Guyana vs Japan: Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-18)
Guyana
7.5 DB17-20 methodology
in 2019
Japan
7.5 DB17-20 methodology
in 2019
Guyana rank
109th
Japan rank
109th
Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-18) over time
- Guyana
- Japan
How they compare
Guyana currently reports 7.5 DB17-20 methodology against 7.5 DB17-20 methodology in Japan, a difference of 0 DB17-20 methodology.
Across all 5 years both countries report, Japan has been ahead every year.
Guyana ranks 109th and Japan ranks 109th of 191 countries.
Japan 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), Guyana or Japan?
- Guyana, at 7.5 DB17-20 methodology against 7.5 DB17-20 methodology in Japan as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-18) between Guyana and Japan?
- 0 DB17-20 methodology, with Guyana ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Guyana and Japan?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
- How do Guyana and Japan rank globally for enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-18)?
- Guyana ranks 109th and Japan ranks 109th 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.