Latvia vs North Macedonia: Ammonia, anhydrous — Import quantity
Ammonia, anhydrous — Import quantity over time
- Latvia
- North Macedonia
How they compare
Latvia currently reports 411.56 t against 282.1 t in North Macedonia, a difference of 129.46 t.
That makes Latvia's figure about 1.5 times North Macedonia's.
The two have swapped places 5 times across 23 shared years of data; in 2002 it was North Macedonia ahead.
Latvia ranks 63rd and North Macedonia ranks 66th of 177 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Latvia averaged higher in 2 and North Macedonia in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Latvia | North Macedonia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 54,809 t | 1,500 t | 53,309 t | Latvia |
| 2010s | 1,499 t | 369.58 t | 1,130 t | Latvia |
| 2020s | 103.39 t | 272.95 t | 169.56 t | North Macedonia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher ammonia, anhydrous — import quantity, Latvia or North Macedonia?
- Latvia, at 411.56 t against 282.1 t in North Macedonia as of 2024.
- What is the difference in ammonia, anhydrous — import quantity between Latvia and North Macedonia?
- 129.46 t, with Latvia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Latvia and North Macedonia?
- 23 years are reported by both, from 2002 to 2024.
- How do Latvia and North Macedonia rank globally for ammonia, anhydrous — import quantity?
- Latvia ranks 63rd and North Macedonia ranks 66th of 177 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Ammonia, anhydrous — Import quantity. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Fertilizers by Product dataset contains information on the Production, Trade and Agriculture Use of inorganic (chemical or mineral) fertilizers products. The fertilizer statistics data are for a set of 23 product categories. Both straight and compound fertilizers are included. Methodological details can be found at: https://files-faostat.fao.org/production/RFB/RFB_EN_README.pdf