Sweden vs United Kingdom: Dealing with construction permits: Procedures (number) - Score

Sweden
88
in 2019
United Kingdom
84
in 2019
Sweden rank
3rd
United Kingdom rank
6th

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

  • Sweden
  • United Kingdom
020406080200520122019

How they compare

Sweden currently reports 88 against 84 in United Kingdom, a difference of 4.

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

Sweden ranks 3rd and United Kingdom ranks 6th of 188 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Sweden United Kingdom Difference Ahead
2000s 88 58.4 29.6 Sweden
2010s 88 84 4 Sweden

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score, Sweden or United Kingdom?
Sweden, at 88 against 84 in United Kingdom as of 2019.
What is the difference in dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score between Sweden and United Kingdom?
4, with Sweden ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Sweden and United Kingdom?
15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
How do Sweden and United Kingdom rank globally for dealing with construction permits: procedures (number) - score?
Sweden ranks 3rd and United Kingdom ranks 6th 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.