Resolving insolvency: Management of debtor's assets index (0-6) in Georgia
Georgia: Resolving insolvency: Management of debtor's assets index (0-6) was 5.5 DB15-20 methodology in 2019. ▼ Falling
Resolving insolvency: Management of debtor's assets index (0-6) in Georgia, 2003–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB15-20 methodology.
Analysis
Georgia recorded 5.5 DB15-20 methodology for resolving insolvency: management of debtor's assets index (0-6) in 2019. That is the highest value across all 17 years on record.
Compared with earlier readings it is up 57.1% over ten years.
Over the whole period, resolving insolvency: management of debtor's assets index (0-6) in Georgia peaked at 5.5 DB15-20 methodology in 2003 and was at its lowest, 3.5 DB15-20 methodology, in 2008.
That places Georgia 34th out of 191 countries with data for 2019, putting it in the top quarter.
The long-run direction has been consistently falling across the 17 years of available data.
Resolving insolvency: Management of debtor's assets index (0-6) in Georgia, year by year
| Year | DB15-20 methodology | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2003 | 5.5 DB15-20 methodology | — |
| 2004 | 5.5 DB15-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2005 | 5.5 DB15-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2006 | 5.5 DB15-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2007 | 5.5 DB15-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2008 | 3.5 DB15-20 methodology | -36.4% |
| 2009 | 3.5 DB15-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2010 | 3.5 DB15-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2011 | 3.5 DB15-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2012 | 3.5 DB15-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2013 | 3.5 DB15-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2014 | 3.5 DB15-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2015 | 3.5 DB15-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2016 | 3.5 DB15-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 5.5 DB15-20 methodology | +57.1% |
| 2018 | 5.5 DB15-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 5.5 DB15-20 methodology | +0.0% |
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 4.93 DB15-20 methodology | 3.5 DB15-20 methodology | 5.5 DB15-20 methodology | 7 |
| 2010s | 4.1 DB15-20 methodology | 3.5 DB15-20 methodology | 5.5 DB15-20 methodology | 10 |
Countries ranked near Georgia
- 34 Pakistan 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Mexico 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Brazil 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Austria 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Belarus 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Benin 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Burkina Faso 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Cameroon 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Central African Republic 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Chad 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Colombia 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Comoros 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Congo, Democratic Republic of the 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Congo 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Côte d'Ivoire 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Czechia 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Djibouti 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Dominican Republic 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Equatorial Guinea 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Estonia 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Gabon 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Greece 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Guinea 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Guinea-Bissau 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Israel 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Italy 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Kenya 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Republic of Korea 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Madagascar 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Mali 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Mauritius 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Morocco 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Niger 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Philippines 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Portugal 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Senegal 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Taiwan, China 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Togo 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
- 34 Tunisia 5.5 DB15-20 methodology compare
More reference data data for Georgia
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.097 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 0.684 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 1.01 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.0278 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 1.01 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.3252 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 0.2904 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 3.69 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 5.28 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.1515 (2050)
Frequently asked questions
- What is resolving insolvency: management of debtor's assets index (0-6) in Georgia?
- Resolving insolvency: management of debtor's assets index (0-6) in Georgia was 5.5 DB15-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest resolving insolvency: management of debtor's assets index (0-6) recorded in Georgia?
- The highest recorded value was 5.5 DB15-20 methodology in 2003.
- What is the lowest resolving insolvency: management of debtor's assets index (0-6) recorded in Georgia?
- The lowest recorded value was 3.5 DB15-20 methodology in 2008.
- How does Georgia rank for resolving insolvency: management of debtor's assets index (0-6)?
- Georgia ranks 34th out of 191 countries with data for 2019.
- Is resolving insolvency: management of debtor's assets index (0-6) rising or falling in Georgia?
- Over the last ten years it is up 57.1%. The long-run trend across the full record is falling.
- Where does this Georgia data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Resolving insolvency: Management of debtor's assets index (0-6) (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 management of debtor's assets index has six components: (i) whether the debtor (or an insolvency representative on its behalf) can continue performing contracts essential to the debtor’s survival; (ii) whether the debtor (or an insolvency representative on its behalf) can reject overly burdensome contracts; (iii) whether undervalued transactions entered into before commencement of insolvency proceedings can be avoided after proceedings are initiated; (iv) whether transactions entered into before commencement of insolvency proceedings that give preference to one or several creditors can be avoided after proceedings are initiated; (v) whether the insolvency framework includes specific provisions that allow the debtor (or an insolvency representative on its behalf), after commencement of insolvency proceedings, to obtain financing necessary to function during the proceedings; and (vi) whether post-commencement finance receives priority over ordinary unsecured creditors during distribution of assets.