Protecting minority investors: Extent of director liability index in Fiji
Fiji: Protecting minority investors: Extent of director liability index was 80 in 2019. ▬ Flat
Protecting minority investors: Extent of director liability index in Fiji, 2005–2019
Source: World Bank.
Analysis
The most recent figure for protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index in Fiji is 80, measured in 2019. That is the highest value across all 15 years on record.
That represents a change of unchanged over ten years.
Over the whole period, protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index in Fiji peaked at 80 in 2005 and was at its lowest, 80, in 2005.
That places Fiji 16th out of 191 countries with data for 2019, putting it in the top 10%.
Protecting minority investors: Extent of director liability index in Fiji, year by year
| Year | Value | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 80 | — |
| 2006 | 80 | +0.0% |
| 2007 | 80 | +0.0% |
| 2008 | 80 | +0.0% |
| 2009 | 80 | +0.0% |
| 2010 | 80 | +0.0% |
| 2011 | 80 | +0.0% |
| 2012 | 80 | +0.0% |
| 2013 | 80 | +0.0% |
| 2014 | 80 | +0.0% |
| 2015 | 80 | +0.0% |
| 2016 | 80 | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 80 | +0.0% |
| 2018 | 80 | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 80 | +0.0% |
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 80 | 80 | 80 | 5 |
| 2010s | 80 | 80 | 80 | 10 |
Countries ranked near Fiji
- 15 United States 86 compare
- 16 Brazil 80 compare
- 16 Antigua and Barbuda 80 compare
- 16 Botswana 80 compare
- 16 Brunei 80 compare
- 16 Djibouti 80 compare
- 16 Dominica 80 compare
- 16 Grenada 80 compare
- 16 Honduras 80 compare
- 16 Hong Kong 80 compare
- 16 Ireland 80 compare
- 16 Jamaica 80 compare
- 16 Maldives 80 compare
- 16 Mauritius 80 compare
- 16 Mongolia 80 compare
- 16 Montenegro 80 compare
- 16 Seychelles 80 compare
- 16 Sierra Leone 80 compare
- 16 South Africa 80 compare
- 16 Saint Kitts and Nevis 80 compare
- 16 Saint Lucia 80 compare
- 16 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 80 compare
More reference data data for Fiji
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.0683 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 0.1992 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 0.307 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.0009 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 0.307 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.2292 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 0.1685 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 1.05 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 1.62 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.0049 (2050)
Frequently asked questions
- What is protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index in Fiji?
- Protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index in Fiji was 80 in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index recorded in Fiji?
- The highest recorded value was 80 in 2005.
- What is the lowest protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index recorded in Fiji?
- The lowest recorded value was 80 in 2005.
- How does Fiji rank for protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index?
- Fiji ranks 16th out of 191 countries with data for 2019.
- Is protecting minority investors: extent of director liability index rising or falling in Fiji?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this Fiji data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Protecting minority investors: Extent of director liability index (0-10) - Score. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 15 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
About this data
The score for extent of director liability index benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. The score is indicated on a scale from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance.