Getting electricity: Mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) in Lao People's Democratic Republic
Lao People's Democratic Republic: Getting electricity: Mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019. ◆ Volatile
Getting electricity: Mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) in Lao People's Democratic Republic, 2014–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB16-20 methodology.
Analysis
Lao People's Democratic Republic recorded 1 DB16-20 methodology for getting electricity: mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) in 2019. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.
Lao People's Democratic Republic ranks 1st of 186 countries on this measure, in the top 10%.
Countries ranked near Lao People's Democratic Republic
- 1 China 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 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 Mexico 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 Algeria 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Antigua and Barbuda 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 Austria 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Azerbaijan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bahamas 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bahrain 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 Belize 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Brunei Darussalam 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bulgaria 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Burkina Faso 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Burundi 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cambodia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Canada 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 Denmark 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Djibouti 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Dominica 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Dominican Republic 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ecuador 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Egypt 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 El Salvador 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Estonia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Eswatini 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Fiji 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Finland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 France 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Gabon 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Germany 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ghana 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Greece 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Guatemala 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hong Kong (China) 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hungary 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iceland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iran (Islamic Republic of) 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iraq 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 Jordan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kazakhstan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kenya 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Korea 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kosovo 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kuwait 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Latvia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Libya 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lithuania 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Luxembourg 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malawi 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malaysia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malta 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 Namibia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Netherlands 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 New Zealand 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Nicaragua 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 Palau 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Panama 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Papua New Guinea 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Paraguay 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 Puerto Rico 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Qatar 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Romania 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Rwanda 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Samoa 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 San Marino 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saudi Arabia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Senegal 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Serbia 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 South Africa 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Spain 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sri Lanka 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saint Lucia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sudan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Suriname 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sweden 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Switzerland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Taïwan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tanzania, United Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Thailand 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tonga 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Trinidad and Tobago 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tunisia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Türkiye 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uganda 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 Palestine, State of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Zambia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
More private sector data for Lao People's Democratic Republic
- Merchandise trade 124.1% (2025)
- Food imports 12.7% (2023)
- Manufactures imports 61.7% (2023)
- Merchandise imports 10.34 billion current US$ (2025)
- Food exports 23.2% (2023)
- Manufactures exports 32.8% (2023)
- Merchandise exports 12.38 billion current US$ (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per capita 1,572 current US$ per person (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per unit of GDP 0.6762 current US$ per US$ of GDP (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), annual growth rate 31.87 % change on previous year (2025)
Frequently asked questions
- What is getting electricity: mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) in Lao People's Democratic Republic?
- Getting electricity: mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) in Lao People's Democratic Republic was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest getting electricity: mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) recorded in Lao People's Democratic Republic?
- The highest recorded value was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019.
- What is the lowest getting electricity: mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) recorded in Lao People's Democratic Republic?
- The lowest recorded value was 0 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- How does Lao People's Democratic Republic rank for getting electricity: mechanisms for restoring service (0-1)?
- Lao People's Democratic Republic ranks 1st out of 186 countries with data for 2019.
- Where does this Lao People's Democratic Republic data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Getting electricity: Mechanisms for restoring service (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
The mechanisms for restoring service index evaluates what tools are used by the distribution utility to restore power supply. A score of 1 is assigned if the utility uses automated tools, such as an OMS/IMS or SCADA system. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.