Botswana vs Mauritania: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)
Botswana
50
in 2014
Mauritania
45.16
in 2014
Botswana rank
152nd
Mauritania rank
155th
Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology) over time
- Botswana
- Mauritania
How they compare
Botswana currently reports 50 against 45.16 in Mauritania, a difference of 4.84.
That makes Botswana's figure about 1.1 times Mauritania's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Mauritania ahead.
Botswana ranks 152nd and Mauritania ranks 155th of 181 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Botswana averaged higher in 1 and Mauritania in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Botswana | Mauritania | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 38.06 | 41.94 | 3.87 | Mauritania |
| 2010s | 45.48 | 44.52 | 0.9677 | Botswana |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology), Botswana or Mauritania?
- Botswana, at 50 against 45.16 in Mauritania as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Botswana and Mauritania?
- 4.84, with Botswana ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Botswana and Mauritania?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Botswana and Mauritania rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
- Botswana ranks 152nd and Mauritania ranks 155th of 181 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (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 time 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.