Central African Republic vs Niger: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)
Central African Republic
0
in 2014
Niger
8.06
in 2014
Central African Republic rank
174th
Niger rank
172nd
Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology) over time
- Central African Republic
- Niger
How they compare
Niger currently reports 8.06 against 0 in Central African Republic, a difference of 8.06.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Niger ahead.
Central African Republic ranks 174th and Niger ranks 172nd of 183 countries.
Central African Republic has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Central African Republic | Niger | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 1.29 | 0 | 1.29 | Central African Republic |
| 2010s | 7.42 | 3.55 | 3.87 | Central African Republic |
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), Central African Republic or Niger?
- Niger, at 8.06 against 0 in Central African Republic as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Central African Republic and Niger?
- 8.06, with Niger ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Central African Republic and Niger?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Central African Republic and Niger rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
- Central African Republic ranks 174th and Niger ranks 172nd of 183 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.