Croatia vs Philippines: Dealing with construction permits: Procedures (number) - Score

Croatia
32
in 2019
Philippines
32
in 2019
Croatia rank
173rd
Philippines rank
173rd

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

  • Croatia
  • Philippines
0102030200520122019

How they compare

Croatia currently reports 32 against 32 in Philippines, a difference of 0.

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

Croatia ranks 173rd and Philippines ranks 173rd of 188 countries.

Croatia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Croatia Philippines Difference Ahead
2000s 29.6 12.8 16.8 Croatia
2010s 32 24 8 Croatia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score, Croatia or Philippines?
Croatia, at 32 against 32 in Philippines as of 2019.
What is the difference in dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score between Croatia and Philippines?
0, with Croatia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Croatia and Philippines?
15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
How do Croatia and Philippines rank globally for dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score?
Croatia ranks 173rd and Philippines ranks 173rd 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.