Cambodia vs Tajikistan: Dealing with construction permits: Cost (% of Warehouse value) - Score
Cambodia
84.9%
in 2019
Tajikistan
85.1%
in 2019
Cambodia rank
101st
Tajikistan rank
100th
Dealing with construction permits: Cost (% of Warehouse value) - Score over time
- Cambodia
- Tajikistan
How they compare
Tajikistan currently reports 85.1% against 84.9% in Cambodia, a difference of 0.2%.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Cambodia ahead.
Cambodia ranks 101st and Tajikistan ranks 100th of 191 countries.
Cambodia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Cambodia | Tajikistan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 94.3% | 24.7% | 69.6% | Cambodia |
| 2010s | 77.2% | 76.3% | 0.9% | Cambodia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher dealing with construction permits: cost (% of warehouse value) - score, Cambodia or Tajikistan?
- Tajikistan, at 85.1% against 84.9% in Cambodia as of 2019.
- What is the difference in dealing with construction permits: cost (% of warehouse value) - score between Cambodia and Tajikistan?
- 0.2%, with Tajikistan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Cambodia and Tajikistan?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Cambodia and Tajikistan rank globally for dealing with construction permits: cost (% of warehouse value) - score?
- Cambodia ranks 101st and Tajikistan ranks 100th 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.