Dealing with construction permits: Quality control after construction in Greece
Greece: Dealing with construction permits: Quality control after construction was 3 DB16-20 methodology in 2019. ▬ Flat
Dealing with construction permits: Quality control after construction in Greece, 2014–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB16-20 methodology.
Analysis
In 2019, dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction in Greece stood at 3 DB16-20 methodology. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.
That represents a change of unchanged over ten years.
That places Greece 1st out of 183 countries with data for 2019, putting it in the top 10%.
Countries ranked near Greece
- 1 China 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bangladesh 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 India 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Indonesia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Pakistan 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United States 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Russia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Japan 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Albania 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Algeria 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Argentina 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Armenia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Australia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Austria 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Azerbaijan 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bahamas 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bahrain 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Barbados 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belarus 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belgium 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belize 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bhutan 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bosnia and Herzegovina 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Botswana 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Brunei 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bulgaria 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Burkina Faso 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cape Verde 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Canada 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Chad 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Chile 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Colombia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Costa Rica 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Croatia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cyprus 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Czechia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Denmark 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Djibouti 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Dominican Republic 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ecuador 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Egypt 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 El Salvador 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Estonia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Eswatini 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Fiji 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Finland 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Georgia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Guatemala 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Honduras 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hong Kong 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hungary 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iceland 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iran 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ireland 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Israel 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Italy 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Jordan 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kazakhstan 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 South Korea 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kuwait 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kyrgyzstan 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Laos 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Latvia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lebanon 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lithuania 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Luxembourg 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malawi 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malaysia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malta 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mauritius 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Moldova 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mongolia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Montenegro 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Morocco 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mozambique 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Myanmar 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Namibia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Nepal 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Netherlands 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 New Zealand 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 North Macedonia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Norway 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Oman 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Palau 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Panama 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Papua New Guinea 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Paraguay 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Peru 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Philippines 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Portugal 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Puerto Rico 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Qatar 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Romania 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Rwanda 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 San Marino 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saudi Arabia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Serbia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Seychelles 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sierra Leone 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Singapore 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Slovakia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Slovenia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 South Africa 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Spain 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sri Lanka 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saint Kitts and Nevis 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saint Lucia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sweden 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Switzerland 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Taiwan 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tajikistan 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tanzania 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Thailand 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tonga 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Trinidad and Tobago 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tunisia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Turkey 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uganda 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ukraine 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United Arab Emirates 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United Kingdom 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uruguay 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uzbekistan 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Vanuatu 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Venezuela 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Vietnam 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Palestine 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Zimbabwe 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
More private sector data for Greece
- Merchandise trade 52.5% (2025)
- Food imports 13.1% (2024)
- Manufactures imports 54.6% (2024)
- Merchandise imports 92.56 billion current US$ (2025)
- Food exports 21.7% (2024)
- Manufactures exports 37.1% (2024)
- Merchandise exports 54.77 billion current US$ (2025)
- Commercial service exports 55.64 billion current US$ (2024)
- Transport services 64.0% (2024)
- Computer, communications and other services 17.4% (2024)
Frequently asked questions
- What is dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction in Greece?
- Dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction in Greece was 3 DB16-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction recorded in Greece?
- The highest recorded value was 3 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- What is the lowest dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction recorded in Greece?
- The lowest recorded value was 3 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- How does Greece rank for dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction?
- Greece ranks 1st out of 183 countries with data for 2019.
- Is dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction rising or falling in Greece?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this Greece data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Dealing with construction permits: Quality control after construction index (0-3) (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 quality control after construction index evaluates quality control after the construction process. It has two components: (i) whether a final inspection is mandated by law to verify that the building was built in accordance with the approved plans and existing building regulations; and (ii) whether the final inspection is implemented in practice. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.