Russian Federation vs Slovak Republic: Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological

Russian Federation
121,649 Hectares
in 2020
Slovak Republic
1,346 Hectares
in 2020
Russian Federation rank
4th
Slovak Republic rank
21st

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

  • Russian Federation
  • Slovak Republic
025.0k50.0k75.0k100.0k125.0k200020102020

How they compare

Russian Federation currently reports 121,649 Hectares against 1,346 Hectares in Slovak Republic, a difference of 120,303 Hectares.

That makes Russian Federation's figure about 90.4 times Slovak Republic's.

Across all 21 years both countries report, Russian Federation has been ahead every year.

Russian Federation ranks 4th and Slovak Republic ranks 21st of 167 countries.

Russian Federation has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Russian Federation Slovak Republic Difference Ahead
2000s 122,463 Hectares 1,410 Hectares 121,054 Hectares Russian Federation
2010s 121,649 Hectares 1,363 Hectares 120,286 Hectares Russian Federation
2020s 121,649 Hectares 1,346 Hectares 120,303 Hectares Russian Federation

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 23 - ecological, Russian Federation or Slovak Republic?
Russian Federation, at 121,649 Hectares against 1,346 Hectares in Slovak Republic as of 2020.
What is the difference in africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 23 - ecological between Russian Federation and Slovak Republic?
120,303 Hectares, with Russian Federation ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Russian Federation and Slovak Republic?
21 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2020.
How do Russian Federation and Slovak Republic rank globally for africa's development dynamics (afdd) table 23 - ecological?
Russian Federation ranks 4th and Slovak Republic ranks 21st of 167 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 — 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

Russian Federation vs Slovak Republic: Africa's Development Dynamics (AfDD) Table 23 - Ecological. Statizoid, drawing on Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved 30 August 2026, from https://environment.statizoid.com/compare/africa-s-development-dynamics-afdd-table-23-ecological-sustainability-arable-land/russian-federation/slovak-republic-2/

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/russian-federation/slovak-republic-2/">Russian Federation vs Slovak Republic: 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.