Bahamas vs New Caledonia: Agriculture, forestry, fishing (central government expenditure)
Agriculture, forestry, fishing (central government expenditure) over time
- Bahamas
- New Caledonia
How they compare
New Caledonia currently reports 38.48 million USD against 35.84 million USD in Bahamas, a difference of 2.64 million USD.
That makes New Caledonia's figure about 1.1 times Bahamas's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2011 it was New Caledonia ahead.
Bahamas ranks 126th and New Caledonia ranks 125th of 166 countries.
New Caledonia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bahamas | New Caledonia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 21.46 million USD | 30.69 million USD | 9.24 million USD | New Caledonia |
| 2020s | 29.15 million USD | 38.48 million USD | 9.33 million USD | New Caledonia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher agriculture, forestry, fishing (central government expenditure), Bahamas or New Caledonia?
- New Caledonia, at 38.48 million USD against 35.84 million USD in Bahamas as of 2020.
- What is the difference in agriculture, forestry, fishing (central government expenditure) between Bahamas and New Caledonia?
- 2.64 million USD, with New Caledonia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bahamas and New Caledonia?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2011 to 2020.
- How do Bahamas and New Caledonia rank globally for agriculture, forestry, fishing (central government expenditure)?
- Bahamas ranks 126th and New Caledonia ranks 125th of 166 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Agriculture, forestry, fishing (central government expenditure) — Value US$. 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.