Brunei vs Equatorial Guinea: Dealing with construction permits (DB06-15 methodology) - Score
Dealing with construction permits (DB06-15 methodology) - Score over time
- Brunei
- Equatorial Guinea
How they compare
Equatorial Guinea currently reports 71.2 against 71.13 in Brunei, a difference of 0.07.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 9 shared years of data; in 2006 it was Equatorial Guinea ahead.
Brunei ranks 63rd and Equatorial Guinea ranks 62nd of 181 countries.
Equatorial Guinea has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Brunei | Equatorial Guinea | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 68.45 | 71.18 | 2.73 | Equatorial Guinea |
| 2010s | 71.08 | 71.19 | 0.1169 | Equatorial Guinea |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher dealing with construction permits (db06-15 methodology) - score, Brunei or Equatorial Guinea?
- Equatorial Guinea, at 71.2 against 71.13 in Brunei as of 2014.
- What is the difference in dealing with construction permits (db06-15 methodology) - score between Brunei and Equatorial Guinea?
- 0.07, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Brunei and Equatorial Guinea?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2006 to 2014.
- How do Brunei and Equatorial Guinea rank globally for dealing with construction permits (db06-15 methodology) - score?
- Brunei ranks 63rd and Equatorial Guinea ranks 62nd of 181 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Dealing with construction permits (DB06-15 methodology) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for dealing with construction permits is the simple average of the scores for each of the component indicators: the procedures, time, cost to deal with construction permits, as well as the building quality control index that evaluate the quality of building regulations, the strength of quality control and safety mechanisms, liability and insurance regimes and professional certification requirements. The score is computed based on the methodology in the DB06-15 studies.