Namibia vs Saint Lucia: Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD) (DB16

Namibia
29.72
in 2019
Saint Lucia
32.31
in 2019
Namibia rank
161st
Saint Lucia rank
160th

Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD) (DB16 over time

  • Namibia
  • Saint Lucia
0102030201420162019

How they compare

Saint Lucia currently reports 32.31 against 29.72 in Namibia, a difference of 2.59.

That makes Saint Lucia's figure about 1.1 times Namibia's.

Across all 6 years both countries report, Saint Lucia has been ahead every year.

Namibia ranks 161st and Saint Lucia ranks 160th of 188 countries.

Saint Lucia has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher trading across borders: cost to export: border compliance (usd) (db16, Namibia or Saint Lucia?
Saint Lucia, at 32.31 against 29.72 in Namibia as of 2019.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export: border compliance (usd) (db16 between Namibia and Saint Lucia?
2.59, with Saint Lucia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Namibia and Saint Lucia?
6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
How do Namibia and Saint Lucia rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export: border compliance (usd) (db16?
Namibia ranks 161st and Saint Lucia ranks 160th of 188 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 1,139 data points, 2014–2019
Last refreshed

The score for the cost for border compliance to export benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. The score ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance, and is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.