Antigua and Barbuda vs Suriname: Enforcing contracts: Procedures (number) - Score

Antigua and Barbuda
28.12
in 2014
Suriname
28.12
in 2014
Antigua and Barbuda rank
146th
Suriname rank
146th

Enforcing contracts: Procedures (number) - Score over time

  • Antigua and Barbuda
  • Suriname
0102030200520092014

How they compare

Antigua and Barbuda currently reports 28.12 against 28.12 in Suriname, a difference of 0.

Across all 10 years both countries report, Suriname has been ahead every year.

Antigua and Barbuda ranks 146th and Suriname ranks 146th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Antigua and Barbuda Suriname Difference Ahead
2000s 26.25 28.12 1.88 Suriname
2010s 28.12 28.12 0

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: procedures (number) - score, Antigua and Barbuda or Suriname?
Antigua and Barbuda, at 28.12 against 28.12 in Suriname as of 2014.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: procedures (number) - score between Antigua and Barbuda and Suriname?
0, with Antigua and Barbuda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Antigua and Barbuda and Suriname?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Antigua and Barbuda and Suriname rank globally for enforcing contracts: procedures (number) - score?
Antigua and Barbuda ranks 146th and Suriname ranks 146th of 181 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts: Procedures (number) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Enforcing contracts: Procedures (number) - 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 procedures 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, and is computed based on the methodology in the DB04-15 studies.