Kyrgyzstan vs Malaysia: Agriculture, forestry, fishing, Recurrent (central government)
Agriculture, forestry, fishing, Recurrent (central government) over time
- Kyrgyzstan
- Malaysia
How they compare
Malaysia currently reports 4,313 million SLC against 3,324 million SLC in Kyrgyzstan, a difference of 989 million SLC.
That makes Malaysia's figure about 1.3 times Kyrgyzstan's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 13 shared years of data; in 2012 it was Malaysia ahead.
Kyrgyzstan ranks 42nd and Malaysia ranks 39th of 94 countries.
Malaysia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Kyrgyzstan | Malaysia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 1,284 million SLC | 4,544 million SLC | 3,260 million SLC | Malaysia |
| 2020s | 2,443 million SLC | 2,775 million SLC | 331.64 million SLC | Malaysia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher agriculture, forestry, fishing, recurrent (central government), Kyrgyzstan or Malaysia?
- Malaysia, at 4,313 million SLC against 3,324 million SLC in Kyrgyzstan as of 2024.
- What is the difference in agriculture, forestry, fishing, recurrent (central government) between Kyrgyzstan and Malaysia?
- 989 million SLC, with Malaysia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Kyrgyzstan and Malaysia?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 2012 to 2024.
- How do Kyrgyzstan and Malaysia rank globally for agriculture, forestry, fishing, recurrent (central government)?
- Kyrgyzstan ranks 42nd and Malaysia ranks 39th 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.