Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15) in Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe: 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 Zimbabwe, 2005–2014
Source: World Bank.
Analysis
In 2014, trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) in Zimbabwe stood at 0. That is the lowest value across all 10 years on record.
Compared with earlier readings it is down 100.0% on the previous year and down 100.0% over ten years.
Over the whole period, trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) in Zimbabwe peaked at 40.28 in 2006 and was at its lowest, 0, in 2008.
Zimbabwe 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 Zimbabwe, year by year
| Year | Value | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 36.87 | — |
| 2006 | 40.28 | +9.2% |
| 2007 | 38.91 | -3.4% |
| 2008 | 0 | -100.0% |
| 2009 | 0 | — |
| 2010 | 0.1664 | — |
| 2011 | 10.33 | +6104.7% |
| 2012 | 15.63 | +51.3% |
| 2013 | 13.08 | -16.3% |
| 2014 | 0 | -100.0% |
Zimbabwe compared with similar countries
- Zimbabwe's 0 is below the median for lower middle income countries, which is 79.21. (46 countries reporting)
- Zimbabwe'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 | 23.21 | 0 | 40.28 | 5 |
| 2010s | 7.84 | 0 | 15.63 | 5 |
Countries ranked near Zimbabwe
- 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 Congo 0 compare
- 177 Kyrgyzstan 0 compare
- 177 Tajikistan 0
- 177 Uzbekistan 0
- 177 Zambia 0 compare
More reference data data for Zimbabwe
- Exchange rate, new LCU per USD extended backward, period average 58,959 (2026)
- Exchange rate, old LCU per USD extended forward, period average 58,959 (2026)
- Official exchange rate, LCU per USD, period average 58,959 (2026)
- Political opposition, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Elected parliament and government, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Global number of reported disasters by size, gaps filled 0 events (2024)
- Annual precipitation, annual growth rate 122.78 % change on previous year (2025)
- Free country, gaps filled 0 (2025)
- Civil liberties rating, gaps filled 5 (2025)
- Civil liberties rating, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
Frequently asked questions
- What is trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) in Zimbabwe?
- Trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) in Zimbabwe 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 Zimbabwe?
- The highest recorded value was 40.28 in 2006.
- What is the lowest trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) recorded in Zimbabwe?
- The lowest recorded value was 0 in 2008.
- How does Zimbabwe rank for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15)?
- Zimbabwe 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 Zimbabwe?
- Over the last ten years it is down 100.0%. The long-run trend across the full record is volatile.
- Where does this Zimbabwe 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.