Indicator
Digital trade policy framework
Implemented
Not Implemented
Not Applicable
| Level | ALB | BIH | KOS | MNE | MKD | SRB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Results of the monitoring and evaluation activities are taken into account in future policy design. | ||||||
| Programmes and initiatives related to digital trade are evaluated from the angle of output effectiveness and efficiency. | ||||||
| The digital trade law is aligned with national policy documents governing digital aspects of the economy. | ||||||
| The public has the means to influence policy design and implementation. | ||||||
| National and sub-national institutions have a formal co-ordination mechanism in place to implement digital trade policy and programmes. | ||||||
| The government collects data on digital trade, although to a limited extent. | ||||||
| The law has been subject to stakeholder consultations, including the private sector. | ||||||
| The law establishes clear and harmonized rules on a wide variety of digital trade measures (including transparency and information requirements for online service providers, commercial communications, electronic contracts and limitations of liability of intermediary service providers) | ||||||
| There is dedicated digital trade law in place. | ||||||
| Programmes and policies relating to digital trade are fully funded from the government’s budget. | ||||||
| Digital trade programmes are subject to regular monitoring and evaluation by independent agencies. | ||||||
| Sustainability objectives are integrated into digital trade policy. |
Note that for Bosnia and Herzegovina, “State” stands for the state level, while “FBiH” stands for the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and “RS” stands for Republika Srpska - the two entities of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Note that the presented scoring criteria system is not a full representation of the scoring methodology used to determine the score for an indicator. For more information, see the Methodology section.