Hong Kong vs United Kingdom: Dealing with construction permits (DB06-15 methodology) - Score
Dealing with construction permits (DB06-15 methodology) - Score over time
- Hong Kong
- United Kingdom
How they compare
Hong Kong currently reports 88.29 against 86.82 in United Kingdom, a difference of 1.47.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was United Kingdom ahead.
Hong Kong ranks 3rd and United Kingdom ranks 5th of 184 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Hong Kong averaged higher in 1 and United Kingdom in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Hong Kong | United Kingdom | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 64.77 | 73.47 | 8.7 | United Kingdom |
| 2010s | 88.28 | 86.61 | 1.67 | Hong Kong |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher dealing with construction permits (db06-15 methodology) - score, Hong Kong or United Kingdom?
- Hong Kong, at 88.29 against 86.82 in United Kingdom as of 2014.
- What is the difference in dealing with construction permits (db06-15 methodology) - score between Hong Kong and United Kingdom?
- 1.47, with Hong Kong ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Hong Kong and United Kingdom?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Hong Kong and United Kingdom rank globally for dealing with construction permits (db06-15 methodology) - score?
- Hong Kong ranks 3rd and United Kingdom ranks 5th of 184 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.