Dealing with construction: Liability and insurance in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines: Dealing with construction: Liability and insurance was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019. ▬ Flat
Latest (2019)
1 DB16-20 methodology
Change on year
unchanged
World rank
42nd
of 186 countries
All-time high
1 DB16-20 methodology
in 2014
All-time low
1 DB16-20 methodology
in 2014
Years of data
6
2014–2019
Dealing with construction permits: Liability and insurance regimes in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, 2014–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB16-20 methodology.
Analysis
In 2019, dealing with construction permits: liability and insurance regimes in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines stood at 1 DB16-20 methodology. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.
That represents a change of unchanged over ten years.
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ranks 42nd of 186 countries on this measure, in the top quarter.
Dealing with construction: Liability and insurance in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, year by year
| Year | DB16-20 methodology | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2014 | 1 DB16-20 methodology | — |
| 2015 | 1 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2016 | 1 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 1 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2018 | 1 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 1 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines compared with similar countries
- Saint Vincent and the Grenadines's 1 DB16-20 methodology is above the median for upper middle income countries, which is 1 DB16-20 methodology, 1.0× the median. (55 countries reporting)
- Saint Vincent and the Grenadines's 1 DB16-20 methodology is above the median for Latin America & Caribbean, which is 1 DB16-20 methodology, 1.0× the median. (33 countries reporting)
Countries ranked near Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
- 41 Mexico 1.17 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Russia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Japan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Brazil 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Afghanistan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Angola 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Argentina 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Australia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Bahrain 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Belarus 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Bolivia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Burundi 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Chile 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Comoros 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Democratic Republic of Congo 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Costa Rica 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Cote d'Ivoire 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Croatia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Czechia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Denmark 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Djibouti 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Dominican Republic 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Ecuador 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Equatorial Guinea 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Estonia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Fiji 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Georgia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Ghana 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Greece 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Guatemala 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Guinea 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Honduras 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Hungary 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Jamaica 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Jordan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Kazakhstan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 South Korea 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Kosovo 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Lithuania 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Madagascar 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Malaysia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Moldova 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Montenegro 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Netherlands 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Niger 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 North Macedonia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Oman 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Panama 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Paraguay 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Peru 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Portugal 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Puerto Rico 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Qatar 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Romania 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 San Marino 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Slovakia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Slovenia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Solomon Islands 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Spain 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Sudan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Taiwan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Thailand 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Tonga 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Turkey 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Ukraine 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Uruguay 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Uzbekistan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Venezuela 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 42 Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
More private sector data for Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
- Merchandise trade 43.5% (2025)
- Food imports 26.0% (2023)
- Manufactures imports 61.3% (2023)
- Merchandise imports 509.00 million current US$ (2025)
- Commercial service imports 209.19 million current US$ (2025)
- Food exports 72.5% (2023)
- Manufactures exports 26.6% (2023)
- Merchandise exports 37.00 million current US$ (2025)
- Commercial service exports 380.27 million current US$ (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per capita 370.28 current US$ per person (2025)
Frequently asked questions
- What is dealing with construction permits: liability and insurance regimes in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines?
- Dealing with construction permits: liability and insurance regimes in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest dealing with construction permits: liability and insurance regimes recorded in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines?
- The highest recorded value was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- What is the lowest dealing with construction permits: liability and insurance regimes recorded in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines?
- The lowest recorded value was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- How does Saint Vincent and the Grenadines rank for dealing with construction permits: liability and insurance regimes?
- Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ranks 42nd out of 186 countries with data for 2019.
- Is dealing with construction permits: liability and insurance regimes rising or falling in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this Saint Vincent and the Grenadines data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Dealing with construction permits: Liability and insurance regimes index (0-2) (DB16-20 methodology). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 6 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
About this data
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.