Dealing with construction permits: Quality control after construction in North Macedonia, Republic of
North Macedonia, Republic of: 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 North Macedonia, Republic of, 2014–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB16-20 methodology.
Analysis
The most recent figure for dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction in North Macedonia, Republic of is 3 DB16-20 methodology, measured in 2019. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.
That represents a change of unchanged over ten years.
North Macedonia, Republic of ranks 1st of 185 countries on this measure, in the top 10%.
Countries ranked near North Macedonia, Republic of
- 1 China (People’s Republic of) 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 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, Republic of 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Australia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Austria 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Azerbaijan, Republic of 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bahamas, The 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bahrain, Kingdom of 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Barbados 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belarus, Republic of 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 Cabo 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, Republic of 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cyprus 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Czech Republic 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, Arab Republic of 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 El Salvador 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Estonia, Republic of 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Eswatini, Kingdom of 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Fiji, Republic of 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 Special Administrative Region, People's Republic of 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, Republic of 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Korea, Republic of 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kosovo 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kuwait 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kyrgyz Republic 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lao People's Democratic Republic 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Latvia, Republic of 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lebanon 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lithuania, Republic of 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, Republic of 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, Republic of 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, The 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 New Zealand 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Norway 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Oman 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Palau, Republic of 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, Republic of 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saudi Arabia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Serbia, Republic of 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 Slovak Republic 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Slovenia, Republic of 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 St. Kitts and Nevis 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 St. Lucia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sweden 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Switzerland 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Chinese Taipei 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tajikistan, Republic of 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, Republic of 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, Republic of 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Vanuatu 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Venezuela, República Bolivariana de 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 North Macedonia, Republic of
- Merchandise trade 115.8% (2025)
- Food imports 11.7% (2024)
- Manufactures imports 64.5% (2024)
- Merchandise imports 13.06 billion current US$ (2025)
- Food exports 10.6% (2024)
- Manufactures exports 80.6% (2024)
- Merchandise exports 9.06 billion current US$ (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per capita 4,973 current US$ per person (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per unit of GDP 0.4741 current US$ per US$ of GDP (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), annual growth rate 7.53 % change on previous year (2025)
Frequently asked questions
- What is dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction in North Macedonia, Republic of?
- Dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction in North Macedonia, Republic of 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 North Macedonia, Republic of?
- 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 North Macedonia, Republic of?
- The lowest recorded value was 3 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- How does North Macedonia, Republic of rank for dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction?
- North Macedonia, Republic of ranks 1st out of 185 countries with data for 2019.
- Is dealing with construction permits: quality control after construction rising or falling in North Macedonia, Republic of?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this North Macedonia, Republic of 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.