China vs Kazakhstan: Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-18)
China
16.5 DB17-20 methodology
in 2019
Kazakhstan
16 DB17-20 methodology
in 2019
China rank
1st
Kazakhstan rank
2nd
Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-18) over time
- China
- Kazakhstan
How they compare
China currently reports 16.5 DB17-20 methodology against 16 DB17-20 methodology in Kazakhstan, a difference of 0.5 DB17-20 methodology.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 5 shared years of data; in 2015 it was China ahead.
China ranks 1st and Kazakhstan ranks 2nd of 191 countries.
China has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-18), China or Kazakhstan?
- China, at 16.5 DB17-20 methodology against 16 DB17-20 methodology in Kazakhstan as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-18) between China and Kazakhstan?
- 0.5 DB17-20 methodology, with China ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for China and Kazakhstan?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
- How do China and Kazakhstan rank globally for enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-18)?
- China ranks 1st and Kazakhstan ranks 2nd of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-18) (DB17-20 methodology). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The quality of judicial processes index is the sum of the court structure and proceedings, case management, court automation and alternative dispute resolution. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB17-20 studies.