Ease of Doing Business

Ease of Doing Business
Name	Ease of Doing Business
Type	Index
Established	2003
Dissolved	2021
Publisher	World Bank
Scope	Global
Headquarters	Washington, D.C.
Language	English

Ease of Doing Business

Ease of Doing Business was an index and associated reports produced by the World Bank that measured regulatory environments for private-sector activity across jurisdictions, informing policy debates involving International Monetary Fund, United Nations, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, International Finance Corporation, and national institutions such as the Ministry of Finance (India), Treasury (United States), and Her Majesty's Treasury. The project influenced reform agendas linked to institutions including the African Development Bank, Asian Development Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Inter-American Development Bank, and leaders like Christine Lagarde, Jim Yong Kim, David Malpass, and Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala.

Overview

The initiative originated within the World Bank Group with operational links to the International Finance Corporation and collaboration with country offices such as World Bank Group India and regional hubs in Brussels, Beijing, and Abuja. The reports synthesised legal and administrative procedures across jurisdictions such as United States of America, China, India, Brazil, United Kingdom, Germany, France, Japan, Australia, Canada, South Africa, Russia, Mexico, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Argentina, Egypt, Nigeria, Kenya, Ethiopia, Ghana, Rwanda, Singapore, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Chile, Colombia, Peru, Poland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Ireland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Iceland, Israel, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Libya, Sudan, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Uganda, Tanzania.

Methodology and Indicators

Methodology combined legal analysis, surveys of practitioners, and administrative records, drawing on templates used by International Labour Organization, World Trade Organization, World Health Organization, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, United Nations Development Programme, and metrics comparable to indices such as the Global Competitiveness Report, Global Innovation Index, Corruption Perceptions Index, Human Development Index, Logistics Performance Index, Transparency International outputs, and datasets from United Nations Statistical Division. Core indicators included starting a business, dealing with construction permits, getting electricity, registering property, getting credit, protecting minority investors, paying taxes, trading across borders, enforcing contracts, and resolving insolvency; these were operationalised with benchmarks referencing laws such as Companies Act 2006, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (India), Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, European Union directives, World Customs Organization standards, International Accounting Standards Board rules, and court procedures exemplified by institutions like the Supreme Court of the United States, Supreme Court of India, European Court of Justice, International Court of Justice.

Global Rankings and Trends

Annual reports produced rankings that affected narratives around emerging markets like China, India, Brazil, Mexico, Indonesia, Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, South Korea, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and frontier economies including Rwanda and Georgia. The index correlated with capital flows tracked by Bank for International Settlements statistics, foreign direct investment patterns studied by United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, sovereign credit assessments by Moody's Investors Service, Standard & Poor's, and Fitch Ratings, and multilateral lending priorities at the World Bank Group and International Monetary Fund. Reports highlighted reform waves during administrations such as those led by Narendra Modi, Joko Widodo, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Justin Trudeau, Emmanuel Macron, Angela Merkel, Tony Blair, David Cameron, and Barack Obama.

Criticism and Controversies

Critics from institutions including Harvard University, London School of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Oxford, University of Chicago, Princeton University, Yale University, Columbia University, Stanford University, University of California, Berkeley, and think tanks such as Brookings Institution, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Chatham House, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Cato Institute, Heritage Foundation, Center for Global Development argued that methodology favoured deregulation narratives promoted by actors like International Monetary Fund programs, Washington Consensus–era prescriptions, and bilateral advisors from agencies like United States Agency for International Development, UK Department for International Development, and Agence française de développement. Controversies included allegations of data irregularities involving high-profile cases linked to staff and management at the World Bank, inquiries by audit bodies such as Office of the Inspector General (World Bank), and parliamentary scrutiny by legislatures including the United States Congress and Parliament of the United Kingdom. Scholarly critiques cited works from authors like Dani Rodrik, Ha-Joon Chang, Joseph Stiglitz, Amartya Sen, Thomas Piketty, Paul Krugman, Daron Acemoglu, James Robinson, Angus Deaton, and Esther Duflo.

Impact on Policy and Investment

Findings were used by finance ministries, central banks, investment promotion agencies like Invest India, Invest in France, Invest Hong Kong, Singapore Economic Development Board, and sovereign funds including Government Pension Fund of Norway and Abu Dhabi Investment Authority to justify regulatory reforms, special economic zones such as Shenzhen Special Economic Zone, trade facilitation measures aligned with WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement, and public–private dialogues involving chambers such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Confederation of Indian Industry, Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce & Industry, Confederation of British Industry, and Federation of German Industries. Private investors and multinationals including Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, BlackRock, Vanguard, HSBC, Standard Chartered, BP, Shell plc, ExxonMobil, Toyota Motor Corporation, Samsung Electronics, Huawei, Siemens, General Electric, Amazon (company), and Alibaba Group used rankings alongside macroeconomic indicators from International Monetary Fund and World Bank country briefs.

Country Case Studies

Case studies examined reform trajectories in countries such as Rwanda (streamlining registration), Georgia (country) (judicial and land reforms), India (federal and state reforms), China (administrative simplification), New Zealand (baseline high ranking), Denmark (regulatory quality), Singapore (business facilitation), United States (state-by-state variation), United Kingdom (post‑Brexit adjustments), Brazil (tax and labor reforms), Mexico (trade and customs), Argentina (macroeconomic volatility), Ethiopia (investment law changes), Kenya (infrastructure and digital services), Nigeria (institutional constraints), Vietnam (manufacturing competitiveness), Poland (EU accession reforms), Chile (trade liberalisation), Colombia (security and reform), Turkey (business climate shifts), Saudi Arabia (Vision 2030 reforms), United Arab Emirates (free zones), Qatar (infrastructure projects), South Africa (regulatory bottlenecks), Australia (state-level planning), Canada (provincial variation), Japan (corporate governance), South Korea (innovation policy), Indonesia (ease of licensing), Philippines (tax administration), Malaysia (investment incentives), Thailand (tourism and trade), Israel (high-tech ecosystems), Ireland (corporate tax environment), Luxembourg (financial services), Switzerland (legal predictability), and Iceland (small-economy dynamics).

Category:World Bank