Mozambique vs New Zealand: Enforcing contracts: Procedures (number) - Score

Mozambique
71.88
in 2014
New Zealand
71.88
in 2014
Mozambique rank
19th
New Zealand rank
19th

Enforcing contracts: Procedures (number) - Score over time

  • Mozambique
  • New Zealand
020406080200320082014

How they compare

Mozambique currently reports 71.88 against 71.88 in New Zealand, a difference of 0.

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

Mozambique ranks 19th and New Zealand ranks 19th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Mozambique New Zealand Difference Ahead
2000s 67.86 71.88 4.02 New Zealand
2010s 71.88 71.88 0

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: procedures (number) - score, Mozambique or New Zealand?
Mozambique, at 71.88 against 71.88 in New Zealand as of 2014.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: procedures (number) - score between Mozambique and New Zealand?
0, with Mozambique ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Mozambique and New Zealand?
12 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2014.
How do Mozambique and New Zealand rank globally for enforcing contracts: procedures (number) - score?
Mozambique ranks 19th and New Zealand ranks 19th 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.