Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15) in Congo
Congo: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15) was 0 in 2014. ◆ Volatile
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15) in Congo, 2005–2014
Source: World Bank.
Analysis
Congo recorded 0 for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) in 2014. That is the lowest value across all 10 years on record.
Compared with earlier readings it is down 100.0% over ten years.
Over the whole period, trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) in Congo peaked at 56.57 in 2007 and was at its lowest, 0, in 2010.
Congo ranks 177th of 184 countries on this measure, in the bottom quarter.
The series is highly variable year to year, so single readings are best treated with caution.
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15) in Congo, year by year
| Year | Value | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 34.68 | — |
| 2006 | 47.32 | +36.4% |
| 2007 | 56.57 | +19.6% |
| 2008 | 40.11 | -29.1% |
| 2009 | 53.41 | +33.2% |
| 2010 | 0 | -100.0% |
| 2011 | 0 | — |
| 2012 | 0 | — |
| 2013 | 0 | — |
| 2014 | 0 | — |
Congo compared with similar countries
- Congo's 0 is below the median for lower middle income countries, which is 79.21. (46 countries reporting)
- Congo's 0 is below the median for Sub-Saharan Africa, which is 70.57. (46 countries reporting)
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 46.42 | 34.68 | 56.57 | 5 |
| 2010s | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
Countries ranked near Congo
- 174 Rwanda 17.93 compare
- 175 Kazakhstan 13.05 compare
- 176 Afghanistan 5.68 compare
- 177 Central African Republic 0 compare
- 177 Chad 0
- 177 Kyrgyzstan 0 compare
- 177 Tajikistan 0
- 177 Uzbekistan 0
- 177 Zambia 0 compare
- 177 Zimbabwe 0 compare
More reference data data for Congo
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.0199 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 0.1866 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 0.2108 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.0031 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 0.2108 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.0668 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 0.0724 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 0.9126 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 1.08 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.017 (2050)
Frequently asked questions
- What is trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) in Congo?
- Trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) in Congo was 0 in 2014, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) recorded in Congo?
- The highest recorded value was 56.57 in 2007.
- What is the lowest trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) recorded in Congo?
- The lowest recorded value was 0 in 2010.
- How does Congo rank for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15)?
- Congo ranks 177th out of 184 countries with data for 2014.
- Is trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) rising or falling in Congo?
- Over the last ten years it is down 100.0%. The long-run trend across the full record is volatile.
- Where does this Congo data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 methodology) - Score. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 10 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
About this data
The score for the cost 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 DB06-15 studies.