Dealing with construction: Quality control before in Tajikistan
Tajikistan: Dealing with construction: Quality control before was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019. ▬ Flat
Dealing with construction permits: Quality control before in Tajikistan, 2014–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB16-20 methodology.
Analysis
In 2019, dealing with construction permits: quality control before in Tajikistan stood at 1 DB16-20 methodology. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.
Compared with earlier readings it is unchanged over ten years.
That places Tajikistan 1st out of 186 countries with data for 2019, putting it in the top 10%.
Dealing with construction: Quality control before in Tajikistan, 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% |
Tajikistan compared with similar countries
- Tajikistan's 1 DB16-20 methodology is above the median for lower middle income countries, which is 1 DB16-20 methodology, 1.0× the median. (47 countries reporting)
- Tajikistan's 1 DB16-20 methodology is above the median for Europe & Central Asia, which is 1 DB16-20 methodology, 1.0× the median. (49 countries reporting)
Countries ranked near Tajikistan
- 1 China 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 Russia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Japan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Brazil 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Afghanistan 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 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Australia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Azerbaijan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bahamas 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bahrain 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belarus 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 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bulgaria 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Burkina Faso 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cape 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 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Democratic Republic of Congo 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Congo 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Costa Rica 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cote d'Ivoire 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 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 El Salvador 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Estonia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Eswatini 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ethiopia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Fiji 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 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 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hungary 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iceland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iran 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 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 Kyrgyzstan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Laos 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Latvia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lebanon 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lesotho 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 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 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mauritius 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Moldova 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 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 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 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saudi Arabia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Senegal 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Serbia 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 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Spain 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saint Kitts and Nevis 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saint Lucia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saint 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 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tanzania 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 Turkey 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 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Venezuela 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Vietnam 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Palestine 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Zambia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
More private sector data for Tajikistan
- Merchandise trade 61.1% (2025)
- Food imports 26.5% (2023)
- Manufactures imports 61.9% (2023)
- Merchandise imports 8.31 billion current US$ (2025)
- Commercial service imports 1.12 billion current US$ (2025)
- Food exports 5.2% (2023)
- Manufactures exports 17.8% (2023)
- Merchandise exports 2.49 billion current US$ (2025)
- Commercial service exports 164.20 million current US$ (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per capita 230.75 current US$ per person (2025)
Frequently asked questions
- What is dealing with construction permits: quality control before in Tajikistan?
- Dealing with construction permits: quality control before in Tajikistan 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 Tajikistan?
- The highest recorded value was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- What is the lowest dealing with construction permits: quality control before recorded in Tajikistan?
- The lowest recorded value was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- How does Tajikistan rank for dealing with construction permits: quality control before?
- Tajikistan ranks 1st out of 186 countries with data for 2019.
- Is dealing with construction permits: quality control before rising or falling in Tajikistan?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this Tajikistan 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.