Papua New Guinea vs Spain: Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15)
Papua New Guinea
79.85
in 2014
Spain
80.39
in 2014
Papua New Guinea rank
107th
Spain rank
104th
Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15) over time
- Papua New Guinea
- Spain
How they compare
Spain currently reports 80.39 against 79.85 in Papua New Guinea, a difference of 0.54.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Spain ahead.
Papua New Guinea ranks 107th and Spain ranks 104th of 183 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Papua New Guinea averaged higher in 1 and Spain in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Papua New Guinea | Spain | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 80.2 | 82.83 | 2.63 | Spain |
| 2010s | 82.57 | 80.58 | 1.99 | Papua New Guinea |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15), Papua New Guinea or Spain?
- Spain, at 80.39 against 79.85 in Papua New Guinea as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15) between Papua New Guinea and Spain?
- 0.54, with Spain ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Papua New Guinea and Spain?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Papua New Guinea and Spain rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export (us$ per container) (db06-15)?
- Papua New Guinea ranks 107th and Spain ranks 104th of 183 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Cost to export (US$ per container) (DB06-15 methodology) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for the cost 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 DB06-15 studies.