Botswana vs Democratic Republic of Congo: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met over time
- Botswana
- Democratic Republic of Congo
How they compare
Botswana currently reports 40.66 against 30.36 in Democratic Republic of Congo, a difference of 10.3.
That makes Botswana's figure about 1.3 times Democratic Republic of Congo's.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Botswana has been ahead every year.
Botswana ranks 165th and Democratic Republic of Congo ranks 166th of 181 countries.
Botswana has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Botswana | Democratic Republic of Congo | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 25.25 | 0 | 25.25 | Botswana |
| 2010s | 36.6 | 26.6 | 10 | Botswana |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met, Botswana or Democratic Republic of Congo?
- Botswana, at 40.66 against 30.36 in Democratic Republic of Congo as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Botswana and Democratic Republic of Congo?
- 10.3, with Botswana ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Botswana and Democratic Republic of Congo?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Botswana and Democratic Republic of Congo rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
- Botswana ranks 165th and Democratic Republic of Congo ranks 166th of 181 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Cost to import (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 import 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.