Guinea-Bissau vs South Africa: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container deflated)

Guinea-Bissau
2,006 DB06-15 methodology
in 2014
South Africa
2,080 DB06-15 methodology
in 2014
Guinea-Bissau rank
48th
South Africa rank
46th

Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container deflated) over time

  • Guinea-Bissau
  • South Africa
01.0k2.0k3.0k200520092014

How they compare

South Africa currently reports 2,080 DB06-15 methodology against 2,006 DB06-15 methodology in Guinea-Bissau, a difference of 74 DB06-15 methodology.

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

Guinea-Bissau ranks 48th and South Africa ranks 46th of 184 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Guinea-Bissau averaged higher in 1 and South Africa in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Guinea-Bissau South Africa Difference Ahead
2000s 2,282 DB06-15 methodology 2,216 DB06-15 methodology 66.29 DB06-15 methodology Guinea-Bissau
2010s 2,085 DB06-15 methodology 2,141 DB06-15 methodology 56.25 DB06-15 methodology South Africa

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container deflated), Guinea-Bissau or South Africa?
South Africa, at 2,080 DB06-15 methodology against 2,006 DB06-15 methodology in Guinea-Bissau as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container deflated) between Guinea-Bissau and South Africa?
74 DB06-15 methodology, with South Africa ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Guinea-Bissau and South Africa?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Guinea-Bissau and South Africa rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container deflated)?
Guinea-Bissau ranks 48th and South Africa ranks 46th of 184 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container deflated)(DB06-15 methodology). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Guinea-Bissau vs South Africa: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container deflated). Statizoid. Retrieved 30 August 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/trading-across-borders-cost-to-import-us-per-container-deflated-db06-15-methodology/guinea-bissau/south-africa/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/trading-across-borders-cost-to-import-us-per-container-deflated-db06-15-methodology/guinea-bissau/south-africa/">Guinea-Bissau vs South Africa: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container deflated)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container deflated)(DB06-15 methodology)
Unit
DB06-15 methodology
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
184 places, 1,819 data points, 2005–2014
Last refreshed

The cost to import records the cost associated with importing a standardized cargo of goods by sea transport through 4 predefined stages: document preparation; customs clearance and inspections; inland transport and handling; and port and terminal handling. It is calculated in US dollars per container deflated. Cost measures the fees levied on import of goods in a 20-foot container, in US dollars. All fees charged by government agencies and the private sector to a trader in the process of exporting and importing the goods are taken into account. These include but are not limited to costs for documents, administrative fees for customs clearance and inspections, customs broker fees, port-related charges and inland transport costs. Only official costs are recorded. The component indicator is computed based on the methodology in the DB06-15 studies.