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

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

Where does this Sudan 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 Sudan

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

Sudan: Trading across borders: Cost to import: Documentary compliance (USD) ( was 40 in 2019. ▬ Flat

Latest (2019)

Change on year

unchanged

World rank

170th

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 Sudan, 2014–2019

Source: World Bank.

Analysis

The most recent figure for trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( in Sudan is 40, measured in 2019. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.

That represents a change of unchanged over ten years.

Sudan ranks 170th of 188 countries on this measure, in the bottom quarter.

Countries ranked near Sudan

167 Algeria 42.89 compare
168 Mauritania 42.86 compare
169 Liberia 42.14 compare
171 Angola 34.29 compare
172 Ghana 32.29 compare
173 Central African Republic 28.57 compare
173 Chad 28.57 compare
173 Iraq 28.57 compare

See the full ranking of 190 places →

More reference data data for Sudan

Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Burning - Crop residues 0.0139 (2019)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 17.81 (2019)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.5846 (2019)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.4356 (2019)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 19.69 (2019)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 93.88 (2019)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 80.68 (2019)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 19.69 (2019)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 2.37 (2019)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 0.8148 (2019)

All data for Sudan →

Frequently asked questions

What is trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( in Sudan?: Trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( in Sudan was 40 in 2019, according to the World Bank.
What is the highest trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( recorded in Sudan?: The highest recorded value was 40 in 2014.
What is the lowest trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( recorded in Sudan?: The lowest recorded value was 40 in 2014.
How does Sudan rank for trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) (?: Sudan ranks 170th out of 188 countries with data for 2019.
Is trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( rising or falling in Sudan?: Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
Where does this Sudan 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.