New Zealand vs Sao Tome and Principe: Dealing with construction permits: Cost (% of Warehouse value) - Score
New Zealand
89.2%
in 2019
Sao Tome and Principe
89.0%
in 2019
New Zealand rank
86th
Sao Tome and Principe rank
88th
Dealing with construction permits: Cost (% of Warehouse value) - Score over time
- New Zealand
- Sao Tome and Principe
How they compare
New Zealand currently reports 89.2% against 89.0% in Sao Tome and Principe, a difference of 0.2%.
Across all 15 years both countries report, New Zealand has been ahead every year.
New Zealand ranks 86th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 88th of 191 countries.
New Zealand has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | New Zealand | Sao Tome and Principe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 96.2% | 85.5% | 10.7% | New Zealand |
| 2010s | 90.5% | 88.0% | 2.5% | New Zealand |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher dealing with construction permits: cost (% of warehouse value) - score, New Zealand or Sao Tome and Principe?
- New Zealand, at 89.2% against 89.0% in Sao Tome and Principe as of 2019.
- What is the difference in dealing with construction permits: cost (% of warehouse value) - score between New Zealand and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 0.2%, with New Zealand ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for New Zealand and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do New Zealand and Sao Tome and Principe rank globally for dealing with construction permits: cost (% of warehouse value) - score?
- New Zealand ranks 86th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 88th 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.