Central African Republic vs Solomon Islands: Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim) - Score
Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim) - Score over time
- Central African Republic
- Solomon Islands
How they compare
Solomon Islands currently reports 11.4% against 7.9% in Central African Republic, a difference of 3.5%.
That makes Solomon Islands's figure about 1.4 times Central African Republic's.
Across all 17 years both countries report, Solomon Islands has been ahead every year.
Central African Republic ranks 186th and Solomon Islands ranks 183rd of 191 countries.
Solomon Islands has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Central African Republic | Solomon Islands | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 7.9% | 11.4% | 3.5% | Solomon Islands |
| 2010s | 7.9% | 11.4% | 3.5% | Solomon Islands |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score, Central African Republic or Solomon Islands?
- Solomon Islands, at 11.4% against 7.9% in Central African Republic as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score between Central African Republic and Solomon Islands?
- 3.5%, with Solomon Islands ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Central African Republic and Solomon Islands?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Central African Republic and Solomon Islands rank globally for enforcing contracts: cost (% of claim) - score?
- Central African Republic ranks 186th and Solomon Islands ranks 183rd of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for cost to enforce contracts benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. The score is indicated on a scale from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance.