Mauritius vs South Africa: Enforcing contracts (DB04-15 methodology) - Score

Mauritius
66.22
in 2014
South Africa
66.14
in 2014
Mauritius rank
42nd
South Africa rank
44th

Enforcing contracts (DB04-15 methodology) - Score over time

  • Mauritius
  • South Africa
0204060200320082014

How they compare

Mauritius currently reports 66.22 against 66.14 in South Africa, a difference of 0.08.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 11 shared years of data; in 2004 it was South Africa ahead.

Mauritius ranks 42nd and South Africa ranks 44th of 181 countries.

South Africa has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Mauritius South Africa Difference Ahead
2000s 60.36 65.1 4.74 South Africa
2010s 64.6 66.14 1.54 South Africa

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts (db04-15 methodology) - score, Mauritius or South Africa?
Mauritius, at 66.22 against 66.14 in South Africa as of 2014.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts (db04-15 methodology) - score between Mauritius and South Africa?
0.08, with Mauritius ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Mauritius and South Africa?
11 years are reported by both, from 2004 to 2014.
How do Mauritius and South Africa rank globally for enforcing contracts (db04-15 methodology) - score?
Mauritius ranks 42nd and South Africa ranks 44th of 181 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts (DB04-15 methodology) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Enforcing contracts (DB04-15 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
183 places, 2,113 data points, 2003–2014
Last refreshed

The score for enforcing contracts is the simple average of the scores for each of the component indicators: the procedures, time and cost for resolving a commercial dispute through a local first-instance court. The score is computed based on the methodology in the DB04-15 studies.