Getting electricity: Financial deterrents aimed at limiting outages in Romania
Romania: Getting electricity: Financial deterrents aimed at limiting outages was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019. ▬ Flat
Getting electricity: Financial deterrents aimed at limiting outages in Romania, 2014–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB16-20 methodology.
Analysis
The most recent figure for getting electricity: financial deterrents aimed at limiting outages in Romania is 1 DB16-20 methodology, measured in 2019. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.
Compared with earlier readings it is unchanged over ten years.
That places Romania 1st out of 187 countries with data for 2019, putting it in the top 10%.
Getting electricity: Financial deterrents aimed at limiting outages in Romania, year by year
| Year | DB16-20 methodology | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2014 | 1 DB16-20 methodology | — |
| 2015 | 1 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2016 | 1 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 1 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2018 | 1 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 1 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
Countries ranked near Romania
- 1 India 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Indonesia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Pakistan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United States of America 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Russian Federation 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Japan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Brazil 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Albania 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Angola 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Argentina 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Armenia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Australia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Barbados 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belarus 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belgium 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bhutan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bolivia, Plurinational State of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Brunei Darussalam 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bulgaria 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cameroon 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Chile 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Colombia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Costa Rica 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Côte d'Ivoire 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Croatia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cyprus 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Czechia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ecuador 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 El Salvador 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Estonia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Finland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 France 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Georgia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Germany 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Greece 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Guatemala 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Guyana 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hong Kong, China 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hungary 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ireland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Israel 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Italy 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Jamaica 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kazakhstan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kiribati 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Republic of Korea 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kosovo 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kyrgyzstan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lithuania 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malaysia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mauritius 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Republic of Moldova 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Montenegro 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Morocco 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mozambique 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Netherlands 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 New Zealand 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 North Macedonia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Norway 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Oman 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Panama 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Papua New Guinea 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Peru 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Philippines 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Poland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Portugal 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Rwanda 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sao Tome and Principe 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saudi Arabia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Senegal 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Singapore 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Slovakia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Slovenia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Spain 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sweden 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Taiwan, China 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tanzania, United Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Thailand 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Togo 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Trinidad and Tobago 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Türkiye 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ukraine 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United Arab Emirates 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uruguay 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uzbekistan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Vanuatu 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Viet Nam 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
More private sector data for Romania
- Merchandise trade 59.5% (2025)
- Food imports 10.7% (2024)
- Manufactures imports 77.2% (2024)
- Merchandise imports 146.04 billion current US$ (2025)
- Food exports 11.5% (2024)
- Manufactures exports 79.3% (2024)
- Merchandise exports 109.13 billion current US$ (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per capita 5,738 current US$ per person (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per unit of GDP 0.2546 current US$ per US$ of GDP (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), annual growth rate 8.82 % change on previous year (2025)
Frequently asked questions
- What is getting electricity: financial deterrents aimed at limiting outages in Romania?
- Getting electricity: financial deterrents aimed at limiting outages in Romania was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest getting electricity: financial deterrents aimed at limiting outages recorded in Romania?
- The highest recorded value was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- What is the lowest getting electricity: financial deterrents aimed at limiting outages recorded in Romania?
- The lowest recorded value was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- How does Romania rank for getting electricity: financial deterrents aimed at limiting outages?
- Romania ranks 1st out of 187 countries with data for 2019.
- Is getting electricity: financial deterrents aimed at limiting outages rising or falling in Romania?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this Romania data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Getting electricity: Financial deterrents aimed at limiting outages (0-1) (DB16-20 methodology). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 6 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
About this data
Th financial deterrents index evaluates whether financial deterrents exist to limit outages. A score of 1 is assigned if the utility compensates customers when outages exceed a certain cap, if the utility is fined by the regulator when outages exceed a certain cap or if both these conditions are met. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.