Is trading across borders: cost to export: documentary compliance (usd) ( rising or falling in Latvia?

Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.

Where does this Latvia data come from?

The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Trading across borders: Cost to export: Documentary compliance (USD) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.

Trading across borders: Cost to export: Documentary compliance (USD) ( in Latvia

Name: Trading across borders: Cost to export: Documentary compliance (USD) ( in Latvia
Creator: World Bank
License: CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)

Latvia: Trading across borders: Cost to export: Documentary compliance (USD) ( was 91.25 in 2019. ▬ Flat

Latest (2019)

91.25

Change on year

unchanged

World rank

36th

of 188 countries

All-time high

91.25

in 2014

All-time low

91.25

in 2014

Years of data

2014–2019

Trading across borders: Cost to export: Documentary compliance (USD) ( in Latvia, 2014–2019

Source: World Bank.

Analysis

Latvia recorded 91.25 for trading across borders: cost to export: documentary compliance (usd) ( in 2019. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.

That represents a change of unchanged over ten years.

Latvia ranks 36th of 188 countries on this measure, in the top quarter.

Countries ranked near Latvia

33 Lithuania 93 compare
34 Greece 92.5 compare
35 Mali 91.67 compare
36 Malaysia 91.25 compare
36 Serbia 91.25 compare
39 Singapore 90.75 compare

See the full ranking of 190 places →

More reference data data for Latvia

Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.128 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 0.0503 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 0.4657 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.0673 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 0.4657 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.4291 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 0.2986 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 0.2679 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 2.27 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.3666 (2050)

All data for Latvia →

Frequently asked questions

What is trading across borders: cost to export: documentary compliance (usd) ( in Latvia?: Trading across borders: cost to export: documentary compliance (usd) ( in Latvia was 91.25 in 2019, according to the World Bank.
What is the highest trading across borders: cost to export: documentary compliance (usd) ( recorded in Latvia?: The highest recorded value was 91.25 in 2014.
What is the lowest trading across borders: cost to export: documentary compliance (usd) ( recorded in Latvia?: The lowest recorded value was 91.25 in 2014.
How does Latvia rank for trading across borders: cost to export: documentary compliance (usd) (?: Latvia ranks 36th out of 188 countries with data for 2019.
Is trading across borders: cost to export: documentary compliance (usd) ( rising or falling in Latvia?: Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
Where does this Latvia data come from?: The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Trading across borders: Cost to export: Documentary compliance (USD) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.

Download this data

CSV · JSON — 6 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).

About this data

Indicator: Trading across borders: Cost to export: Documentary compliance (USD) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score
Source: World Bank
Licence: CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage: 190 places, 1,139 data points, 2014–2019
Last refreshed: 10 August 2026

The score for the cost for documentary compliance to export 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.