Botswana vs Iraq: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met

Botswana
40.66
in 2014
Iraq
41.73
in 2014
Botswana rank
165th
Iraq rank
163rd

Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met over time

  • Botswana
  • Iraq
010203040200520092014

How they compare

Iraq currently reports 41.73 against 40.66 in Botswana, a difference of 1.07.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Botswana ahead.

Botswana ranks 165th and Iraq ranks 163rd of 181 countries.

Botswana has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Botswana Iraq Difference Ahead
2000s 25.25 5.03 20.23 Botswana
2010s 36.6 31.85 4.75 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 Iraq?
Iraq, at 41.73 against 40.66 in Botswana as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Botswana and Iraq?
1.07, with Iraq ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Botswana and Iraq?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Botswana and Iraq rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
Botswana ranks 165th and Iraq ranks 163rd 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

Indicator
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
183 places, 1,813 data points, 2005–2014
Last refreshed

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.