Mauritius vs Namibia: Agriculture, forestry, fishing, Recurrent (central government)
Agriculture, forestry, fishing, Recurrent (central government) over time
- Mauritius
- Namibia
How they compare
Mauritius currently reports 58.57 million USD against 55.65 million USD in Namibia, a difference of 2.92 million USD.
That makes Mauritius's figure about 1.1 times Namibia's.
The two have swapped places 6 times across 11 shared years of data; in 2014 it was Mauritius ahead.
Mauritius ranks 65th and Namibia ranks 66th of 94 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Mauritius averaged higher in 1 and Namibia in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Mauritius | Namibia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 69.81 million USD | 72.84 million USD | 3.03 million USD | Namibia |
| 2020s | 62.74 million USD | 55.49 million USD | 7.25 million USD | Mauritius |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher agriculture, forestry, fishing, recurrent (central government), Mauritius or Namibia?
- Mauritius, at 58.57 million USD against 55.65 million USD in Namibia as of 2024.
- What is the difference in agriculture, forestry, fishing, recurrent (central government) between Mauritius and Namibia?
- 2.92 million USD, with Mauritius ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Mauritius and Namibia?
- 11 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2024.
- How do Mauritius and Namibia rank globally for agriculture, forestry, fishing, recurrent (central government)?
- Mauritius ranks 65th and Namibia ranks 66th 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.