Malaysia vs United Arab Emirates: Dealing with construction permits: Time (days) - Score
Malaysia
95.68
in 2019
United Arab Emirates
93.8
in 2019
Malaysia rank
4th
United Arab Emirates rank
5th
Dealing with construction permits: Time (days) - Score over time
- Malaysia
- United Arab Emirates
How they compare
Malaysia currently reports 95.68 against 93.8 in United Arab Emirates, a difference of 1.88.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was United Arab Emirates ahead.
Malaysia ranks 4th and United Arab Emirates ranks 5th of 188 countries.
United Arab Emirates has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Malaysia | United Arab Emirates | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 28.13 | 85.56 | 57.44 | United Arab Emirates |
| 2010s | 76.89 | 93.59 | 16.7 | United Arab Emirates |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher dealing with construction permits: time (days) - score, Malaysia or United Arab Emirates?
- Malaysia, at 95.68 against 93.8 in United Arab Emirates as of 2019.
- What is the difference in dealing with construction permits: time (days) - score between Malaysia and United Arab Emirates?
- 1.88, with Malaysia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Malaysia and United Arab Emirates?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Malaysia and United Arab Emirates rank globally for dealing with construction permits: time (days) - score?
- Malaysia ranks 4th and United Arab Emirates ranks 5th of 188 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Dealing with construction permits: Time (days) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for time 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.