Australia vs Micronesia (country): Dealing with construction permits: Cost (% of Warehouse value) - Score
Australia
96.9%
in 2019
Micronesia (country)
97.1%
in 2019
Australia rank
34th
Micronesia (country) rank
32nd
Dealing with construction permits: Cost (% of Warehouse value) - Score over time
- Australia
- Micronesia (country)
How they compare
Micronesia (country) currently reports 97.1% against 96.9% in Australia, a difference of 0.2%.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Australia ahead.
Australia ranks 34th and Micronesia (country) ranks 32nd of 191 countries.
Micronesia (country) has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Australia | Micronesia (country) | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 95.8% | 95.9% | 0.1% | Micronesia (country) |
| 2010s | 96.0% | 97.1% | 1.1% | Micronesia (country) |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher dealing with construction permits: cost (% of warehouse value) - score, Australia or Micronesia (country)?
- Micronesia (country), at 97.1% against 96.9% in Australia as of 2019.
- What is the difference in dealing with construction permits: cost (% of warehouse value) - score between Australia and Micronesia (country)?
- 0.2%, with Micronesia (country) ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and Micronesia (country)?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Australia and Micronesia (country) rank globally for dealing with construction permits: cost (% of warehouse value) - score?
- Australia ranks 34th and Micronesia (country) ranks 32nd of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Dealing with construction permits: Cost (% of Warehouse value) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for cost benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. The score ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance.