Resource-rich countries vs Russia: Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological

Resource-rich countries
213,301 Hectares
in 2020
Russia
121,649 Hectares
in 2020
Resource-rich countries rank
4th
Russia rank
4th

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

  • Resource-rich countries
  • Russia
050.0k100.0k150.0k200.0k200020102020

How they compare

Resource-rich countries currently reports 213,301 Hectares against 121,649 Hectares in Russia, a difference of 91,652 Hectares.

That makes Resource-rich countries's figure about 1.8 times Russia's.

Across all 21 years both countries report, Resource-rich countries has been ahead every year.

Resource-rich countries ranks 4th and Russia ranks 4th of 28 groups.

Resource-rich countries has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Resource-rich countries Russia Difference Ahead
2000s 208,356 Hectares 122,463 Hectares 85,893 Hectares Resource-rich countries
2010s 211,327 Hectares 121,649 Hectares 89,678 Hectares Resource-rich countries
2020s 213,301 Hectares 121,649 Hectares 91,652 Hectares Resource-rich countries

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 23 - ecological, Resource-rich countries or Russia?
Resource-rich countries, at 213,301 Hectares against 121,649 Hectares in Russia as of 2020.
What is the difference in africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 23 - ecological between Resource-rich countries and Russia?
91,652 Hectares, with Resource-rich countries ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Resource-rich countries and Russia?
21 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2020.
How do Resource-rich countries and Russia rank globally for africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 23 - ecological?
Resource-rich countries ranks 4th and Russia ranks 4th of 28 groups.
Where does this data come from?
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, published as Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological sustainability — Arable 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

Resource-rich countries vs Russia: Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological. Statizoid, drawing on Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved 03 October 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/africa-s-development-dynamics-afdd-table-23-ecological-sustainability-arable-land/resource-rich-countries/russian-federation/

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-arable-land/resource-rich-countries/russian-federation/">Resource-rich countries vs Russia: Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological sustainability — Arable land
Unit
Hectares
Source
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Licence
OECD Terms and Conditions (attribution required)
Coverage
242 places, 5,064 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.