Botswana vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Dealing with construction permits: Cost (% of Warehouse value) - Score
Botswana
98.2%
in 2019
Saint Kitts and Nevis
98.0%
in 2019
Botswana rank
18th
Saint Kitts and Nevis rank
20th
Dealing with construction permits: Cost (% of Warehouse value) - Score over time
- Botswana
- Saint Kitts and Nevis
How they compare
Botswana currently reports 98.2% against 98.0% in Saint Kitts and Nevis, a difference of 0.2%.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Saint Kitts and Nevis ahead.
Botswana ranks 18th and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 20th of 191 countries.
Saint Kitts and Nevis has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Botswana | Saint Kitts and Nevis | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 71.4% | 98.2% | 26.8% | Saint Kitts and Nevis |
| 2010s | 92.3% | 97.9% | 5.6% | Saint Kitts and Nevis |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher dealing with construction permits: cost (% of warehouse value) - score, Botswana or Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- Botswana, at 98.2% against 98.0% in Saint Kitts and Nevis as of 2019.
- What is the difference in dealing with construction permits: cost (% of warehouse value) - score between Botswana and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- 0.2%, with Botswana ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Botswana and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Botswana and Saint Kitts and Nevis rank globally for dealing with construction permits: cost (% of warehouse value) - score?
- Botswana ranks 18th and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 20th 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.