Argentina vs Central African Republic: Dealing with construction permits: Procedures (number) - Score
Argentina
52
in 2019
Central African Republic
52
in 2019
Argentina rank
123rd
Central African Republic rank
123rd
Dealing with construction permits: Procedures (number) - Score over time
- Argentina
- Central African Republic
How they compare
Argentina currently reports 52 against 52 in Central African Republic, a difference of 0.
Across all 15 years both countries report, Central African Republic has been ahead every year.
Argentina ranks 123rd and Central African Republic ranks 123rd of 188 countries.
Central African Republic has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Argentina | Central African Republic | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 32 | 52 | 20 | Central African Republic |
| 2010s | 35.2 | 52 | 16.8 | Central African Republic |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score, Argentina or Central African Republic?
- Argentina, at 52 against 52 in Central African Republic as of 2019.
- What is the difference in dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score between Argentina and Central African Republic?
- 0, with Argentina ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Argentina and Central African Republic?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Argentina and Central African Republic rank globally for dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score?
- Argentina ranks 123rd and Central African Republic ranks 123rd of 188 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Dealing with construction permits: Procedures (number) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for the number procedures 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.