Kenya vs Poland: Agriculture, forestry, fishing, Recurrent (central government)
Agriculture, forestry, fishing, Recurrent (central government) over time
- Kenya
- Poland
How they compare
Kenya currently reports 27,202 million SLC against 24,062 million SLC in Poland, a difference of 3,140 million SLC.
That makes Kenya's figure about 1.1 times Poland's.
The two have swapped places 5 times across 16 shared years of data; in 2008 it was Poland ahead.
Kenya ranks 24th and Poland ranks 27th of 94 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Kenya averaged higher in 2 and Poland in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Kenya | Poland | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 11,824 million SLC | 12,043 million SLC | 218.55 million SLC | Poland |
| 2010s | 17,399 million SLC | 10,349 million SLC | 7,050 million SLC | Kenya |
| 2020s | 24,251 million SLC | 16,917 million SLC | 7,334 million SLC | Kenya |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher agriculture, forestry, fishing, recurrent (central government), Kenya or Poland?
- Kenya, at 27,202 million SLC against 24,062 million SLC in Poland as of 2024.
- What is the difference in agriculture, forestry, fishing, recurrent (central government) between Kenya and Poland?
- 3,140 million SLC, with Kenya ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Kenya and Poland?
- 16 years are reported by both, from 2008 to 2023.
- How do Kenya and Poland rank globally for agriculture, forestry, fishing, recurrent (central government)?
- Kenya ranks 24th and Poland ranks 27th of 94 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Agriculture, forestry, fishing, Recurrent (central government expenditure) — Value Standard Local Currency. 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.