Marshall Islands vs Sweden: Dealing with construction permits: Procedures (number) - Score

Marshall Islands
92
in 2019
Sweden
88
in 2019
Marshall Islands rank
1st
Sweden rank
3rd

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

  • Marshall Islands
  • Sweden
020406080100200520122019

How they compare

Marshall Islands currently reports 92 against 88 in Sweden, a difference of 4.

Across all 15 years both countries report, Marshall Islands has been ahead every year.

Marshall Islands ranks 1st and Sweden ranks 3rd of 188 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Marshall Islands Sweden Difference Ahead
2000s 92 88 4 Marshall Islands
2010s 92 88 4 Marshall Islands

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score, Marshall Islands or Sweden?
Marshall Islands, at 92 against 88 in Sweden as of 2019.
What is the difference in dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score between Marshall Islands and Sweden?
4, with Marshall Islands ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Marshall Islands and Sweden?
15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
How do Marshall Islands and Sweden rank globally for dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score?
Marshall Islands ranks 1st and Sweden ranks 3rd 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.