Australia vs Bangladesh: Agriculture, forestry, fishing, Recurrent (central government)
Agriculture, forestry, fishing, Recurrent (central government) over time
- Australia
- Bangladesh
How they compare
Bangladesh currently reports 2,910 million USD against 2,205 million USD in Australia, a difference of 705 million USD.
That makes Bangladesh's figure about 1.3 times Australia's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 14 shared years of data; in 2001 it was Australia ahead.
Australia ranks 8th and Bangladesh ranks 7th of 94 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Australia averaged higher in 1 and Bangladesh in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Australia | Bangladesh | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 1,760 million USD | 390.27 million USD | 1,370 million USD | Australia |
| 2020s | 2,146 million USD | 2,413 million USD | 266.8 million USD | Bangladesh |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher agriculture, forestry, fishing, recurrent (central government), Australia or Bangladesh?
- Bangladesh, at 2,910 million USD against 2,205 million USD in Australia as of 2024.
- What is the difference in agriculture, forestry, fishing, recurrent (central government) between Australia and Bangladesh?
- 705 million USD, with Bangladesh ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and Bangladesh?
- 14 years are reported by both, from 2001 to 2024.
- How do Australia and Bangladesh rank globally for agriculture, forestry, fishing, recurrent (central government)?
- Australia ranks 8th and Bangladesh ranks 7th 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 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.