Statizoid

Dealing with construction permits: Liability and insurance regimes index (0-2) (DB16-20 methodology) by country

The liability and insurance regimes index evaluates the stringency of latent defect liability and insurance regimes. It has two components: (i) whether any parties involved in the construction process are held legally liable for latent defects such as structural flaws or problems in the building once it is in use;...

Countries reporting
185
Highest
2 DB16-20 methodology
Albania
Lowest
0 DB16-20 methodology
Zambia
Median
1 DB16-20 methodology
Years covered
6
2014–2019
Data points
1,109

What the numbers show

Dealing with construction permits: Liability and insurance regimes index (0-2) (DB16-20 methodology) is currently reported for 185 countries. The highest value is 2 DB16-20 methodology in Albania; the lowest is 0 DB16-20 methodology in Zambia.

The median across all reporting countries is 1 DB16-20 methodology, and the mean is 0.8489 DB16-20 methodology.

Over the past decade 2 countries rose and 1 fell. The largest increase was in Philippines (up 100.0%), and the largest decrease in Singapore (down 100.0%).

Dealing with construction permits: Liability and insurance regimes: full country ranking

#Country LatestYear 10-year changeTrend
1 Albania 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 United Arab Emirates 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Austria 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Belgium 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Benin 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Burkina Faso 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Bulgaria 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Canada 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 China (People’s Republic of) 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Cameroon 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Congo, Republic of 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Colombia 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Cape Verde 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Algeria 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Egypt, Arab Republic of 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 France 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People's Republic of China 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Indonesia 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 India 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” volatile
1 Israel 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Italy 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Kuwait 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Lebanon 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Luxembourg 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Morocco 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Malta 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Mongolia 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Mauritius 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 New Zealand 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Philippines 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 100.0% rising
1 Poland 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Rwanda 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 100.0% rising
1 Senegal 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Serbia, Republic of 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Chad 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
1 Togo 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” volatile
1 Tunisia 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
38 Iran, Islamic Republic of 1.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
38 Mali 1.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
38 Suriname 1.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
41 Mexico 1.17 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Afghanistan 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Angola 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Argentina 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Australia 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Burundi 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Bahrain, Kingdom of 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Belarus, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Bolivia 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Brazil 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Chile 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 CΓ΄te d'Ivoire 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Congo, Democratic Republic of the 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Comoros, Union of the 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Costa Rica 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Czechia 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Djibouti 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” volatile
42 Denmark 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Dominican Republic 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Ecuador 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Spain 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Estonia 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Fiji, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Georgia 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” volatile
42 Ghana 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Guinea 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” volatile
42 Equatorial Guinea, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Greece 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Guatemala 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Honduras 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Croatia 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Hungary 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Jamaica 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Jordan 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Japan 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Kazakhstan, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Korea 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Lithuania 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Moldova, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Madagascar, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 North Macedonia 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Montenegro 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Malaysia 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Niger 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Netherlands 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Oman 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Panama 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Peru 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Puerto Rico 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Portugal 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Paraguay 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Qatar 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Romania 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Russia 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Sudan 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Solomon Islands 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 San Marino 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Slovak Republic 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Slovenia 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Thailand 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Tonga 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 TΓΌrkiye 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Ukraine 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Uruguay 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Uzbekistan 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 St. Vincent and the Grenadines 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Venezuela, RepΓΊblica Bolivariana de 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Kosovo 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Taiwan, China 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
111 Pakistan 0.975 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
112 Barbados 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
112 Germany 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
112 Gabon 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” volatile
112 Guinea-Bissau 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
112 Iraq 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
112 Kiribati 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
112 Lao People's Democratic Republic 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
112 St. Lucia 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
112 Mauritania, Islamic Republic of 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
112 Malawi 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
112 Namibia 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
112 Nicaragua 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
112 Sao Tome and Principe 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
112 Zimbabwe 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
126 United States 0.4 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
127 Armenia, Republic of 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Antigua and Barbuda 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Azerbaijan, Republic of 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Bangladesh 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Bahamas, The 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Belize 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Brunei Darussalam 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Bhutan 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Botswana 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Central African Republic 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Switzerland 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Cyprus 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Dominica 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Ethiopia, The Federal Democratic Republic of 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Finland 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Micronesia, Federated States of 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 United Kingdom 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Gambia 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Grenada 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Guyana 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Haiti 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Ireland 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Iceland 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Kenya 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Kyrgyz Republic 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Cambodia 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 St. Kitts and Nevis 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Liberia 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Sri Lanka 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Lesotho, Kingdom of 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Latvia 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Maldives 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Marshall Islands 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Myanmar 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Mozambique, Republic of 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Nigeria 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Norway 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Nepal 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Palau, Republic of 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Papua New Guinea 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Palestine, State of 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Saudi Arabia 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Singapore 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 100.0% volatile
127 Sierra Leone 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 El Salvador 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 South Sudan 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Sweden 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Eswatini 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Seychelles 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Tajikistan, Republic of 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Timor-Leste 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Trinidad and Tobago 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Tanzania, United Republic of 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Uganda 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Vietnam 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Vanuatu 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Samoa 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 South Africa 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat
127 Zambia 0 DB16-20 methodology 2019 β€” flat

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Dealing with construction permits: Liability and insurance regimes by country. Statizoid. Retrieved 19 August 2026, from https://private-sector.statizoid.com/stat/dealing-with-construction-permits-liability-and-insurance-regimes-index-0-2-db16-20/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://private-sector.statizoid.com/stat/dealing-with-construction-permits-liability-and-insurance-regimes-index-0-2-db16-20/">Dealing with construction permits: Liability and insurance regimes by country</a> β€” Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Dealing with construction permits: Liability and insurance regimes index (0-2) (DB16-20 methodology)
Unit
DB16-20 methodology
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
185 places, 1,109 data points, 2014–2019
Last refreshed

The liability and insurance regimes index evaluates the stringency of latent defect liability and insurance regimes. It has two components: (i) whether any parties involved in the construction process are held legally liable for latent defects such as structural flaws or problems in the building once it is in use; (ii) whether any party involved in the construction process is legally required to obtain a latent defect liability or decennial (10 years) liability insurance policy to cover possible structural flaws or problems in the building once it is in use. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.