Lesotho vs United States of America: Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological

Lesotho
2,600 Hectares
in 2020
United States of America
405,810 Hectares
in 2020
Lesotho rank
20th
United States of America rank
3rd

Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological over time

  • Lesotho
  • United States of America
0100.0k200.0k300.0k400.0k200020102020

How they compare

United States of America currently reports 405,810 Hectares against 2,600 Hectares in Lesotho, a difference of 403,210 Hectares.

That makes United States of America's figure about 156.1 times Lesotho's.

Across all 21 years both countries report, United States of America has been ahead every year.

Lesotho ranks 20th and United States of America ranks 3rd of 28 countries.

United States of America has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Lesotho United States of America Difference Ahead
2000s 2,325 Hectares 412,696 Hectares 410,370 Hectares United States of America
2010s 2,302 Hectares 405,032 Hectares 402,730 Hectares United States of America
2020s 2,600 Hectares 405,810 Hectares 403,210 Hectares United States of America

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 23 - ecological, Lesotho or United States of America?
United States of America, at 405,810 Hectares against 2,600 Hectares in Lesotho as of 2020.
What is the difference in africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 23 - ecological between Lesotho and United States of America?
403,210 Hectares, with United States of America ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Lesotho and United States of America?
21 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2020.
How do Lesotho and United States of America rank globally for africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 23 - ecological?
Lesotho ranks 20th and United States of America ranks 3rd of 28 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, published as Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological sustainability — Agricultural land. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Lesotho vs United States of America: Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological. Statizoid, drawing on Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved 31 August 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/africa-s-development-dynamics-afdd-table-23-ecological-sustainability-agricultural-land/lesotho-2/united-states/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under OECD Terms and Conditions (attribution required); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/africa-s-development-dynamics-afdd-table-23-ecological-sustainability-agricultural-land/lesotho-2/united-states/">Lesotho vs United States of America: Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological sustainability — Agricultural land
Unit
Hectares
Source
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Licence
OECD Terms and Conditions (attribution required)
Coverage
244 places, 5,106 data points, 2000–2020
Last refreshed

The Statistical Annex to the annual Africa's Development Dynamics (AFDD) report is a collection of development indicators that were gathered and analysed while conducting the research that went into the report. These data are also available online for free viewing or download at https://oe.cd/AFDD-2024, a bilingual website which links to the electronic version of the Africa's Development Dynamics book in both English and French. Table 23 shows indicators of ecological sustainability, in terms of land use. This includes number of hectars of land allocated to different kinds of use, carbon stock in living biomass, and fertiliser use, and wood production.