Statizoid

Resolving insolvency: Creditor participation index (0-4) in Uganda

Uganda: Resolving insolvency: Creditor participation index (0-4) was 1 DB15-20 methodology in 2019. ◆ Volatile

Latest (2019)
1 DB15-20 methodology
Change on year
unchanged
World rank
84th
of 188 countries
All-time high
1 DB15-20 methodology
in 2014
All-time low
0 DB15-20 methodology
in 2003
Years of data
17
2003–2019

Resolving insolvency: Creditor participation index (0-4) in Uganda, 2003–2019

00.20.40.60.812003201120192003: 0 DB15-20 methodology2004: 0 DB15-20 methodology2005: 0 DB15-20 methodology2006: 0 DB15-20 methodology2007: 0 DB15-20 methodology2008: 0 DB15-20 methodology2009: 0 DB15-20 methodology2010: 0 DB15-20 methodology2011: 0 DB15-20 methodology2012: 0 DB15-20 methodology2013: 0 DB15-20 methodology2014: 1 DB15-20 methodology2015: 1 DB15-20 methodology2016: 1 DB15-20 methodology2017: 1 DB15-20 methodology2018: 1 DB15-20 methodology2019: 1 DB15-20 methodology

Source: World Bank. Measured in DB15-20 methodology.

Analysis

Uganda recorded 1 DB15-20 methodology for resolving insolvency: creditor participation index (0-4) in 2019. That is the highest value across all 17 years on record.

Compared with earlier readings it is unchanged over five years.

Over the whole period, resolving insolvency: creditor participation index (0-4) in Uganda peaked at 1 DB15-20 methodology in 2014 and was at its lowest, 0 DB15-20 methodology, in 2003.

That places Uganda 84th out of 188 countries with data for 2019, putting it in the middle of the range.

The series is highly variable year to year, so single readings are best treated with caution.

Averages by decade

DecadeAverage LowestHighest Years
2000s 0 DB15-20 methodology 0 DB15-20 methodology 0 DB15-20 methodology 7
2010s 0.6 DB15-20 methodology 0 DB15-20 methodology 1 DB15-20 methodology 10

Countries ranked near Uganda

  1. 84 India 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  2. 84 Nigeria 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  3. 84 Japan 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  4. 84 Algeria 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  5. 84 Antigua and Barbuda 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  6. 84 Argentina 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  7. 84 Armenia 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  8. 84 Bahamas 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  9. 84 Bahrain 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  10. 84 Benin 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  11. 84 Bhutan 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  12. 84 Brunei 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  13. 84 Burkina Faso 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  14. 84 Burundi 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  15. 84 Cameroon 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  16. 84 Central African Republic 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  17. 84 Chad 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  18. 84 Comoros 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  19. 84 Democratic Republic of Congo 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  20. 84 Congo 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  21. 84 Costa Rica 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  22. 84 Cote d'Ivoire 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  23. 84 Cyprus 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  24. 84 Ecuador 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  25. 84 Equatorial Guinea 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  26. 84 Eritrea 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  27. 84 Eswatini 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  28. 84 Ethiopia 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  29. 84 France 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  30. 84 Gabon 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  31. 84 Greece 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  32. 84 Guinea 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  33. 84 Guinea-Bissau 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  34. 84 Haiti 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  35. 84 Honduras 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  36. 84 Hong Kong 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  37. 84 Iran 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  38. 84 Iraq 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  39. 84 Ireland 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  40. 84 Jordan 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  41. 84 South Korea 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  42. 84 Kuwait 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  43. 84 Kyrgyzstan 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  44. 84 Lesotho 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  45. 84 Liberia 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  46. 84 Libya 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  47. 84 Lithuania 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  48. 84 Luxembourg 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  49. 84 Madagascar 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  50. 84 Malawi 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  51. 84 Mali 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  52. 84 Malta 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  53. 84 Montenegro 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  54. 84 Namibia 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  55. 84 Niger 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  56. 84 Oman 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  57. 84 Papua New Guinea 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  58. 84 Qatar 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  59. 84 Samoa 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  60. 84 Senegal 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  61. 84 Sierra Leone 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  62. 84 Singapore 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  63. 84 Slovenia 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  64. 84 Solomon Islands 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  65. 84 South Sudan 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  66. 84 Spain 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  67. 84 Sri Lanka 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  68. 84 Syria 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  69. 84 Tajikistan 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  70. 84 Tanzania 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  71. 84 Togo 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  72. 84 Tonga 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  73. 84 Tunisia 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  74. 84 United Arab Emirates 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  75. 84 Vanuatu 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  76. 84 Venezuela 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  77. 84 Vietnam 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  78. 84 Palestine 1 DB15-20 methodology compare
  79. 84 Yemen 1 DB15-20 methodology compare

See the full ranking of 190 places →

More reference data data for Uganda

All data for Uganda →

Frequently asked questions

What is resolving insolvency: creditor participation index (0-4) in Uganda?
Resolving insolvency: creditor participation index (0-4) in Uganda was 1 DB15-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
What is the highest resolving insolvency: creditor participation index (0-4) recorded in Uganda?
The highest recorded value was 1 DB15-20 methodology in 2014.
What is the lowest resolving insolvency: creditor participation index (0-4) recorded in Uganda?
The lowest recorded value was 0 DB15-20 methodology in 2003.
How does Uganda rank for resolving insolvency: creditor participation index (0-4)?
Uganda ranks 84th out of 188 countries with data for 2019.
Where does this Uganda data come from?
The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Resolving insolvency: Creditor participation index (0-4) (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

Indicator
Resolving insolvency: Creditor participation index (0-4) (DB15-20 methodology)
Unit
DB15-20 methodology
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 3,230 data points, 2003–2019
Last refreshed

The creditor participation index has four components: (i) whether creditors appoint the insolvency representative or approve, ratify or reject the appointment of the insolvency representative; (ii) Whether creditors are required to approve the sale of substantial assets of the debtor in the course of insol­vency proceedings; (iii) Whether an individual creditor has the right to access financial information about the debtor during insolvency proceedings; and (iv) Whether an individual creditor can object to a decision of the court or of the insolvency representative to approve or reject claims against the debtor brought by the creditor itself and by other creditors.