Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in South Korea
South Korea: Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) was 3 DB15-20 methodology in 2019. ▬ Flat
Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in South Korea, 2003–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB15-20 methodology.
Analysis
South Korea recorded 3 DB15-20 methodology for reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in 2019. That is the highest value across all 17 years on record.
Compared with earlier readings it is unchanged over ten years.
Over the whole period, reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in South Korea peaked at 3 DB15-20 methodology in 2003 and was at its lowest, 3 DB15-20 methodology, in 2003.
That places South Korea 1st out of 188 countries with data for 2019, putting it in the top 10%.
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3 DB15-20 methodology | 3 DB15-20 methodology | 3 DB15-20 methodology | 7 |
| 2010s | 3 DB15-20 methodology | 3 DB15-20 methodology | 3 DB15-20 methodology | 10 |
Countries ranked near South Korea
- 1 United States 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Japan 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Albania 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bosnia and Herzegovina 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cambodia 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Croatia 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Czechia 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Germany 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Italy 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kenya 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Micronesia (country) 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Montenegro 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 North Macedonia 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Philippines 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Poland 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Portugal 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Puerto Rico 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Rwanda 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Serbia 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Slovakia 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 1 Thailand 3 DB15-20 methodology compare
More reference data data for South Korea
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 19.85 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 3.55 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 3.55 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.2074 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.9638 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 0.9281 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 5.17 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 1.13 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Burning - Crop residues 0.0294 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 4.37 (2050)
Frequently asked questions
- What is reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in South Korea?
- Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in South Korea was 3 DB15-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest reorganization proceedings index (0-3) recorded in South Korea?
- The highest recorded value was 3 DB15-20 methodology in 2003.
- What is the lowest reorganization proceedings index (0-3) recorded in South Korea?
- The lowest recorded value was 3 DB15-20 methodology in 2003.
- How does South Korea rank for reorganization proceedings index (0-3)?
- South Korea ranks 1st out of 188 countries with data for 2019.
- Is reorganization proceedings index (0-3) rising or falling in South Korea?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this South Korea data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) (DB15-20 methodology). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 17 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
About this data
The reorganization proceedings index has three components: (i) whether the reorganization plan is voted on only by the creditors whose rights are modified or affected by the plan; (ii) whether creditors entitled to vote on the plan are divided into classes, each class votes separately and the creditors within each class are treated equally; and (iii) whether the insolvency framework requires that dissenting creditors receive as much under the reorganization plan as they would have received in liquidation.