Is trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16 rising or falling in Lebanon?

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

Where does this Lebanon data come from?

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

Trading across borders: Cost to import: Border compliance (USD) (DB16 in Lebanon

Name: Trading across borders: Cost to import: Border compliance (USD) (DB16 in Lebanon
Creator: World Bank
License: CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)

Lebanon: Trading across borders: Cost to import: Border compliance (USD) (DB16 was 34.17 in 2019. ▬ Flat

Latest (2019)

34.17

Change on year

unchanged

World rank

158th

of 188 countries

All-time high

34.17

in 2014

All-time low

34.17

in 2014

Years of data

2014–2019

Trading across borders: Cost to import: Border compliance (USD) (DB16 in Lebanon, 2014–2019

Source: World Bank.

Analysis

Lebanon recorded 34.17 for trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16 in 2019. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.

Compared with earlier readings it is unchanged over ten years.

Lebanon ranks 158th of 188 countries on this measure, in the bottom quarter.

Countries ranked near Lebanon

155 Afghanistan 37.5 compare
156 Comoros 36.22 compare
157 South Sudan 34.9 compare
159 Guinea 32.62 compare
160 Sierra Leone 31.58 compare
161 Syria 31.02 compare

See the full ranking of 190 places →

More reference data data for Lebanon

Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 0.3495 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 0.3495 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 0.1892 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.0413 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.0181 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) (AR5) - Manure applied to Soils 36.73 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Manure left on Pa 251.2 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) (AR5) - Manure Management 41.73 (2050)
Emission Totals - Direct emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 1.25 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) (AR5) - Agricultural Soils 423.02 (2050)

All data for Lebanon →

Frequently asked questions

What is trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16 in Lebanon?: Trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16 in Lebanon was 34.17 in 2019, according to the World Bank.
What is the highest trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16 recorded in Lebanon?: The highest recorded value was 34.17 in 2014.
What is the lowest trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16 recorded in Lebanon?: The lowest recorded value was 34.17 in 2014.
How does Lebanon rank for trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16?: Lebanon ranks 158th out of 188 countries with data for 2019.
Is trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16 rising or falling in Lebanon?: Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
Where does this Lebanon data come from?: The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Trading across borders: Cost to import: Border 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 import: Border 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 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.