Central African Republic vs Laos: Enforcing contracts: Procedures (number) - Score

Central African Republic
31.25
in 2014
Laos
31.25
in 2014
Central African Republic rank
137th
Laos rank
137th

Enforcing contracts: Procedures (number) - Score over time

  • Central African Republic
  • Laos
0102030200320082014

How they compare

Central African Republic currently reports 31.25 against 31.25 in Laos, a difference of 0.

Across all 12 years both countries report, Laos has been ahead every year.

Central African Republic ranks 137th and Laos ranks 137th of 181 countries.

Head to head by decade

Decade Central African Republic Laos Difference Ahead
2000s 31.25 31.25 0
2010s 31.25 31.25 0

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: procedures (number) - score, Central African Republic or Laos?
Central African Republic, at 31.25 against 31.25 in Laos as of 2014.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: procedures (number) - score between Central African Republic and Laos?
0, with Central African Republic ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Central African Republic and Laos?
12 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2014.
How do Central African Republic and Laos rank globally for enforcing contracts: procedures (number) - score?
Central African Republic ranks 137th and Laos ranks 137th 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.