Argentina vs Sierra Leone: Dealing with construction permits: Procedures (number) - Score

Argentina
52
in 2019
Sierra Leone
52
in 2019
Argentina rank
123rd
Sierra Leone rank
123rd

Dealing with construction permits: Procedures (number) - Score over time

  • Argentina
  • Sierra Leone
0204060200520122019

How they compare

Argentina currently reports 52 against 52 in Sierra Leone, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Argentina ahead.

Argentina ranks 123rd and Sierra Leone ranks 123rd of 188 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Argentina averaged higher in 1 and Sierra Leone in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Argentina Sierra Leone Difference Ahead
2000s 32 19.2 12.8 Argentina
2010s 35.2 51.6 16.4 Sierra Leone

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score, Argentina or Sierra Leone?
Argentina, at 52 against 52 in Sierra Leone as of 2019.
What is the difference in dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score between Argentina and Sierra Leone?
0, with Argentina ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Argentina and Sierra Leone?
15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
How do Argentina and Sierra Leone rank globally for dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score?
Argentina ranks 123rd and Sierra Leone 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

Indicator
Dealing with construction permits: Procedures (number) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 2,783 data points, 2005–2019
Last refreshed

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.