Costa Rica vs Guinea-Bissau: Enforcing contracts: Procedures (number) - Score
Costa Rica
40.62
in 2014
Guinea-Bissau
40.62
in 2014
Costa Rica rank
109th
Guinea-Bissau rank
109th
Enforcing contracts: Procedures (number) - Score over time
- Costa Rica
- Guinea-Bissau
How they compare
Costa Rica currently reports 40.62 against 40.62 in Guinea-Bissau, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Costa Rica ahead.
Costa Rica ranks 109th and Guinea-Bissau ranks 109th of 181 countries.
Costa Rica has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Costa Rica | Guinea-Bissau | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 40.62 | 37.5 | 3.12 | Costa Rica |
| 2010s | 40.62 | 40.62 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts: procedures (number) - score, Costa Rica or Guinea-Bissau?
- Costa Rica, at 40.62 against 40.62 in Guinea-Bissau as of 2014.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: procedures (number) - score between Costa Rica and Guinea-Bissau?
- 0, with Costa Rica ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Costa Rica and Guinea-Bissau?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Costa Rica and Guinea-Bissau rank globally for enforcing contracts: procedures (number) - score?
- Costa Rica ranks 109th and Guinea-Bissau ranks 109th 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
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.