Grenada vs Lao People's Democratic Republic: Getting electricity: Reliability of supply and transparency of tariff
Grenada
37.5
in 2019
Lao People's Democratic Republic
37.5
in 2019
Grenada rank
125th
Lao People's Democratic Republic rank
125th
Getting electricity: Reliability of supply and transparency of tariff over time
- Grenada
- Lao People's Democratic Republic
How they compare
Grenada currently reports 37.5 against 37.5 in Lao People's Democratic Republic, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 6 shared years of data; in 2014 it was Grenada ahead.
Grenada ranks 125th and Lao People's Democratic Republic ranks 125th of 191 countries.
Grenada has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher getting electricity: reliability of supply and transparency of tariff, Grenada or Lao People's Democratic Republic?
- Grenada, at 37.5 against 37.5 in Lao People's Democratic Republic as of 2019.
- What is the difference in getting electricity: reliability of supply and transparency of tariff between Grenada and Lao People's Democratic Republic?
- 0, with Grenada ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Grenada and Lao People's Democratic Republic?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
- How do Grenada and Lao People's Democratic Republic rank globally for getting electricity: reliability of supply and transparency of tariff?
- Grenada ranks 125th and Lao People's Democratic Republic ranks 125th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Getting electricity: Reliability of supply and transparency of tariff index (0-8) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for the reliability of supply and transparency of tariff index benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. The score ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance, and is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.