Lebanon vs Moldova: Dealing with construction permits: Procedures (number) - Score

Lebanon
32
in 2019
Moldova
36
in 2019
Lebanon rank
173rd
Moldova rank
170th

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

  • Lebanon
  • Moldova
010203040200520122019

How they compare

Moldova currently reports 36 against 32 in Lebanon, a difference of 4.

That makes Moldova's figure about 1.1 times Lebanon's.

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

Lebanon ranks 173rd and Moldova ranks 170th of 188 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Lebanon Moldova Difference Ahead
2000s 36 8 28 Lebanon
2010s 33.2 7.6 25.6 Lebanon

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score, Lebanon or Moldova?
Moldova, at 36 against 32 in Lebanon as of 2019.
What is the difference in dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score between Lebanon and Moldova?
4, with Moldova ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Lebanon and Moldova?
15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
How do Lebanon and Moldova rank globally for dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score?
Lebanon ranks 173rd and Moldova ranks 170th 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.