Dealing with construction permits: Quality control after construction in Kosovo (UNSCR 1244)
Kosovo (UNSCR 1244): 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 Kosovo (UNSCR 1244), 2014–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB16-20 methodology.
Analysis
In 2019, dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction in Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) stood at 3 DB16-20 methodology. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.
The figure is unchanged over ten years.
Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) ranks 1st of 186 countries on this measure, in the top 10%.
Dealing with construction permits: Quality control after construction in Kosovo (UNSCR 1244), year by year
| Year | DB16-20 methodology | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2014 | 3 DB16-20 methodology | — |
| 2015 | 3 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2016 | 3 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 3 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2018 | 3 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 3 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
Countries ranked near Kosovo (UNSCR 1244)
- 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 of America 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Russian Federation 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 Darussalam 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 Greece 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Guatemala 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Honduras 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hong Kong, China 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hungary 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iceland 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iran, Islamic Republic of 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 Republic of Korea 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kosovo 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kuwait 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kyrgyzstan 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lao People's Democratic Republic 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 Republic of 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, China 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tajikistan 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tanzania, United Republic of 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 Türkiye 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 of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 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, Bolivarian Republic of 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Viet Nam 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Palestine, State of 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Zimbabwe 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
More private sector data for Kosovo (UNSCR 1244)
- Commercial service exports 4.87 billion current US$ (2025)
- Transport services 20.0% (2025)
- Computer, communications and other services 18.0% (2025)
- Commercial service imports 2.18 billion current US$ (2025)
- Computer, communications and other services 19.3% (2025)
- Travel services 55.9% (2025)
- Travel services 75.7% (2025)
- Transport services 4.5% (2025)
- Insurance and financial services 6.2% (2025)
- Merchandise imports from economies in the Arab World 1.4% (2023)
Frequently asked questions
- What is dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction in Kosovo (UNSCR 1244)?
- Dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction in Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) 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 Kosovo (UNSCR 1244)?
- 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 Kosovo (UNSCR 1244)?
- The lowest recorded value was 3 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- How does Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) rank for dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction?
- Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) ranks 1st out of 186 countries with data for 2019.
- Is dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction rising or falling in Kosovo (UNSCR 1244)?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) 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.