Enforcing contracts: Court structure and proceedings (0-5) in El Salvador
El Salvador: Enforcing contracts: Court structure and proceedings (0-5) was 3 DB17-20 methodology in 2019. ▬ Flat
Enforcing contracts: Court structure and proceedings (0-5) in El Salvador, 2015–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB17-20 methodology.
Analysis
El Salvador recorded 3 DB17-20 methodology for enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5) in 2019. That is the highest value across all 5 years on record.
That represents a change of unchanged over five years.
El Salvador ranks 96th of 191 countries on this measure, in the middle of the range.
Enforcing contracts: Court structure and proceedings (0-5) in El Salvador, year by year
| Year | DB17-20 methodology | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 3 DB17-20 methodology | — |
| 2016 | 3 DB17-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 3 DB17-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2018 | 3 DB17-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 3 DB17-20 methodology | +0.0% |
El Salvador compared with similar countries
- El Salvador's 3 DB17-20 methodology is below the median for upper middle income countries, which is 3.5 DB17-20 methodology, 86% of the median. (56 countries reporting)
- El Salvador's 3 DB17-20 methodology is below the median for Latin America & Caribbean, which is 3.5 DB17-20 methodology, 86% of the median. (33 countries reporting)
Countries ranked near El Salvador
- 96 Bangladesh 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Indonesia 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Russia 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Japan 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Algeria 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Bahrain 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Barbados 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Benin 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Brunei 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Burundi 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Central African Republic 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Chile 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Comoros 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Costa Rica 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Cyprus 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Djibouti 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Eswatini 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Fiji 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Ghana 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Greece 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Guatemala 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Honduras 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Hungary 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Israel 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Italy 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Kiribati 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Latvia 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Malta 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Marshall Islands 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Nepal 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Netherlands 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 New Zealand 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Paraguay 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Puerto Rico 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Senegal 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Seychelles 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Solomon Islands 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Tanzania 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Thailand 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Togo 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Trinidad and Tobago 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Vanuatu 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Vietnam 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
- 96 Zimbabwe 3 DB17-20 methodology compare
More reference data data for El Salvador
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.2714 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 0.6267 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 1.78 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.0909 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 1.78 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.91 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 0.3176 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 3.5 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 8.5 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.4948 (2050)
Frequently asked questions
- What is enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5) in El Salvador?
- Enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5) in El Salvador was 3 DB17-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5) recorded in El Salvador?
- The highest recorded value was 3 DB17-20 methodology in 2015.
- What is the lowest enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5) recorded in El Salvador?
- The lowest recorded value was 3 DB17-20 methodology in 2015.
- How does El Salvador rank for enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5)?
- El Salvador ranks 96th out of 191 countries with data for 2019.
- Where does this El Salvador data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Enforcing contracts: Court structure and proceedings (0-5) (DB17-20 methodology). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 5 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
About this data
The court structure and proceedings evaluates five aspects of the court system: (i) whether a specialized commercial court, division or section is available; (ii) whether a small claims court and/or simplified procedure for small claims is available; (iii) whether pretrial attachment of defendant's movable assets is available; (iv) whether new cases are assigned randomly and through an automated system to judges; and (v) whether a woman’s testimony in court carries the same evidentiary weight as that of a man's. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB17-20 studies.