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

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

Enforcing contracts: Procedures (number) - Score over time

  • Central African Republic
  • Qatar
0102030200320082014

How they compare

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

Across all 8 years both countries report, Qatar has been ahead every year.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Central African Republic Qatar 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 Qatar?
Central African Republic, at 31.25 against 31.25 in Qatar as of 2014.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: procedures (number) - score between Central African Republic and Qatar?
0, with Central African Republic ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Central African Republic and Qatar?
8 years are reported by both, from 2007 to 2014.
How do Central African Republic and Qatar rank globally for enforcing contracts: procedures (number) - score?
Central African Republic ranks 137th and Qatar 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.