Australia vs Kazakhstan: Enforcing contracts (DB17-20 methodology) - Score
Australia
79
in 2019
Kazakhstan
81.25
in 2019
Australia rank
6th
Kazakhstan rank
4th
Enforcing contracts (DB17-20 methodology) - Score over time
- Australia
- Kazakhstan
How they compare
Kazakhstan currently reports 81.25 against 79 in Australia, a difference of 2.25.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 5 shared years of data; in 2015 it was Australia ahead.
Australia ranks 6th and Kazakhstan ranks 4th of 188 countries.
Australia has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts (db17-20 methodology) - score, Australia or Kazakhstan?
- Kazakhstan, at 81.25 against 79 in Australia as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts (db17-20 methodology) - score between Australia and Kazakhstan?
- 2.25, with Kazakhstan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and Kazakhstan?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
- How do Australia and Kazakhstan rank globally for enforcing contracts (db17-20 methodology) - score?
- Australia ranks 6th and Kazakhstan ranks 4th of 188 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts (DB17-20 methodology) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for enforcing contracts is the simple average of the scores for each of the component indicators: the time and cost for resolving a commercial dispute through a local first-instance court, as well as the quality of judicial processes that promotes quality and efficiency in the court system. The score is computed based on the methodology in the DB17-20 studies.