Mozambique vs Serbia: Dealing with construction permits: Procedures (number) - Score

Mozambique
76
in 2019
Serbia
76
in 2019
Mozambique rank
27th
Serbia rank
27th

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

  • Mozambique
  • Serbia
020406080200520122019

How they compare

Mozambique currently reports 76 against 76 in Serbia, a difference of 0.

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

Mozambique ranks 27th and Serbia ranks 27th of 188 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Mozambique Serbia Difference Ahead
2000s 76 47.2 28.8 Mozambique
2010s 76 57.2 18.8 Mozambique

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score, Mozambique or Serbia?
Mozambique, at 76 against 76 in Serbia as of 2019.
What is the difference in dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score between Mozambique and Serbia?
0, with Mozambique ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Mozambique and Serbia?
15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
How do Mozambique and Serbia rank globally for dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score?
Mozambique ranks 27th and Serbia ranks 27th 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.