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

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

Where does this Georgia data come from?

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

Trading across borders: Cost to import: Documentary compliance (USD) ( in Georgia

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

Georgia: Trading across borders: Cost to import: Documentary compliance (USD) ( was 73 in 2019. ▬ Flat

Latest (2019)

Change on year

unchanged

World rank

139th

of 188 countries

All-time high

in 2014

All-time low

in 2014

Years of data

2014–2019

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

Source: World Bank.

Analysis

The most recent figure for trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( in Georgia is 73, measured in 2019. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.

Compared with earlier readings it is unchanged over ten years.

Georgia ranks 139th of 188 countries on this measure, in the middle of the range.

Countries ranked near Georgia

136 Maldives 74.22 compare
137 Vanuatu 73.93 compare
137 Vietnam 73.93 compare
140 Jordan 72.86 compare
141 Burkina Faso 71.93 compare
142 Azerbaijan 71.43 compare
142 Kyrgyzstan 71.43 compare

See the full ranking of 190 places →

More reference data data for Georgia

Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.097 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 0.684 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 1.01 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.0278 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 1.01 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.3252 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 0.2904 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 3.69 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 5.28 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.1515 (2050)

All data for Georgia →

Frequently asked questions

What is trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( in Georgia?: Trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( in Georgia was 73 in 2019, according to the World Bank.
What is the highest trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( recorded in Georgia?: The highest recorded value was 73 in 2014.
What is the lowest trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( recorded in Georgia?: The lowest recorded value was 73 in 2014.
How does Georgia rank for trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) (?: Georgia ranks 139th out of 188 countries with data for 2019.
Is trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( rising or falling in Georgia?: Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
Where does this Georgia data come from?: The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Trading across borders: Cost to import: 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 import: 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 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.