Chile vs Kiribati: Enforcing contracts: Alternative dispute resolution (0-3)
Enforcing contracts: Alternative dispute resolution (0-3) over time
- Chile
- Kiribati
How they compare
Chile currently reports 1.5 DB16-20 methodology against 1.5 DB16-20 methodology in Kiribati, a difference of 0 DB16-20 methodology.
Across all 5 years both countries report, Kiribati has been ahead every year.
Chile ranks 167th and Kiribati ranks 167th of 188 countries.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts: alternative dispute resolution (0-3), Chile or Kiribati?
- Chile, at 1.5 DB16-20 methodology against 1.5 DB16-20 methodology in Kiribati as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: alternative dispute resolution (0-3) between Chile and Kiribati?
- 0 DB16-20 methodology, with Chile ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Chile and Kiribati?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
- How do Chile and Kiribati rank globally for enforcing contracts: alternative dispute resolution (0-3)?
- Chile ranks 167th and Kiribati ranks 167th of 188 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts: Alternative dispute resolution (0-3) (DB16-20 methodology). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The alternative dispute resolution evaluates two aspects: (i) whether domestic commercial arbitration is regulated by law, all disputes can be submitted to arbitration and valid arbitration clauses are usually enforced by courts; and (ii) whether voluntary mediation and/or conciliation are a recognized way of resolving commercial disputes, they are regulated by law and there are financial incentives for parties to attempt mediation of conciliation. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB17-20 studies.