Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in Thailand
Thailand: Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) was 3 DB15-20 methodology in 2019. ▲ Rising
Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in Thailand, 2003–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB15-20 methodology.
Analysis
In 2019, reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in Thailand stood at 3 DB15-20 methodology. That is the highest value across all 17 years on record.
That represents a change of up 20.0% over ten years.
Over the whole period, reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in Thailand peaked at 3 DB15-20 methodology in 2017 and was at its lowest, 2.5 DB15-20 methodology, in 2003.
Thailand ranks 1st of 188 countries on this measure, in the top 10%.
The long-run direction has been consistently rising across the 17 years of available data.
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 2.5 DB15-20 methodology | 2.5 DB15-20 methodology | 2.5 DB15-20 methodology | 7 |
| 2010s | 2.65 DB15-20 methodology | 2.5 DB15-20 methodology | 3 DB15-20 methodology | 10 |
Countries ranked near Thailand
- 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 South Korea 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
More reference data data for Thailand
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 1.67 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 1.89 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 13.08 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 1.45 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 13.08 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 5.58 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 7.72 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 10.67 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 65.23 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 7.92 (2050)
Frequently asked questions
- What is reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in Thailand?
- Reorganization proceedings index (0-3) in Thailand was 3 DB15-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest reorganization proceedings index (0-3) recorded in Thailand?
- The highest recorded value was 3 DB15-20 methodology in 2017.
- What is the lowest reorganization proceedings index (0-3) recorded in Thailand?
- The lowest recorded value was 2.5 DB15-20 methodology in 2003.
- How does Thailand rank for reorganization proceedings index (0-3)?
- Thailand ranks 1st out of 188 countries with data for 2019.
- Is reorganization proceedings index (0-3) rising or falling in Thailand?
- Over the last ten years it is up 20.0%. The long-run trend across the full record is rising.
- Where does this Thailand 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.