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

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

Where does this Russia 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 Russia

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

Russia: Trading across borders: Cost to import: Documentary compliance (USD) ( was 78.21 in 2019. ▬ Flat

Latest (2019)

78.21

Change on year

unchanged

World rank

127th

of 188 countries

All-time high

78.21

in 2014

All-time low

78.21

in 2014

Years of data

2014–2019

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

Source: World Bank.

Analysis

The most recent figure for trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( in Russia is 78.21, measured in 2019. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.

That represents a change of unchanged over ten years.

Russia ranks 127th of 188 countries on this measure, in the middle of the range.

Countries ranked near Russia

126 Gambia 78.3 compare
128 Malawi 76.92 compare
129 Ukraine 76.86 compare
130 Canada 76.79 compare

See the full ranking of 190 places →

More reference data data for Russia

Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 4.94 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - IPCC Agriculture 34,368 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Manure applied to 8,299 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Manure Management 5,137 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Burning - Crop re 145.72 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Agricultural Soil 29,086 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Manure left on Pa 4,811 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 9.34 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 4.11 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Burning - Crop residues 0.5499 (2050)

All data for Russia →

Frequently asked questions

What is trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( in Russia?: Trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( in Russia was 78.21 in 2019, according to the World Bank.
What is the highest trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( recorded in Russia?: The highest recorded value was 78.21 in 2014.
What is the lowest trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( recorded in Russia?: The lowest recorded value was 78.21 in 2014.
How does Russia rank for trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) (?: Russia ranks 127th out of 188 countries with data for 2019.
Is trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( rising or falling in Russia?: Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
Where does this Russia 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.