Dealing with construction permits: Quality of building regulations in Mongolia
Mongolia: Dealing with construction permits: Quality of building regulations was 2 DB16-20 methodology in 2019. ▬ Flat
Dealing with construction permits: Quality of building regulations in Mongolia, 2014–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB16-20 methodology.
Analysis
In 2019, dealing with construction permits: quality of building regulations in Mongolia stood at 2 DB16-20 methodology. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.
The figure is unchanged over ten years.
Mongolia ranks 1st of 186 countries on this measure, in the top 10%.
Dealing with construction permits: Quality of building regulations in Mongolia, year by year
| Year | DB16-20 methodology | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2014 | 2 DB16-20 methodology | — |
| 2015 | 2 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2016 | 2 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 2 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2018 | 2 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 2 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
Countries ranked near Mongolia
- 1 China 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bangladesh 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 India 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Nigeria 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Pakistan 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United States of America 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mexico 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Russian Federation 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Japan 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Brazil 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Albania 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Algeria 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Antigua and Barbuda 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Argentina 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Armenia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Australia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Austria 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Azerbaijan 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bahamas 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bahrain 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Barbados 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belarus 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belgium 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belize 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Benin 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bhutan 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bosnia and Herzegovina 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Brunei Darussalam 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bulgaria 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cambodia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cameroon 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Canada 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Chile 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Colombia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Congo, Democratic Republic of the 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Costa Rica 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Côte d'Ivoire 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Croatia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Czechia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Denmark 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Djibouti 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Dominica 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Dominican Republic 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Egypt 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 El Salvador 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Estonia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Eswatini 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ethiopia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Finland 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 France 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Gabon 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Georgia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ghana 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Guatemala 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Guinea 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hong Kong, China 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hungary 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iceland 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iran, Islamic Republic of 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ireland 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Israel 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Italy 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Jamaica 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Jordan 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kazakhstan 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kenya 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Republic of Korea 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kosovo 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kuwait 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kyrgyzstan 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Latvia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lebanon 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lithuania 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Luxembourg 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Madagascar 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malaysia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Maldives 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malta 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mauritania 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mauritius 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Morocco 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Myanmar 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Namibia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Nepal 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Netherlands 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 New Zealand 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Nicaragua 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Niger 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 North Macedonia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Norway 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Oman 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Palau 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Panama 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Papua New Guinea 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Peru 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Philippines 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Portugal 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Puerto Rico 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Qatar 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Romania 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Rwanda 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 San Marino 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saudi Arabia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Senegal 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Serbia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Seychelles 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Singapore 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Slovakia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Slovenia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Solomon Islands 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 South Africa 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Spain 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sri Lanka 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saint Lucia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sudan 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sweden 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Switzerland 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Taiwan, China 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tajikistan 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tanzania, United Republic of 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Thailand 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Togo 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Trinidad and Tobago 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tunisia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Türkiye 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uganda 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ukraine 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United Arab Emirates 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uruguay 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uzbekistan 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Viet Nam 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Palestine, State of 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Zambia 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) 2 DB16-20 methodology compare
More private sector data for Mongolia
- Merchandise trade 106.7% (2025)
- Food imports 11.0% (2023)
- Manufactures imports 65.3% (2023)
- Merchandise imports 11.31 billion current US$ (2025)
- Food exports 3.3% (2023)
- Manufactures exports 1.7% (2023)
- Merchandise exports 15.76 billion current US$ (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per capita 4,416 current US$ per person (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per unit of GDP 0.6213 current US$ per US$ of GDP (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), annual growth rate -0.1394 % change on previous year (2025)
Frequently asked questions
- What is dealing with construction permits: quality of building regulations in Mongolia?
- Dealing with construction permits: quality of building regulations in Mongolia was 2 DB16-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest dealing with construction permits: quality of building regulations recorded in Mongolia?
- The highest recorded value was 2 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- What is the lowest dealing with construction permits: quality of building regulations recorded in Mongolia?
- The lowest recorded value was 2 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- How does Mongolia rank for dealing with construction permits: quality of building regulations?
- Mongolia ranks 1st out of 186 countries with data for 2019.
- Is dealing with construction permits: quality of building regulations rising or falling in Mongolia?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this Mongolia data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Dealing with construction permits: Quality of building regulations index (0-2) (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 of building regulations index evaluates the accessibility and transparency of building regulations. It has two components: (i) whether building regulations are easily accessible; and (ii) whether the requirements for obtaining a building permit are clearly specified. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.