Latvia vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Dealing with construction permits: Cost (% of Warehouse value) - Score
Latvia
97.9%
in 2019
Saint Kitts and Nevis
98.0%
in 2019
Latvia rank
22nd
Saint Kitts and Nevis rank
20th
Dealing with construction permits: Cost (% of Warehouse value) - Score over time
- Latvia
- Saint Kitts and Nevis
How they compare
Saint Kitts and Nevis currently reports 98.0% against 97.9% in Latvia, a difference of 0.1%.
Across all 15 years both countries report, Saint Kitts and Nevis has been ahead every year.
Latvia ranks 22nd 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 | Latvia | Saint Kitts and Nevis | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 93.9% | 98.2% | 4.3% | Saint Kitts and Nevis |
| 2010s | 96.8% | 97.9% | 1.1% | 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, Latvia or Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- Saint Kitts and Nevis, at 98.0% against 97.9% in Latvia as of 2019.
- What is the difference in dealing with construction permits: cost (% of warehouse value) - score between Latvia and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- 0.1%, with Saint Kitts and Nevis ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Latvia and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Latvia and Saint Kitts and Nevis rank globally for dealing with construction permits: cost (% of warehouse value) - score?
- Latvia ranks 22nd 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.