Hungary vs Malawi: Agriculture, forestry, fishing, Capital (central government)
Agriculture, forestry, fishing, Capital (central government) over time
- Hungary
- Malawi
How they compare
Hungary currently reports 184.3 million USD against 141.11 million USD in Malawi, a difference of 43.19 million USD.
That makes Hungary's figure about 1.3 times Malawi's.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 17 shared years of data; in 2001 it was Hungary ahead.
Hungary ranks 18th and Malawi ranks 20th of 93 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Hungary averaged higher in 1 and Malawi in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Hungary | Malawi | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 361.18 million USD | 24.08 million USD | 337.1 million USD | Hungary |
| 2010s | 85.56 million USD | 85.72 million USD | 0.1687 million USD | Malawi |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher agriculture, forestry, fishing, capital (central government), Hungary or Malawi?
- Hungary, at 184.3 million USD against 141.11 million USD in Malawi as of 2023.
- What is the difference in agriculture, forestry, fishing, capital (central government) between Hungary and Malawi?
- 43.19 million USD, with Hungary ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Hungary and Malawi?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2001 to 2017.
- How do Hungary and Malawi rank globally for agriculture, forestry, fishing, capital (central government)?
- Hungary ranks 18th and Malawi ranks 20th of 93 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Agriculture, forestry, fishing, Capital (central government expenditure) — Value US$, 2015 prices. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Statistics Division of FAO collects annually data on Government Expenditure on Agriculture through a questionnaire, which was developed in partnership with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF is the responsible institution for the Government Finance Statistics (GFS) methodology and annually collects GFS data, including Expenditure by Functions of Government (COFOG). The Classification of the Functions of Government (COFOG) is an international classification developed by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and published by the United Nations Statistical Division (UNSD), with the aim of categorise governments' functions according to their purposes. The FAO questionnaire aligns with Table 7 of the IMF GFS questionnaire, replicates the relevant aggregates and drills down to request additional detail related to Agriculture. The FAO dataset consists of a time series, from 2001 onwards, of Total Government Expenditure and expenditure in: Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, along with its three disaggregated subsectors of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing; and Environmental Protection. In addition, expenditure in each detailed function are further disaggregated into Recurrent and Capital expenditure. Additional indicators include the Agriculture Share of Government Expenditure, and the Agriculture Orientation Index (ratio between the Agriculture Share of Government Expenditure and the Agriculture Value Added as Share of GDP). Data are reported for the highest level of government available (Consolidated general government, consolidated central government or budgetary central government) and are available for about 100 countries on a regular basis.