Doing Business records the time and cost associated with the logistical process of exporting and importing goods. Doing Business measures the time and cost (excluding tariffs) associated with three sets of procedures—documentary compliance, border compliance and domestic transport—within the overall process of exporting or importing a shipment of goods. The most recent round of data collection for the project was completed in June 2017. See the methodology for more information.

Given the importance of trade digitalization, in Doing Business 2018, the Trading across Borders questionnaire included research questions on the availability and status of implementation of Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) and Single Window (SW) systems. With this information, Doing Business built a comprehensive dataset on the adoption and level of sophistication of electronic platforms in 190 economies. These data are not used to compute the distance to frontier score or ranking of the ease of doing business. The new dataset on EDI and SW systems is available here.

Good Practices

Allowing electronic submission and processing of information required by customs
Linking agencies through an electronic single window
Using risk-based inspections
Overcoming geographic barriers through regional cooperation
Sparking competition by making private participation easier
Upgrading trade logistics infrastructure
Promoting efficiency in product-specific inspections

The economies with the most efficient trading environments share common features. They allow traders to exchange information with customs and other control agencies electronically. They also use risk-based assessments to limit physical inspections to only a small percentage of shipments, reducing customs clearance times. Likewise, these economies tend to trade within customs unions or engage in other forms of bilateral and multilateral trade agreements, making the time and cost for complying with border formalities negligible.


Electronic systems for filing, transferring, processing and exchanging customs information have become an important tool for managing flows of information, now widely used in complex trading systems. The most advanced web-based systems allow traders to submit relevant documents and to pay duties online from anywhere in the world. The key to success is the ability of an economy to adapt its regulatory framework to the new information technologies.

If implemented effectively, such a system saves precious time and money. It can also limit direct interactions with officials, which reduces opportunities for corruption. However, introducing an electronic system often requires governments to enact legislations on electronic signatures and transactions; without appropriate legislations in place, the implementation of a new system can lead to redundancy and delays, requiring paper submission of signed documents after they have already been filed electronically. Furthermore, for small and low-income economies, the infrastructure and training costs of implementing such systems can be onerous, and meaningful effects for local traders may take time to materialize.

Exchange of customs data and harmonization of customs procedures are important pillars of many regional communities, and electronic data interchange systems can help facilitate the materialization of regional integration initiatives. In Central America, the International Goods in Transit (TIM) system harmonizes previously cumbersome procedures in a single document to manage the movement of goods across 9 economies. At some border locations, this system has reduced clearance times for goods in transit by up to 90% (1). However, linking 2 or more information technology systems through a common interface is not always a simple process. Integrating Kenya’s Simba system with Uganda’s ASYCUDA++ through the development of the Revenue Authorities Digital Data Exchange (RADDEx) system has taken several years and expanding this system to the rest of the East African Community also remains an ongoing challenge.

The full potential of digitalization and electronic data interchange systems is not realized immediately. Implementing the systems takes time and involves change in operational practices, in training and in some cases, in the work habits of staff. Zambia reduced the time to complete documentary and border compliance by about 30%, underscoring the impact of its rolling out of the ASYCUDA World system, an automated customs data management system, to multiple customs offices nationwide. Despite initial setbacks, in 2017 Zambia increased the functionality of the platform, enabling electronic submission of declarations, supporting documents and the online payment of customs fees.

Across economies, regardless of income level, allowing electronic submission and processing of customs-related documents has been one of the most common and effective ways to reduce delays in the trading process. Today, traders can submit all trade documents electronically in more than half of OECD high-income economies with no need to provide hard copies. In Sub-Saharan Africa and Eastern Europe and Central Asia, by contrast, most economies that have electronic systems still require traders to submit hard copies of documents.


Increasingly, economies are taking a step further to virtually link not only traders and customs but all agencies involved in trade and transport through an electronic single-window system. In the best case scenario, the system allows traders to file standard information and documents through a single entry point to fulfill all import, export and transit-related regulatory requirements, then shares relevant information with all parties involved in trade, including private participants such as banks and insurance companies, as well as public agencies such as immigration and vehicle registration authorities.

An increasing number of developing economies are interested in introducing single window systems of varying complexity. For example, Colombia and Senegal have both implemented single-window systems, though achieving complete functionality is an ongoing process. Since 2016, Brazil enhanced the electronic SISCOMEX Portal system, which links customs, tax, and administration agencies involved in the exporting and importing process. The single-window system is also being embraced at the regional level. The 10 member nations of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have set an ambitious goal of establishing an ASEAN-wide single window. Plans call for integrating members’ national single windows so that a single submission of data and information suffices for the entire ASEAN region.

Several economies have reported positive results from the implementation of single-window systems. The Korea Customs Service estimates that the introduction of its single-window system brought $18 million in benefits in 2010, part of the overall economic benefits that year of as much as $3.47 billion from the agency’s trade facilitation efforts (2). Indeed, for Korean-based companies such as Samsung and LG—global leaders in the electronics industry—achieving rapid and predictable turnaround time is an important aspect of their competitiveness strategies.

In Singapore, the implementation of a single window led to large gains in government productivity. The government established the world’s first national single window for trade (TradeNet) in 1989, bringing together more than 35 border agencies. Today TradeNet handles more than 30,000 declarations a day, processes 99% of permits in 10 minutes and receives all collections through interbank deductions (3).



Requiring imports and exports to undergo inspections—for tax, security, environmental, border control, and health and safety reasons—is often necessary. How these inspections are carried out, including how cargo is selected for inspection, however, varies across economies. Done with a heavy hand, inspections can be a serious obstacle to efficient and predictable trade. Over the years, customs administrations around the world, working in tandem with other border control agencies, have developed systems for establishing risk profiles that allow them to apply physical inspections corresponding to the potential risk of consignments. Investing in equipment is another way to help expedite the processing of cargo. Many economies have adopted the use of scanners to limit the need to physically open containers. In some economies, however, inefficient use of scanners has led to additional burden on traders, as customs agents scan all containers, creating delays and incurring mandatory scanning fees on traders. Efficient use of scanners in conjunction with risk-based profiling can strike the right balance in inspection, contributing to the efficiency of the trading process.

Risk-based inspections are the norm in OECD high-income economies, and they are becoming increasingly common elsewhere as well. Traders in Kosovo are among those who are benefiting from the improvements in the inspection process through the adoption of a risk-based system. Since July 2015, the customs authority in Kosovo has gradually introduced a new customs clearance procedure for export and now only red channel exports are selected for examination at the terminals of internal customs offices. Kosovo has also completed the implementation a green channel and an increased utilization of a blue channel (cargo subjected to post-import control only). As a result inspections, and therefore the process of export customs clearance, have become faster. In Sub-Saharan Africa, since September 2016, Ethiopia has carried out several initiatives such as the implementation of a risk-based inspection system for exports, resulting in more efficient trade processes. Moreover, scanning equipment has been installed at clearance points decreasing the frequency of physical inspections. As a result of these initiatives, the overall clearance process in Ethiopia has improved, reducing border compliance and documentary compliance time for exports and imports.


Many economies face special challenges in competing globally because of the greater inland distances and multiple border crossings involved in their trade. These economies can accelerate trade through efforts to increase border cooperation agreements and reduce the number of checkpoints so that cargo can move freely—without being stopped for customs or other inspections—until it reaches its destination.

One example of regional cooperation is the creation of customs unions. More than fifty years ago, while the rest of the international community was negotiating the levels of tariffs and quotas, the European Union embarked on a grand experiment—the launch of a customs union. There would be no customs duties at internal borders between the EU member states; there would be common customs duties on imports from outside the European Union as well as common rules of origin for products from outside; and there would be a common definition of customs value.

While the EU customs union remains one of the best examples of trade facilitation between disparate nations, it is far from alone. More than half the 190 economies covered by Doing Business are in a customs union today. Moreover, 33 economies are in a customs union with their case study export partner, and 39 are in a customs union with their case study import partner. For these economies the time for documentary and border compliance is substantially lower on average than for others. However, not all customs unions are equal. Customs unions among OECD high-income economies (essentially the EU customs union) perform substantially better than others, followed by customs unions in Europe and Central Asia and then by those in Sub-Saharan Africa.


Beyond the customs formalities, private providers of trade services—such as customs brokers, transport companies and port service providers—all have important effects on the time and cost of trading across borders. Greater competition among trade service providers can lead to lower fees and higher quality of service, as can better infrastructure. In 2016, the Russian Federation inaugurated a new Multifunctional Sea Cargo Complex at the Port of Bronka. Bronka is located in proximity to the Port of St. Petersburg, which has decreased its prices for port and terminal handling due to growing competition. Importers and Exporters have, therefore, experienced a decrease in the cost of border compliance on merchandise going through the Port of St. Petersburg.

Not all trade facilitation reforms require heavy spending. Initiatives such as providing training, clarifying and publicizing the rules, holding regular meetings with exporters on the clearance process and removing certain requirements or making them more efficient can make a difference. For example, in November 2015 the government of Antigua and Barbuda repealed Section 24 of the Customs Control and Management Act, which required importers to obtain a certificate of good standing (tax compliance certificate) before customs clearance. Following the repeal, importers are no longer required to obtain this document from the Commissioner of Inland Revenue before clearing goods. As a result, Antigua and Barbuda reduced documentary compliance time to import by 61 hours (4).


Inadequate infrastructure is one of the main burdens in international trade (5), As part of its National Development Plan 2013-2017, Angola has significantly rehabilitated and upgraded the port of Luanda, expanding the terminals, adding new berths and acquiring equipment. This has resulted in improvements in handling processes and reduced border compliance time for both exports and imports.

On September, 2016 Singapore inaugurated the new Pasir Panjang Terminal Building Gate 3 for containerized cargo within the Port of Singapore. The new terminal provides access to eight additional flow-through container lanes. Together with the expansion of the port, investments were made to improve port infrastructure. As a result, terminal handling processes at the port have improved, reducing the time for import and export border compliance.


In economies whose top export is an agricultural product, border compliance takes 84% more time (37 more hours) on average than in other economies. The main reason for these differences is that most of economies whose top export is an agricultural product require product specific inspections and procedures (such as fumigation or phytosanitary inspections) to export that product.

Yet even among economies whose top export is an agricultural product, documentary and border compliance times vary widely. Border compliance times for agricultural products subject to product specific inspections range from 2 hours to 202. This variation suggests that it is possible to protect consumers and businesses while still facilitating (or at least not impeding) trade.

Economies exporting agricultural products span all regions and income groups, such as Norway among OECD high-income economies or Guinea-Bissau in Sub-Saharan Africa. Both Namibia and Australia, for example, require sanitary inspections and certificates for their top export product. Yet completing border compliance procedures takes 120 hours for an exporter of fish in Namibia, while it takes only 36 hours for an exporter of meat in Australia. And completing documentary compliance takes 13 times as many hours for the exporter in Namibia (90) as it does for the exporter in Australia (7). The exporter in Namibia must wait to obtain and submit hard copies of documents from various government agencies. In Australia, by contrast, quarantine authorities work closely with both producers and customs authorities throughout the process and most documents can be submitted electronically. What matters is not whether enhanced inspections and procedures are required but whether they are carried out efficiently.


1. Sarmiento, Alvaro, Krista Lucenti and Aurelio Garcia. 2010. "Automating the Control of Goods in International Transit in Goods: Implementing the TIM in Central America."IFC Smart Lessons, World Bank Group, Washington, DC. 
2. Korea Customs Service. 2011. The Embodiment of Business-Friendly Environment by KCS Challenges. Seoul. 
3. Singapore Customs Service. 2007. Annual Report 2006/07. Singapore. 
4. Doing Business database.
5. Lanz, Rainer, Michael Roberts, and Sainabou Taal. 2016. “Reducing Trade Costs in LDCs: The Role of Aid for Trade.” WTO Working Paper, World Trade Organization, Geneva.