Registering property: Transparency of information index (0-6) in Rwanda
Rwanda: Registering property: Transparency of information index (0-6) was 4.5 DB16-20 methodology in 2019. ▲ Rising
Registering property: Transparency of information index (0-6) in Rwanda, 2015–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB16-20 methodology.
Analysis
In 2019, registering property: transparency of information index (0-6) in Rwanda stood at 4.5 DB16-20 methodology. That is the highest value across all 5 years on record.
The figure is up 200.0% over five years.
Rwanda ranks 13th of 186 countries on this measure, in the top 10%.
Registering property: Transparency of information index (0-6) in Rwanda, year by year
| Year | DB16-20 methodology | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 1.5 DB16-20 methodology | — |
| 2016 | 4.5 DB16-20 methodology | +200.0% |
| 2017 | 4.5 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2018 | 4.5 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 4.5 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
Countries ranked near Rwanda
- 11 Brazil 5.2 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 12 Seychelles 5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Armenia 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Belarus 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Bulgaria 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Ecuador 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Georgia 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Guatemala 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Ireland 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Israel 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Italy 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Republic of Korea 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Latvia 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Lithuania 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Malaysia 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Republic of Moldova 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Myanmar 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 New Zealand 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Portugal 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Serbia 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Suriname 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Sweden 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Taiwan, China 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Thailand 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Tunisia 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 13 Vanuatu 4.5 DB16-20 methodology compare
More private sector data for Rwanda
- Merchandise trade 45.9% (2025)
- Food imports 22.4% (2022)
- Manufactures imports 50.0% (2022)
- Merchandise imports 5.07 billion current US$ (2025)
- Food exports 27.2% (2022)
- Manufactures exports 10.4% (2022)
- Merchandise exports 2.45 billion current US$ (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per capita 168.16 current US$ per person (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per unit of GDP 0.1496 current US$ per US$ of GDP (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), annual growth rate -23.46 % change on previous year (2025)
Frequently asked questions
- What is registering property: transparency of information index (0-6) in Rwanda?
- Registering property: transparency of information index (0-6) in Rwanda was 4.5 DB16-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest registering property: transparency of information index (0-6) recorded in Rwanda?
- The highest recorded value was 4.5 DB16-20 methodology in 2016.
- What is the lowest registering property: transparency of information index (0-6) recorded in Rwanda?
- The lowest recorded value was 1.5 DB16-20 methodology in 2015.
- How does Rwanda rank for registering property: transparency of information index (0-6)?
- Rwanda ranks 13th out of 186 countries with data for 2019.
- Where does this Rwanda data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Registering property: Transparency of information index (0-6) (DB16-20 methodology). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 5 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
About this data
The transparency of information index evaluates whether the land administration system makes land-related information publicly available. It has ten components: (i) whether information on land ownership is made publicly available; (ii) whether the list of documents required for completing the registration of property transactions is made publicly available; (iii) whether the fee schedule for completing the registration of property transactions is made publicly available; (iv) whether the agency in charge of immovable property registration commits to a specific time frame for delivering a legally binding document that proves property ownership; (v) whether there is a specific and independent mechanism for filing complaints about a problem that occurred at the agency in charge of immovable property registration; (vi) whether there are publicly available official statistics tracking the number of transactions at the immovable property registration agency; (vii) whether maps of land plots are made publicly available; (viii) whether the fee schedule for accessing maps is made publicly available; and (ix) whether the mapping agency commits to a specific time frame for delivering an updated map; and (x) whether there is a specific and independent mechanism for filing complaints about a problem that occurred at the mapping agency. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB17-20 studies.