New Zealand vs Peru: Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-18)
New Zealand
9.5 DB17-20 methodology
in 2019
Peru
9.5 DB17-20 methodology
in 2019
New Zealand rank
63rd
Peru rank
63rd
Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-18) over time
- New Zealand
- Peru
How they compare
New Zealand currently reports 9.5 DB17-20 methodology against 9.5 DB17-20 methodology in Peru, a difference of 0 DB17-20 methodology.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 5 shared years of data; in 2015 it was New Zealand ahead.
New Zealand ranks 63rd and Peru ranks 63rd of 191 countries.
New Zealand 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), New Zealand or Peru?
- New Zealand, at 9.5 DB17-20 methodology against 9.5 DB17-20 methodology in Peru as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-18) between New Zealand and Peru?
- 0 DB17-20 methodology, with New Zealand ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for New Zealand and Peru?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
- How do New Zealand and Peru rank globally for enforcing contracts: quality of the judicial processes index (0-18)?
- New Zealand ranks 63rd and Peru ranks 63rd 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.