Invest.climate;functioning of government international comparison 1990-2012


This table provides an international overview of several aspects of how the government functions in relation to the investment climate. The functioning of the apparatus of government is about two roles, namely:
(1) the government corrects markets that do not work well. It is expressed by the degree in which the government exerts influence on economic activity (for example by state control, sectoral and ad hoc state support and rules for starting up a business);
(2) the government as a market party, for example as a supplier of online basic public services.

Note:
Comparable definitions are used to compare the figures presented internationally. The definitions sometimes differ from definitions used by Statistics Netherlands. The figures in this table could differ from Dutch figures presented elsewhere on the website of Statistics Netherlands.

Data available from 1990 up to 2012.

Status of the figures:
The external sources of these data frequently supply adjusted figures on preceding periods. These adjusted data are not mentioned as such in the table.

Changes as of 22 December 2017:
No, table is stopped.

When will new figures be published?
Not.

Invest.climate;functioning of government international comparison 1990-2012

Countries Periods State control (score on scale 0-6) Online availability of basic public serv (% of basic public services) Starting a new businessRequired number of days (number of days) Starting a new businessRequired number of procedures (number of procedures) Starting a new businessAdministrative burden (score on scale 1-7) Government effectiveness (score on scale 0-100) Ad hoc and sectoral state support (% of Gross Domestic Product) Corporate tax rate (% of net revenues)
Belgium 2003 2.58 35 56 7 . 96.1 0.06 34.0
Belgium 2004 . 35 56 7 3.7 94.6 0.08 34.0
Belgium 2005 . . 34 4 . 93.2 0.13 34.0
Belgium 2006 . 47 34 4 . 94.6 0.11 34.0
Belgium 2007 . 63 27 4 . 91.7 0.11 34.0
Belgium 2008 2.53 . 4 3 . 87.9 0.11 34.0
Belgium 2009 . 69 4 3 . 92.8 0.13 34.0
Belgium 2010 . 79 4 3 . 93.3 0.09 34.0
Belgium 2011 . . 4 3 . 93.8 . 34.0
Belgium 2012 . . 4 3 . . . 34.0
Denmark 2003 1.34 72 7 5 4.7 99.0 0.15 30.0
Denmark 2004 . 61 7 5 4.7 100.0 0.18 30.0
Denmark 2005 . . 7 5 . 99.5 0.12 28.0
Denmark 2006 . 66 6 4 . 100.0 0.13 28.0
Denmark 2007 . 61 6 4 . 100.0 0.14 25.0
Denmark 2008 1.37 . 6 4 . 99.5 0.12 25.0
Denmark 2009 . 84 6 4 . 100.0 0.12 25.0
Denmark 2010 . 95 6 4 . 99.0 0.10 25.0
Denmark 2011 . . 6 4 . 99.5 . 25.0
Denmark 2012 . . 6 4 . . . 25.0
Finland 2003 2.01 61 31 3 5.6 100.0 0.94 29.0
Finland 2004 . 69 31 3 5.6 99.0 0.94 29.0
Finland 2005 . . 14 3 . 100.0 0.99 26.0
Finland 2006 . 64 14 3 . 99.5 0.92 26.0
Finland 2007 . 65 14 3 . 97.6 0.82 26.0
Finland 2008 1.75 . 14 3 . 99.0 0.71 26.0
Finland 2009 . 86 14 3 . 99.0 0.76 26.0
Finland 2010 . 95 14 3 . 99.5 0.71 26.0
Finland 2011 . . 14 3 . 100.0 . 26.0
Finland 2012 . . 14 3 . . . 24.5
Germany 2003 2.13 40 45 9 4.3 89.8 0.25 40.2
Germany 2004 . 47 45 9 4.1 90.2 0.23 38.9
Germany 2005 . . 45 9 . 90.7 0.20 38.9
Germany 2006 . 49 24 9 . 91.7 0.16 38.9
Germany 2007 . 72 24 9 . 93.2 0.14 38.9
Germany 2008 1.96 . 18 9 . 91.3 0.13 30.2
Germany 2009 . 74 18 9 . 92.3 0.12 30.2
Germany 2010 . 95 18 9 . 91.9 0.11 30.2
Germany 2011 . . 15 9 . 91.9 . 15.8
Germany 2012 . . 15 9 . . . 15.8
The Netherlands 2003 1.87 26 9 7 5.0 98.0 0.23 34.5
The Netherlands 2004 . 33 9 7 4.7 97.1 0.21 34.5
The Netherlands 2005 . . 9 7 . 98.0 0.20 31.5
The Netherlands 2006 . 56 9 7 . 95.6 0.13 29.6
The Netherlands 2007 . 63 8 6 . 94.7 0.17 25.5
The Netherlands 2008 1.71 . 8 6 . 94.7 0.16 25.5
The Netherlands 2009 . 71 8 6 . 95.2 0.16 25.5
The Netherlands 2010 . 95 8 6 . 94.3 0.20 25.5
The Netherlands 2011 . . 8 6 . 96.7 . 25.0
The Netherlands 2012 . . 8 6 . . . 25.0
Sweden 2003 2.77 69 15 3 . 98.5 0.09 28.0
Sweden 2004 . 76 15 3 5.4 97.6 0.09 28.0
Sweden 2005 . . 15 3 . 97.1 0.10 28.0
Sweden 2006 . 76 15 3 . 96.6 0.13 28.0
Sweden 2007 . 75 15 3 . 98.1 0.11 28.0
Sweden 2008 2.38 . 15 3 . 98.1 0.09 28.0
Sweden 2009 . 95 15 3 . 98.6 0.14 26.3
Sweden 2010 . 100 15 3 . 98.6 0.09 26.3
Sweden 2011 . . 15 3 . 98.6 . 26.3
Sweden 2012 . . 15 3 . . . 26.3
United Kingdom 2003 1.28 50 13 6 5.3 92.7 0.09 30.0
United Kingdom 2004 . 59 13 6 5.6 92.7 0.09 30.0
United Kingdom 2005 . . 13 6 . 93.7 0.07 30.0
United Kingdom 2006 . 68 13 6 . 93.2 0.07 30.0
United Kingdom 2007 . 78 13 6 . 92.7 0.06 30.0
United Kingdom 2008 1.50 . 13 6 . 93.7 0.06 28.0
United Kingdom 2009 . 93 13 6 . 90.9 0.07 28.0
United Kingdom 2010 . 98 13 6 . 92.3 0.06 28.0
United Kingdom 2011 . . 13 6 . 92.4 . 26.0
United Kingdom 2012 . . 13 6 . . . 24.0
United States 2003 1.19 . 6 6 5.8 91.2 . 39.3
United States 2004 . . 6 6 5.6 92.2 . 39.3
United States 2005 . . 6 6 . 91.2 . 39.3
United States 2006 . . 6 6 . 89.8 . 39.3
United States 2007 . . 6 6 . 90.8 . 39.3
United States 2008 1.10 . 6 6 . 89.3 . 39.3
United States 2009 . . 6 6 . 88.5 . 39.1
United States 2010 . . 6 6 . 90.0 . 39.2
United States 2011 . . 6 6 . 88.6 . 35.0
United States 2012 . . 6 6 . . . 35.0
Source: CBS.
Explanation of symbols