Statizoid

Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-18) (DB17-20 methodology) by country

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.

Countries reporting
187
Highest
16.5 DB17-20 methodology
China
Lowest
1.5 DB17-20 methodology
Iraq
Median
8 DB17-20 methodology
Years covered
5
2015–2019
Data points
950

What the numbers show

Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-18) (DB17-20 methodology) is currently reported for 187 countries. The highest value is 16.5 DB17-20 methodology in China; the lowest is 1.5 DB17-20 methodology in Iraq.

The median across all reporting countries is 8 DB17-20 methodology, and the mean is 8.66 DB17-20 methodology.

The gap between the highest and lowest reporting country is a factor of about 11.

Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-18): full country ranking

#Country LatestYear 10-year changeTrend
1 China 16.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
1 Djibouti 5.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
2 Kazakhstan 16 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
2 Rwanda 16 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
4 Australia 15.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
4 Singapore 15.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
6 United Kingdom 15 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
6 Lithuania 15 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
6 Turkey 15 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
9 United States 14.6 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
10 South Korea 14.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
11 United Arab Emirates 14 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
11 Denmark 14 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
11 Norway 14 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
11 Romania 14 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
11 Taiwan 14 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
16 Estonia 13.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
16 Israel 13.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
16 Latvia 13.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
16 Mauritius 13.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
16 Portugal 13.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
16 Serbia 13.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
16 Slovakia 13.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
23 Brazil 13.09 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
24 Austria 13 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
24 Croatia 13 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
24 Italy 13 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
24 North Macedonia 13 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — falling
24 Malaysia 13 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
29 Argentina 12.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
29 Germany 12.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
29 Greece 12.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
29 Hungary 12.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
33 France 12 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
33 Georgia 12 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
33 Sweden 12 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
36 Armenia 11.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
36 Antigua and Barbuda 11.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
36 Brunei 11.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
36 Dominica 11.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
36 Spain 11.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
36 Saint Kitts and Nevis 11.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
36 Saint Lucia 11.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
36 Montenegro 11.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
36 Saudi Arabia 11.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
36 Slovenia 11.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
36 Ukraine 11.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
36 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 11.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
48 Canada 11 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
48 Grenada 11 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
48 Moldova 11 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
48 Poland 11 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
48 Puerto Rico 11 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
53 Azerbaijan 10.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
53 Bulgaria 10.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
53 Switzerland 10.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
53 India 10.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
53 Malta 10.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
53 Namibia 10.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
53 Paraguay 10.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
60 Mexico 10.1 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
61 Chile 10 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
61 Hong Kong 10 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
63 Bosnia and Herzegovina 9.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
63 Cote d'Ivoire 9.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
63 Costa Rica 9.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
63 Czechia 9.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
63 Jamaica 9.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
63 Morocco 9.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
63 Malawi 9.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
63 New Zealand 9.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — falling
63 Peru 9.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
63 Palau 9.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
63 Russia 9.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
74 Nigeria 9.15 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
75 Bahrain 9 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
75 Colombia 9 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
75 Kenya 9 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
75 Solomon Islands 9 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
79 Indonesia 8.89 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
80 Finland 8.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
80 Guinea-Bissau 8.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
80 Ireland 8.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
80 Sri Lanka 8.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
80 Lesotho 8.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
80 Luxembourg 8.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
80 Mozambique 8.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
80 Papua New Guinea 8.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
80 Thailand 8.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
80 Uganda 8.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
80 Uzbekistan 8.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
92 Belgium 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
92 Bahamas 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
92 Belize 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
92 Bhutan 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
92 Cyprus 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
92 Jordan 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
92 Madagascar 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
92 Marshall Islands 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
92 Mauritania 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
92 Niger 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
92 Panama 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
92 Sierra Leone 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
92 El Salvador 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
92 Trinidad and Tobago 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
92 Uruguay 8 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
107 Albania 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
107 Burkina Faso 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
107 Bangladesh 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
107 Belarus 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
107 Cape Verde 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
107 Fiji 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
107 Guyana 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
107 Honduras 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
107 Iceland 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
107 Japan 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
107 Kuwait 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
107 Liberia 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
107 Oman 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
107 Philippines 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
107 Eswatini 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
107 Vietnam 7.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
123 Barbados 7 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
123 Botswana 7 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
123 Ethiopia 7 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
123 Netherlands 7 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
123 Chad 7 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
123 Venezuela 7 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
129 Benin 6.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
129 Dominican Republic 6.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
129 Ecuador 6.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
129 Ghana 6.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
129 Haiti 6.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
129 Lebanon 6.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
129 Nicaragua 6.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
129 Senegal 6.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
129 Seychelles 6.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
129 Tajikistan 6.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
129 Tunisia 6.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
129 Vanuatu 6.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
129 Zambia 6.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
129 Zimbabwe 6.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
143 Bolivia 6 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
143 Guatemala 6 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
143 Kiribati 6 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
143 Nepal 6 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
143 Tanzania 6 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
148 Pakistan 5.65 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
149 Angola 5.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
149 Democratic Republic of Congo 5.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
149 Comoros 5.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
149 Algeria 5.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
149 Maldives 5.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
149 Mongolia 5.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
149 San Marino 5.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
149 Togo 5.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
149 Samoa 5.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — falling
159 Afghanistan 5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
159 Burundi 5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
159 Cameroon 5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
159 Congo 5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
159 Guinea 5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
159 Gambia 5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
159 Iran 5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
159 Kyrgyzstan 5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
159 Mali 5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
168 Micronesia (country) 4.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
168 Cambodia 4.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
168 Qatar 4.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
168 Somalia 4.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
168 Sao Tome and Principe 4.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
168 Tonga 4.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
174 Egypt 4 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
174 Gabon 4 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
174 Libya 4 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
174 Myanmar 4 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
174 Palestine 4 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
174 Sudan 4 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
174 Syria 4 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
174 Yemen 4 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
182 Equatorial Guinea 3.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — rising
182 Laos 3.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
182 South Sudan 3.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
182 Suriname 3.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
186 Eritrea 3 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
187 East Timor 2.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat
188 Iraq 1.5 DB17-20 methodology 2019 — flat

Regions and income groups

Aggregates are excluded from the country ranking above so that a region can never outrank a country.

About this data

Indicator
Enforcing contracts: Quality of the judicial processes index (0-18) (DB17-20 methodology)
Unit
DB17-20 methodology
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 950 data points, 2015–2019
Last refreshed

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.