Romania vs Tanzania: Dealing with construction permits: Procedures (number) - Score

Romania
24
in 2019
Tanzania
24
in 2019
Romania rank
180th
Tanzania rank
180th

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

  • Romania
  • Tanzania
0204060200520122019

How they compare

Romania currently reports 24 against 24 in Tanzania, a difference of 0.

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

Romania ranks 180th and Tanzania ranks 180th of 188 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Romania averaged higher in 1 and Tanzania in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Romania Tanzania Difference Ahead
2000s 48.8 36 12.8 Romania
2010s 26.4 27.6 1.2 Tanzania

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score, Romania or Tanzania?
Romania, at 24 against 24 in Tanzania as of 2019.
What is the difference in dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score between Romania and Tanzania?
0, with Romania ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Romania and Tanzania?
15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
How do Romania and Tanzania rank globally for dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score?
Romania ranks 180th and Tanzania ranks 180th 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.