.72 rating (0-10), 6.1% of women aged 20-24Kenya: 4.73 rating (0-10), 12.5% of women aged 20-24Kyrgyz Republic: 4.58 rating (0-10), 9.2% of women aged 20-24Cambodia: 3.92 rating (0-10), 17.9% of women aged 20-24Lao PDR: 4.54 rating (0-10), 30.5% of women aged 20-24Lebanon: 3.59 rating (0-10), 6% of women aged 20-24Liberia: 3.91 rating (0-10), 24.9% of women aged 20-24Libya: 2.67 rating (0-10), 4.1% of women aged 20-24Sri Lanka: 5.12 rating (0-10), 9.8% of women aged 20-24Lesotho: 4.76 rating (0-10), 13.4% of women aged 20-24Lithuania: 7.67 rating (0-10), 0.2% of women aged 20-24Morocco: 5.31 rating (0-10), 13.7% of women aged 20-24Moldova: 5.77 rating (0-10), 12.2% of women aged 20-24Madagascar: 3.08 rating (0-10), 38.8% of women aged 20-24Mexico: 4.27 rating (0-10), 18.2% of women aged 20-24North Macedonia: 4.72 rating (0-10), 7.5% of women aged 20-24Mali: 3.53 rating (0-10), 48.5% of women aged 20-24Myanmar: 3.27 rating (0-10), 16% of women aged 20-24Montenegro: 5.68 rating (0-10), 5.8% of women aged 20-24Mongolia: 6.06 rating (0-10), 8.1% of women aged 20-24Mozambique: 4.7 rating (0-10), 48.4% of women aged 20-24Mauritania: 3.39 rating (0-10), 36.6% of women aged 20-24Malawi: 4.72 rating (0-10), 38.7% of women aged 20-24Namibia: 5.93 rating (0-10), 6.9% of women aged 20-24Niger: 3.62 rating (0-10), 76.3% of women aged 20-24Nigeria: 3.63 rating (0-10), 33.4% of women aged 20-24Nicaragua: 3.49 rating (0-10), 35.2% of women aged 20-24Norway: 9.05 rating (0-10), 0% of women aged 20-24Nepal: 4.83 rating (0-10), 34.9% of women aged 20-24Oman: 5.7 rating (0-10), 4% of women aged 20-24Pakistan: 3.74 rating (0-10), 18.3% of women aged 20-24Panama: 5.79 rating (0-10), 26.4% of women aged 20-24Peru: 5.19 rating (0-10), 17.9% of women aged 20-24Philippines: 4.72 rating (0-10), 9.4% of women aged 20-24Papua New Guinea: 4.72 rating (0-10), 27.3% of women aged 20-24Paraguay: 4.47 rating (0-10), 21.6% of women aged 20-24Qatar: 5.6 rating (0-10), 1.7% of women aged 20-24Romania: 6.69 rating (0-10), 6.9% of women aged 20-24Russian Federation: 4.86 rating (0-10), 6.2% of women aged 20-24Rwanda: 6.07 rating (0-10), 5.5% of women aged 20-24Saudi Arabia: 6.22 rating (0-10), 3.4% of women aged 20-24Sudan: 1.92 rating (0-10), 34.2% of women aged 20-24Senegal: 4.28 rating (0-10), 30.2% of women aged 20-24Singapore: 8.47 rating (0-10), 0.1% of women aged 20-24Sierra Leone: 4.61 rating (0-10), 29.6% of women aged 20-24El Salvador: 4.33 rating (0-10), 19.7% of women aged 20-24Serbia: 5.38 rating (0-10), 5.5% of women aged 20-24Suriname: 4.3 rating (0-10), 36% of women aged 20-24Eswatini: 3.11 rating (0-10), 1.9% of women aged 20-24Chad: 2.42 rating (0-10), 60.6% of women aged 20-24Togo: 5.03 rating (0-10), 24.8% of women aged 20-24Thailand: 5.37 rating (0-10), 17% of women aged 20-24Tajikistan: 4.2 rating (0-10), 8.8% of women aged 20-24Timor-Leste: 3.9 rating (0-10), 14.9% of women aged 20-24Trinidad and Tobago: 5.18 rating (0-10), 4.2% of women aged 20-24Tunisia: 4.54 rating (0-10), 2.4% of women aged 20-24Turkiye: 4.91 rating (0-10), 14.7% of women aged 20-24Tanzania: 5.11 rating (0-10), 29.1% of women aged 20-24Uganda: 4.66 rating (0-10), 34% of women aged 20-24Ukraine: 4.57 rating (0-10), 9.1% of women aged 20-24Uruguay: 6.09 rating (0-10), 24.6% of women aged 20-24Viet Nam: 5.11 rating (0-10), 14.6% of women aged 20-24South Africa: 5.72 rating (0-10), 3.6% of women aged 20-24Zambia: 4.96 rating (0-10), 23.9% of women aged 20-24Zimbabwe: 3.63 rating (0-10), 33.7% of women aged 20-24CAFDNKFINHTILBYMOZNERNORSWZTCD

best-fit line line after adjusting

Four ways to measure the link

MethodrpCountries
Standard (Pearson), not adjusted-0.5441.7e-10119
By rank (Spearman), not adjusted-0.5344.2e-10119
Standard (Pearson), adjusted for national income-0.1900.039119
By rank (Spearman), adjusted for national income-0.1930.036119

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 119 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: +0.354 (a minus sign means it grew).

How solid is it?

Leaving out one country at a time, r ranges from -0.218 (without LBY) to -0.156 (without RWA). 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: RWA (+0.034).

Fragile: this link may not hold up.
  • direction is not consistent across regions

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.

nr
East Asia & Pacific13+0.22
Europe & Central Asia23-0.45
Latin America & Caribbean23-0.29
Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan & Pakistan15-0.38
Sub-Saharan Africa40-0.38

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.

nr
Poorest third40-0.24
Middle third39-0.23
Richest third40-0.31

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.

nr
Christians68-0.31
Muslims37-0.13

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.

nr
France24+0.06
Never a European colony16-0.08
Spain18-0.41
United Kingdom35-0.22

By official ideology

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.

nr
Nationalist19-0.09
No strong official ideology77-0.20

By party system

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.

nr
A few parties banned25+0.05
No parties banned81-0.34

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 = -0.224 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 0years. So a link here can’t come from anything about a country that stays the same, such as its history, geography, institutions or culture.

Not enough history inside each country to look at this over time. That needs countries measured for several years in a row, and at least one of these measures is measured too rarely.

The data


rating (0-10)

% of women aged 20-24
Years
Denmark DNK9.090.7%2024, 2021
Norway NOR9.050%2024, 2022
Finland FIN8.880.1%2024, 2017
Singapore SGP8.470.1%2024, 2025
United Kingdom GBR7.920%2024, 2021
Lithuania LTU7.670.2%2024, 2022
Belgium BEL7.640.1%2024, 2020
Chile CHL6.960%2024
Bhutan BTN6.739%2024, 2023
Romania ROU6.696.9%2024, 2021
Costa Rica CRI6.6217.1%2024, 2018
Cabo Verde CPV6.338.4%2024, 2018
Saudi Arabia SAU6.223.4%2024
Israel ISR6.140.8%2024, 2022
Uruguay URY6.0924.6%2024, 2013

Gwartney, J., Lawson, R., Murphy, R. and others, Economic Freedom of the World: 2026 Annual Report, Fraser Institute. Data from the EFW panel dataset (efotw-2026-master-index-data-for-researchers-iso.xlsx).
World Bank, World Development Indicators

Sources

Legal system and property rights (Fraser)

Economic freedom, area 2, legal system and property rights (Fraser Institute)

Fraser Institute · No licence stated; used with citation · updated annual

Whether courts are independent and fair, contracts are enforced, property is protected and the police are reliable, from 0 to 10. It draws on some of the same expert sources as other rule-of-law measures, so expect it to track them closely.

Married by 18

Women who were first married by age 18 (% of women ages 20-24)

UNICEF · CC BY 4.0 · updated quarterly

From household surveys, mostly in lower-income countries, and only in years a survey ran. No year reaches sixty countries, so the latest value used is up to a decade old for some. Rich countries rarely report it at all, which shapes any link with income.

How this was computed

Data used: most recent value in 2010-2025; values come from 2010–2025. 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 6 World Bank regions. The q-value corrects for testing all 17,292 pairs at once, using the Benjamini–Hochberg method. Underlying data last updated V-Dem v16; V-Party v2. How the country data works · explore Legal system and property rights (Fraser) and Married by 18

This page shows that two measures go together. It does not show that Legal system and property rights (Fraser) changes Married by 18, or the reverse. These figures also describe countries, not individual people. See the ecological fallacy.

More links with Legal system and property rights (Fraser) or Married by 18