Dealing with construction permits: Quality control before in Côte d'Ivoire
Côte d'Ivoire: Dealing with construction permits: Quality control before was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019. ◆ Volatile
Dealing with construction permits: Quality control before in Côte d'Ivoire, 2014–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB16-20 methodology.
Analysis
In 2019, dealing with construction permits: quality control before in Côte d'Ivoire stood at 1 DB16-20 methodology. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.
That places Côte d'Ivoire 1st out of 185 countries with data for 2019, putting it in the top 10%.
Countries ranked near Côte d'Ivoire
- 1 China (People’s Republic of) 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bangladesh 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 India 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Indonesia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Nigeria 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Pakistan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United States 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mexico 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Russian Federation 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Japan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Brazil 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Afghanistan, Islamic Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Albania 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Algeria 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Angola 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Argentina 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Armenia, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Australia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Azerbaijan, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bahamas, The 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bahrain, Kingdom of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belarus, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belgium 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belize 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Benin 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bhutan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bolivia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Brunei Darussalam 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bulgaria 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Burkina Faso 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cabo Verde 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cambodia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cameroon 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Canada 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Central African Republic 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Chile 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Colombia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Comoros, Union of the 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Congo, Democratic Republic of the 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Congo, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Costa Rica 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cyprus 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Denmark 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Djibouti 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Dominica 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Dominican Republic 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ecuador 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Egypt, Arab Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 El Salvador 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Estonia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Eswatini, Kingdom of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ethiopia, The Federal Democratic Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Fiji, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Finland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 France 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Gabon 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Gambia, The 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Georgia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Germany 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ghana 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Greece 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Grenada 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Guatemala 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Guinea 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Guinea-Bissau 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Haiti 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Honduras 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People's Republic of China 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hungary 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iceland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iraq 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ireland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Israel 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Jamaica 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Jordan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kazakhstan, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kenya 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kiribati 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kosovo 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kuwait 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kyrgyz Republic 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lao People's Democratic Republic 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Latvia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lebanon 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lesotho, Kingdom of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Liberia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lithuania 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Luxembourg 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Madagascar, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malawi 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malaysia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Maldives 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mali 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malta 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mauritania, Islamic Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mauritius 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Moldova, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mongolia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Montenegro 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Morocco 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mozambique, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Myanmar 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Namibia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Nepal 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Netherlands 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 New Zealand 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Nicaragua 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Niger 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 North Macedonia, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Norway 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Oman 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Panama 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Papua New Guinea 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Paraguay 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Peru 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Philippines 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Poland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Portugal 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Puerto Rico 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Qatar 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Romania 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Rwanda 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Samoa 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 San Marino, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saudi Arabia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Senegal 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Serbia, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sierra Leone 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Singapore 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Slovenia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Solomon Islands 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 South Africa 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 South Sudan, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Spain 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 St. Kitts and Nevis 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 St. Lucia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 St. Vincent and the Grenadines 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sudan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Suriname 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sweden 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Switzerland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Taiwan Province of China 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tajikistan, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tanzania, United Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Thailand 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Togo 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tonga 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Trinidad and Tobago 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tunisia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Türkiye 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uganda 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United Arab Emirates 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United Kingdom 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uruguay 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uzbekistan, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Venezuela, República Bolivariana de 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Vietnam 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Palestine, State of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Zambia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
More private sector data for Côte d'Ivoire
- Merchandise trade 47.9% (2025)
- Food imports 20.5% (2024)
- Manufactures imports 51.2% (2024)
- Merchandise imports 19.27 billion current US$ (2025)
- Food exports 47.2% (2024)
- Manufactures exports 8.0% (2024)
- Merchandise exports 28.47 billion current US$ (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per capita 870.37 current US$ per person (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per unit of GDP 0.2854 current US$ per US$ of GDP (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), annual growth rate 38.55 % change on previous year (2025)
Frequently asked questions
- What is dealing with construction permits: quality control before in Côte d'Ivoire?
- Dealing with construction permits: quality control before in Côte d'Ivoire was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest dealing with construction permits: quality control before recorded in Côte d'Ivoire?
- The highest recorded value was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2018.
- What is the lowest dealing with construction permits: quality control before recorded in Côte d'Ivoire?
- The lowest recorded value was 0 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- How does Côte d'Ivoire rank for dealing with construction permits: quality control before?
- Côte d'Ivoire ranks 1st out of 185 countries with data for 2019.
- Where does this Côte d'Ivoire data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Dealing with construction permits: Quality control before construction index (0-1) (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 before construction index evaluates quality control in the review of the building plans. The index measures whether by law, a licensed architect or engineer is part of the committee or team that reviews and approves building permit applications and whether that person has the authority to refuse an application if the plans are not in conformity with regulations. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.