Bosnia and Herzegovina vs Kosovo (UNSCR 1244): Trading across borders: Time to import: Border compliance (hours)
Bosnia and Herzegovina
98.23
in 2019
Kosovo (UNSCR 1244)
98.39
in 2019
Bosnia and Herzegovina rank
45th
Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) rank
42nd
Trading across borders: Time to import: Border compliance (hours) over time
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Kosovo (UNSCR 1244)
How they compare
Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) currently reports 98.39 against 98.23 in Bosnia and Herzegovina, a difference of 0.16.
Across all 6 years both countries report, Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) has been ahead every year.
Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 45th and Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) ranks 42nd of 191 countries.
Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trading across borders: time to import: border compliance (hours), Bosnia and Herzegovina or Kosovo (UNSCR 1244)?
- Kosovo (UNSCR 1244), at 98.39 against 98.23 in Bosnia and Herzegovina as of 2019.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import: border compliance (hours) between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo (UNSCR 1244)?
- 0.16, with Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo (UNSCR 1244)?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
- How do Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) rank globally for trading across borders: time to import: border compliance (hours)?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 45th and Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) ranks 42nd of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Time to import: Border compliance (hours) (DB16-20 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 time for border compliance 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 DB16-20 studies.